Step Off, Nicholas

1. "Synagogue In Venezuela Vandalized in Break-In"; By Simon Romero; 10
2. "Obama's Long Shot For Peace"; Nicholas D. Kristof; 10Wk
3. "In Search of Another Route to Mideast Peace"; Letters; Wednesday, February 4; A30

If ever there was a link between anti-Israelism and anti-Semitism, this is it. Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez incites hatred against the state of Israel, "a genocidal government," following the expulsion of Venezuelan diplomats from Israel - which occurred after an in-kind action by Venezuela - and shortly thereafter, a synagogue is attacked. 

Communications Minister Jesse Chacon actually tries to manipulate the incident in order to bolster Chavez, claiming the attackers were anti-government. The real issue, however, as the Anti Defamation League reports, is that anti-Semitism "is left unchallenged by officials in the Chavez regime." As Simon Romero reports, pro-government groups have been known to "associate Jews with unsubstantiated antigovernment conspiracies."

In the Week in Review, Nicholas Kristof condemns readers to his pitiful assessment of how to move "the peace process" forward. Surprisingly, the editorial board is aware of how poor Kristof's evaluation is. In Wednesday's paper, the board published five letters that were critical of "Obama's Long Shot..." and not one that spoke favorably of it.

Arthur Levy argues that Israel deterred Hezbollah in the 2006 Lebanon War and suggests that the same will likely be true of Hamas after Cast Lead.

Laraine Fergenson asserts that resolution to the Conflict will be achieved through Palestinian responsibility and accountability, which Kristof deemphasizes.

Ilya Shlyakhter isolates the charge of "disproportionate force" from its polemical usage plainly stating that "a 'proportional' response uses enough force to stop future attacks - no more and no less."

George Jochnowitz highlights Hamas' wretched and intransigent character. Hamas has "been fighting against the establishment of an independent state" because "independence is not acceptable if it means letting Israel exist," he writes. 

The best and most sophisticated response to Kristof's inanity comes from Joseph Elias. 

"Beware of placing too much emphasis on “peeling” Damascus away from Iran, with the hope of weakening Hezbollah and Hamas. Or of measuring success by the reduction of violence in the area or the willingness of the Palestinians to face the inevitable and accept what Israel would offer. An Israeli-Syrian treaty should be reached on the mutual benefits that can be derived for the parties themselves."

Rather than seek a highly publicized, but unenforced treaty, Israel and Syria should start with "economic and cultural exchanges" followed by a "reduction of hostilities" emanating from Syria. 

If NYT editorialists are not sensible, at least NYT readers are.