Ending relationship hurts U.S. as well

Thomas Friedman’s column “Driving drunk in Jerusalem: Israel takes U.S. for granted” [Opinion, March 16] puts him at the front of the line of people pouring gasoline on a fire in an attempt to put it out.

As many more astute observers have remarked on other pages, the impasse between Israel and the Palestinians has nothing to do with settlements. The Palestinians cannot abide the existence of Israel, period. If they could, we would have had peace 60 years ago, 30 years ago or today.

The Obama administration, by artificially creating a new “obstacle to peace” that did not exist before, has handed the Palestinians another weapon in their worldwide campaign to delegitimize Israel and wipe it off the map. In this effort they have many allies and now we can add Friedman to the list.

But what I object to most of all is the title of his piece. The reality is: The U.S. needs the support of Israel and until now has had no better friend in the world. Israel’s existence is at stake, but in this ridiculous and unnecessary imbroglio, America has the second-most to lose.

— Robert Wilkes, Bellevue

White House picking a losing fight

For Thomas Friedman, it is always axiomatic that Jewish construction is bad and Arab destruction, — like the Biden-and-Clinton-inspired Arab rioting now going on in Jerusalem — is good, or at any rate “justifiable.”

Of course, the decision of the White House to pick a fight with Israel over its routine announcement of an intention to build some apartments for the expanding population of its own capital city has two causes — neither commendable.

First is the desire to keep alive the option of an apartheid Palestine, for it is well-known that Palestinian Arabs cannot accommodate a single Jew in their projected state.

The second part is to divert attention from the implications of Biden’s ludicrous declaration to the Israeli public on March 11 that “The United States is determined to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, period.”

Anyone who believes this might be interested in some choice real estate I know about in downtown Kabul.

— Edward Alexander, Seattle

The straw that broke America’s backing of Israel

Thank you for the powerful editorial suggesting a way to “encourage” Israel to become a true “partner for peace” with Palestine [“Expensive stalemate,” Opinion, March 14]. Up to this point, the U. S. policy has been to demand that Israel stop building settlements but there have been no consequences if the construction did not cease. That demand has been totally ignored, as settlement construction continues at a greater pace.

Now is the time to demand a change in Israel’s policy, with negative consequences if Israel does not comply. The perfect consequence would be for the U. S. government to discontinue military aid to Israel until it stops building settlements.

As Palestinians watch their homes and farmland being demolished and experience the harassment of over 500 Israeli checkpoints — which delay their passage to medical facilities, schools, employment, shopping, worship and family gatherings — they conclude that Israel has no interest in peace, but only in making peace agreements. The constant settlement expansion is the “straw that broke the camel’s back.”

— Sue Ellen Johnson, Shelton