Let’s be clear
Recently many progressive activists have drawn an analogy between the former Indonesian occupation of East Timor and the current Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.
This is also an analogy I have personally drawn in the past, both in order to confirm the merits of a clear-cut two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and also to carefully delineate the precise limits of such a solution. That is to clarify that ‘Israel out of the West Bank and Gaza’ means precisely the same as ‘Indonesia out of East Timor’. It does not and cannot mean the abolition of the state of Israel any more than East Timorese independence required the destruction of Indonesia.
However, there are three fundamental differences between the two situations which need to be considered in any balanced assessment.
Firstly, the East Timorese never made any demands on Indonesian territory beyond their own state. In contrast, the Palestinians continue to demand a Right of Return of 1948 refugees to Israel proper, and the major Islamic factions unequivocally demand all of Israel.
Secondly, to the best of my knowledge, the East Timorese never attacked Indonesian civilians anywhere outside East Timor. In contrast, most of the recent Palestinian suicide/homicide bombings have taken place against Israeli civilians in Green Line Israel, rather than in the Palestinian Territories.
Thirdly, the countries neighbouring Indonesia never provided military or political support to the East Timorese, and certainly never funded extremist factions within East Timor. In contrast, Israel’s neighbours still support the Palestinian intifada to a greater or lesser degree, and some of them specifically fund Hamas and other extremist groups which are opposed to any two-state solution.
Philip Mendes
Kew, VIC
Call to arms
Recently the Vatican issued what has been aptly termed ‘a call to arms’ to all Catholics. Clearly the Vatican believes that homosexual activity is not only wrong but also deserving of a public, Catholic condemnation.
This belief is at odds with its attitude to paedophile activity. Until the secular press forced it to change its mind, the Vatican believed that some paedophile activity deserved not public condemnation, but silence and a cover-up.
This inconsistency does not trouble the Vatican, but it troubles many Catholics who, apparently, are expected by the Vatican to rally to the call and add our condemnation to its own.
The Vatican, of course, would not have noticed it, but many Catholics are still trying, day by day, to live down