Israel defended

WHILE I appreciate James Wall's perspective on the future of Palestinian statehood, I find his take on the historical facts of the Middle East a bit one-sided ("After Arafat," Dec. 28). I wouldn't doubt that Israel came into the Madrid talks with hopes that its relationship with the United States might grant some strategic advantage. However, I find Wall's characterization of Israel as the "bad guy" unfair. Since the 1993 Oslo agreement, Israel has traded nearly all the Gaza Strip and more than 40 percent of the West Bank in an expectation of peace. Israel fulfilled its part of the agreement without pressure from the U.S. Had the Palestinians fulfilled their obligations they would likely have a state today.

Highlighting the possibility of back-door negotiations at Oslo seems inflammatory in its insinuation that Israel is the oppressor while Arafat and his successors are the oppressed. If people like Haidar Abdel Shaft, Hanan Ashrawi and the other Palestinians present at Madrid can negotiate peace, I would hope they would step forward. But to blame the U.S. or Israel for the failure of peace in the Middle East is short-sided and unfair.

Rabbi Aaron Spiegel

Indianapolis Center for Congregations,

Indianapolis, Ind.

COPYRIGHT 2005 The Christian Century Foundation
COPYRIGHT 2008 Gale, Cengage Learning