J.Post March 23: BDS - Wrong Prescription, Wrong Diagnosis

Reader James Adler leaves us with the impression that he sleeps very well now that he has concluded that he possesses the formula for ending the BDS movement and resolving the Arab-Israel conflict (“Rx for BDS,” Letters, March 20). To achieve this state of bliss, all Israel must do is “cease settlement expansion and end the occupation.”

It is worthy to note that when Adler iterates what Israel must do, he provides not even the slightest hint as to any obligations or requirements that are expected of the Palestinian side in order to reach this messianic goal. Some points of reality that he might want to consider are: 

1. The state of Israel is surrounded by hate and enmity, and the corrupt Palestinian Authority is engaged in active anti-Israel incitement in its educational system and mosques, so that the relinquishing of any territory is not doable now or in the foreseeable future. We have witnessed the results of our unilateral withdrawal from Gaza, where we were repaid with thousands of rockets.

2. The primary interest of the PA and its partner, Hamas, is not a state of their own, but the elimination of the State of Israel.

3. The discomfort of checkpoints is not the cause of terrorism. Terrorism demands the security need for checkpoints.

4. The settlements and occupation are not the cause of BDS, as attempts to boycott Israel have been a tool of Israel-haters ever since the state’s establishment.

ZEV CHAMUDOT

Petah Tikva 

(You can read Adler's response here.)

[Image credit: Flickr user claudia gabriela marques vieira]

J.Post October 29: The 'Palestinian state' folly

Sir, - The article by Michael Cohen submitted as a "Letter from America" with the title "Why a Palestinian state is essential" suffers from an obvious major flaw. While it very well may be an accurate expression of why America views a Palestinian state to be essential, it completely fails to appreciate the genuine existential concerns of the people of Israel, while at the same time reveals a gross lack of understanding about the realities of the PA-Israel conflict.

Since Michael Cohen lists himself as a Rabbi and a college teacher of conflict resolution, I unfortunately feel compelled to criticize the thesis of his article in relation to these two professional areas. One of the primary duties of a rabbi has always been to identify with the plight of the Jewish people, seek their welfare, and fight on their behalf. Rabbi Cohen expresses no empathy at all with Israel's fragile security situation, but with unmitigated chutzpah dares to suggest that his understanding of Israel's defense requirements is superior to that of Israel's democratically elected prime minister.

As a rabbi and conflict resolver, Cohen must understand that Israel is surrounded by implacable enemies and unrestrained fanatical hatred. The PA has never ceased its promotion of terrorism in words as well as in deeds. It heroizes the most vile acts of terrorism and constantly uses every vehicle at the UN and elsewhere to demonize Israel by invoking old blood libels, and obscenely accuses Israel of Nazi atrocities. It actively promotes terrorism in its schools and mosques. It joins itself with Hamas, whose charter calls for the annihilation of Israel, who has 'tsunamied' Israel with thousands of deadly rockets, and who has taken the lives of tens of our most precious sons. 

Must not everyone of sound mind and principle decidedly appreciate—despite Cohen's derision—Israel's insistence on maintaining its 'present very narrow and rigid security definition' for its very survival?

ZEV CHAMUDOT
Petach Tikva

The cost of fighting?

Sir, - After a careful reading of Alexander Yakobson's article "The cost of fighting, the cost of not fighting," the best I can say is that he possibly means well but nevertheless is seriously mistaken.

He begins by providing the reader with a seemingly well balanced and judicious argument, in the context of the Israeli-Arab conflict, for the need to carefully weigh the gains of taking a given action against the losses suffered if the action is not taken. Unfortunately his judiciousness becomes suspect when he permits his own biases and unsupported assumptions to seep through when describing the posture of Netanyahu, settlers, and the entire Right in regard to the two-state solution.

Without any equivocation Yakobson proclaims and accuses that "the problem with the right-wing objection to partition is that the Right does not consider the costs and dangers of non-partition." Yakobson arbitrarily chooses the pro-partition platform and pontifically pronounces "non-partition is, in the long run, fatal, because if there are not two states in this land, sooner or later there will be one state here, and this state will not be Israel."

