A new Marshall in Gaza?
Regarding “Leadership or capitulation?” (November 16), with Gaza’s extremism showing the intractable dilemmas in this conflict, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu did the right thing.
In the last war (2014), over 2,000 Gazans died and 12,000 were injured. Many Israelis were killed and wounded also, and tens of thousands of Israelis were terrorized by rockets, yet despite the horrific damage to both sides, we are back to square one. If Hamas is ruthless enough to prefer PR to its people’s welfare, then in another war the PR would be bad for Israel; and the deaths of Gazans and their economic devastation would only fan the fury of moderates and extremists.
If the Gazans could launch their (then) Kassams before Sharon’s withdrawal and before Hamas came to power and still during Israel’s physical presence in Gaza, how could outside bombings stop rockets now? What’s needed is a Israeli Marshall Plan – a socioeconomic/ political solution for both Gaza’s and Israel’s sake. Until some realistic solution that no one has suggested, including Netanyahu after 10 years in office, my heart goes out to Israel’s innocent southern population.
JAMES ADLER Cambridge, MA
Avigdor Liberman resigned as defense minister on Wednesday in the wake of a ceasefire deal that left Hamas with the perception, and correctly so, that they had controlled the events in Gaza over the past few days. Liberman wanted to continue without going into Gaza, bombing and destroying Hamas infrastructure, weapons storage facilities, terror tunnels and if possible going after Hamas leadership until Hamas would ask Israel directly for a ceasefire – not for Israel to agree to a ceasefire arranged through intermediaries which give the false perception that Israel sued for a ceasefire. Liberman was not given the opportunity to complete the task.
The editorial “Ceasefire for what?” (November 15) stating that Avigdor Liberman wanted to send ground forces into Gaza is fake news. ISSY DYKMAN
Ganei Tikva
Politically, Palestinians and Israelis are divided among themselves.
Hamas and Fatah are as divided as are Israel’s main parties. One- two- or even three-state solutions, diplomacy or war? One possible answer is targeted compromise funded by the UN.
Egypt and Israel cede more land to develop a modern environment with good environmental living, housing educational and health facilities for Gaza – built by the Palestinians themselves, which will give them purpose, work and a future that takes the mindset away from terrorism. If peace prevails, then the West Bank and Gaza can be connected with a secure commuter rail network. A demilitarized Palestinian state would pose no threat to Israel security.
Our prime minister is an architect by qualification. A bold design is needed for the future security of Israel as a diverse, inclusive society with a central foundation in Judaism. MELVYN GANDZ
Herzliya Pituah and London
Last week was not a good one for our country. What we saw from both our current government ministers and opposition party leaders was a transparent view of selfishness. There was a rush to chest-beating and to out-“tough talk” the next one. We heard about how the polls look and about early elections. Shame on you all.
Here’s the alternative. Elections are in one year. We have a serious problem in Gaza with Hamas and our current strategy isn’t good enough, yet. I accept there are no easy solutions, if any at all. But that’s when we Israelis are our best. Solving the unsolvable. How about pulling together – no early elections, no polls, finding and implementing a strategy together.
During the US Civil War, president Abraham Lincoln led a cabinet that termed a “team of rivals.” All of them were highly capable in their own right and each one could have been president themselves. Their greatness was that when the going got tough, they put country first. That was leadership.
How about some leadership from you guys? “A high tide raises all ships,” so you will have a true legacy to be proud of.
DAVID BARTH
Ra’anana, Israel