You’re a former one-term president who’s been indicted by diverse federal and state prosecutors for — ah, let’s see — inciting an insurrection at the Capitol, or perhaps stealing classified documents, or maybe attempting to subvert an election, or possibly paying off a porn star, or perchance falsifying business records, or mayhap sexually attacking a female journalist, or all of them? So, what do you do?

Here’s a modest proposal in seven obvious steps:

1. Be smart enough to inherit $413 million from your father; this is key.
2. Announce, “I am a very innocent man.” Swear that “she is not my type.” Insist all the charges are “fake news.” Point out that the judges, judges’ staff, judges’ families, prosecutors, entire jury pools, and the media are corrupt and/or vindictive and/or racially prejudiced and/or “socialist lunatics.”
3. Engage a troupe of incompetent attorneys to blame after you’re convicted.
4. Run again for president of the United States so you can declare — however implausibly — that your sundry prosecutions constitute “election interference.”
5. Establish a political action committee to convert contributions from loyal members of your political base into payments for your pricey legal defense; hawk bits of your clothing.
6. After you’ve been duly convicted of 34 business fraud felonies and sexual assault and libel and assessed millions in damages and fined millions more, and you still face several other serious indictments and trials, instruct your lawyers to file appeal after appeal after appeal to delay, delay, delay, and delay.
7. To divert the voting public’s attention from your status as a convicted felon, adjudicated rapist, serial fabulist, and defective candidate, accuse certain Ohio residents of “eating the dogs,” “eating the cats,” and “eating the pets” and declare, “if I don’t win this election, the Jewish people will really have a lot to do with that loss.”

Follow these steps to avoid prison and — believe it or not — possibly return to the Oval Office.

Of the hundreds of women scientists, why am I highlighting these two? One reason is they contributed in areas that hold great interest for me, astronomy and biology, disciplines at opposite ends of the size scale. The other is that they died early (of cancer) and thus became ineligible for the Nobel Prize which by rule cannot be awarded posthumously.

Henrietta Swan Leavitt (1868-1921) was an American astronomer. A graduate of Radcliffe College, she worked at the Harvard College Observatory as a “human computer”. In 1902 the director of the observatory, Edward Pickering, assigned her to measure and catalog, from the observatory’s collection of photographic plates, variable stars in the Small and Large Magellanic Clouds, nebulae thought to reside within our own Milky Way galaxy.

By graphing the magnitude (apparent brightness) versus logarithm of period of variable stars called Cepheids, Leavitt discovered that “A straight line can be readily drawn among each of the two series of points corresponding to maxima and minima, thus showing that there is a simple relation between the brightness of the Cepheid variables and their periods.” In short, the brighter the star, the longer was its period of oscillation. Her results were published in the Harvard College Observatory Circular of 1912.

Logarithms compensated for the property of light called the “inverse square law”, whereby apparent brightness decreases as the inverse square of its distance. For example, given two sources of equal absolute brightness (say two 100-watt bulbs), if one is three times farther away than the other, it will appear one-ninth as bright.

Ms. Leavitt brilliantly concluded that Cepheid variable stars could serve as the long-sought “standard candle” which would allow measurement of distances well beyond the currently accurate, but relatively short-ranged, triangulation method called stellar parallax.

Apparent brightness, absolute brightness, and distance are related by a simple equation. Knowing any two of these three variables will yield the third. But in 1912 not a single Cepheid variable star had had its distance accurately measured. Thus, Leavitt’s chart could not be calibrated (and used) until the distance to at least one Cepheid was known.

That problem was solved one year later when Ejnar Hertzsprung, using parallax, determined the distance to Delta Cepheus and several other Cepheids in our galaxy. Leavitt was then able to say that the Small Magellanic Cloud was 100 times farther away than Delta Cepheus and was in fact another galaxy.

“Leavitt’s Law”, along with Vesto Slipher’s discovery of spectrographic redshift, allowed Edwin Hubble to discover that our universe is expanding. He often said that Levitt deserved the Noble Prize for her work.

