European Stars and Stripes (Newspaper) - June 30, 1990, Darmstadt, Hesse                                Page 10 a the stars and stripes columns . Rosenthal Quayle a views on Israel out of style but True there he goes again j. Danforth Quayle vice president of the United states doing that Peculiar thing that seems to have become a habit with him. Listen to him the Man is actually trying again to Tell americans the truth about the realities of the Middle East conflict. Listen to All the unfashionable things he is saying a How for decades israelis Hopes for peace were met by Arab rejection How it was israeli victories that discredited the War option for so Long How the Alliance Between the United states and Israel has benefited both countries and the cause of peace How the . As Well As Israel is menaced by terrorism How a Strong american israeli relationship is now More important to each country than Ever. You done to hear that ally talk much around Washington these Days gone right out of style. Quayle does not pretend there Are no differences Between the countries nor does he criticize Bush administration positions the israelis dislike. But in a Washington speech to supporters of Israel on june 11, Quayle showed again that the administration can disagree with Israel without distorting the historic truth. Time and again twisting or rewriting history has brought War and the destruction of civilizations. Unhappily just two Days later Secretary of state James a. Baker Iii turned reality on its head. He said if the israelis wanted peace they should Call the White House. He read Oft the number. That insulting sound bite will pass in time. Baker the president and the israelis Are too sensible to let a piece of petulance fester Long. I Hope. But the Plain harsh implication was that if Only the israelis would negotiate make a Deal peace would arrive. That perpetuates the single most dangerous myth about the Middle East. The truth is exactly the opposite. Since the Day of its nationhood the Arab states have tried War economic Boycott and terrorism against Israel. They have tried everything except direct talks clearly aimed at establishing peace Between them and Israel. The israelis pleaded for negotiations. They were willing to pay for them with the greatest of treasures land. One Man answered a Anwar Al Sadat. From israelis he received the huge Sinai desert. From arabs he received hatred and then death. Just a couple of Days ago prime minister Yitzhak Shamir invited the dictator of Syria to Jerusalem for talks. It was no Surprise when Hafez Al Assad refused. But it did demonstrate the truth a that the Arab George f. Will Quot off Len wre Seeotis about face Call  states will not negotiate. Consider what the world reaction would have been if just to dream a while the invitation had gone from Syria to Israel and been rejected with contempt. The Issue of which Side has been refusing negotiation is not a matter of yesterday but of today and tomorrow a life and death today or tomorrow. As Long As the Arab states refuse to negotiate directly with Israel As Long As they keep hatred of Israel burning and dreams of her extinction alive in their people the israelis cannot expect peace to come to the Middle East. They will have to stand by their arms. The Palestine liberation organization remains a group that practices terrorism a to the Point where Bush reluctantly but sensibly suspended talks with it. In any Case palestinians themselves even if they wished could not give Israel peace. Still the israelis have proposed talks toward palestinian elections and autonomy a not Independence. As Long As nine years ago according to sol m. Lino >4o. Witz former president Carters special negotiator in the Middle East the israelis had agreed to 25 important areas of self government for the palestinians including taxation Justice budget religious affairs and local police a a four fifths of an  but real peace depends on the Arab states. Baker and Bush do not have that in their Power but they can do three things to help. One is to appoint another special envoy to work Day after Day on the Middle East on the spot for the other fifth of the autonomy agreement with the palestinians and to search for an Arab Leader Brave enough to negotiate peace with the israelis. The second is to Tell the historic reality to the whole world Quayle a speech would be a useful crib Sheet. Third Baker when he next appears before the Senate can read out another Telephone number. This time he can urge the arabs to Call it. The number is 972-2-705-555, the Jerusalem office of israelis prime minister. Somebody will answer. C new York time court forsakes actual democracy for idealism Einstein preferred his violin to science. Mozart would rather have been a dancer than a composer. One wonders what the five members of the supreme court majority would rather be doing. Clearly their hearts not to mention their minds Are not in constitutional Law. Last week the court now the second legislative Branch of the Federal government continued its Campaign to purify american democracy this time by ridding it of a blemish As the court sees it traditional to democracy. The tradition is patronage. It is a practice As old As this Republic one favored by the founders but we now learn incompatible with the Constitution they wrote and ratified. In 1980, gov. Jim Thompson of Illinois a Republican instituted a hiring freeze under which state officials were forbidden to hire fill vacancies or create new positions without the governors permission. Various aggrieved people sued claiming that under the freeze the governor was running a patronage system. When granting exceptions to the freeze the governors Agency emphasized party registration support. Justice Brennan joined by White Marshall Black Mun and Stevens argues that the court is Only making a minor Extension to 1976 and 1980 rulings. Those rulings said that conditioning Public employment on political affiliation unconstitutionally inhibits the exercise of fundamental rights in a Way a tantamount to  Justice Scalia dissenting says a the Public official offered a bribe is not a coerced to violate the Law and the private citizen offered a patronage Job is not a coerced to work for the  furthermore Scalia joined by Rehnquist of Connor and Kennedy argues that patronage can Conduce to Good government. Scalia cites various arguments that patronage serves the Public Good. They include patronage strengthens party discipline and combats political fragmentation thereby protecting elected government from Smalt cohesive interest groups. Patronage thickens the ranks of party activists and allows them to rely More on people intensive and less on Money intensive campaigning. By concentrating party cadres on practical rewards patronage discourages ideological excesses and encourages moderate two party systems. Patronage has often been a Means for the political inclusion of previously excluded minorities. Scalia stresses that the court need not find these arguments persuasive. Neither need it ignore the undeniable drawbacks of patronage systems such As incompetence and corruption. The court should Only see that balancing the Good and bad facets of patronage systems is a political judgment Best left to political institutions. Scalia a Contention is Only that the court should acknowledge that a patronage system can be a reasonable political Choice that the Peoples elected representatives Are permitted to make. Some disbursement of jobs on the basis of Politica affiliation must be constitutional. Otherwise Ever presidents Cabinet would be unconstitutional. Hov deeply the patronage knife should Cut is a question about which reasonable communities can differ. Anc not All answers will be reasonable. But a a unreasonable and a a unconstitutional Are not interchangeable adjectives. Once the court rejects the constitutional relevant of americans political tradition and once it also acknowledges As it must that some politically based employment is permissible then the court says Scalia a has left the realm of Law and entered the Domain o political  but because politics is not a science the court must legislate its preferences. Lower courts struggling to implement the courts previously expressed preferences have help that it is constitutional to discharge on Politica grounds a regional director of a Rural housing administration but not a director of roads. The second in command of a water department but not the vice president of a development Bank. Such incoherence is the result of the courts capriciousness which is unconstrained by constitutional principles. The court is subverting actual democracy in that name of the courts Ideal of democracy. C Washington Post