Thank you for the imput for One Jerusalem and the dangers that Israel faces if the Palestinian have ownership in part of Jerusalem. Peace talks are necessary in the long run, but theoption of a Palestine present cooperation is very limited.

 

 

This interview with Dr, Gold has been very informative and broadening. The whole conception of a shelf agreement was new to me. I hope that any negotiations seemingly enticing will never come to such a temporary, possibly damaging end for Israel's sake. Reagan's modus operandi vis-a-vis security makes a great deal of sense. Israel must look out for its own safety before agreeing to any solutions which may benefit others. Major resolutions of the issues facing the Israel-Palestinian conflict should not be addressed in a hurried, fickle fashion. And the strategies of the past regarding negotiations, such as those between Mr. Barack and Mr. Arafat, should remain in the past. The contemporary issues and the means to address them are not the same as those issues in the year 2000, for example. Finally, I disagree with Dr. Gold in terms of the American agendum. President Bush and Secretary Rice desperately desire a hasty outcome to the Middle East conflict before the end of Mr. Bush's presidency. I don't believe that their ignorant comments concerning negotiations dividing Jerusalem, for instance, would be helpful to Israel in any manner. I know that Dr. Gold is very involved with the preservation of a unified Jerusalem under Israeli sovereignty. My concern is with defending the American leaders' approach to the conflict when their comments and objectives appear contrary, if not hazardous, to Israeli interests. In fact, dividing Jerusalem could bring about the end of Israel. Jerusalem is the seat of the Israeli government and the capital of Israel. If the security of Jerusalem is put into jeopardy, the security of the entire country could be at risk.