Home

Pained by letter to President Obama on Gaza

We, the undersigned, are pained by the continued controversy surrounding the letter to the president on Gaza signed by members of Congress, including our congressman, Rush Holt.

Israel is in an unusual and dangerous position. They are attacked in a most ruthless and brutal manner by enemies that seek their destruction as a state and as a people, and the targets are civilians, principally children. This enemy considers humanitarian conduct of a war or conflict to be a weakness, or a weapon to be used against them -- and so disguises combatants as civilians, launches rockets against cities from schools, mosques, or other such sites, making it difficult or impossible to distinguish combatants from civilians in defense or retaliation.

For centuries, the principles of war have provided that sites used for attacks are appropriate for retaliation, and most countries in history have followed such principles. Israel almost uniquely has struggled to find a humanitarian way to defend its own existence and its people. This letter gives no consideration to this extant fact.

Most painful is not just the fact such difficulties are not recognized, but that the letter contains false accusations against Israel and its supporters that truly constitute libel in the moral if not the legal sense.

The letter states: "The current blockade has severely impeded the ability of aid agencies to do their work to relieve suffering."

This is simply false. The Israeli action is not a blockade, but rather a set of targeted sanctions against the Hamas regime. There have been no restrictions on the passage of food, medicine, water, fuel, electricity, or humanitarian supplies. Many have advocated even less targeted economic sanctions as an alternative to war in other conflicts.

Israel and its friends abroad are as concerned with the suffering of the people of Gaza as our congressman, and in our world such concern is rare for a people who wish your destruction and attack your children. This letter would be more credible if it had more clearly recognized the difficulty Israel faces in balancing the imperative to defend its citizens and the desire not to inflict more damage and suffering on others. If this letter sought relief for Gaza and recognized this fact, and called on Hamas or Arab governments to cease this conflict, its intent might have been more credible.

Our congressman has been supportive of Israel, and always studies issues carefully before advocating measures that might be helpful to Israel and the peace process. We can only wish he had afforded such careful study to this letter before inflicting the pain of his signature on some of his constituents.

Sidney Goldfarb, Princeton
Naomi Vilko, Princeton
Randall Krakauer, Princeton Junction
Miki Krakauer, Princeton Junction