January-February 2002:
Nonviolent Resistance & Islam
A Journey to Pacifism
Reflections at Ground Zero
WRL Message Board
Dr. King’s Legacy
Letters
Activist News
Activist Reviews

Homepages:
War Resisters League
The Nonviolent Activist

Activist Letters

Anti-Zionism and racism: a different perspective
“The Conflict’s Deep Roots” (November-December) does a disservice by retailing the by-now lamentably commonplace falsehoods on the issue of Jews and Palestinians in the context of the current international situation. Contrary to the account of contributor Phyllis Bennis, there is little connection between Al Qaeda’s activities and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The attacks by bin Laden’s followers upon the United States have little to do with the conspirators’ views about Zionism, but rather everything to do with their (mis-)perception about U.S. life and power.

The pages of the organ of the War Resisters League do not need to make sorry common cause with anti-Zionist propaganda abroad. Remember, please, that is it anti-Zionism that equals racism. We need to discourage just such racism on the part of certain individuals among our Arab and Islamic brothers and sisters. Incidentally, it is the expression of such anti-Jewish racism that underscores the need for a state such as Israel.

—Robert Reiss, New York, NY

The editors respond:
1) Bennis didn’t say U.S. Middle East policies inspired Al Qaeda; she said those policies inspire the anger that fuel terrorism.
2) Many Jews reject entirely the equation of anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism and “anti-Jewish racism.”

Pacifism—it’s personal
I have been a member and/or supporter of the WRL since 1942. I was registered as a conscientious objector in World War II and I would do it again in any other war. That’s because I believe that war resistance is a personal witness. It is simply not feasible for a nation to take a pacifist position.

Thus I find myself in partial agreement with David McReynolds’ analysis (NVA, November-December). As McReynolds writes, nothing can “excuse the criminal act of murdering thousands of people” on September 11. He then calls for the arrest of whoever perpetrated the September 11 terror and trial before an international criminal court. At the time McReynolds wrote his analysis, the now-revealed bin Laden tape was not known. Assuming McReynolds would agree that the tape is indeed a “smoking gun,” then it follows he wants bin Laden arrested along with all others involved in the scheme that led to Terrible Tuesday.

Pointedly, I think, McReynolds does not tell us how he would bring about the arrest of the perpetrators. Neither bin Laden nor his Al Qaeda comrades would willingly give themselves up. The Taliban would not cooperate in their capture. We know this because the Pakistanis, who were their sponsors, tried twice and failed. How then can it get done? Is there a nonviolent way? Would it get done if the United Nations passed a resolution condemning the Al Qaeda and the Taliban too? How about sanctions? How about organizing nonviolent resistance among the mujahideen in Afghanistan? Whatever nonviolent way were chosen, it would in any case take years to take effect (as in the Philippines, South Africa, Chile and Serbia). Meanwhile, is bin Laden resting?

It is no solution to the problem to point to the failed and miserable U.S. policy in the Middle East. Terrorists are afoot here and could kill more thousands because there are so many vulnerable targets. What do we do? Recommending nonviolent solutions is merely denying reality. We have to admit that while the war in Afghanistan has not guaranteed the end of terrorism, it has—coupled with the arrest of persons in Europe and the disruption of Al Qaeda’s financial network—severely eroded Al Qaeda’s ability to mount actions like that of September 11.

Only the truly sadistic or insane favor war. There are times, however, when violence is the only way that works. Pacifists can choose not to participate or to participate in a nonviolent way. Nations cannot.

—Eugene Vasilew, Monks Corner, SC

David McReynolds responds:
Eugene Vasilew makes a strong point. He might consider, one, whether a nation must use violence in defending itself (certainly you can’t ask a militarized nation—either our own or India—to renounce it, but a nation that had chosen alternatives might); and, two, each war has to be judged on its own merits—the fact the United States was attacked by Al Qaeda, a group of individuals scattered throughout the world, hardly justifies the response of attacking a nation, Afghanistan, that did not commit that attack.

Life, embryos and ethics
Everything was fine till I got to the end of the last paragraph [of Wendy Schwartz’s review of Targets of Hatred: Anti-Abortion Terrorism, NVA, November-December].

I disagree that the anti-abortionists created an ethical dilemma. Abortion is an ethical issue—no matter which side of it one supports. As to putting life in quotation marks—“trading the ‘life’ of an embryo for the good health of a human being”—most embryos I’ve known have been alive, i.e., live, living tissue. Both sides usually see that. It’s when one considers what kind of life that is that we run into disagreement.

This is my first issue of the NVA. I wasn’t prepared for such one-sided reporting in a book review. One more nit to pick: “Had the anti-abortion terrorists been stopped when they began their violent rampage …” My word, that sounds like a war on terrorism in the making! If you’re going to oppose the War on Terrorism, then I would expect that one was going to oppose all extremist methods/ideologies.

For the record, I deplore the conduct of the anti-abortion terrorists and also the extreme measures that less violent members employ. Again, I look for some consistency. If all life is valuable, then how can they kill clinic workers? And how can they be for the death penalty?

So, I repeat: I was gung-ho with you seven-eighths of the way through your piece. And the rest of the publication was an inspiring read. Good to hear that we in our town aren’t the only ones standing on the curb, holding signs, etc. Thanks

—Mary Jo Pfander Kettering, OH