December 7: Ayalon out

Ayalon out

Sir, – There is no question that the political party to feel the effect of Avigdor Liberman’s extraordinary and illogical action of removing Danny Ayalon from his Knesset roster (“Liberman surprises, leaves Ayalon off list,” December 5) will be Binyamin Netanyahu’s Likud.

Notwithstanding the rather foolish incident in which Ayalon once placed the Turkish ambassador on a lower seat and refused to shake his hand, he has been an exemplary deputy foreign minister. In fact, he is everything Liberman is not.

Ayalon exhibits dignity and a deep knowledge of Israeli history. He speaks and expresses himself in perfect English. He is able to succinctly explain the history of the present Palestinian- Israeli conflict in the clearest of terms and logic.

He is not an extremist in any sense of the word, and represents a cultured, educated and considered view of Israel’s predicament to world leaders.

If the rank and file of Yisrael Beytenu had been given the democratic option of choosing who might have represented it on the party list, there is no doubt Ayalon would have been given a very high slot.

I believe that many Israelis now will not vote for the Likud/Israel Beytenu list because of the completely undemocratic fashion that ousted such an excellent, experienced and tested politician. The loser will not be Ayalon – it will be Liberman, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and the Israeli electorate.

EDGAR ASHER
Petah Tikva

Sir, – You are on target with the word you use for Avigdor Liberman (“The bouncer’s behest,” Analysis, December 5). I would go even farther and call Liberman a dictator-in-the-making, ready to move in on Binyamin Netanyahu at the first opportunity.

I hope our prime minister didn’t make a mistake by opening the door to Liberman.

It is tantamount to having the hawk guard the chicken coop.

I also hope this government can find another place for Danny Ayalon. He is too valuable to lose.

JAN GAINES
Netanya

Irreconcilable

Sir, – In “Negotiating the inevitable with the irreversible” (Comment & Features, December 4), David Newman and Joel Peters find themselves trapped because of their inability to reconcile the irreversibility of Jewish community expansion in Judea and Samaria with the inevitability of a Palestinian state.

Neither questions the PA’s premise that the Palestinian state must be based on the racist idea where no Jews are allowed to reside, while it’s perfectly acceptable for Israel to have a 20 percent Arab population in its midst.

If Abbas truly wants an open democratic state, drawing the political lines for his new nation should not be an issue.

The fact that he has been arresting journalists because of their critical opinions of him is irreconcilable with a true democracy.

Maybe Newman and Peters should address that issue instead.

MATTIAS ROTENBERG
Petah Tikva

Sir, – David Newman and Joel Peters call for new and fresh ideas to solve the Israel-Palestinian conflict.

However, such an idea has already been enunciated in the Clinton Doctrine (in the Jerusalem context): “Where Arabs live goes to Palestine, where Jews live goes to Israel.”

Admittedly, this can lead to checkerboard-like states, but wouldn’t a Palestine made up of the West Bank and Gaza be such, too?

ROBERT ENGLMAN
Jerusalem

CORRECTIONS The top right photograph on Page 14 of the 80th Anniversary Supplement in today’s paper was taken by Ariel Jerozolimski.

Unlike what was mentioned in “SodaStream to ‘represent’ Israel at Super Bowl XLVII” (December 6), SodaStream has five manufacturing plants in Israel, including Alon Tavor, Ashkelon and one in Mishor Adumim, where the company employs approximately 450 Palestinians and 400 Israeli-Arabs. The firm is building its new primary facility in Lehavim, near Beersheba.