- - Monday, April 21, 2014


While I have the greatest respect for former U.N. Ambassador John R. Bolton and almost always agree with his views, I have reservations about his “three-state solution” to the Middle East conflict (“A ‘three-state solution’ for Middle East peace,” Web, April 16).

While the joining of Gaza to Egypt certainly makes eminent sense as long as the current Egyptian government remains in power and Egypt does not become a Muslim Brotherhood nation, I am concerned about a union of the Palestinian territories to Jordan. With a 60-percent-Palestinian population in Jordan already, such an agreement would increase this population to 80 percent. The very monarchy and government of Jordan would be threatened.

With a Palestinian population taught not only to hate Israel but strive toward Israel’s destruction, and with an open border to Jordan as a transit point to the Palestinian territories, Jordan will become a Palestinian Arab state with neighboring nations pouring military arms into that new nation.

Without Israeli control of the Jordan Valley, Israel’s very existence would be threatened. I congratulate Mr. Bolton on his attempt to find a solution to the conflict, but a Jordanian-Palestinian state is too great a risk.


Silver Spring

Copyright © 2018 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

The Washington Times Comment Policy

The Washington Times is switching its third-party commenting system from Disqus to Spot.IM. You will need to either create an account with Spot.im or if you wish to use your Disqus account look under the Conversation for the link "Have a Disqus Account?". Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.


Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide