Complicit with Hamas ideology
Regarding “Blinken to Abbas: US opposes moving Gazans to Egypt” (November 6), it is astonishing how wrongheaded much of the US Mideast policy has been under the Obama/Biden administrations. The glaring example is the JCPOA and how it has continued to court the ayatollah-led Iranian regime despite the fact that Iran is the leading sponsor of global terrorism.
The latest example is US opposition to “forced relocation of Palestinians from Gaza to neighboring Egypt.” Israel has warned the Gazan people that they have to move from northern to southern Gaza as there will be mass destruction of all Hamas entities starting in the north.
Hamas has been attempting to hold the Palestinian people as shields and with the millions of warnings Israel has given for this relocation, many have done so; however not without Hamas doing what it can to prevent these human shields from moving, including shooting at them or at IDF troops opening the north-south roads to allow for movement.
When the north is finally cleared of Hamas personnel and infrastructure, the south will be next. That is why it is imperative for the Gazans to move into Egypt for self preservation. That doesn’t preclude their moving back to their homes when Hamas is totally destroyed.
But one thing we should never forget about the people of Gaza: In 2006 they voted Hamas in to replace the Palestinian Authority leadership as a majority in the Palestinian Legislative Council, and celebrated every Hamas murder of Israeli civilians. They are complicit with the Hamas ideology of killing all Jews. Despite this, Israel is giving them every chance to save their lives.
The United States should not block Israeli policy by talking about pauses (aka ceasefire) or stopping the temporary relocation of the population to safe areas in this war.
FRED EHRMAN
Ra’anana
False equivalences
Regarding “Borrell: Israel-Palestinian conflict is now a battle over religion, civilization” (November 7), EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell has a proclivity for drawing false equivalences between Israel and its mortal enemies. In his most recent disquisition, he disgracefully accused Israel and Hamas of contributing equally to the current Israel-Hamas war.
What absolute balderdash! On October 7, Israeli civilians were living in peace with Gazans. They were providing thousands of Gazans with access to jobs in Israel, opportunities for advanced medical treatment, and supplying Gaza with water, electricity, and shipments of food and medicines. In return Israeli civilians were brutally massacred by thousands of Hamas savages and Gazan civilians who followed them into Israel.
Yet Borrell thinks the Israelis bear equal responsibility for their own murders. It somehow doesn’t occur to him that this kind of reasoning is disgustingly close to Nazi-era blaming Jews for their own misfortunes. Perhaps that’s understandable since Borrell once publicly stated at a soirée that non-Europeans were all barbarians (perhaps not coincidentally another Nazi-like trope).
Yet in the end, Borrell may have hinted partially at two truths about this conflict. First, he described it as a clash of civilizations. In fact it is a clash of civilization with Hamas barbarism. Second, he described it as a clash of religions. It’s certainly true that Hamas is a phenomenon of Islamist extremism, at war with Israel, Jews worldwide, and anyone else they perceive as being an infidel.
Europe’s ghastly history of genocide, murder, pogroms, and persecution of the Jewish people hardly gives a European diplomat like Borrell the moral standing to judge Israel and find it wanting. The sooner he returns to soirée hopping, the better.
DANIEL H. TRIGOBOFF
Williamsville, New York
Not a new goal
I think that Jack Hoffmann makes a very cogent point in “The ultimate aim of Hamas and its allies” (November 6) when he describes the ultimate aim of Hamas and its allies as establishing a caliphate throughout the Middle East and the whole world.
The spread of fundamental Islamic influence throughout the world is not a new goal of Middle Eastern states.
I remember back in the 1970s when I was teaching at a local community college in New York State, one semester there was a sudden influx of Muslim students from Iran. The faculty was instructed to welcome the students and we were told that the college had received a lot of funding from their country to ease their way.
The young men were quite engaging. They were all men because, as they explained to us, it was the custom in their religion for only men to receive higher education. We received that news respectfully, since that is how college professors were trained in those days – to be inclusive of all cultures.
As a matter of fact, I developed a special course in the Sociology Department to help to acclimate them to their new studies.
