Paul Zanetti of Australia

LATIMES. COM/ OPINION TUESDAY, JULY 22, 2014 A13

OP-ED
Jonah Goldberg
has the day off
B
ecause of British currency re-
strictions enacted just before
World War II, my father had to
comeupwithaninnovativewayof
getting his cash out of England
when, fearingaGermaninvasion, weimmi-
grated to the United States. He settled on
silver. Before leaving, he purchased all the
Georgian silver objects he could find, with
the idea of selling them once the family
reachedAmerica.
A few months after we arrived, he
opened the Harris English Silver Co. in
Manhattan. Whilewartimerationingmade
many everyday items difficult to obtain,
thedemandsof holidays, birthdaysandan-
niversaries still required special gifts. An-
tique silver answered that need for many
NewYorkers.
By 1944 my father had made more than
enough to move the family to California,
where he sold most of the remainder of his
original inventory. Things were going so
well that he decidedtotake abuyingtripto
England in 1948, and he took me along as
his 11-year-old assistant. At each antique
shopwe visited, he wouldslowly survey the
goods ondisplay, identify the pieces of par-
ticular interest, andthenhave all the items
brought together in one spot where he
could inspect them. I was told to pick out
anything that caught my eye and bring
those pieces, too, to the central collection
point.
I soonfoundthat thepieces I gravitated
to boxes, doll house furnishings, knife
rests, small carvings, writing implements,
hand tools and the like tended to have
one thing in common: They were nearly all
made of ivory.
When the shipment from that buying
trip reached Los Angeles, my father gave
me most of the items I had selected, and
that wasthestart of myivorycollection. Af-
ter becoming a U.S. diplomat, I added to
these original items during trips abroad.
AndI soonbecamefascinatedbythediffer-
ent uses to which ivory has been put
some practical, because of the materials
special properties, and some decorative,
because of its unusual beauty.
Ivory pieces, like other artistic expres-
sions, reflect the time and cultures that
producedthem. Thats oneof themainrea-
sons people collect artifacts of any sort: to
preserve the best examples of cultural ex-
pression.
Today, however, ivory collections like
mine and ivory collectors themselves
are being vilified. The current debate in
Washingtonover ivory policy has far less to
do with protecting elephants than it does
with satisfying the assumptions of animal
rights groups, making things simple for
government officials and accommodating
the special wants of hunters and the spe-
cial needs of musicians and museumcura-
tors. Collectors have little voice in the de-
bate, and their collections have been lik-
ened to blood diamonds or denigrated as
vanity indulgences. Any harmthat Ameri-
can collectors suffer from the new regula-
tions has been dismissed by Dan Ashe, di-
rector of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
as collateral damagefor thegreater goodof
savingelephants.
Ashe has issued an order that virtually
eliminates all trade and movement in the
UnitedStates of objects made fromor with
ivorynomattertheirorigin, ageorprove-
nance by requiring unimpeachable, de-
tailed documentation on the ivory con-
tained in a piece. To buy, trade or sell such
pieces, collectors must haveoriginal bills of
saleor repair invoices or proof of theyear of
importationintothe UnitedStates. Nocol-
lector and very few antique dealers can
produce that kindof documentation, espe-
cially since none of it was required at the
time most of the pieces were imported or
purchased. Howmany treasures inherited
froma relative or given as gifts come with
written proof of where they came from or
howthey got here?
These draconian new rules have not
been promulgated casually. Ashe believes
that virtually ending all trade in African
ivoryinthe UnitedStates thus sendinga
message that ivory is valueless is the
best way toprotect Africanelephants from
the ravishes of poachers.
But thatsunrealisticandunproven. To-
days poaching problem has its roots in
East Asia, where there is still a strong de-
mand for and an active trade in new ivory
objects. Demonizing older ivory objects to
discourage possession of newer versions of
similar items will not bring back the mam-
moths or save modern elephants fromthe
economic forces that drive poachers.
Indeed, the International Ivory Society,
onwhose advisory boardI sit, believes that
takingvaluable ivoryobjects out of circula-
tion will only increase the market price for
rawivoryabroadandput elephants ineven
more danger thanat the present.
Everyone is rightly concerned with the
plight of Africanelephants andthe horrors
that poachersareinflictingonherdsacross
the continent. All of us want to find the
right solutiontostabilize elephant popula-
tions in Africa through sound economic
and conservation policies. But the answer
must not come at the expense of collectors
who play such an important role in pre-
serving important, interesting and revela-
tory objects inour cultural history.
GodfreyHarris heads apublic policy
consultingfirminLos Angeles andis
principal representative of the Political
ActionNetworkof the International Ivory
Society.
How to save
elephants
and ivory
By Godfrey Harris
S
omething similar is
happening at the U.S.-
Mexico border and on
the Mediterranean. In
both places, lifesaving
and rights-respecting policies
are being blamed for a surge in
migrants andasylumseekers.
