I'm sorry to see fatuous comparisons between Native Americans and Palestinians given such prominent space in the Sunday (March 24) print edition of the Star Tribune.
It would be much better to discuss the President's trip to Israel and the Middle East and the intricate and intimate choreography resulting in, hopefully, the resumption of full diplomatic relations between Israel and Turkey, thus strengthening America's position with respect to Syria and Iran. It would better to discuss the possibility of resumption of negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians after the President's meetings with Prime Minister Netanyahu and Chairman Abbas in Jerusalem and Ramallah. It would be better to discuss Pope Francis – the "New World Pope" in the words of Time Magazine – and his dedication to alleviating poverty.
Alas, there is little choice but to respond to the mischaracterizations articulated.
Start with the proposition – as I once heard Elie Wiesel say – that it is difficult to compare the suffering of one people to another.
As Jews, also, who have been subjected to genocidal attempts of extermination, we are deeply sensitive to the pain and loss suffered by Native Americans, and other victims of genocide. Indeed, a leading early exponent of Native American rights in the United States was Felix S. Cohen, a distinguished scholar and author of the Handbook of Federal Indian Law (1942). Prof. Cohen was a champion of Native American self-government and recognized that a discrimination against one people endangered all peoples.
Jews, also, the world over and in Israel have adopted the mainstream consensus view of the critical nature of a two state solution of Israel and Palestine to safeguard the security of Israel and vindicating Palestinian aspirations. President Obama repeatedly stressed this goal on his visits to Jerusalem, Ramallah, and Amman during his recent Middle East trip.
Jews have supported Palestinian and Native American rights of self-determination.
If comparisons are to be made, begin with Palestinian opportunities for statehood, as opposed to the fate of Native American aspirations in the United States.