I vigorously beg to differ. Am yisrael chai!

ZEV CHAMUDOT
Petach Tikva

[Image credit: Israel Defense Forces]

Kerry and Indyk: the Real Tragedy of Historic Proportions

Sir, - I am rather surprised that the Jerusalem Post would permit an article with such pronounced bias and hopelessly frail logic to be presented to its readers. Author Peter A. Joseph joins Martin Indyk and John Kerry in warning Israel that it is headed toward a "tragedy of historic proportions" unless it conclude an agreement with the Palestinians based on the program of two states for two peoples.

Joseph tries to assure us that his team is scrupulously fair in attributing blame for the breakdown in the negotiations to both sides, and then with perverted logic concludes that nevertheless, it is Israel who is really to blame because it continues with settlement activity that is anathema to the PA.

In order to achieve an honest evaluation of what led to the breakdown it is important raise some questions and establish certain truths. The negotiations were born in sin and clearly biased against Israel from the start when Joseph's friends insisted that the PA deserved a reward just for agreeing to negotiate. Why? Joseph's allies insisted on the morally reprehensible demand that Israel free hundreds of abominable terrorist murderers! Israel then made it clear to Kerry, Indyk, Obama, and Abbas that settlement activity would continue during the negotiations, and that this comes as a surprise to any of those honorable gentlemen either casts serious doubts on their honorability or on their mental fitness. 

By the way, did anyone ever consider warning the PA about the "tragedy of historic proportions" that it would face if it failed to negotiate in good faith?

Also worth considering is what constitutes a more serious impediment to negotiations: Israel's building in undisputed areas, or glorification and heroization of terrorist in the schools and mosques of the PA? What about hooking up with a terrorist organization that calls by word and deed for the annihilation of the Jewish state? The sad truth is that Joseph himself admits to the fact that the settlement issue is not the substantive one that divides us, but in his own words it has provided the Palestinian leaders with "an excuse" to avoid making compromises or preparing their public for peace.

ZEV CHAMUDOT

Petach Tikva

J.Post December 26: Delusions Behind Israeli Settlement Policy

Sir, - Isi Leibler once again presents us with a highly readable column, advancing straightforward facts and "A coherent settlement policy."
clear-cut arguments. He attempts to make a strong case for the necessity of Israel under the leadership of Netanyahu to establish what he calls

Leibler contends that the government's present ambiguous policy is the number one issue that is utilized by our detractors to vilify us. He cites several examples where Israel is facing increasing hostility on campuses, growing pressure for boycotts, as well as frequent anti-Israel U.N. resolutions, and claims that "the entire world is deluded into believing that settlements represent the principal obstacle to peace."

I confess I am truly surprised by Isi Leibler. While he is obviously correct about the desirability of a cohesive settlement policy, it would undoubtedly have little effect on Israel's maligners. Does Leibler really believe that even a total retreat from a pro-settlement stance by Netanyahu would reduce Israel-bashing in the least bit? Does he really believe that Abbas would then permit the presence of soldiers in the Jordan Valley or would agree to an undivided Jerusalem as the capitol of Israel? Would the PA president then be willing to declare Israel as the homeland of the Jewish people? 

I hope that Isi Leibler's response to the above questions would be in the negative, especially in view of the fact that he himself uses the term 'deluded' to describe those that believe the settlement issue to be the biggest obstacle to peace. It is important to understand that Israel is facing an implacable enemy and we therefore must remain forever vigilant in safeguarding and remaining true to our vital national interests, and not succumb to any perilous delusions.

ZEV CHAMUDOT
Petach Tikvah

A Two-State Non-Solution

Sir, - Several aspects of Susan Hattis Rolef's article "Netanyahu and the two-state solution" I found to be deeply troubling. While her concern for the confusion caused to her acquaintance from abroad by the disagreements within the government regarding the two-state solution may be genuine, she seems to be totally oblivious of the very real threats to Israel's security and well-being that the implementation of this 'solution' would engender.

