Questionable data on water and Israel
I wish to point out some major errors stated by Joan Meisel of Jewish Voice for Peace about Israel stealing Palestinian water (“Israel’s drought relief comes at a [Palestinian] cost,” July 17). Israel’s drought relief occurred because of an abundance of rain, water recycling, conservation and large desalination plants. Sorek, south of Tel Aviv, produces 40 billion gallons per year.
Meisel quotes old 2009 data, some from questionable sources (B’Tselem). Because of Israel, the supply of water to Hamas-controlled Gaza is being doubled, from 5 million to 10 million cubic meters per year. The mountain aquifers lie mostly in Israel, not the West Bank. As for the Oslo accords, Israel now provides Palestinians with 57 million cubic meters of water per year, almost double the amount agreed to. Israel also supplies Jordan with 55 million cubic meters of water per year. Finally, water extraction and water availability are totally unrelated. Just ask our Central Valley farmers.
Marvin Yudenfreund | Richmond
‘Actual facts’ on water agreements
It’s not surprising that JVP would disseminate lies about the subject of water. After all, any group that endorses BDS and thereby works for the elimination of Israel will not spare the truth in the service of that goal. Here are the actual facts:
The Oslo agreements grant the Palestinians the right to draw 70 million cubic meters from the Eastern Mountain Aquifer. As per the Israeli-Palestinian agreement, some 40 sites were identified for drilling into this aquifer in the eastern Hebron hills region, and permits were granted to the Palestinians by the Israel-PA Joint Water Committee. Yet the Palestinians have only drilled at one-third of these sites, despite the fact that the international community has offered to finance the drilling.
If the Palestinians were to drill and develop all these wells, they could have completely solved the existing water shortage. But the Palestinians have preferred to drill wells on the Western Mountain Aquifer, the basin that provides groundwater to the State of Israel. Meanwhile, Israel sells 50 million cubic meters a year of water to the PA.
In addition to refusing to develop the water sources to which they are entitled, by their agreement with Israel, they refuse to repair leaks in their own water systems, they refuse to treat sewage so that it can be used for irrigation (90 percent of Israel’s irrigation water is so treated). They could even start using drip irrigation techniques, as is done in Israel. Yet they refuse — maybe because it’s “Zionist” technology?
An in-depth factual analysis of the water situation can be found at www.tinyurl.com/besacenter-water.
Mike Harris | San Francisco
Unpopular opinions are welcome here
Arye Dworken, in his July 10 op-ed “Best Orthodox response to marriage equality? None,” is appalled by RCA President Rabbi Leonard Matanky’s chutzpah and audacity to actually have an opinion and to express it. According to Dworken, an opinion that is not the one he favors should not be uttered.
It is interesting that the very same people who fought for the right of homosexuals to be open and vocal and get out of the closet are now actively and forcefully silencing those who disagree with the current Supreme Court decision.
The strength of Judaism is in the vibrancy and robustness of all dialogue, no matter which subject is being discussed. Please, don’t preach or impose silence on those with whom you disagree.
Sophie Shtil | Fremont
‘Jews who support Obama never learn’
I wish I were surprised by J.’s editorial in support of Obama’s preemptive surrender to Iran’s Islamofascist rulers, but it was just par for the course (“Iran deal isn’t perfect, but neither is the alternative,” July 17). Jews who support Obama never learn.
When Obama opposed sanctions, most Jews bought his absurd rationale (supposedly, sanctions would destroy the grand coalition he was building.) Only when Congress clearly had the votes to override his veto did Obama relent. Then, when sanctions brought Iran to the table, Obama, characteristically, tried to take credit for them.
Now, Obama has really turned the screws on Israel — an inspection regimen more porous than Swiss cheese, a sanctions plan that will mean no sanctions, and Iran given the green light to develop technologies for manufacturing nuclear weapons even quicker.
Lastly, of course, this appeasement will mean billions of dollars more for Hezbollah and Hamas. Any Jew who voted — twice — for Obama should be ashamed.
Tod Zuckerman | Daly City
Iran nuclear deal squanders leverage
Here is my problem with the Iran nuclear deal: It is more like a truce than a peace agreement. And where are both sides after 15 years when it ends?
Iran has the know-how and the facilities to move forward to create a bomb, and can quickly reassemble the centrifuges it had stored. The U.S. and its partners can impose sanctions, but effectiveness of sanctions builds slowly, much slower than Iran could rebuild its nuclear plant. Further, Iran will likely remove its assets that were once frozen and put them out of reach. We will have squandered the leverage over Iran we now hold to force a negotiated solution, leaving war or a nuclear Iran as more likely outcomes.
Supporters of this deal are looking only at the short term and are not thinking about the long term. The long-term defects outweigh the short term benefits.
Alan Titus | San Francisco
Iran deal is done, time to look to future
You can’t trust Iran. They’re regional bad actors. It’s a bad deal. We caved. The pundits are going in circles.
Opposing the deal in Congress is a tall order, fraught with danger for Israel, and likely to lose in the end. I’m skeptical that Iran will live up to its end of the bargain. So what’s next?
Would Israel be wiser to seek greatly enhanced conventional military and intelligence cooperation with the U.S. to enhance its tactical advantage? Defense Secretary Ashton Carter is the first visitor to Israel. Make use of that strategic relationship to enhance Israel’s strategic military superiority.
The next weeks and months are going to be critical for U.S-Israel relations. I would be more afraid of seeing Israel’s security becoming more of a wedge issue than it already is.
Bottom line: I think it may be time to move off Bibi’s strategy based on opposition to the deal to a strategy based on Israel’s legitimate security concerns. It is time to get off a losing horse and look to a realistic future.
Steve Lipman | Foster City