Mideast Peace

Re “Arabs Ponder How to Salvage Peace,” Commentary, June 20: If only Arab leaders would give up their prejudgments and preconditions for peace, we could get this long-awaited process on its toddler feet.

Egyptian journalist Mohamed Sid-Ahmed’s article angered me by its fidelity to stubborn stereotypes of Israeli politics. He has already labeled Prime Minister-elect Benjamin Netanyahu a “common threat” to Arabs without Netanyahu doing anything yet.

Sid-Ahmed’s criticism is melodramatically simplistic. To claim that “Netanyahu’s accession to power confirms the rejectionist argument that the peace process was doomed to failure since its inception” resembles the finger-pointing syndrome I recall from grade school, albeit with bigger words. Indeed, Sid-Ahmed writes, “The Arab regimes have every interest in dispelling any doubts as to where the responsibility for this new crisis lies.” Talk about focusing on the empty half of the glass! Netanyahu disagrees with Sid-Ahmed’s method of peace, but still promises to negotiate for a lasting peace.

Many Arab leaders obstinately insist, as does Sid-Ahmed, that the road to peace can only be embarked on using the exclusive “land for peace” formula. But why must peace necessarily be bought? Sid-Ahmed is not a prophet and is in no position to say that no Arab leader should make peace with Israel unless the Israelis give up half of their land--land that was acquired in wars clearly instigated by neighboring Arab countries.

At least give Netanyahu and the Likud Party a chance. Not only do they deserve it, but the Arabs have nothing to lose by it.

TZVIKA NISSEL

Beverly Hills