In Cal Thomas’ column of Nov. 23 in the BDN he writes that Secretary of State Colin Powell is suffering from a “mirage” and not a “vision” for “peace in the Middle East.” He then goes on to make the statement that “Israel ceded land in those deals, which it had seized to protect itself … .” He challenges Colin Powell’s vision of “… two states – Israel and Palestine -[which can] live side by side within secure and recognized borders.”

Following that, Thomas states with peculiar certainty, “that’s not Arafat’s vision … Yasser Arafat … continues to make war.” He also says that the U.S. sends “$100 million annually to Palestinian Arabs” while ignoring the fact that the U.S. sends billions of dollars in military aid annually to Israel.

Thomas states that Palestinian children “… have been put in the front lines and urged to throw rocks” at tanks so that Israelis can shoot them and this “make[s] Israel look bad and force[s] her into new concessions.” Thomas conveniently forgets the enormous power that Israel possesses to retaliate with modern weaponry, which results in many more Palestinians being killed by Israelis than the other way around. His curious lapse in this regard and his dismissive attitude reflects an inability to maintain a minimal level of impartiality.

Deriding the Palestine cause with partial truths and one-sided arguments only helps to exacerbate tensions while misleading the American public. It seems imperative to me that in facing this new century we should be more inclusive in our thinking and less dogmatic in our denunciations. Giving impressions that the U.S. is unsympathetic to Arab problems is not only unhelpful but contributes to further tensions.

Cal Thomas also recently wrote a column stating that nuclear bombs should be used in Afghanistan. This cavalier attitude toward innocent civilians indicates a decided lack of empathy for human suffering. The fact that many innocent women and children would have been killed by such a horrendous act does not seem to have concerned him. Presumably as long as a few terrorists were killed such an action would have been justified in his mind.

Another conflict that bears considerable resemblance to the Middle East situation is the one in Northern Ireland. It too has faced terrorism from both the Nationalist and the Unionist extremists and suffered severely as a result. Peace talks were initiated several years ago with the help of Sen. George Mitchell and backed by former President Clinton. Long-standing grievances in both communities had contributed to intransigent “eitheror” thinking. Each community blamed the other and accused the other of terrorism.

To the native Catholic Irish the Royal Ulster Constabulary were repressive and represented, with the British Army, a state sponsored terrorism. To the Protestant Unionists the Catholic Nationalists, represented by the IRA, perpetrated terrorism on innocent Protestants.

Thirty years ago many American journalists, who had little understanding of the history of the conflict, accepted a simplistic version of the “troubles” based on the British news services. But the reality was and still is that both sides had valid arguments. Eventually American journalists, as well as U.S. policy makers, became more impartial and took a more inclusive “both/and” position.

In terms of the Israel/Palestinian conflict it seems clear that Colin Powell is taking the more inclusive “both/and” course of action. Hopefully we will not have to wait another 30 years for Mr. Thomas, and those who think like him, to admit that he was wrong in viewing the Middle East debacle from such a stark “either/or” perspective.

He may even come to realize that if the U.S. becomes an impartial mediator it can provide the world with a truer model of American conscientiousness than his own attempt to take absolute positions in an emotional cauldron he barely understands.

Hugh Curran is a resident of Surry who teaches in the Peace Studies Program at the University of Maine.