One-state solution misses Israel’s points

FORMER president Kgalema Motlanthe’s conclusion that a one-state solution could settle the Israel/Arab dispute, in “Israelis, Palestinians should explore single, secular state” (March 12), is hopelessly flawed, mainly because his premises are wrong.

The attempt to equate the situation in Israel with that of pre-1994 South Africa has no substance, for the following reasons: South Africa was one state (notwithstanding the contrived “self-governing homelands”), where all, black and white, were legally its citizens, while Israel is a sovereign state surrounded by disputed territories with noncitizens living there; and the black opposition in South Africa was desirous of a state “which belongs to all who live in it”, while the Arabs in the disputed areas have the stated object of destroying the Jewish state.

When Motlanthe lists the superficial reasons that settlement has failed he does not mention the core one: that in 1948 the Arabs refused the offer of a state and have continuously denied the right of the Jews to be in the region and have, by war and terrorism, tried to “liberate Palestine”, meaning the whole of Israel.

Palestinian leaders have refused every offer to settle on a two-state solution which would leave Israel acceptable security, in the forlorn hope that Israel in a moment of madness would again agree to an unsupervised aggressive entity on its doorstep, as it did with the withdrawal from Gaza, with disastrous results.

Because of his mis-analysis, Motlanthe missed the simple solution that could have occurred at any time in the past 70 years: Palestinians should genuinely and honestly accept that the Jewish state exists and will always exist, renounce their claim to the whole of the region, negotiate in good faith, and there will be a Palestinian state within 12 months. — Sydney Kaye, Cape Town

A stream of Bull from SOEs

THE Chiefs of the so-called stateowned enterprises are essentially cash Crusaders intent on feeding us a continual stream of Bull.

Battle Lions will have to be drawn to quell these Sharks who have given us nothing but the Blues.

The system has sadly embraced these pariahs, who have fast-tracked these entities into the proverbial Reds-zone.

Already dressed in sheep’s clothing, Hlaudi, Brian and Bathabile seem dead certs to sign up for the Sun Wolves.

The destruction caused by SOEs make the appearance of Hurricanes a mere sea breeze. — Sipho K Chipiwa, Randburg

Pigs are the best beasts

GIVE us a break, Z Breakey — your indignation about the newsworthiness of the Pigcasso story (Letters, March 12) is pigheaded!

A story that highlights the intelligence of pigs beats those that tell of the stupidity of man. We arrogantly always underestimate the intelligence of animals.

Please don’t choke on your pork rashers. — J Silva, Johannesburg

Raised to praise the IFP

MANGOSUTHU Buthelezi’s article “I convinced FW to release Mandela” (March 12), is puzzling.

I grew up under the Inkatha leadership in the semi-independent homeland of KwaZulu where, every Wednesday afternoon in primary school, we had a class on Inkatha and Buthelezi. We would chant IFP freedom songs, led by our school principal at the time, a diehard Inkatha supporter.

This happened in most schools in my neighbourhood. It was known that schoolchildren were being indoctrinated about Inkatha.

I do not blame Buthelezi: those were tough times!

The book mentioned in the article, Jabulani “Mzala” Nxumalo’s Gatsha Buthelezi: Chief with a Double Agenda, sought to criticise, which is needed in a democracy. At the same time, Buthelezi has every right to defend himself. But why? And better yet, why now? Nxumalo died in 1991 in London at the age of 35. Fastforward 26 years, and Buthelezi does not seem to have made peace with Nxumalo’s book. It’s a puzzle!

Political parties all need some kind of propaganda, as long as it does not backfire. I do not think the Inkatha propaganda of the late ’80s backfired; I think the ANC was just too attractive, and in the end the chanting and anti-[PW] Botha slogans were

Grab the pay but avoid taking responsibility

SOCIAL Development Minister Bathabile Dlamini is obviously happy to take home a salary of around R2 309 262 a year (R192 438 a month), but not quite so keen to undertake the duties which go with this enormous pay.

Remember that transport and housing are also supplied free of charge to cabinet ministers — over and above the salary!

In the three years since the decision of the Constitutional Court that the Cash Paymaster Services contract was illegal, our esteemed minister has never found the time to find a solution to the problem.

In the four months since his appointment, the department’s director-general, Zane Dangor, realised that he could not solve the problem, and took the honourable course and resigned.

The government and the ministers have no idea of honour and only see huge salaries and bluelight not enough.

The question is, if Buthelezi can point us to history and list his accolades for readers, is he aware that the propaganda evidence is part of that very same history? — Londeka Ndlovu, Equestria, Pretoria

Water, not sulphur dioxide

I HAVE to point out that in the picture accompanying your report “Eskom seeks free pass on pollution” (March 12), it is steam vapour that spews out of the cooling towers at the Lethabo power station, not pollutants.

The chimneys do the dirty work. — Dave, Sedgefield

We can’t eat history

TO every old lady MP from the ANC rising in parliament to talk about the past: Mama, with respect, South Africans can no longer eat history.

Under apartheid we were oppressed by the whites, but to be oppressed by ANC corruption is a bitter pill to swallow.

That is why the DA is winning: it is correcting the past, which the ANC can’t, as its members are busy indulging. — Lindi Zantsi, Worcester NO HONOUR: Bathabile Dlamini, minister of social development convoys as their right.

The people of South Africa are quite happy to tolerate the current government and are also happy to pay the taxes required to (over)pay the ministers. The voters should never complain about their government, as the people of South Africa elected these people.

Remember: as ye sow, so shall ye reap! — Tom Lambe, Oakdene

Who really owns the land?

PUBLISH a large map of South Africa, in all the national papers, showing who exactly owns all the land. The map should show:

The vast tracts of state-owned land, including that owned by the defence force, the police, and the state forests; SANParks land; That taken by private game parks where conservation is practised;

The tribal trust lands which are meant to be held in trust for the poorest and most vulnerable;

All the land that is being efficiently used for food production for the nation; and

Municipal land. Would that not put some arguments to rest? — Cynthia Morgan, Howick