Thursday, June 3, 2010;
A16
As East Coast coordinator with the Free Gaza Movement, which has provided on-the-ground support to all nine aid- flotilla voyages, I felt insult was added to injury for The Post to state in its June 1 editorial "The flotilla fiasco" that we were a "motley" crew that -- according to Israel -- has terrorist ties.
Our passengers included 11 Americans, three of whom are veterans. There were numerous European parliamentarians, journalists, medical staffers and even two Israeli Knesset members on board. Among the Americans, one passenger was a former State Department official, another a former ambassador. Two were in their 80s. We have been endorsed by numerous peace and humanitarian groups, including Israel's own peace bloc Gush Shalom.
What was all the more disturbing about your allegation is that hundreds of the passengers have been in captivity in Israel and unable to speak on their own behalf. Even our injured passengers were taken to secret locations. When the editorial was published, we did not even know the names and countries of those who died. But The Post editorial board seemed to know that we are "motley" and were quick to take Israel's word that we have terrorist ties.
Not once did the editorial refer to the context of our work: to challenge a catastrophic, man-made humanitarian crisis affecting 1.5 million people.
Susan Kerin, Rockville
--
Unlike many governments that have immediately condemned Israel for the violent confrontation between Israeli troops and the mostly Turkish passengers sailing toward Gaza aboard a Turkish ship, President Obama was wise to stress "the importance of learning all the facts and circumstances" before assigning blame ["Complicated relationship with U.S. grows more so," front page, June 1].
Clearly, this calls for an investigation of Israel's policy and action leading up to the confrontation, but the investigation should also cover: the motives of the organizers of the flotilla carrying supplies to Gaza; Turkish government policy in approving departure from its port of a ship intending to break the Israeli-Egyptian blockade; and why the captain of the Turkish ship ignored repeated Israeli warnings about approaching Gaza, with which Israel is at war, and refused alternative means of delivering its supplies.
Albert Arking, Potomac
--
The editorial "The flotilla fiasco" sorely underestimated the importance of international scrutiny in encouraging political moderation. No territory can develop into a viable state while unable to even import basic supplies such as cement and office paper. Israeli policymakers have refused to heed repeated diplomatic calls to end their blockade of Gaza.
As much as I wish that the confrontation that flotilla participants recently "provoked" had been limited to nonviolent resistance, it was not. Unfortunately, experience does not suggest that recent Israeli policymakers will allow the creation of the conditions necessary for a Palestinian state unless they are challenged.
Rachel Metz, Alexandria
--
The statements from the Turkish government and other world leaders condemning Israel for the loss of life in the flotilla approaching Gaza represent the highest level of cynicism. The flotilla's sponsors knew perfectly well that if they wanted to bring humanitarian supplies to Gaza, they could easily have done so in cooperation with Israel.
But they were interested in provoking a confrontation. They knew the ships would be stopped and boarded. They knew that the weapons the "protesters" used were there in readiness. They knew that attacks on the boarders could lead to casualties. They knew that world leaders would condemn Israel. They knew it all, including how the media would respond.
And they proceeded. If any group should be condemned for the violence that occurred, it is the flotilla sponsors who got just what they asked for.
Paul Feldman, Spencerville, Md.
--
A peaceful six-ship aid flotilla carrying, food, wheelchairs, water purification systems and cement, as well as representatives of the United States, Australia, Turkey, Ireland, Germany, Canada, Greece, Ireland and other countries, is attacked, resulting in nine reported deaths and many wounded.
What is your reaction when one inserts after "attacked" in the prior sentence "by North Korea, Iran, Israel"? Your answer reflects whether you are a person of "principle" or "politics"; as well as "humanitarian" or of "might is right" thinking.
Sameena Ahmed, Potomac Falls
--
Harold Meyerson's June 2 op-ed column, "Collateral damage," clearly defined a major division in the American Jewish community regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. But the vast gulf between the hard-line "aging Jewish establishment" in the United States and a liberal younger generation that does not identify much with Israel and favors a two-state solution is not the whole megillah.
There are also American Jews, this writer among them, who believe that the solution for Israelis and Palestinians lies with a single, democratic state. We should no more expect the Palestinians to see the creation of a truncated, nonviable state on a portion of their land as acceptable than we would expect Americans to accept a Christian theocratic state here. The Holocaust notwithstanding, nothing in Israel's short, militarized history suggests that a Jewish state offers more security for Jews than would a secular, democratic state in which Jews and Arabs would have equal rights.
Jeff Epton, Washington
Post a Comment
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.