I find it quite disturbing that the 'retired Knesset employee' is so quick to mimic the opinions of some acquaintance while disdainfully dismissing the validity of any and all governmental concerns. I personally reject the two-state solution for the following reasons:

• The reality of the hostility and instability that surrounds us does not leave room for a non-hostile Palestinian state. 
• The 'borders of Auschwitz' that existed in 1967 are even less defensible today with the readily available arsenals of offensive weaponry and rockets. 
• While the peace negotiations are being conducted, there is a deliberate, continuous flow of incitement and vicious anti-Israel invective that emerges from P.A. schools and mosques. 
• The continuous heroization of terrorists being vigorously conducted by the P.A.
• The unilateral withdrawal from Gaza appears to have only whetted the murderous appetite of Hamas, who openly declare their non-recognition of Israel and anti-Israel hostility.

Rolef also much too quickly accepts a distorted interpretation about the 'illegality' of the settlements and seems totally unwilling to give any credence to the many legal opinions that clearly establish our right to settle in Judae and Samaria. In short, I would much appreciate it if Rolef would for once use her writing skills to support the democratically elected 'good guys' -- and leave the Israel bashing to those too anxious to take up their cause.

ZEV CHAMUDOT

Petach Tikvah

Keep Jerusalem UNITED, Keep Jerusalem JEWISH

Sir, - Gershon Baskin's article is basically another one of Baskin's attempts to deceive and thereby influence the Israeli public towards accepting his perverse pro-Palestinian position.

The attempt at deception begins with the very title "Negotiating Jerusalem, negotiating peace" -- by which Baskin means that he would like to see Israel totally capitulate to the Palestinian position and accept their claims of entitlement to the Old City and East Jerusalem as the capital of Palestine. Presently Jerusalem is united under Israeli sovereignty, so the P.A. has nothing to offer at the so-called negotiations other than what exists in Baskin's delusional scenarios.

United Jerusalem as Israel's capital affords unprecedented equal rights and access to all its citizens, as well as full freedom of worship. Throughout the millennia it has never served as the political or religious capital of any sovereign entity other than that established by the ancient Davidic Kingdom or the modern state of Israel. 

The hundreds of years of Muslim dominance in this region have always placed the capital cities in Damascus, Baghdad, or Istanbul -- but never in Jerusalem. Baskin has the effrontery to cite Jordan's annexation of East Jerusalem in 1949, when Jordan joined several other Arab countries in their attack to eliminate the new state of Israel. In the 19 years of Hashemite rule, Jerusalem was never considered its capital. It did, however, manage to divide the city by barbed wire fences and walls that cut off the Old City and the Jewish holy places from Israel and the Jewish world.

Baskin's unmitigated gall continues with his positive approval of the Palestinian position as including the entire Old City of Jerusalem including the Jewish Quarter and the Jewish holy places. He is, however, willing to accept a division of the Old City that would leave the Jewish Quarter under Israeli sovereignty while the other three quarters -- Armenian, Christian, and Muslim -- would come under Palestinian sovereignty. Under what flight of fancy should the Armenian or Christian quarters be turned over to Muslim rule, when faced with indisputable evidence of deliberate Muslim deprivation of the Christian community of Bethlehem and active anti-Christian behavior throughout the Muslim world???

Baskin is most treacherous when trying to tackle the question of the Temple Mount. He makes himself completely oblivious to the harsh reality where the Muslim Waqf absolutely forbids Jewish prayer on the Temple Mount. A Jew is presently not permitted to move his lips without being stopped by Muslim officers. If this shamefully abusive denial of freedom of worship for Jews exists while under general Israeli sovereignty, can any honest and sane person other than Baskin truly believe it would change under Muslim sovereignty? I challenge Baskin to find any recognized Muslim religious authority that would back his claim that Muslim Sharia law permits the Jews to pray in the Temple Mount mosques. 

He goes on, cynically finding support for his anti-Jewish bias in some rabbis from the orthodox world who oppose praying on the Temple Mount. Their objection is based on the state of sanctity of the Temple Mount and their zealous concern that this sanctity not be defiled. He obviously does not understand that their opposition would have to include Muslims as well.

