To the Editor:
Regarding the Obama administration’s offer to Israel to extend its freeze on settlement construction, you deem the incentives “overly generous” and you “can’t understand why Mr. Netanyahu hasn’t grabbed it” (“They Need to Talk,” editorial, Oct. 7).
Here is one reason: In light of commitments President Obama has already made repeatedly and publicly to Israel (an “unshakable” commitment to Israel’s security and to preserving its qualitative military edge), the items offered are not “overly generous.” Moreover, committing the United States to vetoing United Nations resolutions on Israeli-Arab issues when such resolutions are predictably vehicles for one-sided Israel bashing is something the United States has done for decades.
If Mr. Obama wants Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to break his word to the Israeli public and take a bold political risk for the uncertain outcome of peace talks, the president needs to be really bold in what he offers to Israel.
And, in the spirit of Jewish self-loathing, self-destruction and mah-yhafis, we have this next letter there:-
After more than 60 years of unwavering support militarily, diplomatically and financially, the United States finds itself in the humiliating situation of having to beg the state of Israel for a mere 60-day extension of the settlement freeze to facilitate an agreement between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, which is so important in promoting peace and security for the region and the world.
As an American citizen of Israeli origin, I am angry and offended. It is time for the White House to explain to the nation how American interests are still being protected within such an uneven relationship and what it plans to do about it.
Michael Harel, New York
By the way, that editorial asserted that
Mr. Abbas...had been promised a permanent freeze by the White House
Oh really?
- - -
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment