‘Paris, Oslo, Helsinki’

It is the end of an era in the Middle East with the passing of Yasser Arafat who truly was one of the most controversial persons of our times [“Paris, Oslo, Helsinki,” Editorial, November 12, 2004].

It is said of him that he was a terrorist and a peacemaker, an imperfect visionary who served as father to an unborn nation. He was considered by his fellow Palestinians for the past three decades to be their symbol of homeland and hope.

Now that he is gone does that mean the possibility of peace is gone with him? I truly hope not, but I do believe peace is the goal between the Palestinians and the Israelis, for the killing has to stop.

President Bush and Prime Minister Blair of Great Britain who were at the White House the other day expressed hope for a renewed push for peace in the Middle East. Mr. Bush said at their meeting that a Palestinian state and a secure Israel can be reached only by one path: the path of democracy. I whole heartily concur.

Arafat once said, “Do not let the olive branch fall from my hands.” It fell with him, but let’s not let it fall with the new leadership. I think there is a need to support a moderate Palestinian leadership before extremist groups like the Hamas try to take control.

FREDERICK R. BEDELL JR.
Little Neck , N.Y.

‘Waiting for Estrada’

As to The New York Sun’s recommendation re: Miguel Estrada [“Waiting for Estrada,” Editorial, October 19, 2004].

Perhaps he should consider changing his domicile to New York, and run – for the betterment of America – such as Ambassador Alan Keyes did – in the state of Illinois.

I truly respect Mr. Keyes’s decision, because the principles he espouses override any appearance of impropriety. And, yes, I did, and still do, object to Hillary Rodham Clinton’s move to New York State; she is principle-less.

NANCY JOYCE JANCOURTZ
Brooklyn

‘After Arafat’

The New York Sun’s November 5, 2004 editorial expressed a lofty sentiment: “America has a role in helping those Palestinian Arabs who disavow terrorism, support freedom, democracy, and the rule of law, and accept Israel’s right to exit as a Jewish state in peace and within secure borders.” The statement cannot be evaluated without defining “secure borders” and identifying those Arabs [“After Arafat”].

The problem with identifying them is that doing so marks them for death. The Palestinian Authority is such a violence-prone society, and has built such a pervasive culture of bigotry on a foundation of Islam, that the few Arabs there who might dissent do not dare speak up. If they can’t speak up, they have no influence. This supposed role for America is a pipe dream.

Yes, some Palestinian Arabs do disavow terrorism and say they accept a Jewish state. Arafat was among them, and we knew he didn’t mean it. His ideology approved of such deception. Hence he signed agreements promising those lofty goals in order to get concessions from Israel. He got the concessions and broke the agreements. We should have stopped getting fooled. Any new leaders we assist into power are most likely to renew terrorism.

When we analyze how to implement these fine sentiments about America’s role, we find the proposals not feasible and certain to cause more injustice.

Israel remains in control of small areas acquired in that war. Some, around Jerusalem and atop the Golan, it has annexed, which legally removes them from contention. Under the anti-Zionist atmosphere in the State Department and elsewhere, efforts persist to oust Israel from those areas.

Not annexed is the unallocated part of the Mandate. It is Israel’s right to annex that area, as indicated by the Palestine Mandate, which was incorporated into the U.N. Charter. The Security Council is trumped. But those in power there ignore legal restraints. Law and justice do not move them; hatred does. Force reigns.

The same thing is true of the question what boundaries then would be secure. They state the phrase, “secure borders,” as if the lip service of stating it balances the disservice of almost total withdrawal. By withdrawal, need I add, the powers that be mean Israeli withdrawal, when justice would dictate that the aggressor Arab population withdraw from the Jewish homeland.

The chiefs of staff found that Israel must retain almost all of the Territories and the Golan. These areas would give Israel some strategic depth. They position Israeli artillery near enough to Damascus to deter Syrian attack. Their hills and valleys allow early warning, prevent being shelling from above, and serve as natural tank traps. However, our secretary of state studiously avoids mentioning the chiefs’ study. It debunks his lip service.

RICHARD H. SHULMAN
Manhattan

---

Please address letters intended for publication to the Editor of The New York Sun. Letters may be sent by e-mail to editor@nysun.com, facsimile to 212-608-7348, or post to 105 Chambers Street, New York City 10007.Please include a return address and daytime telephone number. Letters may be edited.