Poland: Back to the past
“Poland approves restitution law, Israel recalls envoy” (August 15) was extremely disconcerting.
My father of blessed memory was born in Warsaw in 1903. Fortunately, his father/my grandfather was extremely perturbed by the way the Jews of Poland were being treated by their neighbors a decade later. He, therefore, arranged for the family to emigrate to the United States.
This was many years prior to the Nazi invasion of Poland, so the Polish attitude to Jews can in no way be misconstrued as in any way being tied to the Nazis!
As the saying goes: The more things change, the more they remain the same! Over a century later, and the Polish government is still enacting antisemitic legislation.
MICHAEL D. HISCHTzur Yitzhak
Woke ideological bullies
Regarding “Do Jewish Studies courses require warning labels?” (August 11), after decades of left-wing academia, with Saudi Arabia and Qatar massively funding chairs of learning in the United States, is it any wonder our university graduates, who are today’s policymakers and influencers are as self-abasing and antisemitic as they are?
The Nation of Islam, Black Lives Matter and the myriad tentacles of the Muslim Brotherhood are aggressively fighting the West and Jews in particular. CAIR, Hamas and the Muslim Students’ Associations (MSA) in our universities are part of the Brotherhood. MSA sponsors the Boycott, Divest and Sanctions and the Israel Apartheid Week libels, spreading turmoil and hatred on campus and beyond.
The Algemeiner’s Annual List of US and Canada’s Worst Campuses for Jewish Students puts Columbia, Vassar, the University of Toronto and McGill at the top of the list.
Yes, Jewish studies courses do require warning labels. Ensure your students know the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict and have them join pro-Israel groups to help fend off academia’s systemic antisemitism.
LEN BENNETTOttawa, On.
Taiwan tied to China
Stop endorsing the “Taiwan Independence” Forces and groundless speeches.
“Why Taiwan seeks Israel’s partnership to combat cybersecurity threats” (July 27) article undisguisedly advocated for the so-called “Taiwan independence,” blatantly confronted the one-China policy and fabricated rumors and lies about cyberattacks against Taiwan from the Chinese mainland. We are strongly dissatisfied with and firmly opposed to this.
First, there is only one China in the world, and the government of the People’s Republic of China is the sole legitimate government representing the whole of China. It is the international community’s common consensus that Taiwan is an inseparable part of China. Upholding the one-China principle is not only the political foundation of diplomatic ties between China and countries including Israel, but also a political commitment the government of the State of Israel made to the government of the People’s Republic of China. Taiwan has never been a country, neither did it have any so-called “digital minister” nor “foreign minister.” The Taiwan question is an untouchable Red Line issue as it bears on China’s core interests.
Secondly, the baseless accusation against the Chinese mainland on cybersecurity issues made in this article is completely defamation out of political motives. China is a staunch upholder of cybersecurity. It has always firmly opposed and combated cyberattacks launched within its border or with its network infrastructure. In fact, China is a major victim of cyberattacks. According to statistics from China’s National Computer Network Emergency Response Technical Team, about 52,000 malicious program command and control servers located outside China took control of about 5.31 million computer hosts in China in 2020, which seriously undermined China’s national security, economic and social development and Chinese people’s daily life and work. Those personnel from Taiwan’s Democratic Progressive Party authority made such groundless accusations out of thin air, only to exploit relevant issues for political gains.
We hope our Israeli friends and media outlets can make a clear distinction between right and wrong, respect China’s core interests and refrain from providing platforms for rumors.
WANG YONGJUNSpokesperson of the Embassy of the People’s Republic of China in the State of Israel
Towards more accords
Despite Avi Berkowitz’s understandable optimism regarding the Abraham Accords (“A year into peace, region excited for future ties,” August 13), most of the dominoes that are part of the game are still standing. Few of Israel’s long-standing enemies are prepared to openly accept the Jewish State as an indispensable partner to ensure the health and economic prosperity of this region. No doubt the countries that comprise the Gulf, Middle East and North African states are carefully observing the progress that is taking place between Israel and the three countries that have thus far signed the Accords, but they are keeping a significant distance and appear in no rush to close the gap.
