A clear case
I appreciated “When Gantz meets Harris” (editorial, March 5). Nevertheless, I felt that the editorial did not deliver a strong enough punch. Vice President Harris said that Israel “must do more to...”
My question is, why? Could the vice president please provide us with one instance in which one country having been attacked by another provides the other with aid (food, water, energy)? The US State Department accepts that manifestations of antisemitism “might include the targeting of the State of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity,” and that it would be antisemitic to apply “double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.”
Is this not a clear case? Should not the State of Israel be commended for doing anything, indeed anything at all to ease the plight of an enemy nation?
BARRY LYNNEfrat
Your editorial is a well-designed commentary on the background of the meetings which Benny Gantz has been holding in the US. You have pointed clearly to the obscene equation drawn by Kamala Harris when equating the roles of Hamas and Israel in this present conflict, together with the sinister juxtaposition of her description of the plight of the “starving” Gazans to the statement that these people were “met with gunfire and chaos,” thus suggesting that the gunfire came from the Israelis.
I have no doubt that Benny Gantz was singled out by Harris and her friends on the American Left, in order to work on him and bring him over to the side of President Biden in his yearning for a two-state solution. It is clear that she has done her homework and knows that Gantz is the weak link in the high echelons of Israeli politics, and that his diplomatic ineptitude may well cause him to fall victim to those who are advising Biden.
Those are the very same people who were advising Barack Obama some years ago. We know where that nearly landed all of us.
I sincerely hope that Benny Gantz will be strong enough to stand firm on the clearly enunciated Israeli position, and that he will not have been persuaded by Harris to betray his fellow members of the government.
LAURENCE BECKERJerusalem
Raw hatred
Apart from a lot of hyperbole and clever turns of phrase, Avi Gil (“Ben-Gvir is good for the Palestinians,” March 5) only demonstrates his own blinkered view combined with wishful thinking
I agree with those who say that after the war, Netanyahu has to step down, but I would also add Gantz and Eisenkot and others who all followed the mistaken path of appeasement but seem to have become heroes. October 7 has ripped off the mask from the face of the Palestinians which the likes of Avi Gil put there, and exposed a raw hatred of Israel from the youngest to the oldest and across the whole population.
Netanyahu should exit from the political stage once Gaza is conquered fully, but one of his crowning achievements will have been to have stopped a Palestinian state. I am not sure who else is strong and wily enough to prevent that catastrophe in the future
DANIEL BAUMZichron Ya’acov
Very painful concessions
Regarding “Thousands join hostage families in four-day march on Jerusalem” (March 3), families of hostages and their supporters are continuing their protests to urge the government to conclude a deal for the release of the hostages. As they must be aware, government negotiators have already made some very painful concessions to accomplish that goal, according to media reports.
It is Hamas that is holding up an agreement. What more would the protesters have the government do? Should the government accept a permanent ceasefire, and allow Hamas to survive and return to power? That would be insanity, and the great majority of Israelis reject that option, which would ensure another October 7.
We can all empathize with the pain that these families are experiencing, but the signs they should be holding are those which carry the slogan that “together we will win” with total victory, and in so doing bring the hostages home again.
FRED EHRMANRa’anana
Completely delinquent
Regarding “US: Ball in Hamas’s court for hostage deal” (March 3), the ball has been in Hamas’s court for nearly thirty years. Instead of developing Gaza’s economy and building a Palestinian state (coexisting with the nation-state of the Jews) and offering citizenship to the “Palestine refugees” who’ve been stuck in refugee limbo for generations, Hamas chose to spend a billion dollars to build an extensive network of terror tunnels and acquire a huge supply of missiles which it fired at Israeli population centers from Gazan population centers – a double war crime.
While being completely delinquent in matters of civil governance, Hamas has dedicated itself to efforts to destroy Israel. Israel can’t count on the possibility that Hamas will run out of ammunition anytime soon. If Hamas wants the war to end, it should free the hostages and surrender unconditionally.
TOBY F. BLOCKAtlanta
Naive or manipulative
Regarding “PM: Pass haredi conscription law compromise, or election will end war” (March 1), Netanyahu is not wrong. Holding national elections during a period in which war is being waged, while not unprecedented, makes little sense. The focus, here, must remain on destroying Hamas’s terror infrastructure and rescuing the some 130 hostages still withering away in captivity.
A three-month period of electioneering followed by 60 days of coalition negotiations would be giving our enemies a brightly wrapped gift. And while haredi conscription is, admittedly, a serious issue that must, at some point, be faced and dealt with, there are other domestic and international items that influence which slip of paper is dropped into the ballot box.
Right now, I’m less concerned with Iran’s nuclear capability, the South African and Brazilian heinous charges of genocide, global warming, and Israel’s credit rating than I am with bringing this war to a successful and gratifying end.
The prime minister’s call for compromise, though, is somewhat naive, or manipulative. He, more than anyone else, is aware that compromise in Israeli politics is viewed as failure. The structure of our government – a single legislative body, lack of representation through constituencies, ceremonial rather than executive presidential powers – provides an effective firewall against the kind of compromise that provides the basis of true democracies.
Can there be a Center-Right government without the inclusion of the haredi parties? Maybe, but now is not the time to find out.
BARRY NEWMANGinot Shomron
Multicultural society
Regarding “The government takes reservists for granted” (February 21), Uri Keidar, representing the Israel Hofsheet – Be Free Israel, organization, meaning free of the Jewish religion, rants about haredi exemptions from military service.
Glaringly he totally ignores the exemption of the some 20% of the population who are Arab. Apparently he takes the Arab situation for granted as immutable, while believing that Jews of a haredi lifestyle can and should be forced to change to his view. Israel is a very multicultural society, and the best way to cause friction is for one culture to try to convert another as Israel Hofsheet appears to attempt.
Whatever the solutions, it may take not a stroke by the Knesset, but generations of gradual transitions for all concerned. It’s best to simply accept the reality of haredi culture and just move on, for the sake of peace.
GERSHON DALINModi’in-Maccabim-Reut