so I UK ylfcSTIOS UK PALESTINE out, is therefore something, I bciieve, to be opposed and subject to serious analysis. What is the meaning and the form of such opposition? Because o f the political and epistcm ological circumstances that I have been describing, to oppose anything about Israel and Zionism is to seem to be advocating anti-Semitism at least, and genocide at most. O f course to draw such conclusions out of what I hope to show is a principled and discrete platform of opposition, is to do a mischievous and destructive thing; but it is done anyway, and will continue to be done, alas, for years to come. Y et the whole point o f rational discussion, in which I strongly bciieve, is to attempt to change the terms and the perspectives in which insoluble-appearing problems are understood— and Israelis and the Palestinians together consti­ tute such a problem , and together also require such a rational change. A perfect opportunity for change was at hand when the Soviet Union and the United States issued their joint declara­ tion on O ctober ], [977. The notable thing about the declara­ tion was that it spoke o f Palestinian rights (and not merely interests) as something to be discussed in any final peaceful settlement o f the Middle Eastern problem. The chorus of abuse and hysteria greeting that declaration from organized Jewish opinion was disheartening. Not only was the domestic Jewish-American reaction abusive, it was proudly so, as Jewish leaders boasted of having inundated the W hite House with thousands o f letters and phone calls. The intended lesson was that any pcrceived threat to Israel (and any perceived devia­ tion from an expected U .S. government line o f unconditional acceptance o f everything done by Israel) would totally mobi­ lize every Jew and every Israeli supporter against the adminis­ tration. The meaning of such intimidation is to keep the Middle East as a domestic, and not merely a foreign policy, issue. The other meaning, how ever, is that it is easy to mobilize people on the basis o f fear. One wonders nevertheless whether fear, repression, and outright intellectual terrorism are warranted, or whether they serve an almost incredibly shortsighted and finally unintelli­