This is not surprising. Years of enmity cannot be dissolved overnight, so while Jerusalem – first under Netanyahu and now under Bennett/Lapid – seems ready to leap into agreements without looking, potential signees are busy calculating how much they can extract from Israel, the United States or anyone else in exchange for cooperation. Considering the fact that a two-state solution with the Palestinian entity as well as other long-term concessions will most certainly be an overriding condition, I wouldn’t count on recruiting new Accords members any time soon.
Has anything really changed in the last year? We had a major skirmish with Hamas, rockets are being fired at us from Lebanon, antisemitism is increasing in all regions of the world, and the BDS movement appears to be gaining traction. True, Israelis now have new, exotic travel destinations and new markets may be emerging in areas that were at one time closed – at least in theory – to anything that had a “Made in Israel” label. For the most part, though, our lives are not much different than they were on August 12, 2020.
And let us not forget that in return for our being a party to the Accords, Jerusalem agreed to table – for the time being, anyway – the issue of sovereignty. I doubt it will be revived during the Bennett/Lapid administration. I’ll leave to pundits to decide if the trade-off was worth it.
BARRY NEWMANGinot Shomron
“Proud of the strength and resiliency of our newfound relationship” (August 13) by United Arab Emirates Ambassador to Israel Mohamed Al Khaja, was a breath of fresh air and hope for the future.
Citing “heroic steps of our leaders and those of the United States and Bahrain,” Al Khaja, stated that the nations involved are dedicated to creating a new future for the children to know that peace is a solution to fixing problems. Looking at the region “through the lens of opportunity… instead of security threats, empower(s) our youth so that th(e) relationship becomes impenetrable.”
What genius… what goals this man brings forward from his people and government! This is the language that Israelis and most of the democratic world, have been waiting to hear. The louder and more often this is said, the more it will reach the ears of our enemies, who will see the rewards reaped by peace, not war.
He acknowledged the “naysayers” who promote hatred, and stated it saddened him to think that there were people who still believed that to be true. If only he is able to exert influence over more of the moderate Middle East states.
He ends with an analogy of a “table set with a new government… (and hoping) to all have a seat at the table,” Dinner served under this analogy would surely be resplendent with talk of our children’s futures, sustainable economies, and working to “address both regional and global challenges.”
Wouldn’t it be wonderful if dessert would be peace and tranquility for us all?
DEBRA FORMANModi’in
Unwise compromise lies
Gershon Baskin’s claim (“The challenge of changing the mindset,” August 12) that “We (the Palestinians) made a historic compromise by accepting the two-state solution...” is fallacious.
Since November 30, 1947 when the Palestinians, led by Nazi war criminal the grand mufti Amin al-Husseini rejected an independent State of Palestine when it was offered on that proverbial silver platter by the United Nations General Assembly, every offer of a Palestinian state has been met with an antisemitic wall of rejection.
In 1964 when the PLO was formed, there were no “settlements.” Its charter, the enabling document of the Palestinian Authority mandates the annihilation of every Jew in Israel. Those annihilation clauses have never been revoked as per Article 33 of the PLO Charter. Article 7 of the Hamas Charter requires every member and supporter of Hamas – which includes every member of Students for Justice in Palestine – to murder every Jew on earth. The Palestinian Arabs also rejected offers of a country called Palestine in 1948, 1967, 2000, 2008, 2019 and 2020.
They have never accepted a two-state solution because it requires accepting the existence of the state of the Jews.
RICHARD SHERMANMargate, Florida
Gershon Baskin needs a history lesson.
Arab leaders went to war to prevent the emergence of a modern Jewish state in Palestine; those leaders did not help the Arabs of Palestine organize for the autonomy offered them by the UN Partition Plan. The Palestine Liberation Organization was founded when Egypt occupied Gaza and Jordan occupied eastern Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria (areas the Jordanians dubbed “The West Bank). But the founding charter of the PLO specified that the organization made no claims on the land then under Egyptian and Jordanian control. Thus, the land to be “liberated” was the nation-state of the Jews.
