An international conference should be held immediately after the Persian Gulf War to avoid "low-intensity conflicts, terrorism and tottering regimes," advises a professor of Middle East history.

Arthur Goldschmidt told an audience in Kern Building last night that the United States can no longer rely on the "same tired old (Middle East) policies which we've adopted piecemeal over the years."

The conference Goldschmidt proposes would need to address border disputes, the sharing of oil revenue, the distribution of waning water resources and the development of permanent settlements for Palestinians, Kurds and Armenians.

Goldschmidt offered his views during a two-hour long panel discussion titled "Perspectives on the War." Other faculty members who participated in the discussion were Abbas Aminmansour, Wayne Husted and Samuel Zamrik. Scheduled guest panelist and pro-Israeli speaker, Glenn Mones, refused to participate.

Aminmansour, a native of Iran and a University instructor of architectural engineering, criticized what he called America's "double standard when it comes to crises in that region."

In 1979 when the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan, he said, the United State's "only reaction was to ban its athletes from going to the (Moscow) Olympics."

Similarly, the United Nations Security Council did not condemn the Iraqi invasion of Iran in 1980, he said. Aminmansour said the United States has adopted a hypocritical stance in relation to Middle East issues.

He displayed a black and white poster showing the bodies of two children, killed by Iraqi chemical weapons, lying in the street.

"Pretty soon you might see American bodies in that place . . . or Kuwaiti or Saudi," he said.

Aminmansour said the United States contributed to the development of Iraq's weapons technology during the Iran-Iraq war. And Great Britain helped Iraq modify the now-infamous Iraqi Scud missiles launched into Israel and Saudi Arabia, he said.

Aminmansour said the United States should be more consistent in its handling of international crises.

"It's the selective response that really gets to us," he said.

Samuel Zamrik, an Arab-American and University professor of engineering mechanics, also condemned the Bush administration's response to Iraq's invasion of Kuwait.

"What kind of objective (are we pursuing) when we drop one bomb per minute over Baghdad?" he asked. "Is it our objective to destroy the Iraqi nation just to liberate Kuwait?"

Zamrik said the war was not being fought for democracy, as espoused by the current administration.

"The whole region is filled with . . . monarchies without the foggiest idea of what freedom and human rights are," Zamrik said.

Each of the speakers spoke on the Arab-Israeli dispute.

"That is the major question," Zamrik said. "It is the cause of all problems."

Husted, instructor of religious studies, said Palestinians in the occupied territories are not backing Saddam Hussein because he is a "good Muslim."

"They're not supporting (Hussein) because of his religious beliefs, but out of utter, complete desparation . . . it's unfortunate," Husted said.

Mones, co-founder of Tagar -- a Zionist youth movement on college campuses -- and an adviser to major Jewish organizations, chose not to attend.

Yachad, Penn State Friends of Israel, was planning to sponsor Mones. Ari Storch, vice-president of Yachad, said the group chose not to send a delegate because the make-up of the panel was "one-sided" and the views of their representative would be overpowered.

"The reason (Mones) was not here was because he and our board decided not to put one on three," Storch said, adding they would have participated had they been allowed two pro-Israel representatives.

Members of Yachad distributed a flyer explaining that Mones would not participate in a panel where the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait was linked to the Palestinian-Israeli issue.

Storch said that during the discussion Israel was unduly blamed for problems in the Middle East.

"How is Israel responsible for the Iran-Iraq war and the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait?" Storch asked.

Others in attendance found the panel to be balanced.

"I thought it was interesting because all opinions were discussed," said Fadi Akar (sophomore-engineering). "It was not biased in any way."

The discussion of human rights and the Arab/Israeli withdrawl from Lebanon were particularly beneficial, Akar said.

"These are issues similar to Kuwait that have not been dealt with and should be dealt with after the war," he added.