Henrietta Swan Leavitt (Isn’t that a wonderful name for an astronomer?) died of stomach cancer at the age of 53. Asteroid 5383 Leavitt is named for her, as is Crater Leavitt on the Moon.

 Rosalind Franklin (1920-1958) was a British chemist and X-ray crystallographer whose work led to the discovery of the structure of DNA. A graduate of Newnham College, with PhD from Cambridge University, she was hired in 1950 by John Randall and assigned to work with Maurice Wilkins at King’s College London in trying to discover the structure and replicating mechanism of the DNA molecule.

Franklin had made herself an expert in X-ray crystallography, even suggesting design improvements of the instrument. However, images produced by X-ray crystallography are anything but lucid. It’s akin to shining a light up through a crystal chandelier, photographing the image you see on the ceiling, and from that deciding what the chandelier looks like – a lot of interpretation required.

Franklin and Wilkins did not get along. Wilkins thought Franklin was hired to be his assistant; Frankin thought she was hired as his equal.

In 1952 two other teams were competing to be first in discovering the structure of DNA, thought to be the copying mechanism of genetic material and recipe for building every living thing. James Watson and Francis Crick were working at the famous Cavendish Laboratory at the University of Cambridge, 60 miles north of London. Linus Pauling, who a year earlier had discovered, using X-ray crystallography, the alpha-helix (single helix) structure of proteins, was working at Caltech in the USA.

Watson and Crick collaborated well, and somewhat with Wilkins at King’s College, but not with Ms. Franklin who did not trust that the guys would ultimately give her credit for her work.

To give you a feel for the environment that Ms. Franklin had to endure I present the following quotes by James Watson from his book The Double Helix; A Personal Account of the Discovery of THE STRUCTURE OF DNA (1968).

“By choice she [Rosalind] did not emphasize her feminine qualities. Though her features were strong, she was not unattractive and might have been quite stunning had she taken even a mild interest in clothes. This she did not. There was never lipstick to contrast with her straight black hair, while at the age of thirty-one her dresses showed all the imagination of English blue-stocking adolescents.”

“Clearly Rosy had to go or be put in her place. The former was obviously preferable because, given her belligerent moods, it would be very difficult for Maurice to maintain a dominant position that would allow him to think unhindered about DNA.”

Franklin was meticulous in analyzing data and the X-ray images she had her assistant, Raymond Gosling, take. It was obvious that DNA had a helical form, but was it a 2, 3, or 4-strand helix? And were the nucleotide bases on the inside or outside of the phosphate groups that formed the “rails” of the helical ladder?

Watson and Crick thought they knew, as they had been building physical 3-D models of various configurations. Hoping for confirmation, Watson went down to King’s College and asked Rosalind if he could view her latest images. In the presence of Wilkins, she refused, saying she had not had time to analyze them. She stormed out of the room, apparently upset that Watson would even ask. Her feelings toward him must have been reciprocal. Watson then asked Wilkins if he could see Franklin’s images, and Wilkins agreed! An egregious breach of ethics in scientific research.

James Watson, in seeing famous “Photo 51” (Google it), immediately recognized the double-helix structure of DNA. On 28 February 1953, at the Eagle pub on the Cambridge University campus, he and Crick announced that they had “discovered the secret of life.”

Watson, Crick, and Wilkins were awarded the 1962 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine. Rosalind Franklin had died of ovarian cancer at the age of 37 in 1958, and so was ineligible to receive the Nobel Prize she rightly deserved.

 

            Introduction. In an earlier Chestertown Spy article (5-26-24) “Understanding the Israeli/Palestinian Animus”, the evolution of Zionism was traced from an ancient prayer for a Jewish homeland to a political movement launched in 1896-97. It acquired powerful British support in 1917 that, after WWII and the Holocaust, led to the founding of Israel in 1948 in the former Mandate.  The pre and post Independence years featured considerable violence between the Zionists/Israelis and first the Mandate-British and then the Palestinians.

