Not attuned

It was both surprising and deeply disappointing to read the Jerusalem Post editorial, “Coalition Integration” August 25. In presenting a summary of Ayman Odeh’s conditions for joining a ruling coalition, the editorial writer has no critical comments about “A renewal of peace talks with the Palestinian Authority” and “the annulment of the controversial Nation-State Law, which downgraded the status of Arabic in Israel.”

What’s the problem? Had the conditions been “renewal of peace talks with the Palestinian Authority without any pre-conditions by either side” and “amendment of the Nation-State Law” it would have been totally different.

First, Israel has frequently offered to renew peace talks without pre-conditions, but the PA insists that talks be based on the 1949 armistice lines.

Calling for Israel to commit to renew negotiations under these circumstances is to require a major upfront concession by Israel without getting anything in return. Sorry, that’s not acceptable.

Second, the editorial quotes that part of Israel’s Declaration of Independence that includes “it will ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants...” However, the editorial curiously does not quote the Declaration’s central ideas: “The Land of Israel was the birthplace of the Jewish people. Here their spiritual, religious and political identity was shaped.”

The declaration then refers to “the right of the Jewish people to national rebirth in its own country. This right was recognized in the Balfour Declaration of the 2nd November, 1917, and re-affirmed in the Mandate of the League of Nations which, in particular, gave international sanction to the historic connection between the Jewish people and Eretz-Israel...”

The core of the Nation-State Law is about this right, and it should not be annulled. Many of those opposed to the version passed by the Knesset would have favored a version that quoted the declaration.

Yes, perhaps the law should be amended. But that is not what Odeh called for.

I would have expected the editorial to be more attuned to the serious implications of the words used. LEWIS ROSEN Jerusalem