Palestinians and Mideast Conflict

Stanley Hirsh’s fine pleading in behalf of the Los Angeles Jewish Federation Council with regard to the “West Bank and Gaza Conflict” (Letters, Feb. 6) fails to deal with the reality that the time has come to “negotiate with the enemy.” Regardless of semantics and history, the Palestine Liberation Organization is the “enemy.” If it were not, the Lebanon effort and the continuing war with the PLO would not be the priority target in Israeli defense and security efforts.

Moshe Dayan recognized it. And so do others who agree with the policies and views Dayan espoused, and echoed by Abba Eban, and at times Ezra Wiezman.

The Camp David Accords refer constantly to “representatives of the Palestinian People (who) should participate in the resolution of the Palestinian problem in all its aspects,” and set down how the negotiations relating to the West Bank and Gaza “should proceed in three stages.” The negotiations, the accords say, “shall be based on all the provisions and principles of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242.” So, if “elected representatives of the inhabitants of the West Bank and Gaza” (as specified) are PLO members and attend any negotiations (regardless of under what sponsorship and invitation), they would need to accept Resolution 242 if they were to be seated.

Hirsh and the JFC board, of which I am a member, justifiably note in his letter, of our community’s record of accomplishments in Israel and the requested special effort now under way to “upgrade the educational opportunities and social needs of both Arabs and Jews living in the Tel Aviv neighborhood of Ajami-Lev Yafo.” We have also lent our political strength to further Israel-U.S. relationships --mutually beneficial. So why the hang-up on pressing for negotiations “with the enemy”? It’s not our “friends” giving us and Israel sleepless nights and who threaten establishment of a lasting peace.

HYMAN H. HAVES

Pacific Palisades