Web Letters: A Memo to Obama on Israel

Avnery must turn to the leftist press in the US, as he is already well-funded by the anti-Semitic left in Europe. In Israel, he has been embarrassed repeatedly over the last twenty years as being out of touch with reality and provably so. He especially humiliated himself in public by fawning over the Palestinian President for Life Arafat. Avnery completely missed what was obvious to most other Israelis: any pull-back from territory would be filled with Islamic terrorists. And so it has become and so Avnery still cannot see the truth.

Shel Zahav

Jerusalem, Israel

Would that your suggestions be heard and applied, but I fear it may already be too late. Biden correctly foresaw that Obama would be tested in his first days or weeks in office, and I fear he has already been tested with the Gaza tragedy. Sadly Obama's response to this test--silence-- has been loud and clear to Israel: It indicates that he will continue turning a blind eye to Israel's actions, essentially giving the green light for it to attack Iran with impunity and obliterate it, as Hillary, diplomatic as ever, threatened. Israel is out of control and the world is intimidated and clucks its collective tongue as the vision of Greater Israel looms larger each day. I hope I'm wrong, but all signals are that Obama has already been bought and paid for. By the way, if Obama speaks to Israelis in a public forum, it is only inviting some madman to assassinate him.

Letter-writer Joanie Fritz Zazike writes: "However, I am sickened by and ashamed of Israel's cavalier attitude that feigns sympathy for innocent Palestinian citizens, yet forgives 'collateral damage' as a necessary result of war"--a brilliant observation and spot on. The "feigns sympathy" comment is particularly resonant now in New York with the opening of the Israeli animated film Waltz With Bashir. This is a cunning propaganda attempt to whitewash the culpability of Sharon, who was found guilty of crimes against humanity in the International Court. The film is diabolically timed to coincide with the current genocide in Gaza. What a despicable idea, to really imagine people would be deceived into gaining synpathy for the genocidal maniacs in Gaza. The film ends with a long and heartbreaking display of the widows of the murdered Palestinian men in the Sabra and Shatila camps, as if sympathy for their victimhood would automatically absolve Sharon of cold bloooded murder. This despicable film could have been commissioned by Goebels if this was WWII.

stanley hersh

New York, NY

In reading this, I'm struck by my own ignorance of specific details of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Avnery's "Memo" was very helpful in this regard. Nevertheless, as a Jew, the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is always a squeamish issue for me. I feel this irrational fear that any public statement I make about Israeli aggression will make me sound like an anti-Semite. However, I am sickened by and ashamed of Israel's cavalier attitude that feigns sympathy for innocent Palestinian citizens, yet forgives "collateral damage" as a necessary result of war--as if the actions of the past week will bring peace to this region. They will not. If anything, Israel's unabashed assault on Gaza has only caused a further deterioration of the situation, attracting more virulent strains of Hamas-like terrorists, and galvanizing the Palestinian people behind their only apparent "protectors."

Israel is acting like the US acted with Iraq. Their answer to the "Palestinian problem" is to decimate the region so they can dissolve its leadership, whether seated in government (Hussein or Hamas) or radical elements (Al Qaeda or Hamas). Should Barack Obama choose to address the hard-line Israeli leadership with a different tune than the Bush administration sang all these years, it would go a long way toward setting a standard. But as long as the soon-to-be Obama White House keeps rattling sabers at Afghanistan, vowing to take out Osama bin Laden in the same manner as the Israeli government is committed to taking out Hamas, such an Obama address would be nothing but lip service. Change is needed, and change begins at home. Alas, this is the one comment lacking from Uri Avnery's very astute memo to Obama.

Joanie Fritz Zosike

New York, NY

This is a difficult observation to make--particularly in response to Uri Avnery's persistently conscientious work, though it also makes it specially appropriate--but the way to peace is often paved with injustice. There are plenty of liberal axioms that could be classified as "propaganda," and one of which is certainly the insistence that an independent Palestinian state is prerequisite to peace. What is seen by Avnery as "the express purpose of making a Palestinian state--and hence peace--impossible, by cutting the territory of the prospective State of Palestine into ribbons," could also be interpreted through history's eyes as keeping the land of "Israel," "Palestine," or whichever term you would prefer, in its (some would add, "miraculous") cohesiveness. Someone must take account of Palestine's ridiculous intended geography and its incongruity with the stated aim of maintaining Palestinian unity.

My personal hopes regarding Obama's impact are centered mostly on his predilection for solutions that result from a simple understanding of people's needs. One must once and for all divorce the issue of Palestinian life in modern-day Israel from ambitions to form an alternative, political entity, as it becomes increasingly clear that Palestinian welfare does not concern the two objectives to an equal degree. Where did all the Socialists go, I ask?

Avnery knows just as well as I do that no religious camp would accept his division idea for two capitals--not in a million years--not for long. His naïveté in believing that a "Joint Commission for Truth and Reconciliation, composed of Palestinian, Israeli and international historians, will examine the events of 1948 and 1967 and determine who was responsible for what" would actually be acceptable for anyone involved--thus cutting through all the "thousands of hours of negotiations, conferences" etc.--is frankly unfathomable.

I do completely agree with the basic necessity for a Palestinian right of return; my version, however, places this principle alongside the right of return of all Jews, in recognition of their global insecurity and ancient roots in the land. I'm not exactly fond of this fact, but Jewish claims for this right will never cease for the same reason that Palestinian claims for the entire land won't end as long as they feel in danger as individuals and as a people. The right of every Muslim, Christian and Jew to visit any portion of Israel, must be secured forever--what railway will guarantee that?

Inbal Cohen

Jerusalm, Israel

Sounds good! I would only add that a referendum on this proposal should be held in Israel and Palestine. If this or any other plan is accepted, the hard-liners on both sides of this conflict would have an opportunity to bow gracefully to the will of their respective people. If the IDF goes into Gaza, we are looking at a bloodbath on both sides. There will be a repeat of the inquires after the last incursion into Lebanon. Heads will again roll, and there is an off chance that a peace deal will look better to both sides. We can only hope!

Pervis James Casey

Riverside, CA

As Cynthia McKinney said on CNN following the ramming of the relief boat by the Israelis, now is the time for President-elect Obama to stand up and make a statement about this violent onslaught and the suffering of Palestinians in Gaza. If he were to speak up now, that would set a long-awaited new course for US policy in the Middle East, do more to combat the root causes of Islamic terrorism than all the weapons and heavy-handed means money can buy and, just as importantly, send a message to the Israeli right that there is a new sheriff coming to town.

john molina

Chula Vista, CA