David Post"s "Palestinian statehood: An all or nothing affair" (11/26/01) falls short of being objective in its assessment of historical facts as well as conjures up a very selective perspective of the Israeli leadership"s handling of the Palestinian issue. Firstly, with regard to Ben-Gurion"s vision of "full and equal citizenship and representation" by Arab "inhabitants" of the state of Israel, I wonder if Ben-Gurion himself, would have been sad to see that the Israeli Parliament earlier this month lifted the immunity of its Arab member, Azmi Bishara, voting to deny the right to freedom of speech to its own democratically elected member of the Knesset because he is Palestinian.

Secondly, it is a well known tactic that Israeli leadership employs in its biased assessment to make the Palestinian victims responsible for their own suffering. How can peace be achieved when such people are vilified into "the enemy population" as Post"s viewpoint refers to them as?

One statement I do agree with Post on is his remark "One-thousand UN resolutions could not nullify Israel"s first obligation is to provide security to its citizens." Based on the countless UN resolutions that Israel has failed to implement such as 242, 338, and 194, I would have no choice but to believe him.

Moreover, it is short-sighted to assume that an acceptance of Barak"s proposal would "end the suffering of the Palestinian population." Aside from the fact that Palestinians have already accepted Israel"s existence on 78 percent of what "was" Palestine and the fact that settlement building under Barak was at its peak during his administration than at any other time, it is necessary to ask what kind of "state" is being proposed?

Ariel Sharon time and time again has stated that the "state" will have no borders with Arab states such as Jordan or Egypt and must be surrounded by Israel from all sides. Furthermore, it will be demilitarized, with Israel controlling its water and its air space. Israeli settlements, consuming about 50 percent of the West Bank and a third of Gaza, will all remain intact, and with them the entire network of checkpoints, military bases and roads, which are only open for Israelis. ("Say No to a Palestinian "State,"" 11/13/01, Ran HaCohen anti-war.com). How this resembles a state that will end the suffering of the Palestinians is a mystery to me.

The Palestinians are desperately in need of land, which Israeli settlements are not helping. They need to have jurisdiction over their own water supply. It is amazing how, for example in Hebron, 85 percent of the water is given to about 400 Israeli settlers, while 15 percent must be divided among Hebron"s 120,000 Palestinians.

The envisioned Palestinian "state" will not give Palestinians their due rights. Not by a long shot. On the contrary, it will serve as "institutionalized oppression," further justifying the ongoing occupation. It will inevitably take the Palestinian issue off the international agenda by turning it into a mere border-dispute. Such a proposed Palestinian state under the auspices of Israel"s occupation is a shameful mockery of the term "state."

Ashraf is an LSA senior.