The Professors for a Strong Israel and its Chairman, Prof. Ron Breiman, have written a letter countering a call upon the Michigan city of Ann Arbor to boycott Israel and companies that invest here. Breiman, explaining the letter to Arutz-7, expressed the hope that the \"actions of a group of [Israeli] extremists who asked foreigners to boycott and harm Israel in the midst of the Oslo war\" not be publicized too widely. However, he sent Arutz-7 a copy of his response to what he called the \"hate letter of a handful of Israeli professors and others\" in the hope that its arguments be publicized to counteract the extremists\' anti-Israel campaign.
The original anti-Israel letter to Ann Arbor stated,
\"All of us, signed below, are Israeli Jews… We understand that you passed a comprehensive anti-[South African] apartheid divestment resolution in 1986... Today, many Israeli human rights activists will be grateful if you can do a similar humanitarian service for the Palestinian population, as an act of simple brotherhood. Today, the bulk of the Palestinian population, numbering three million people, lives under the harshest Israeli military occupation. That is why we hope you will pass the strongest possible resolution to divest Ann Arbor from any investments, transactions, or pension funds it may hold in companies or funds which do business in Israel…\" Among the signatories to the letter are Tel Aviv University Professors Rachel Giora, Anat Matar, and Tanya Reinhart.
The letter by Professors for a Strong Israel read,
\"On behalf of hundreds of professors and lecturers, members of Professors for a Strong Israel (PSI), I would like to refer to a letter sent to you recently by a very tiny ultra-extreme group of Israeli academics, calling upon you to take anti-Israeli measures.
\"Professors for a Strong Israel is a non-partisan organization of academics united in a common concern for the security and the Jewish character of the State of Israel… Please allow us to rebut [the above] letter and to offer arguments against the proposed divestiture.
\"Israel has been beset by war since, and indeed before, the founding of the state. As emphasized by Secretary of State Powell in his speech in Kentucky this week, the Arab world has never admitted the possibility of coexistence with Israel and continues to educate its children in the belief that Israel is but a temporary evil. The result has been half a century of suffering for the entire region…
\"US Ambassador Martin Indyk, one of the architects of the peace process, stated recently that he now recognizes that the PLO was never honest in its declarations of peace, and indeed only saw the peace process as an easy way to create a convenient springboard for future war. This change of heart, now common among former advocates of the peace process, was brought about by the events of the summer of 2000. Prime Minister Ehud Barak made the most far-reaching offer of concessions imaginable -- all of Judea and Samaria (\"West Bank\"), all of Gaza Strip, absorption of Arabs into Israel, and even half of Jerusalem, our Capital -- and demanded in return a declared end to the conflict. The Arabs\' answer was a return to war, through a constant and bloody campaign of terrorist attacks that have claimed 200 Israeli victims. Proportionally speaking, Israel has suffered more than the equivalent of the World Trade Center attack. Must she sit defenseless?
\"The Israeli academics that wrote in support of divestiture are a small and extreme minority, on the fringe of Israeli politics... A boycott campaign would damage America\'s closest friend in the Middle East even as she makes great efforts for peace, harming the entire nation regardless of political orientation, harming also the many Arabs whose livelihood is inextricably entwined with Israel\'s economy. It will not move the region an inch closer to a peace made impossible by the actions of Israel\'s enemies.
\"Professors for a Strong Israel call upon the Council and citizens of Ann Arbor to invest in Israel and to have close ties with the State and the People Israel.\"
The original anti-Israel letter to Ann Arbor stated,
\"All of us, signed below, are Israeli Jews… We understand that you passed a comprehensive anti-[South African] apartheid divestment resolution in 1986... Today, many Israeli human rights activists will be grateful if you can do a similar humanitarian service for the Palestinian population, as an act of simple brotherhood. Today, the bulk of the Palestinian population, numbering three million people, lives under the harshest Israeli military occupation. That is why we hope you will pass the strongest possible resolution to divest Ann Arbor from any investments, transactions, or pension funds it may hold in companies or funds which do business in Israel…\" Among the signatories to the letter are Tel Aviv University Professors Rachel Giora, Anat Matar, and Tanya Reinhart.
The letter by Professors for a Strong Israel read,
\"On behalf of hundreds of professors and lecturers, members of Professors for a Strong Israel (PSI), I would like to refer to a letter sent to you recently by a very tiny ultra-extreme group of Israeli academics, calling upon you to take anti-Israeli measures.
\"Professors for a Strong Israel is a non-partisan organization of academics united in a common concern for the security and the Jewish character of the State of Israel… Please allow us to rebut [the above] letter and to offer arguments against the proposed divestiture.
\"Israel has been beset by war since, and indeed before, the founding of the state. As emphasized by Secretary of State Powell in his speech in Kentucky this week, the Arab world has never admitted the possibility of coexistence with Israel and continues to educate its children in the belief that Israel is but a temporary evil. The result has been half a century of suffering for the entire region…
\"US Ambassador Martin Indyk, one of the architects of the peace process, stated recently that he now recognizes that the PLO was never honest in its declarations of peace, and indeed only saw the peace process as an easy way to create a convenient springboard for future war. This change of heart, now common among former advocates of the peace process, was brought about by the events of the summer of 2000. Prime Minister Ehud Barak made the most far-reaching offer of concessions imaginable -- all of Judea and Samaria (\"West Bank\"), all of Gaza Strip, absorption of Arabs into Israel, and even half of Jerusalem, our Capital -- and demanded in return a declared end to the conflict. The Arabs\' answer was a return to war, through a constant and bloody campaign of terrorist attacks that have claimed 200 Israeli victims. Proportionally speaking, Israel has suffered more than the equivalent of the World Trade Center attack. Must she sit defenseless?
\"The Israeli academics that wrote in support of divestiture are a small and extreme minority, on the fringe of Israeli politics... A boycott campaign would damage America\'s closest friend in the Middle East even as she makes great efforts for peace, harming the entire nation regardless of political orientation, harming also the many Arabs whose livelihood is inextricably entwined with Israel\'s economy. It will not move the region an inch closer to a peace made impossible by the actions of Israel\'s enemies.
\"Professors for a Strong Israel call upon the Council and citizens of Ann Arbor to invest in Israel and to have close ties with the State and the People Israel.\"