Finally, Baskin -- who is unable to offer any coherent reasons for denying the status quo -- asks the Jews to accept his Palestinian program and wait for the Messiah to solve the difficulties inherent in his myopic views. I too suggest that we all await the coming of the Messiah, but until then a united Jerusalem should and must remain the capital of Israel.

ZEV CHAMUDOT
Petach Tikva

[Lower image credit: Wikimedia user Ori~]

How to Subscribe to obZEVation!

Subscription is free, and requires nothing but a Google account! And you won't get any unwanted emails.

So if you like what you see on this blog, please follow the 3 easy steps below:

STEP ONE: FIND the "Join this site" button. 

STEP TWO: CLICK the "Join this site" button.

STEP THREE: In the popup window, CLICK the "Google" button, and fill in your account information.  

 That's it! Thank you for following obZEVation.

J.Post April 8: Obama's Peace Offensive in Israel

Sir, - Martin Sherman remains peerless. The intelligent reader who seeks a deeper understanding of rapidly unfolding events beyond their superficial reportage, depends a great deal on the likes of Martin Sherman for an insightful glimpse into the depth of serious meaning that often lies hidden in the simple description of events. His article "Obama in Israel: The sinister subtext?" is a prime example of Sherman's gift of articulating that which many Israelis suspected after being overwhelmed by Obama's charm offensive.

Sherman offers cogent arguments, supported by impeccable logic and an incredibly rich vocabulary to make his points, which he further strengthens by a fertile array of quotes from the subjects of his articles or literary sources. He begins his thesis with a most valid question concerning Obama's decision to bypass Israel's Knesset and deliver a message to a pre-selected group of students whom he urges to organize pressure for the promotion of peace, and if necessary even circumvent their democratically elected officials. What indeed is the nature of this aforementioned peace?

Is this the peace agreement that the government of Israel has been insisting must be negotiated by both sides without pre-conditions, and which the PA has for many months refused to accept but rather has chosen to stir up violent attacks against Israeli civilians and IDF personnel? Or is this rather Obama's subtext peace plan based upon indefensible 1967 borders and the release of hundreds of terrorist prisoners, totally ignoring the growing hostility that surrounds Israel?

Martin Sherman has got it right!

ZEV CHAMUDOT

Petach Tikva

[Image credit: Flickr user DonkeyHotey]

James Adler on the Settlements: An Artificial Issue

Sir, - James Adler now adds grievous misinformation to his consistent insidious anti-Israel bias. Under the guise of neutrality, he focuses on the Israeli settlements and views them as the sole cause of the anti-Israel Western criticism and mindset. Adler chooses to ignore the anti-Jewish and anti-Israel environment that has plagued this area for centuries and unfortunately continues to find new avenues of expression.

Even disregarding the pre-state Arab riots and British hostility, the emerging State of Israel was met by invading Arab armies, determined to wipe out the Zionist effrontery. The 1967 armistice lines were established after Israel again succeeded in repulsing attacks by the armies of all of its neighboring countries. Those cease-fire lines were never meant to define its borders. The land won at that time was indisputably part of the mandated Jewish Homeland, and never belonged to any other sovereign entity. In addition, what must be borne in mind is that all the Israeli blood that was then shed was in defense of Israel, against those who were bent on its annihilation, long before the existence of any so called West Bank settlements. In 1964 the infamous PLO Manifesto was proclaimed and called for Israel's destruction, unrelated to any connection with Israel's territorial expansion.

James Adler now joins a long list of Israel bashers who refuse to recognize the fact that the settlement issue merely provides an artificial and convenient disguise for an anti-Israel animus by villainizing the constructive efforts of some of Israel's most idealistic citizens. Hatred does exist, but any fair-minded analysis would determine that it is mostly directed toward Israel and not vise versa.

ZEV CHAMUDOT
Petach Tikva

[Image credit: Wikimedia user Ling.Nut]

Does Israel Know What It's Best Interests Are?

