Letter to the editor

5/15/08 7:00pm

Baker Institute talk lacks objectivityTo the editor:

As an alumnus now living in Houston, I have been privileged to attend occasional lectures at Rice. A few weeks ago on April 10, I came to the James. A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy to hear professor Lara Deeb discuss "Understanding Hizbullah." Unfortunately, the speech was an apology for Hizbullah and did not contribute much to an understanding of it.

Deeb is an anthropologist and a professor of women's studies, and in those areas, she contributed some useful information and insights. When dealing with historical facts, however, she was highly selective. She made sure to emphasize the brutality of Israeli operations in Lebanon, but made no reference to anything that would cast a negative light on Hizbullah.

---

---

A good scholar knows what context is important. In referring to Israeli operations, she failed to provide this. She referred to the death of Lebanese civilians in 2006 without mentioning that Hizbullah parks its military operations in civilian areas, including schools and hospitals, thus making those within them human shields. Her allegation that the kidnapping of two Israeli soldiers on July 12, 2006 was a justified response to previous Israeli actions is, to put it mildly, highly questionable. This was an act of war and Israel had the right, and the responsibility, to react to it.

A good scholar relies on documented statements and the posted ideology of any political group. Deeb failed to take note of the well-documented, deeply-rooted, vicious antisemitism which is a major part of Hizbullah's program. This includes Holocaust denial, terrorist activities directed outside of Israel (such as the 1994 bombing in Buenos Aires) and the frequent statements of Hizbullah leadership. When questioned about the latter, Deeb dismissed such statements as "rhetoric." I suppose she thinks that Iran's threats to destroy the State of Israel should be treated similarly ... but Israel, and Jews in general, have learned to take such bullying more seriously.

A good scholar of the Middle East would "connect the dots," examining the connections between groups. In her presentation, Deeb made almost no mention of Hizbullah's connections to Syria and Iran; when questioned about this, she said they exist, but failed to discus the implications of Hizbullah's rearmament by these countries. It was as if the big bad Israelis have brought the justified wrath of the Arab world down on themselves, as if Israel never considered that its counter-measures do increase resentment on the Arab streets. Additionally, she noted hat the European Union - unlike our country - did not always classify Hizbullah as a terrorist organization, without asking whether economic relationships and the growing Muslim presence in Europe might have something to do with that.

A good scholar recognizes complexities when they exist. Deeb maintained the simplistic position that "only a just solution to the Palestinian problem will provide peace to the Middle East." This ignores the consistent and ongoing rejection by Hizbullah of the right of a Jewish state to exist at all. She conveniently ignored the fact that the governments of Egypt and Jordan have moved on and made peace with Israel, accepting her presence as reality, which Hizbullah refuses to do. What Hizbullah means by "a just solution" is the elimination of the Jewish state.

One need not agree with every action of one side or another in the Middle East in order to recognize the absence of objective scholarship. If Rice students, along with the History Department and the Baker Institute, want to find "understanding" about the Middle East, they will have to look elsewhere.

Danny Horwitz

Lovett '73

---