Feel right at home
Former deputy national security adviser Chuck Freilich writes: “Israel has succeeded in containing the terrorist threat, ever-present and tragic, at a level its society can tolerate” (“Israel at 70: Strong enough to chart a new national course,” April 11).
I believe we should not have to tolerate terrorism at any level with a strong, able and willing IDF that can destroy our enemies. Sadly, our leadership is not of the same caliber.
Our so-called historic opening with the Sunni states will last until we have served their purposes. The relationship with Russia is edgy, to say the least. Mr. Freilich goes on to tell us that Israel cannot defeat the Palestinians militarily as we have been fighting their national aspirations for a century.
Nonsense! We have been fighting for our survival while they have been fighting to take over the Jewish land!
Mr. Freilich’s opinion piece seems to boil down to Israel giving up its historic land and seeking to align its policies with those of the US so that when it does have to act militarily, it should adopt clear diplomatic objectives and seek prior agreement with the US, even when painful. We should also seek a defense treaty with the US, which would strengthen our sense of security, thereby diminishing security-based objections to a withdrawal from the West Bank and promoting the prospects for peace.
This would mean a significant loss of our independence.
He admits that we have long demonstrated remarkable restraint in the face of ongoing rocket attacks (which, of course, is why they are ongoing) but feels that even greater restraint is appropriate.
After reading this rubbish, I am even more convinced that it is truly a miracle we are still here. I hope Mr. Freilich takes his defeatist ideas to the Arabs, to whom he wants us to surrender. I am sure they will make him feel right at home. EDITH OGNALL
Netanya
Chuck Freilich offers deeply flawed, old-hat leftist advice and presents it as new thinking. As he perceives it, everything depends upon Israel: If we only tried harder we could bring peace. Unfortunately, for him, peace is synonymous with a two-state solution.
He tells us to position ourselves “as the side constantly pursuing peace.” This is an immediate tip-off to his lack of understanding of the Arab mindset: A conciliatory stance involving compromises on our part might seem wise to a westerner, but it suggests weakness to the Arab. We would be inviting additional intransigence, further demands and more violence.
Since that two-state solution is so important, we are advised that if it cannot be achieved via negotiations, we should do it unilaterally. He is suggesting that we pull back to indefensible borders without so much as an end-of-conflict agreement in hand. That would definitely bring peace.
Did he learn nothing from our unilateral Gaza pullout? As the Palestinian Authority was overthrown by Hamas there, so would it be in Judea and Samaria absent our presence.
Enough already! It is time to speak out for our rights to the land.