I left the college some time afterward, but I learned that rather than a one-time thing, this heavily funded program would continue for years to come. I also discovered that my experience was being replicated throughout the country. Indeed heavy Middle Eastern funding began to appear in every kind of political think tank which influenced the highest levels of government.
Demographic change in Europe, with its accompanying political influence, also can be seen in various countries in that continent. We can therefore appreciate Hoffmann’s conclusion that neither negotiations with Hamas nor the creation of Palestinian state will provide the ultimate solution to the current crisis.
With that in mind, a thriving, successful Israeli state in the Middle East will continue to be the best antidote to such plans for world domination.
MARION REISS
Beit Shemesh
Encouraging our enemies
I am not sure what is more shocking – the resumption this past week, in the middle of a war, of the anti-Bibi protests, or the attacks on him for not taking personal responsibility for the debacle (“Why Netanyahu must take personal responsibility” by Tal Shalev, November 3).
Do not the instigators of the protests and the writer of the above article realize that vicious attacks on the democratically elected prime minister weaken the cohesion of the state and encourage our enemies? Who knows whether in fact Hamas saw an opportunity in the present political turmoil?
Very similar arguments were presented by Tal Schneider in The Times of Israel (October 30), who even asks, “Did he regret the 2011 deal to free over 1,000 security prisoners to secure the release of abducted soldier Gilad Schalit?” She has probably forgotten the huge pressure on him, particularly from the Left, to make this exchange, which was done in a period of comparative calm.
And whether or not you are a supporter of his, isn’t he right to leave all discussion of guilt and responsibility until the war is over, when he himself says he will have to answer the charges? Only then, under a full commission of inquiry, when the dust has settled and all the facts and theories will have been proved or disproved, will the full picture be seen and the public be able to make accusations.
Isn’t it correct that if indeed he was not informed of the danger, he could not have prevented it? Wasn’t the failure to prevent it the fault of all governments since 1967, including that which did not imagine that the Yom Kippur War could happen, and our governments over time which did not think the current disaster could take place, and were content instead to contain, and not to wipe out, Hamas and Hezbollah.
Does Shalev not realize that Netanyahu constantly receives bulletins regarding all three fronts (perhaps four, if we include the Houthis) and from intelligence leaders? He discusses the situation with his war cabinet and makes crucial decisions on the conduct of the war and the rescue of the hostages, even as he maintains contacts with our diplomats, international leaders, and the world media.
He stays on top of key national issues like the economy and the behind the battlefront services, and thus must be kept busy 18 hours a day, 7 days a week. Should he take time in the middle of this crisis to visit the injured, the families frantic about their loved ones in tunnels, and shiva homes?
It is easy to be critical, but some common decency and common sense is essential.
ALAN HALIBARD
Beit Shemesh
Left in a vacuum
Everybody seems to be asking: “What about the day after?” We read all kinds of articles about when that time will come. Of course, the Gaza Strip cannot be left in a vacuum. That would be worse than what came beforehand and what is going on right now. Ruth Wasserman Lande writes “The day after” (November 3) outlining the situation, but what about the solution?
I’ve read all kinds of suggestions, including one that the job should be handed over to the Palestinian Authority, which can hardly manage what it has right now.
Other suggestions have been made, including that some coalition of foreign governments should direct the Gazan war survivors onto the right track. Which countries that have sizable numbers of Muslim citizens, who would pressure their host governments into complicated situations, would be able to carry out such a touchy job? Nearly every country in the world, in fact, has such pressure groups among their citizenries.
May I offer a suggestion? When this is over, Israel should take over the management for a set number of years to control that area as a protectorate. No, we definitely don’t wish to absorb two million refugees.
But we do have the experience and the knowledge to be a temporary caretaker government over that strip of land, toward helping them become self-sufficient and successful, and hopefully, peaceful neighbors.
Israel also has the fitting manpower to perform such a project, from among the many Israeli Muslims who are loyal Israeli citizens. They know the mentality and could steer the Gazan people in the proper direction, starting with a basic cleanup of their education system.
Such a project could lead to a success in 25 years, preparing a new generation for a positive outlook on peaceful coexistence with their neighbors in Israel.
SHMUEL SHIMSHONI
Hadera