Considering that no Muslim state in the Middle East offers full civil rights to its non-Muslim residents, that the Palestinians have driven Christian Arabs out of Bethlehem, that Hamas claims to recognize the 1967 borders (actually the 1949 armistice lines), but still fires missiles at mainstream Israeli population centers, and that the PA says its “Pay to Slay” program is its highest responsibility, can Baskin really believe that Jews would have full civil rights (or even be tolerated) in a Muslim-majority Israel, especially one populated by millions of people whom the Arabs held in refugee limbo, feeding them a steady diet of Jew-hatred, for generations?
There is no easy solution and it is not the sole responsibility of Israel to correct all the wrongs of the Palestinian leadership. The people living under Hamas and PA administration would be well advised to learn from the Jews’ ability to survive multiple expulsions and succeed in rebuilding a vibrant state on much less land than they expected to get; Jordan, not Israel, sits on 78% of Britain’s Mandate for Palestine. While never forgetting their roots (in Zion), the Jews did not obsess about the past. They rebuilt their lives following each successive expulsion and always strove to give their children a better future.
TOBY F. BLOCKAtlanta, GA
Less lawlessness
Douglas Altebef (“It’s time for victory at home,” August 12) strikes the right note and delivers the correct message about creeping loss of sovereignty due to the long-term abdication of the Arab sector to lawlessness and mayhem. The baleful consequences can be felt at all levels, personal, community and political.
I consider however that there are two further factors required to ensure meaningful improvement. The first is a carrot approach to the Arab sector in parallel with stricter and more determined policing. In this respect the most important is better education and in particular the encouragement of young Arab people to enter the professions, academia and business. Better-educated people with better careers are more law-abiding, have smaller families and have more to lose. They affect all their surroundings and the effect is pervasive.
The other is an overhaul of the police themselves. Unfortunately, even though there are certainly many exceptions, the Israel police force has a reputation for poor personal and professional standards, rudeness, lack of manners, incompetence, negligence and too often corruption. A higher status, salary structure and qualifications all through the profession would certainly repay the undoubted investment required, not least with regard to policing problematic sectors such as Arab society.
ANTHONY LUDERRosh Pina
Paralympic paradigm
Next week is the opening ceremony of the Paralympic Games in Tokyo and with great excitement I purchased the Friday edition of The Jerusalem Post (August 13). A month before the Olympic Games began your weekend edition had a special magazine about the athletes. So if course I was sure that there would be a similar edition for the Paralympic. There wasn’t. What a tremendous disappointment!
Did Yaakov Tourmakin train more than Mark Maliar? Does the baseball team represent Israel better than the goalball team? The 33 athletes who will begin competing on the August 25 have trained just as hard and fought with as much dignity to achieve the right to compete in the games as the 90 athletes who competed last month. Our athletes are a true representation of this country – Jews, Christians, Muslims and Druse, all together, displaying the flag with pride. They deserve more coverage.
DAVIDAH KOSEFFPhysiotherapist
Israeli delegation to the 2020 Tokyo Paralympic Games
‘Kash in’ on kashrut
Regarding “Rabbinical rebellion: Dozens of rabbis say they will defy conversions, kashrut ordered in gov’t reforms” (August 12), Religious Services Minister Matan Kahana misunderstands one very critical point in his kashrut reform-liberalization program: commercial interest are contradictory to Halachic interests.
I have been a businessmen for over 40 years. If I establish an enterprise for kashrut supervision and certification, then my prime interest will be to make good profits for me and my shareholders. I will aggressively engage on a marketing campaign to attract as many clients as possible to my enterprise – restaurants, food factories, meat processors, etc.
On the other hand, I will instruct my mashgichim (kashrut supervisors) to be lenient with halachic enforcement, and to avoid rescinding our kashrut certificates from clients, especially from big factories that pay hefty sums for kashrut supervision, because this will hurt our profitability.
Therefore, I will develop a profitable kashrut enterprise, but I personally – as an observant Jew – will not eat food products that are under my kashrut supervision. The same holds true for all my observant friends and family members.
Maybe Kahana will eat food under my kashrut supervision.
SHLOMO FELDMANNGivatayim