Sir, - It is quite often wrongly assumed that if you get someone with a Jewish sounding name like Jeffrey Goldberg to write an article, he can deliver the most inane Israel bashing tripe, in the hope that the unenlightened natives in Israel wont recognize it for what it really is. What it really proves, however, is that even possessing a Jewish name does not guarantee either intellectual integrity or more than a most superficial understanding of the Middle East and its conflicts.

The blaring headline that informs us that "Israel doesn't know what its best interests are" is grossly insulting while at the same time it seems to contain a number of veiled, and less than friendly, threats. The claim that the democratically elected government of Israel, representing a majority of its citizens, does not know how to assess its best interests is a patently malicious absurdity. Israel has unfortunately had to pay quite dearly in both blood and materiel in order to learn how to deal with the hostility of its surrounding environment, and how to best evaluate the true nature of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.  

The PA initiative of going to the UN in search of recognition was a blatant violation of the Oslo agreements. It was a conspicuous attempt to out-maneuver Israel and seek territorial and diplomatic gains, while continuing in its adamant refusal to sit and negotiate with Israel without prior conditions. The Oslo peace agreements met their just demise, when the PA was seemingly granted everything it wanted, without any concessions or compromise on its part. While the PA still persists in its onslaught of anti-Israel venom and hate through its schools and mosques, it is Israel that is constantly called on to make "gestures for peace." PA's president, Abbas, still persists in his attempts at unification with the Hamas terror organization, despite the latter's call for the destruction of Israel. The lack of any willingness on the part of the PA to restart negotiations, and in view of their continuing attempts to demonize Israel, it is eminently both just and sensible for Israel to take its own unilateral steps to halt the PA's nefarious behavior, and thus truly provide the people of Israel with the best safeguards for their security and future.

ZEV CHAMUDOT
Petach Tikva

Wake Up Call: James Adler on Israel-PA Conflict

Sir, - James Adler's letter titled "Joint Effort" (J.Post Letters, October 23), is proven to be unfounded and a patent absurdity by the headlines of today. Adler's contention that Israel's joining the Palestinian push for a UN upgrade and leaving the West Bank would result in "the reduction of extremism and the creation of so much good will...[and] would be beneficial to all," unfortunately is completely divorced from reality.

The reality of today wherein over 50 rockets have been fired into Israel from Gaza and seriously wounding several people and causing extensive property damage, should serve to awaken Adler from his 'dreamland' euphoria. Schools in southern Israel had to be closed because there were not sufficient protection against the savage onslaught. Children and adults have suffered these terrorist attacks almost on a daily basis for the last several years.

All this despite Israel's unilateral withdrawal from the Gaza strip,uprooting thousands of families and shattering their lives. This unilateral gesture of good will has been repaid by hate, destruction, and the public declaration by Hamas of their pledge to never recognize the State of Israel.

Adler's unfortunate anti Israel bias blinds him to this reality, and he has been consistently oblivious of the many 'good will' gestures that Israel has made toward the Palestinians ever since 1948 when we were victorious against 5 invading Arab armies. We have returned prisoners, reduced roadblocks, offered to negotiate without preconditions. We have been repaid by the PA's heroizing of terrorists, the teaching and preaching of hatred for Israel in their schools and mosques, and their constant anti-Israel resolutions at the UN.

Wake up Adler! Wake Up!

ZEV CHAMUDOT
Petach Tikva

[Image credit: Nevit Dilmen]

Martin Sherman, Articulate Defender of Israel

Sir, - Two letters appear in today's paper (June 27) that are critical of Martin Sherman's article "Stupid, seditious or suicidal?" What is common to both letters is the accusation of the impracticality of Sherman's one state solution, which the writers claim will incur the wrath of world opinion against the Jewish State.

It is of the utmost importance to note that neither letter presents any substantive argument in disagreement with Sherman's very cogent and lucidly presented thesis. Do either of the writers feel that the alternative two-state proposals have enjoyed acceptance by the Palestinian side? If the truth be stated, the P.A. has rejected any program presented to them that is not based on their preconditions that demand our  acceptance of the 1947 indefensible borders, the Palestinian Right of Return that will overwhelm Israel with an Arab majority, and the freeing of Palestinian terrorist prisoners. If 'practicality' is the issue, I find Martin Sherman's plan to be far more attractive.

