December 13, 2017: More comments on Trump’s recognition of Jerusalem

Our readers sound off on Trump's historic decision.

By LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Updated: DECEMBER 13, 2017 09:04
Letters (photo credit: REUTERS)
Letters
(photo credit: REUTERS)
US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson’s statement (“Tillerson: Embassy move unlikely before 2019,” December 10) is an indication that he is not on the same page as President Donald Trump, who indicated that he wanted the transition to occur as quickly as possible. Mr. Tillerson apparently has no intention of expediting the transition.
The US Consulate in Jerusalem near the Diplomat Hotel is a magnificent edifice. President Trump can, by executive order, immediately convert it into the US Embassy. Once the embassy has been established as a fact on the ground, the demonstrations and protests will quickly become history.
Delay only exacerbates the situation.
MOSHE ZEMEL
Givat Ze’ev
Doesn’t President Trump realize that by moving his embassy to Jerusalem, the Palestinian Authority will retaliate by refusing to accept the millions of dollars the US sends it every year? Of course the Europeans are peeved! Most of that money goes into private bank accounts that PA officials hold in European banks!
DAVID STEINHART
Petah Tikva
In the December 8 Jerusalem Post, there are several articles that can be lumped together.
There are “Security forces brace for a day of rage” and “‘Who is Trump to determine our future? Jerusalem is Palestinian’” on the front page. On Page 2, we see “Nasrallah calls for new intifada” and “Haniyeh urges uprising in West Bank, Jerusalem.” I have also seen that the Muslim and Arab worlds are criticizing Israel, while almost all of Europe is trying to distance itself from President Donald Trump’s recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.
The whole episode reminds me of school children who hear a teacher criticize their actions and then rush out and continue to bully the small kid.
Another way to look at it is to say that for 70 years, the world has been publishing fake news by denying that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel, and when someone gets up and tells them they are liars, they try to shout down the truth.
Three cheers for President Trump. Three boos for the bullies – and they should be reported to the headmaster for bullying.
MICHAEL H. DAVIS
Rishon Lezion
Caroline B. Glick’s “Trump’s great and ingenious gifts” (Column One, December 8) finally gives us some hope after eight terrible years.
During former US president Barack Obama’s tenure, the Palestinians and other Arab countries were indifferent to Israel’s concerns. Now that Trump has done what many thought impossible, we can witness the Palestinians’ real afterthoughts: that peace is not something they adhere to. Any leadership is absent. Witness the violence flaring up again.
What we got all these years and what we’re getting now are the same ingredients, even 24 years after the Oslo Accords.
Peace will only be achievable if some new kind of leadership arises – but I won’t hold my breath!
MOSHE LUFTIG
Jerusalem
In “Upending the applecart,” his analysis of the effects of US President Donald Trump’s recent speech (December 7), Herb Keinon mentions five “tenets that have come to be accepted as truths.” The fact that each is absurd and/or morally reprehensible helps explain why the Oslo process, always a long-shot, has been such a dismal failure.
1. The only solution is a two-state solution: Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas has emphatically rejected the very concept of two states for two peoples, while only a small mind insists there is only one solution to a problem.
2. There can be no long-term interim agreements: No permanent agreement is anywhere on the horizon, so the only reasonable alternatives to no agreements are short, medium or long-term interim agreements.
3. Dozens of settlements will have to be removed: Forcing innocent people from their homes is morally reprehensible unless there is no reasonable alternative. This tenet itself is a tacit admission that the Palestinian Arabs aren’t interested in peace. Obviously, if they were willing to live in peace with Israel and Israelis, they wouldn’t have a problem with the so-called “settlements,” which take up only a minuscule portion of the disputed parts of the Land of Israel. This tenet is also a tacit endorsement of the ethnic cleansing carried out by Jordan (then Transjordan) when it captured the currently disputed territories during the 1948 war.
4. A future Palestinian (Arab) state must be free of Jews: This should be called what it is – ethnic cleansing – although proponents undoubtedly find this truth inconvenient. The criticisms of the removal of “settlements” apply even more strongly here. This Arab demand should be strongly condemned and deemed unacceptable by any human being with any sense of decency.
5. Washington cannot recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital until there is a final peace deal: This is perhaps the most Orwellian tenet of all. To “war is peace,” “freedom is slavery” and “ignorance is strength,” proponents of this tenet are effectively insisting that “truth is dishonesty.”
No wonder the “peace process,” like Humpty Dumpty, has had such a great fall.
ALAN STEIN
Netanya
Unfortunately, Israel has to justify its actions to the world community for almost everything it does that might have some kind of implication for Palestinians. It seems to me that its fundamental and historic right to occupy the Land of Israel and name its own capital is clearly justified.
Commentators often say that the Palestinian question is very complicated, but I would challenge this premise by saying the basic problem and weakness of the Palestinian or Arab argument can be centered on the circumstances of the Six Day War. The veracity of Israel’s claim to Jerusalem and even to the Land of Israel itself is much more simplistic.
In 1967, the Jordanians had complete control over east Jerusalem. They were told at the outbreak of the war that Israel had no argument with them. However, they attacked, among other places, west Jerusalem. When you attack another country and you lose the war, the victor can rightly claim the territory.
If the Arabs regarded east Jerusalem as so important, why did they attack the western part of the city when they knew there was a chance they might lose everything? Arab history – nothing to do with the Jews and Israel – is a history of war and counter-attack. Today, most Arab countries are involved in warlike or terror-related activity that has nothing to do with Israel. Iran, Iraq, Libya, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Syria, Lebanon, Egypt and Somalia – just to mention a few – are involved in violence on a daily basis.
Islamic-based violence has spread across the world. This terrorism has nothing to do with the Jews and Israel.
I say to the Palestinians and their supporters: Jordan attacked west Jerusalem from the east. It lost and enabled Israel to regain control of its historic capital – which predates the advent of Islam by several thousand years.
EDGAR ASHER
Petah Tikva
Apropos the US Reform movement’s criticism of President Trump’s declaration on Jerusalem (“Reform movement against embassy move now,” December 7), I would propose revising the prayer of hope and longing recited by the Jewish people throughout the world – “Next year in Jerusalem” – to “Next year in Jerusalem, but only in the context of a final status peace agreement with the Palestinians.”
NORMAN GLASER
Huntington, West Virginia
I think it only fair that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declares Washington the capital of the United States.
IRWIN DIAMOND
Downsview, Ontario