OPINION:
Shoshana Bryen (“The reality of the ’two-state solution,’” Web, April 29) correctly points out that a full-fledged state established under the auspices of the Palestinian Authority will inevitably be corrupt, belligerent and totalitarian — just like the PA regime is today — and would therefore endanger Israel and undermine American interests in the region.
But there is another important reason why a Palestinian state is a bad idea. The PA currently rules about 40 percent of the Judea-Samaria territories, including the cities where 98 percent of Palestinian Arabs reside. Two of the largest of those cities are Tulkarm and Qalqilya, and they certainly would be included within the boundaries of any Palestinian state. Well, Tulkarm and Qalqilya are at the western-most edge of the PA-controlled areas. At that point, Israel is just nine miles wide.
In other words, if a Palestinian state is established, Israel will be reduced to just nine miles wide at its midsection. That’s not even as wide as Washington, D.C. That means Israel would be in constant mortal danger.
Many of our politicians are all too quick to mouth the slogan “two-state solution” without thinking about where exactly the borders between the two states would be — and how incredibly dangerous they would be for Israel.
STEPHEN M. FLATOW
Long Branch, N.J.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.