For the publisher:

Re “Men of Ice Cream, Men of Principle,” by Bennett Cohen and Jerry Greenfield (guest op-ed essay, Sunday Review, August 1):

Ben & Jerry’s decision not to sell ice cream in the Israeli-occupied territories is a deeply flawed decision.

The corporate decision defended by the authors applies economic and moral coercion to one side of a complex conflict, with competing actions and narratives. It totally ignores, for example, several peace plans presented by Israel, approved by the United States and rejected by the Palestinian leadership.

Marking a camp with all the responsibility for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict may make self-proclaimed social justice advocates proud, but it does not advance peace or justice.

To refute the charge of anti-Semitism, Ben and Jerry make a distinction between not doing business in Israel, which they say would be wrong, and not doing business in the West Bank.

The chairman of the company’s board of directors has publicly stated that she wants to boycott Israel but has been rejected (wrongly according to her) by its parent company, Unilever, and can now only do so through no-deal arrangements. specified.

Ben and Jerry’s failure to address this reality fatally undermines their argument.

Marc D. Stern
new York
The author is chief legal officer of the American Jewish Committee.

For the publisher:

Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett called “anti-Semitic” and “anti-Israel” Ben & Jerry’s decision to end the sale of its ice cream in Jewish settlements in the Israeli-occupied West Bank while continuing to distribute it to within Israel’s internationally recognized borders.

George Orwell said that “in our time political speech and writing is largely the defense of the indefensible.” Israeli leaders today defend a policy of subjugation and oppression of Palestinians, denial of democratic rights to self-determination and equality by the total delegitimization of critics and those who refuse to be accomplices of their breaches of justice and human rights.

Bennett Cohen and Jerry Greenfield, the Jewish founders of Ben & Jerry’s, are right to regard these concepts as “fundamental principles of Judaism”.

When Israeli leaders become apologists for injustice, when they shine a light on those who uphold Judaism’s most sublime values, they prioritize tribal over morale, emptying the very idea of ​​Judaism of its ethical core.

Gidon D. Remba
Westfield, New Jersey
The writer, executive director of the Jewish Alliance for Change, was editor-in-chief of the foreign press and translator in the office of the Israeli prime minister during the Egyptian-Israeli peace negotiations from 1977 to 1978.

For the publisher:

Ben and Jerry could have it upside down.

This problem has been around for a long time and is quite complex. Nevertheless, by stopping sales in the occupied territories, Ben & Jerry’s deprives these inhabitants of their ice cream. And sending no message to the Israelis.

If he wants to make his point to the Israelis, he could continue to sell in the occupied territories but stop selling in Israel. Without their ice cream, some Israelis might just take another look at it and tell their lawmakers.

Jory langner
Delmar, New York State

For the publisher:

I am Jewish and I totally agree with Bennett Cohen and Jerry Greenfield.

The belief that Jews should not criticize Israeli policies reminds Americans chanting “My country, good or bad!” during the Vietnam War.

Patriotism does not require blind allegiance; it takes courage to challenge a government to live up to its ideals. Jews who support Israel must hold Israel accountable for its principles.

Camille Ehrenberg
new York

Host Olympic events in cities around the world

For the publisher:

Re “Even in normal times, hosting the Olympics doesn’t pay off” (DealBook, July 26):

The current method used by the International Olympic Committee to select the nations and cities to submit to the Olympics is not working. The Games in Tokyo are a good example. Preparing for these Games cost Japan billions of dollars; small nations could not begin to afford to sponsor these Olympic events.

A more realistic approach to hosting the Olympic Games would be to establish a permanent world-class Olympic facility in Greece, the birthplace of the Olympic Games. This permanent facility would be used for the opening and closing ceremonies, as well as for traditional sports, such as athletics. The other sports, such as swimming, gymnastics and basketball, would take place in separate facilities in various cities around the world.

The IOC would still have control of the Olympic Games. However, by dividing the responsibilities for logistics and funding, the Games would be much more manageable. This method would allow smaller nations to sponsor certain Olympic events.

James J. Farrell
Bellevue, Washington.

A substitute for shopping

For the publisher:

Re “I don’t want to shop anymore” (guest essay, nytimes.com, August 2):

A good substitute for what Erin Aubry Kaplan describes (recreational shopping, shopping, looking for items that surprise or delight) is going to a museum or botanical garden.

You never know what might grab your attention, and if you’re a regular visitor, you’ll develop favorites and appreciate the things that have changed. And don’t be afraid to bring home things you don’t need!

Karen falk
Bronxville, New York State