I am writing to respond to a couple of points put forward in the letters by Alan Crim and Nathan Hagberg.

First, I will concede a point. What is happening in Israel and the West Bank and Gaza is not a Holocaust. That term has a very specific meaning and should be used carefully. While the equation to the Nazis overstates the point, Jerrett is right about excessive use of force.

Alan Crim writes “No nation is going to let mob violence overtake their land,” and asserts that “violent mobs with bodies over their heads don’t want peace.”

The barehanded beating to death of Israeli soldiers by a mob in Ramallah was abominable.

However, two Palestinian civilians were killed by a Jewish mob several days earlier inside Israel.

Emotions against Israel, which is the oppressor nation, are high.

A recent report by Amnesty International, however, stated very clearly that in the cases where the Israeli troops, for whatever reason, chose not to engage the demonstrators – even when armed with stones -the demonstrations dispersed without injury or death.

Israeli troops have, in addition, chosen to use live ammunition and rubber covered metal bullets (which may be lethal in a shot to the head) rather than tear gas to disperse the demonstrators.

From the beginning of the conflict, Israelis have in many cases moved over security lines to pursue demonstrators, making it almost impossible for Palestinian troops to restrain demonstrators.

Why, is a question that may be answered in the commission of inquiry the Palestinians have been calling for.

Hagberg allows me to talk about the reasons for the demonstrations in the first place. He states “Palestinians want the land of Israel. The Israelis know this, and so does the rest of the world.”

Later, he states, “[the conflict] will not be resolved until Palestinians accept the fact that the land belongs [to the Jews].”

The large majority of Palestinians accepted in 1988 the notion of a two-state solution – in other words, accepting the existence of Israel and forfeiting title to land taken from them in 1948.

The Oslo Accords of 1993 were supposed to have established a process that would yield progressively greater Palestinian control over (and Palestinians thought and hoped for the foundation of a state of Palestine on) the West Bank and Gaza.

Leaving aside for the moment serious flaws with the design of the Oslo Accords, this might well have resolved the conflict.

Instead, since 1993, Palestinians have suffered accelerated expansion by Israeli settlements and decreased mobility, not to mention economic stagnation and declarations that left little hope of relieving the indignity of Israeli control over travel outside the Palestinian territories and Israel.

Israelis, in other words, have been, and continue to be, aggressive against Palestinian land, not the other way around. This is the origin of the conflict.

Stephen P. Gasteyer

Graduate student

Sociology