‘A balanced editorial’
I applaud the balanced editorial regarding Benjamin Netanyahu’s March 3 speech in Congress, and I support the members of our Northern California congressional delegation who did not attend or who spoke critically of the “maladroitly” arranged occasion.(“Congress, show respect for our closest ally,” Feb. 26).
As an American Jew, I find the prime minister’s performance to have been pure self-promoting theater on the wrong stage at the wrong time. Obviously, neither I nor members of Congress vote in Israeli elections, and the prime minister is not running for office in the U.S. His self-serving antics have implications far beyond his relationship with President Obama and the Democratic Party; his blatant attempt to undermine the current negotiations with Iran has potentially dire consequences for efforts to stop nuclear proliferation in the Middle East. Negotiations underway to prevent Iran from obtaining the ability to develop a nuclear weapon are not only an issue of moment for Israel and the United States; they have consequences for global survival. How dare the prime minister in so many ways place his re-election above the interests of so many?
Molly Freeman | Berkeley
Leader, J Street S.F. Bay Area Local
Why negotiate with Iran?
In comments at a Feb. 25 hearing of the House Foreign Relations Committee in Washington, Secretary of State John Kerry said Iran’s membership in the Nonproliferation Treaty prevents Tehran from possessing nuclear weapons. Then what is the reason to negotiate with Iran? The P5+1 countries (United States, Russia, China, United Kingdom and France, plus Germany) have never sought “a deal” with any NPT signatory. The answer is obvious: because there is no trust in mullahs’ promises and agreements after witnessing suspicious underground nuclear activities, ballistic missile developments, and limited access for the International Atomic Energy Agency to Iranian nuclear labs.
“The deal” can’t hinge on a fancied trust while all the facts, enumerated in Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s speech to Congress, point to the reality of Iranian worldwide terrorism. So far, the administration’s success in the diplomatic arena has been checkered, at best, under the watch of both Secretaries of State Hillary Clinton and John Kerry. Russia, North Korea and Yemen quickly come to mind. So, the most cogent course of action would be presenting the P5+1/Iran “deal” to Congress for a thorough and complete evaluation. Only this will guarantee a satisfactory deal for the American people and the world.
Vladimir Kaplan | San Mateo
‘Bibi was grandstanding’
If the goal of Bibi’s congressional speech was to influence the U.S. to more strongly sanction Iran, I think it failed. I cannot think of a single decision-maker that came out of that speech with a changed mind.
If the goal was to shore up congressional support for Israel, it partially succeeded. It’s good to see that Israel has many friends across the partisan aisle. Those standing ovations were something to see.
If the goal was to shore up Bibi’s re-election bid, I guess we’ll know soon.
Sadly, I think the whole affair was a giant unforced error that did nothing to dissuade Iran’s headlong pursuit of nuclear weapons that could not have been accomplished through quiet diplomacy. It was Bibi grandstanding in the worst possible way. He ticked off a whole lot of people, many of whom I think are real friends of Israel, and Bibi has very little to show for it that he did not have before he left Israel.
It’s important to keep our eye on the ultimate goal, to prevent Iran from developing and possessing nuclear weapons. All the theatrics and drama leading up to the speech are just window dressing.
Steve Lipman | Foster City
‘Heartening’ U.C. Davis event
In light of the troubling news from various U.C. campuses of late, I would like to inform J. readers about a very heartening event on the U.C. Davis campus last week. The Jewish studies program and the Middle Eastern-South Asian program co-sponsored a student panel on “Anti-Semitism and Islamophobia: The Anatomy of Twin Hatreds,” based on a history seminar taught by professor Susan Miller, a faculty member who is active in both programs.
Seven undergraduate students presented short talks followed by a very civil Q&A. At least 180 people attended and many more could not get into the room because it had reached capacity. The final comment was by an Egyptian American student, who said that when he heard about the swastikas painted on the Jewish fraternity, he wanted to help clean them up. His response demonstrated that the reportage in the local and national press does not convey the true sense of the open way in which many of our students actually regard each other.
Diane L. Wolf | Berkeley
Director, Jewish studies program, U.C. Davis
‘Baseless, silly accusations’
Rep. Nancy Pelosi’s baseless, silly accusations against Bibi — just minutes after his historic speech — dishonored the memory of her father, Thomas D’Alesandro Jr. D’Alesandro broke ranks with FDR — he actively supported the Bergson Group, which tried to rescue as many European Jews as possible, even though President Roosevelt opposed this group. The Bergson Group had very few supporters — even among American Jews.
That is why her comments were so disappointing. Bibi is trying to save his people from another Holocaust. That is why he gave the speech — it was “go for broke” time. The speech — alongside Winston Churchill’s anti-appeasement speeches of the 1930s and his Fulton, Missouri, 1946 “Iron Curtain speech — will be remembered for generations. There was so much wisdom and logic in Bibi’s explanation of why the proposed deal is catastrophic — there was also an unmistakable hint of desperation.
Yet, Ms. Pelosi chose to be partisan. It was appalling. Doesn’t she get it? This is life and death — not a matter for petty politics. She should have known better, she should have acted as a mensch. That is, she should have acted as her father would have acted. Instead, she did the exact opposite.
Tod Zuckerman | Daly City
Doctor owes apology for comments
I am deeply disturbed and offended by comments made by Dr. Ira Byock on NPR (“The Diane Rehm Show”), comparing aid-in-dying legislation to Nazi practices. I recently went through an agonizing dying process with my mother in hospice. She wished there was a medically assisted dying option, and in her honor and memory, I am supporting the End of Life Option Act. The proposed legislation will expand education and medical aid-in-dying alternatives in California (SB 128). I also have relatives who perished in German death camps at the hands of Nazi perpetrators. To compare and liken the above two situations is deeply disturbing and offensive to me, and, I’d imagine, to all descendants of Holocaust survivors and victims.
On behalf of survivors and their offspring, I demand a public apology from Dr. Byock and assurance that he will no longer make this inflammatory and hurtful comparison to Nazi death camps.
Nancy Levine | Woodacre