This article moves the story forward and focuses on the dynamics of the Israeli/Palestinian relationship over the past 76 years, and the volatile environment it created.  In retrospect, the current war now seems almost inevitable.

Given Netanyahu’s obduracy and the broader regional instability, the US is probably the only country that could change the subject from war and misery to something more positive.

Answers from the Past. .Ken Burns in a 5/19/24 commencement address, described his 50 year career  as “..reminding people of the power our past exerts..and trying to discern patterns and themes from history, to enable us to interpret our dizzying and dismaying present.”  And the following discussion attempts to examine the past, identify its impact in order to interpret the dizzying and dismaying present in Gaza and the West Bank. And perhaps offer Washington some new options.

One historical point seldom mentioned is that the tribal ancestors of today’s Arab Palestinians have occupied the same geographic area for millennia, as empires conquered and ruled it: the Assyrian, Persian, Roman and finally the British (1916-48).

The relations between the native Arab residents of Palestine and the European Jewish migrants in the 19^th and 20^th Centuries, struck me as similar to those between the Native American tribes and the Spanish, French and British Imperial colonies; particularly during the 19^th Century US Westward expansion.  The newcomers wanted land and the Palestinians and the Native Americans had it. Wars ensued and both lost it.

And coincidentally, Native Americans in 1789 and Palestinians in 1948 were both excluded from citizenship. The US Constitution would allow them to become citizens “ … if they paid taxes”.  Why? The Founders considered them foreigners, which explains the  use of “treaties” with each tribe when the US granted them reservations. This was rectified 136 years later in 1924, when Congress passed the Indian Citizenship Act.

Israel has no constitution, but does have a series of “Basic Laws”. None of which sets out “equality” as a fundamental principle of governance.  Thus, on Israel’s Independence Day (5/14/1948), Jewish residents of the Mandate  became full Israeli citizens with all its rights and privileges, while the Palestinians (today 21% of total population) were placed under strict martial law.  In 2018, the Israel Nation-State Law passed the Knesset (Israel’s Parliament), removing some, but not all,of the most onerous discriminatory restrictions.

Violence and terrorism have suffused the Israeli/Palestinian relationship for decades. In 1987 it erupted into “intifada”, a full-scale Palestinian  uprising against Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, areas the UN partition plan had intended for the Palestinians.  Their deepening anger and multiplying grievances against the Jews, in the early 21^st Century, eased Palestinian acceptance of HAMAS.

HAMAS was a much more radicalized and militarily adept Palestinian actor, than the PLO, which it replaced. Then in 2006, it defeated Fatah in a Palestinian Authority election and quickly took control of Gaza and rejected the PLO agreements with Israel and the US. They have ruled oppressively ever since, albeit with early popular support for their tough stance vis a vis Israel and the Jews.

Recent Developments. It has been almost ¾ of a year since the HAMAS invasion generated horror in Washington and EU capitals at the brutality of HAMAS’ assault and led to their immediate support for Israel.   Biden’s personal trip to Israel soon after 10/07/23, was emblematic of this early post attack attitude.

However,  much of that goodwill has been reversed after Israel’s retaliatory, seemingly unrestrained combat operations. They have caused the deaths of some 30,000 Palestinians, destroyed Gaza, displaced over a million people, now facing starvation. And in the West Bank over 400 Palestinians have been murdered since 10/07/23 and thousands of their acres transferred to Jewish Settlers.

Netanyahu and his coalition continue to ignore mounting US and international pressure to cool the combat, announce a ceasefire, gain the release of the hostages and/or their corpses, and join a process to restore peace. Two members of Netanyahu’s governing coalition have said they would withdraw if he paused or halted the war, bringing down the Government.   And on 6/09/24, Benny Gantz, a very prominent moderate politician, resigned from Netanyahu’s war cabinet. And shortly thereafter, Netanyahu dissolved it.

