Madam, - Your Editorial of April 23rd, "Excluding Hamas", advocates the engagement of Hamas in negotiations, yet unintentionally reinforces the rejectionism of the Islamist group, not to mention its quixotic demands.
The most glaring example of this is Khaled Meshaal's insistence upon a "full right of return". The whole raison d'etre of the two-state settlement is that Israel will retain its Jewish and Zionist character in return for the granting of a viable Palestinian entity. Such an elementary requirement will be contradicted if 4.5 million descendants of refugees are allowed an unconditional right of return into Israel.
The so-called "right of return" is not recognised by any binding international law, and even if it were, it is not inalienable. It must be tempered by interests of practicality and security. To this end, UNGA Resolution 194 recognises a host of more realistic solutions to the refugee problem, such as compensation and resettlement.
The Palestinian leadership has never made any secret of its ulterior motive behind the proposed implementation of the "right of return". It is a euphemism for the destruction of Israel, albeit by demographic and not conventional terrorist means. One need only listen to Hamas when it speaks to its constituents and supporters in the Arab world to comprehend this fact, rather than when it speaks to naive, obsequious anti-Zionists in the West. - Yours, etc,
STEVEN CORCORAN, Lawrence Grove, Clontarf, Dublin 3.