Recently, some letter writers to The Star (6/6) have stated that “the two-state solution (of Israel and Palestine) is no longer viable.” Rather, they say a single state for both Jews and Arabs is preferable.But anyone with even a modest knowledge of history knows that the wounds and barriers, both real and psychological, between these two peoples over the past 60-plus years render that improbable anytime soon.
Living next door to Israel with its vibrant press, where dissent is more freely expressed than in the U.S., Palestinians appreciate and even envy this and other aspects of Israeli life, while they are understandably critical of how they perceive their neighbor is treating them.
If both Israelis and Palestinians keep in mind that a single state might be in their foreseeable future, they’ll continue perfecting their respective states. This process reduces the animosity between them and, within a few years, would create even stronger ties, including the possibility of a single state.
However, without this interim step of the two states living side-by-side in peace for several years, the idea of both peoples agreeing to create one state seems impossible.
National board member, Kansas City chapter leader, Brit Tzedek v’Shalom, the Jewish Alliance of Justice and Peace
Why be Israel’s big brother?
Sen. Obama recently appeared before the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the powerful lobbying group supporting Israel, and stated that as president he would be uncompromising in his defense of Israel’s security.
I continue to read about issues related to the Middle East and wonder why our country continues to see itself as Israel’s big brother. It is clear that a great many of our national problems stem from our government’s determination to ensure the security and well being of the nation of Israel.
I certainly understand the practicalities behind this long-standing policy. Our country has a large Jewish population, which strongly favors support for Israel. Those individuals and their organizations vote for and contribute to politicians.
But, other than as a matter of political expediency for individual office holders, why as a nation do we have to invest so much of our own national well-being in the fate of Israel? I cannot see where it is in our national best interest to continue to focus on what is best for Israel as opposed to what is best for our own country. Among other things, we are alienating the people with the oil.
Glenn E. Bradford