Issachar Friedman contends that the choice for Israel lies between “nuanced ‘land for peace” or the “hawkish territorialism and revanchist one-state” ZOA agenda (Your Say, April 24).
The ZOA does not support a one-state agenda, as Friedman would know if he examined our website and publications. Rather, we presently oppose creating a Palestinian state, because neither Mahmoud Abbas’ Palestinian Authority nor Palestinian society in general accept living in peace alongside Israel in a Palestinian state. Abbas and the PA have repeatedly rejected accepting Israel as a Jewish state, demanded that a future Palestinian state be judenrein and refused the idea of ending the conflict even if such a state is created. In case there is any doubt, Abbas reiterated all these points to President Obama just weeks ago.
Friedman claims that pikuach nefesh — protecting and saving lives — has priority over territory. So it does, but his point is irrelevant when experience has shown that ceding territory to unrepentant and unreconstructed Palestinian terrorists has led to a massive increase in the loss of Israeli lives. That is why, for example, the ultra-Orthodox Shas party, which initially cited the imperative of pikuach nefesh in supporting the Oslo Accords, has since admitted it was tragically mistaken to do so.
Creating an irredentist Palestinian Authority state, which can import heavy weaponry, along Israel’s longest border and within mortar range of Ben Gurion Airport and Jerusalem and the coastal plain, which house the vast majority of Israel’s population, drastically endangers Jewish life and statehood.
Morton A. Klein
Zionist Organization of America