Netanyahu  has begun criticizing members of his own coalition and now confronts criticism from his senior generals for: (1) not providing them a plan for Gaza, i.e. who should administer it. Currently, chaos and lawlessness reign, and (2) despite serious Army personnel losses, Netanyahu continues to refuse to draft ultra-Orthodox Jews, thus placating religious members of his coalition,

The international community has tried for months to relieve this severe human suffering, but Israel’s and occasionally Egypt’s, border closures; Israel’s refusal to allow aid ships to unload at its ports, stringent inspection requirements and combat ops, have prevented adequate aid from reaching the Palestinians.   Moreover, the Israeli Defense Force’s (IDF) killing of aid organization staff and volunteers, has reduced their presence in Gaza.

The IDF on 6/16/24 announced it would open a combat-free Gaza highway during daylight hours to allow thousands of waiting aid trucks to transport assistance to the desperate Palestinians . However, given that  armed gangs in Gaza now attack the convoys, t’s too dangerous to use the IDF’s plan.

American and European Attitudes Shifting Sharply. In April and May 2024,  a number of loud, sometimes violent, demonstrations broke out on US campuses across the country. The common demands: US policy priorities focus on helping the desperate Palestinians and stopping the war, not arming Israel.  Similar events, echoing the same sentiments have also occurred in Western Europe.

The Israel/HAMAS war and the worsening Palestinian humanitarian crisis, now headline global media, collect clicks, attract voter attention and, no surprise, have been politicized. This is particularly significant in the US, which is 4+ months away from a presidential election.  Domestically, the war adds yet another issue dividing American voters and further isolates Israel in the international community.

Interpreting the Impact of the Past on the Israel/HAMAS War.  Prior to and following its 1948  Independence, Israel 8as discriminated against its largest minority, the Palestinians (21% of population). Unlike America, no guiding governance principle of “equality” was embedded in Israeli’ laws to counter the human tendency to denigrate others, who are “different”.  America’s long and continuing, often violent, process of social correction, including the Civil War, never began in Israel.

Thus, the constant social frictions over decades have stimulated the same patterns of violent Palestinian actions and violent Israeli reactions to reset the status quo ante. The current war is simply more deadly and destructive than its predecessors.

The United States turns the Page. The only way the Palestinians and the Jews can live peacefully in the same neighborhood, is to change the existing basic dynamic in their relationship, i.e. the latter believe the former are inferior to them.

 A fundamental problem with American Middle East policy since Jefferson and the Barbary Pirates, has been its “us” versus “them”character. The “them”, Arabs plus Iranian[1] ayatollahs view the US as a  hegemonic, former colonial power that is anti-Arab and anti Islam.

Reinforcing this view are the Gulf Wars, today’s multiple US bases in the region and former president Trump’s initiative to ban  US entry, to people from Islamic countries. But, the decades of America’s strong military and political support for Israel,remain a constant reminder.

The current June/July 2024 international environment surrounding the Israel/HAMAS war, badly needs a US  intervention to provide leadership and a strategy to: (1) resolve the humanitarian disaster quickly, (2) stabilize/secure Gaza and (3) change the status of the Palestinians to reduce decades of daily friction and violence with the Jews/Israel.  The following are suggested actions for possible inclusion in a US strategy.

1. Resolve Humanitarian Crisis: US proposes to UNSC a plan to create a security force (Israeli or international) to escort aid convoys across Egyptian border to identified distribution locations in Gaza where displaced Palestinians can safely gather.
2. Confront Fact Gaza is in Violent Anarchy: US offers to provide temporary housing and support for UN and other relief organizations in Gaza, protected by an international security force.
3. President Biden announces US support for the creation of an independent, democratic state of Palestine and the long over due realization of the two state solution.

[1]Iranians are Indo-Europeans, not Arabs.

Tom Timberman

Tom Timberman is an Army vet, lawyer, former senior Foreign Service officer, adjunct professor at GWU, and economic development team leader or foreign government advisor in war zones. He is the author of four books, lectures locally and at US and European universities. He and his wife are 24 year residents of Kent County.