Iran deal doesn’t preclude cataclysm
The U.S plans for the Iran nuclear deal are too loose and will be subject to cheating. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s recommendations are a lot tighter and safer for Israel and the region (“U.S. and Israel escalate war of words over Iran deal,” April 10).
It is very important that inspections be allowed anywhere, anytime. The West seems a bit naive and too trusting while it holds the power cards. If Iran doesn’t agree, it will just have more severe sanctions imposed.
If the end of June deadline is reached and presumably the Iranians are free to build a nuclear arsenal, it seems the Israelis will likely destroy (bomb) their sites with the U.S. playing some backup role. This will of course have many ramifications for the Middle East. Maybe this threat will bring Iran to the table before the deadline. Or maybe the cataclysm is the intended consequence.
Kaye Fichman | San Rafael
Political parties in Israel in agreement on Iran
Writer Uriel Heilman makes the same misleading statements we hear from other “analysts” about the Israelis opposition to the pending agreement with Iran (“After nuclear negotiators go home, what happens next?” April 3). Heilman repeatedly writes that “the government of Israel” or “Prime Minister Netanyahu” opposes the suggested agreement. Unfortunately, this is grossly misleading. Both the coalition and the opposition parties in Israel oppose it.
Isaac Herzog and Tzipi Livni, leaders of the Zionist Union party, stated that “We need to work closely with the powers … to roll back Iran’s nuclear program.”
Zionist Union MK Eitan Cabel wrote on Facebook: “I refuse to join those applauding the agreement with Iran … when it comes to Iran, there is no left or right or coalition or opposition in Israel, only Israelis.” Cabel then added more criticism of Obama: “The fact that the man who is in charge of making sure the deal won’t be broken has a proven record of mocking his own red lines, makes me even more worried.” Cabel also called Netanyahu’s efforts to highlight the dangers of the deal as a “correct struggle.”
Yair Lapid, head of the Yesh Atid party, wrote: “On the topic of Iran’s nuclear program there is no opposition and no coalition. We all share the fear that Iran will bypass [the agreement] and Israel must protect its security interests.” Naftali Bennett, head of the Habayit HaYehudi (Jewish Home) party, a probable coalition party, wrote: “The spin of ‘either this agreement or war’ is incorrect. A third and better possibility exists: Leave sanctions in place until Iran gives up its military nuclear program. When it faces a choice [of] either its nuclear program or its economy, it will give in.”
Isaac Agam | Palo Alto
Israel would still be fine without aid from U.S.
If Obama is really upset over Netanyahu’s policies and “droves” remark (“PM apologizes to Arab Israelis,” March 27), why only consider allowing anti-Israel resolutions to pass in the U.N.? No one cares about the U.N. and ignores its resolutions.
Why doesn’t Obama consider stopping all military and economic aid? That would get Israel’s attention. Maybe the answer is that Israel can survive without U.S. aid. There was no close relationship between both countries from 1948 to 1968. In 1948, Israel’s primary arms supplier was the Soviet Union. Israel flew French planes, not American planes, during the Six-Day War. France helped Israel develop the atomic bomb. So if Obama abandons Israel, Israel can deal with other countries. China will probably pay a nice amount for Israeli military technology. Furthermore, without U.S. aid, Israel will have less incentive to listen. There is so much Israel can do even without U.S. aid. Maybe this is the reason why Obama doesn’t cut the aid, although with a person like him, anything can happen.
Neal Wohlmuth | San Francisco
Obama’s real motive
President Obama is saying Prime Minister Netanyahu has withdrawn his commitment to the “two-state solution” and therefore the United States will no longer support Israel in the United Nations. Obama’s press poodles may print such stuff, but I believe that the real reason is Netanyahu’s opposition to Obama’s give-away nuclear weapons pact with Iran.
Obama badly wants this pact and expects that if he can diminish Netanyahu’s stature, then Netanyahu’s influence with Congress will also be diminished.
Arthur Cohn | Portola Valley
This land is our land — all of it
Prime Minister Netanyahu once again is being subjected to massive pressure from other countries around the globe, particularly the United States. The peace talks are dead because of Arab intransigence, not because of Netanyahu’s refusal to compromise. There is nothing to apologize for when Palestinian representatives reject every offer.
When Israel works only to retain an IDF security presence in parts of Judea or Samaria, we effectively admit that this is Arab land, and we are merely concerned about Israeli security. Safety is important, but less important than the fact that the land is Jewish land.
Every square mile of Samaria and Judea is full of Jewish historical artifacts: ruins of temples, statues, castles and ancient cities, engraved stones, mountains, rivers and towns whose names appear in the Jewish Bible. Everything there is Jewish history and culture, through and through. Together with Jerusalem, it is the cradle of the Jewish nation.
Netanyahu, please don’t be a diplomat. Be a statesman. This is what Israel needs today. Stand tall and strong. Don’t worry about antagonizing Obama, the EU, BDS proponents, the U.N. and others. Our detractors will always find a way to blame us for something, from settlements to fighting against Islamic terrorists. Appeasement never works. To the contrary, it emboldens and provokes our enemies. Say clearly that an undivided Jerusalem is the Jewish capital, and that giving up on Judea and or Samaria is appeasement.
England and France tried to appease Hitler and ended up with World War II. Netanyahu has tried to appease Obama for six years, and where did that get us?
Daniel Grynglas | San Jose
Bay Area neighbors take action on bigotry
In response to the article about the Sacramento home with anti-Semitic flags on the lawn (“Israeli and U.S. flags with swastikas fly outside Sacramento home,” Feb. 26): Some years ago, friends living on a quiet Castro Valley street were troubled by neighbors who displayed white supremacist flags. Our friends were a family with one Japanese American parent and a young daughter.
These friends took actions. They went door to door and met and spoke with all of their neighbors. They also notified ADL about the situation. Their actions brought them closer to their neighbors and provided the neighborhood with information about the troubling problem.
Diane Schoenfeld | Berkeley