The “Jewish State” of Israel was built on the ethnic cleansing of most of the indigenous Palestinian population. Since 1948, U.N. resolutions and international human rights laws have guaranteed the right of Palestinian refugees to return and reclaim their land and homes.

But these resolutions were never enforced, leaving a powerless and impoverished Palestinian population with the impression that armed struggle was their only hope.

That struggle will inevitably continue until the underlying problems are solved.

The peace process of the past decade proposes Israeli withdrawal from lands invaded and occupied since 1967, and the establishment of a Palestinian state alongside Israel. The real bottom line is the Palestinian right of return. Israel insists the Palestinian leadership formally abandon the right of return.

Is there room for compromise? Though no self-respecting Palestinian could abandon the struggle to implement the right of return, one can imagine a compromise in which Israel allows some refugees to return, while Palestinians, given a territorially contiguous state with a capital in Jerusalem, vow to work for the full implementation of the right of return by purely nonviolent means.

By agreeing to abandon any thought of a violent military solution to the refugee problem and devoting themselves to nonviolent political efforts to regain their legitimate and inviolable rights, Palestinians might eventually establish a climate of world and Israeli opinion in which the right of return could be truly and fully implemented — as U.N. resolutions and international law have been insisting for more than 50 years.

Kevin Barrett

U.W.-Madison, African Languages (Arabic)

I hope Matt Lynch was kidding in his article that asked UW to simply be itself (“UW: Yank Ad, Be Yourself,” Feb. 27).

Lynch called for an ad that would show why students are proud to go to UW-Madison. Although Lynch claims he understands UW has diversity, he doesn’t seem to know or respect what diversity is.

I have never been to any UW sporting event, except for when my friend started an Ultimate Frisbee team. I have never been to Brothers or Madhatters. I have not missed out.

Although I have always enjoyed taking the best classes I could (the actual reason why I was here), I don’t think that I am an “over-achieving, pretentious bookworm,” as Lynch implies anyone who came to school for more than beer or sports actually is.

There are a lot of different types of people at UW, all of whom have varying levels of “pride” about going here, and place that pride in very different places.

I would hate to go to Lynch’s UW.

Lizz Wasserman

UW senior

When the loitering ordinance was initially reviewed, I read in The Badger Herald that the Madison police chief said he didn’t know any white drug dealers. Now, Ald. Steve Holtzman, District 19, has been quoted as saying, “The mayor is joining those claiming we have a racist police department.”

Racist police department? Could it be? Well, let’s look at the police chief’s earlier statement. Does he mean there has never been a white person arrested for intent to distribute in Madison? I find this unbelievable.

Could it be our police chief is unaware of Madison’s crime statistics? Yes. Could it be Madison police pursue black drug users but tolerate white ones? Yes.

Could it be there are no white drug dealers? No. Why? Simple economics. There will always be someone who says, “Hey, I got dirt and I need cash.” Wherever there is a huge profit opportunity there will be an opportunist, and I refuse to believe there are no white people smart enough to take advantage of this opportunity.

Furthermore, I refuse to believe our police chief is unaware of any white opportunists. Instead, it seems more likely the police are selectively using racist anti-drug tools like the loitering ordinance.

Chris Wahl
UW senior