PAW’s letters on this subject were astonishing in their anti-Israel tone. The apex was: “The U.S.-favored ‘two-state’ solution is as dead as the U.N.’s 1947 partition, both killed by Israeli intransigence and expansion.” But it was the Jews who accepted the partition, calling their state Israel. The Arabs rejected the partition and attacked the Jewish state to wipe it off the map. In 1967 the Arab policy remained: no peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, no negotiations with it. The Arabs continue to reject the states as defined by the U.N. in 1947. There’s intransigence.
To claim that Israel, as a Jewish state, is “on its face preferential and exclusionary” is to ignore that about 20 percent of Israel’s population continues to be non-Jewish, including representation in the Knesset. On the other hand, a Palestinian Authority official expressed the desire that their state have no Jews. So who is exclusionary?
There is not a word in the letters that refers to Hamas’ policy to eliminate Israel, the destruction of economic structures Israel left in Gaza, or the firing of rockets from Gaza toward Israeli cities for years, leading to the partial blockade of Gaza by Israel (and Egypt). The Arabs and Palestinians do no wrong. Blame Israel.
I am not in favor of all of Israel’s actions. I make no attempt to defend them all. But I will object strenuously to this kind of one-sided presentation.