Nuclear weapons of mass destruction sheidls faith
Matt Bauer
Special Contribution
During my time at Carroll I have had many opportunities to head distinguished guest speakers on our campus, most recently Dr. Shlomo Aronson, a Holocaust scholar and expert on the Middle East. Dr. Aronson’s speech was both enlightening and provocative as he summarized the historical establishment of the Jewish state of Israel, and its subsequent political implications in a hostile region.
Dr. Aronson’s presentation was inherently subjective as I suspected it would be. The arguments set forth served as a demonstration of the deep seeded issues that continue to divide the two states. The beliefs that Dr. Aronson displayed are countered by the exact opposite feelings on the Palestinian side. There has been little to no middle ground on the consistent conflict over whose right it is to occupy the “Holy” land of Jerusalem.
Currently the Middle East region seems to be at the epicenter of our foreign policy focus.
As a quagmire endures in Iraq, oil prices are escalating as consumers continue to express outrage, and a new aspect of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is manifest in the appearance of former U.S. President Jimmy Carter in peace negotiations.
Unfortunately, Dr. Aronson did not address the talks that President Carter has been engaging in with Hamas, widely considered a terrorist organization, and Syria. However, with Dr. Aronson calling Carter a “fool” for his characterization of Israel as an apartheid nation, it is safe to say that Dr. Aronson would not approve of President Carter’s presence even if it comes with the possibility of a peace agreement.
The bottom line is that Israel and the surrounding Arab states have deep seeded resentments toward each other mainly stemming from religious differences that neither can legitimately prove as absolute.
I completely disagree with the use of force to promote beliefs that are based in faith. Faith is the belief in something that is not proven and to me the use of force to promote a belief is used to justify shortcomings within that faith. Force is something that is all too prevalent in this conflict, which leads me to a serious issue I had with an aspect Dr. Aronson’s speech.
He spoke of a massive quantity of nuclear arms that Israel possesses and the willingness that they have to use them. That type of Cold War era rhetoric is both irresponsible and dangerous in a region that is by Western democratic standards considered unstable.
With this stance, what happens if a small terrorist group obtains a nuclear weapon that they feel they should use against Israel in a pre-emptive strike? Will Israel begin nuking any and all countries that they suspect aided the terrorists?
Israel and their ally the U.S. are not innocent in the instability of the region. It is unstable, yet Israel and the U.S. continue to pursue narrow self interests that are met with violent resistance. After all that is why the U.S. went into Iraq, to thwart an unstable dictator with a stockpile of weapons of mass destruction.
Dr. Aronson’s last statement was that it would be a disaster to leave Iraq in the near future, but the real disaster appears to be that our leaders have learned nothing from foreign policy endeavors of the past. This region is one that has consistently displayed hostility towards us, yet we foolishly believe that we can implement our way of life onto people that frankly do not want it.
These are deeply religious people who shun our secular beliefs and customs. To believe that they will drop their religious beliefs and adopt a secular way of life is an exercise in futility.