Part of his legacy
In “Formula for nuke deal still elusive” (May 16), Yonah Jeremy Bob does not really explain why the leaders of the US and Iran are “desperate” to have a nuclear deal signed, sealed, and delivered. What, in other words, would be the consequences should President Trump fail to share a congratulatory handshake with Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei?
It goes without saying that the two would prefer to avoid a regional military conflict. The president is undoubtedly aware that the world sees him as somewhat reluctant to follow through on promises and threats, which, I suspect, is not something he wants as part of his legacy. With regard to Iran, the branch of the tree onto which he has climbed won’t be all that easy to come down from. Should Iran agree to concessions that are little more than meaningless, which is most certainly open to interpretation, a “violent step,” using the president’s words, may become necessary.
As for the ayatollah, well, he would like nothing better than to have the economic sanctions that his country has had to live with for too many years eased if not removed altogether. He is aware that the Iranian people, over all, do not share with their leaders the same enmity toward Israel, and is most surely concerned over the national disappointment should the sanctions be tightened and war declared.
So yes, the two are desperate for a deal. Whether or not a final one includes shoving Israel under the bus remains to be seen.
AMI SHIMON BEN-BARUCH
Be’er Ya’acov
Supple and limber
In “Trump’s swashbuckling regional diplomacy offers opportunities” (May 16), David Weinberg is only the latest of commentators and pundits desperately trying to spin President Trump’s recent activities and forays into the Middle East as something positive for Israel. Sooner or later, he – and others, of course – will have no choice but to admit that the enthusiastic support for the reckless and self-serving Mr. Trump was a bit premature.
Not that I blame him, mind you. Like just about everyone else here in Israel, he must feel blindsided by the president’s unexpected talks with Iran, and concerned that we are pushed to the periphery while POTUS unilaterally engages Saudi Arabia. Oh, and perhaps Mr. Weinberg will share with the rest of us some creative explanation of what happened to the president’s threat to rain down hell on Hamas unless all the hostages have been freed.
Why is it so difficult for your columnist to deal with these issues honestly rather than go through the embarrassment of trying to convince us that a sow’s ear can be turned into a silk purse? I can hardly wait to read how he justifies the inevitable concessions the president will make to Qatar as thanks for the generous gift of that $400m jet. He’ll come up, no doubt, with fanciful benefits to a two-state solution, or the PR advantages of agreeing to a one-sided ceasefire.
I do hope that Mr. Weinberg stays supple and limber. He’ll be spinning for another three-plus years.
BARRY NEWMAN
Ginot Shomron
A definitive victory
Yaakov Katz’s “Left out of the new Middle East” (May 16) is somewhat naive. He wonders: “What if Israel had… secured a hostage deal… ended the fighting sooner, and advanced a political resolution that would install a new governing entity in Gaza?”
Israel has secured hostage deals and has recovered many more than half of the captives. Israel mustn’t end the fighting without a definitive victory over Hamas, or else, again and again, Israel will have to fight Muslim terrorists in Gaza. As for installing a new governing entity in Gaza, that is possible only if Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad are banished from the Gaza Strip.
President Trump’s visit to the Middle East was more about commerce than about ending the war in Gaza or releasing hostages. The fact that Israel wasn’t invited is probably a tactic that the president used to elicit more and better deals.
STEVE KRAMER
Kfar Saba