Italy started a rescue-at-sea
operation called Mare Nostrum
in response to the drowning of
360boat migrantsinOctober. In
the first six months of this year,
65,000 boat migrants arrived in
Italy, an eightfold increase over
the same periodin2013.
And in the United States, in
response to horror stories of the
trafficking of children Congress
passedananti-traffickinglawin
2008 that provided full hearings
for unaccompanied children
from noncontiguous countries.
While waiting for claims for pro-
tection to be heard, they are re-
leasedto families or other spon-
sorsrather thanbeingdetained.
Sofar this fiscal year, more than
57,000 unaccompanied Central
American children have arrived
at the U.S. border.
These are large numbers,
but a little global perspective is
warranted. Syrias neighbors in
the Mideast, for example, are
hosting more than 2.5 million
Syrianrefugees. Basedonabso-
lutenumbers, orontheabilityto
absorbnewcomers as afactor of
GDPandpopulation, theindus-
trialized countries do not bear
nearly the refugee burden of a
Kenya, Jordan, Thailand or
scores of other nations.
Regardless of how the refu-
gee burdens compare, however,
the United States and Europe
have met the latest influx of mi-
grants with a groundswell of
negativity. Many in the United
States are calling on President
Obama to make changes in pol-
icy or the law so that irregular
migrants can be quickly re-
moved, with only cursory con-
sideration of their protection
claims. EuropeanUniongovern-
mentshaverefusedtogivepolit-
ical and financial backing to
Mare Nostrum, calling instead
for tougher action against
smugglers. Italian opposition
parties want to shut down the
rescue operationaltogether.
These are not just knee-jerk,
xenophobic howls. The chronol-
ogy of events suggests that pro-
tective laws and policies may
have been a pull factor for mi-
grants. It is likely that smug-
glers and other criminals are
profiting from these irregular
migration streams, and that
some of the migrants will not
qualify as refugees.
But credible assessments in-
dicate that many of the newar-
rivals are legitimately in need of
international protection. A2014
studybytheU.N. HighCommis-
sioner for Refugees found that
58% of unaccompanied and
separated Central American
children arriving in the United
States face the kind and level of
harm in their home countries
that indicates a need for inter-
national protection. The Italian
government has estimated that
80% of boat migrants this year,
many from Syria, Somalia and
Eritrea, qualify for formal refu-
gee status or other forms of pro-
tection.
There are many possible ap-
proaches to handling these in-
fluxes, butfast-trackprocessing
thatcutscornersondueprocess
should not be one of them. The
process of sorting out claims for
protection cannot be hurried
without risking errors that
could have life-and-death con-
sequences, and the fact that
childrenareinvolvedmakesthis
process even more difficult.
Whether a child qualifies for
protection involves complex le-
gal considerations, such as
whether the childmeets the ref-
ugee definition, whether he or
she is controlled by traffickers
and whether the home govern-
ment can provide protection
from further abuse; and if the
child is to be deported, have ar-
rangements beenmadetoprop-
erly receive and re-integrate
himor her?
So, what is tobe done?
Greater attention must be
paidtoimproving humanrights
conditions and insecurity in the
countriesof originandthecoun-
tries of transit, but this is along-
term effort and will not help
solve the immediate problem.
For the short term, both the
United States and the EU have
the capacity to bear the costs of
providingfair andefficient proc-
essing as well as decent recep-
tion conditions. What is lacking
is the political will to bear these
costs. Equitable burden-shar-
ing among the American states
and European nations would
transformthesesituations from
crises into manageable prob-
lems, but political wrangling
hasstymiedattemptstodistrib-
ute costs andresponsibilities.
In addition to providing fi-
nancial support and joining in
the Mare Nostrumrescue oper-
ation, EUleaders couldapprove
measuresthat wouldrelieveIta-
lys burden by, for example,
transferring asylum seekers
among the 27 other EUmember
states, accordingtotheir capac-
ity. In the United States, Oba-
mas request for $3.7 billion in
additional fundingtorespondto
the border influx has, thus far,
largely produced congressional
posturing rather than serious
debate on whether the funding
will be usedtoprotect childrens
rights.
Humane solutions are not
quick, easy or cheap, but they
are manageable for relatively
rich democratic societies. Such
societies bear a particular re-
sponsibility to serve as models
of behaviorforcountrieswithfar
less capacity that receive far
larger numbers of refugees. The
real burden on the United
States and Italy is to showthat
even large numbers of migrants
and asylum seekers can be
treated fairly and efficiently
without sacrificing basic due
process protections andrespect
for humandignity.
BillFrelickis the director of
HumanRights Watchs refugee
program.
Rich countries, barred doors
Poor nations harbor
millions of refugees; the
U.S. and Europe should
be far more welcoming.
