Debate at Home Reflects Middle East Tensions

Re “Not All in the Family,” Opinion, Nov. 4: Joe Domanick accuses American Jews of viewing Israel “just through the prism of the Holocaust and the glory of its establishment.” He couldn’t be more wrong. He himself mistakenly views Israel as “victimizer” by failing to look beyond the snapshot of today’s headlines.

It’s not just the Holocaust, Mr. Domanick. In its brief existence, Israel has had to fight three major wars of survival (1948, 1967 and 1973). In each of those wars, the Arabs tried, with full fury, to annihilate the Jewish state. Between those wars and up to the present day, Israel has been victim to countless acts of terrorism that targeted school buses and civilians.

If it is the Palestinians who are victims, then they are more surely victims of their own leadership, which rejected statehood and chose violence, both in 1948 and again in 2000.

Gary L. Nudell

Sherman Oaks

*

Rabbi John Rosove’s explanation of his withdrawal from the Muslim-Jewish dialogue group emphasized that Muslims in the group were “extremists” because they did not accept Israel’s right to exist (Voices, Sept. 3). However, Rosove conflates two separate issues in his response, the nature of the Israeli state and the right of Israel to exist. The Muslim Public Affairs Council has no established position on Israel and Palestine. Individual members of the MPAC have their own personal opinions, of course, which Rosove is entitled to disagree with.

For myself, I have long accepted Israel’s right to exist, along with the right of Palestinians to exist in their own state. Whether Israel is an “apartheid state” is a semantic argument, but I doubt Rosove would argue that the Palestinians have been treated as full equals, both in Israel and the West Bank/Gaza. Given that Israel has settled an estimated 200,000 of its citizens in the West Bank, it is curious that none of these settlers come from the 20% of Israel’s people who are not Jewish.

Bob Ali

Pasadena