Sir, – In response to your article about travelling in Israel (Go Israel, Magazine, June 16th), Lorraine Courtney (June 19th) mentions “scars of occupation” in the West Bank.
These “scars” include the fact that the percentage of Palestinians connected to the water infrastructure has grown from 5 per cent in 1967 (the start of Israeli “occupation”) to 95 per cent in 2010.
The border controls, the checkpoints and the security fence/wall mentioned exist because of the need to prevent the entry of suicide bombers and other terrorists from the West Bank into Israel; before their installation, such terrorists murdered almost 1,200 Israeli citizens in the Second Intifada between 2000 and 2006. The assertion by Emily O’Sullivan (also June 19th) that Palestinians do not enjoy high-end hotels and drinkable water would come as news to the inhabitants of Ramallah and other West Bank towns who have seen economic growth rates of up to 8 per cent in recent years.
Ms O’Sullivan also alleges that there is a “huge disparity in the allocation and availability of water resources” between Israelis and Palestinians. Specifically her letter alleges a three-and-a-half-times greater use of water in Israel than in the West Bank. These assertions are incorrect.
In fact, the latest data show that the per capita consumption of fresh water in 2009 was 137 cubic metres in Israel compared to 95 cubic metres in the West Bank. Further, the multi-annual average availability of fresh water per person is 150 cubic metres in Israel compared to 124 cubic metres in the West Bank.
The use of a term such as “annexes Palestinian land” is misleading. The overwhelming majority of Jewish settlements are built on state-owned land or land purchased by the settlers. If the term is meant to denote land expected to be included in a future Palestinian state, the borders of such a state are a subject for negotiation between Israeli and Palestinian political leaders. Israel has been urging a start to such talks for three years, so far without success. – Yours, etc,
Sir, – I would like to register my concern at The Irish Times’s latest example of media imbalance. I know of no other national newspaper in any democratic country that would allow a letter-writer to attack a tourism article by promoting the website of a rival destination (June 19th). Shame on you. – Yours, etc,