By Bill Frelick
T
he key to ending
the current battle
betweenHamas and
Israel and pre-
venting more fight-
ing inthe future is the demili-
tarization of Gaza. Simply put,
Hamas without rockets is not
the same Hamas.
That solution, thoughseem-
ingly uncomplicated, has given
rise to questions about its prac-
ticality. Is it possible? Are there
precedents? How could disar-
mament be implemented and
its permanence assured? And
whowouldleadthe effort, guar-
anteeing that removing rockets
fromGaza would benefit Pales-
tinians and Israelis alike and
advance the cause of peace?
Demilitarization indeed has
precedents, beginning with the
1982 evacuationof the Palestine
Liberation Organization from
Beirut. While Israeli troops be-
siegedthecity, theU.N. Security
Council enacted Resolutions
508 and 509, which created an
international force to facilitate
the PLOs exit. Similarly, today,
the Security Council could au-
thorize international action to
oversee Gazas disarmament.
Rockets, mortars and other
heavy weapons could then be
safely transported to a desig-
natedsite anddestroyed.
More specific models for de-
militarization are contained in
the reports submitted by Sen.
George Mitchell andCIADirec-
tor George Tenet at the height
of the second intifada in 2001.
Both recommended creating a
Palestinian state in stages, be-
ginning with the disarming of
Palestinianfactions. That proc-
ess would be carried out by the
Palestinian Authority cur-
rently confined to the West
BankwhichrecognizedIsrael
and committed to the peace
process. The Mitchell and Ten-
et proposals remain integral to
U.S. policy. The Obama admin-
istration supports the estab-
lishment of ademilitarizedPal-
estinianstate.
President Obama also pro-
vided the most recent preced-
ent for demilitarizing Gaza: the
removal of chemical weapons
from Syria. By threatening to
use military force against Da-
mascus, the president per-
suaded Syrian dictator Bashar
Assad to surrender his chemi-
cal arsenal. Once considered
the source of the chemical
weapons problem, Assad be-
came apartner inresolvingit.
Hamas could do the same.
Largely friendless in the world
and facing numerous adversar-
ies, Hamas couldtrade its rock-
ets for at least implicit recogni-
tion of its status in Gaza. It
could be compensated with
international aid for Gazas ci-
vilians, the reopening of border
crossingsandtheeasingof Isra-
els maritime blockade. Hamas
could also become part of the
solution.
So, too, must thePalestinian
Authority. Inrecent days, Presi-
dent Mahmoud Abbas offered
to deploy his American-trained
security forces at strategic
points on Gazas borders. Add-
ing disarmament to these
forces task would strengthen
moderate Palestinians and es-
tablish the principle funda-
mental to sovereignty that
their government is maintain-
ing a monopoly over armed
power. According to a Palestin-
ian survey taken last month,
88%of Gazas populationfavors
the stationing of disciplined
Palestinian Authority forces in
the area. Gaza guarded by Pal-
estinian Authority policemen
fromthe West Bankis less likely
to become a launching pad for
missile attacks against Israel.
None of these measures can
happen without leadership.
The United States must unite
with international and regional
governments to convince
Hamas that it has nochoice but
to demilitarize. Other states
Qatar and Turkey must af-
firm that their aid to Gaza will
be used to build hospitals and
schools rather than military
bunkers and attack tunnels.
The Israelis must be reassured
that inspectors will remain in
Gaza to prevent Hamas at-
temptsat rearmament. Andthe
Palestinian Authority must be
guaranteed that assuming se-
curityresponsibilitiesinGazais
a step toward, rather than a de-
tour from, independence.
Still, even with precedents
and effective leadership,
Hamasissuretoclingbitterlyto
its rockets. And unlike the
Hamas tunnels, which can be
destroyedbyalimitedIsraeli in-
cursion, silencingtherocket fire
may require reoccupying most
of Gaza. That iswhyIsrael must
be allowedtomaintainand, if
necessary, escalate its pres-
sure on Hamas. Just as a cred-
ible military threat provided
the leverage for extracting the
PLO from Beirut and for
convincing Assad to relinquish
Syrias chemical weapons, so
too must Israels operations,
crucial to defending its citizens
from almost 1,900 Hamas
rockets, be recognized as legiti-
mate by the international com-
munity.
This may be the greatest
challengeenroutetodemilitari-
zation. Though Israel will con-
tinue to exercise extraordinary
caution to minimize innocent
casualties, combating an ene-
mythat uses civilians as human
shields will invariably prove
controversial. The painful im-
ages of human suffering must
not deprive us Israelis and
Palestinians of the opportu-
nity to restore our daily lives
and reopen possibilities for
peace.
Michael B. Oren, former
Israeli ambassador tothe
UnitedStates, holds the chair
ininternational diplomacy at
the Interdisciplinary Center
Herzliyaandis afellowat the
Atlantic Council.
Disarming Gaza
By Michael B. Oren
Demilitarization
could mean benefits
for both sides
and peace.