It also must be noted, that despite all of Israel's concessions to the advancement of peace such as the unilateral withdrawal from Gaza, a 10 month freeze on building settlements, the return of Palestinian bodies and additional "gestures", none have won the appreciation of the P.A. or recognition by world opinion of Israel's concrete efforts toward a just solution of the conflict.

Martin Sherman in addition should be commended for being one of the most literate, knowledgeable, and articulate defenders of Israel in the public media.

ZEV CHAMUDOT

Petach Tikva

Adler's Non-solution to PA-Israel Conflict

Sir, - In his desire to heap scorn on Martin Sherman, James Adler resorts to childish attempts at ridicule of Martin Sherman's unsurpassed ability to precisely and accurately describe the current political scene in Israel and the nature of the PA-Israel conflict.

While Adler insists on informing us that the Earth is indeed round, he fails completely to comprehend that the real questions revolve about the behavior and relationships of its inhabitants. He therefore feels he is able to pontificate and offer thoughtless and simplistic solutions to truly complex problems.

Martin Sherman possesses superb analytical ability which he fortifies with an abundance of facts and then presents his arguments with impeccable logic. Adler, it should be noted, while he mocks Sherman's linguistics, makes no attempt at all to deal with his arguments.

Adler's 'two state solution' has proven to be a non-starter. The facts are such, that the maximum that Israel can safely concede, does not begin to satisfy the Palestinian's minimum demands. Israel cannot afford to return to the 1947 borders without sacrificing the security of its citizens. Israel cannot afford to relinquish control over Jerusalem and the Temple Mount without sacrificing its legitimate historical, and religious heritage. 

ZEV CHAMUDOT
Petach Tikva

Partners for Peace? Olmert & Abbas

Sir, - After years of negotiations and 36 meetings which failed to produce any conclusive agreement, Ehud Olmert nevertheless unequivocally declares that Abbas is a 'partner for peace'. These many lengthy meetings he feels, have provided him the opportunity not only to assess Abbas's character, but to recognize his genuine desire for peace.

Permit me to suggest a different reading and interpretation of the events. Mahmoud Abbas, who embarked on his career as one of the world's better known deniers of the Holocaust, served as Yasser Arafat's deputy, and persistently rejects any Jewish claims to an historical attachment to the Land of Israel or to Jerusalem, found a sympathetic ear in his discussions with Ehud Olmert. Abbas found Olmert to be spineless and lacking any deep commitment to Jewish history and tradition.

Is it therefore at all surprising that after their many meetings Ehud Olmert 'caved in' to Abbas and offered to retreat to the 1947 indefensible borders, to the division of Jerusalem, and the abdication of sovereignty over the Temple Mount?

Abbas indeed found a partner for peace in Ehud Olmert!

ZEV CHAMUDOT
Petach Tikva

J.Post February 6: Barking Up the Wrong Tree

Sir, - It seems puzzling and contradictory for Sheldon Schreter, who left his native Canada in 1976 to make aliya to Israel and bemoans the loss in the 'belief in God's promise of this Land to Abraham,' to speak disparagingly of 'messianist ideologies' and vigorously advocate the removal of all post-'67 settlements ('For the cause, the settlements must go,' January 30). Even more bewildering is his haste to uncritically accept the defamation of settler behavior and repeat horrid accusations concerning abominations committed in the West Bank in the name of the Jewish people.

As someone who came on aliya before Schreter, my belief in the rightness of our cause has grown in strength, accompanied by a feeling of inspiration almost entirely due to witnessing the settlers' idealism, courage and dedication to the original values of our Zionist founding fathers.

I find myself dumbfounded by Schreter's naive and distorted ideas regarding the cures for our internal strife, and his panacea for bringing about peace with our enemies. He insists that our dismantling the settlements will gain us both security and respect in the international community. Surely the tragedy that resulted from the abandonment of Gush Katif should convince Schreter that he is barking up the wrong messianic tree.

ZEV CHAMUDOT
Petah Tikva