nel Hampton always played their musicnand stubbornly refused to refresh it ornamend it according to the demands ofnnewness, progress, trendiness. For generations,ntheir music preserved thatneternal freshness which is beyond innovations,ntrends, new horizons—and itnstill does, even on the oldest and mustiestnrecords. DnA Piano DuonRalph Sutton & Jay McShann: ThenLast of the Whorehouse Piano Players;nChaz Jazz Records; NorthnHampton, New Hampshire.nTo entitle this two-volume albumnby two technically accomplished pian­nists—who evoke the times and moodsnof jazz which have become perfectlynrespectable over decades of the Americannmusical tradition—whorehouse pianonplaying is either gauche, or coy, ornobscure. Sutton and McShann representna kind of Midwestern pattern, whichncame to its peak under the Kansas Citystylenlabel. There are plenty of mildnmannerisms and eclecticism in their approachnto the tonal fabric and melodicnlore with which both men obviously havenspent their lives. They both seem to lovenwarmly what they committed themselvesnto and what for them is art. The recordsncan be obtained only through mail ordernand should be requested from Chaz JazznRecords, Box 565, North Hampton.nNew Hampshire 03862. DnPOLEMICS & EXCHANGESnIsrael or the Quandaries of Commitmentnby Leopold Tyrmandn”All I know is what I see in the papers”n—Will Rogers used to repeat wistfully.nIn our time we must revise that gloomyncondition: these days, all we are supposednto know is what we see in the liberalnpapers. Most of what we see therenis, at best, puzzling. For example: Why,nduring the last two years, have the liberalnpapers become rabidly anti-Israel?nTime magazine and the Chicago Tribunenlead .the way.nThe hypocrisy, equivocation and casuistrynwith which the “responsible” organsnapproach the issue borders on thenbizarre. On one of Newsweek’s recentncovers one could see a picture whichnwould have made Julius Streicher snugglencomfortably in his grave. It featuredna Star of David composed of assaultnrifles, and an inset of Mr. Begin’s facenexactly as it would have been presentednon the front page of Der Stiirmer in annMr. Tyrmand is editor of the Chroniclesnof Culture.n48inChronicles of Culturenattempt to pictorialize the Jew, the eternalnwrecker of the world. The covernstory is entitled “Roadblock to Peace.'”,nand it repeats the familiar charge: thatnMr. Begin’s premiership is the gravest,nperhaps the only, reason that this planetncannot achieve a state of idyllic tranquility.nWhy Mr. Begin’s nationalism—nfirmly grounded in a democratic, arch-nWestern principle of representing thenwill of the people through a mechanismnof undisputably free elections —is andespicable right-wing phenomenon innAmerican liberal eyes, while the viciousnnationalism of Hanoi, the Sandinistas,nthe late President Torrijos or Mr. Mugabenis kosher is a question one can neverncease to ask.nThe code word of all that liberal anti-nIsrael maneuvering is America’s nationalninterest. It seems appropriate tonmention that neither The Nation nornthe World Council of Churches hasnbeen, for the last century or so, too passionatelyndevoted to American interest:nat the hub of their concern was humanity’sninterest—the interest of the under­nnn^nnourished masses in Asia, the starvingninfants in Africa or along the Amazonnand, more recently, the interest of anti-nAmerican guerrilla movements allnaround the world. But suddenly—whennit pontificates about Israel—the entirenAmerican liberal left adopts the stancenof a hard-boiled corporate imperialistnegomaniac whose only passionate commitmentnis to the immediate Americanninterest and any cullable profits.nOne thus is inclined to ask a question:nIn light of the current geopoliticalnsituation and with special regard to thenMiddle East—what is America’s interestnand how best can it be served?nLet’s avoid military-strategic intelligence-gatheringnspeculations, on whichnnot everybody is able properly to elaborate.nHowever, reaching into pure politicalnlogic (which is available to anyonenwho wishes to be morally decentnabout public matters), one would likento stress that the primary allegiance ofnour foreign policy should be to annideological ally. Common civilizationalnand ideological heritage is the only rudimentnof meaningful and functional alliances.nEngland and France discoverednthrough the Entente Cordiale that submittingnpolitico-commercial cutthroatnantagonisms to the requirements of annalliance based on a common Weltanschauungnmakes nations best fit to overcomentheir shared dangers. America,nthe staunchest supporter of moral substancenin foreign-policy matters, shouldnknow by now that it was always victoriousnwhen its wars were an imperativento help those with whom the bonds of ancommon principle existed. Over thenlast two decades we have forfeited twonallegiances, betrayed two allies andncome quite close, under Carter, to anthird failure of word, will and politicalndecency. Anyone who claims that suchnan approach to world affairs meansnRealpolitik is suffering from politicalnmyopia. To abandon Israel would makenus a laughingstock in all those chancelloriesnaround the world where, thesendays, the local Realpolitikers are advisingnus to do just that.n