To the Editors:

Your Essay "What to Do About Israel" [Sept. 7] is a disturbing approach to the multiple issues facing the Reagan Administration as it formulates its policy toward the Middle East. The Essay assumes, wrongly, that the U.S. can "do" something about Israel. America exalts the virtue of democratic leadership among our many friends, but whenever the exercise of democracy yields difficult policy disharmony, there are those who quickly forget that this is the price exacted by free governmental processes.

Unlike TIME, most Americans do see Israel as a strategic ally, and would not accept the conclusion that "Israel is well on its way to becoming not just a dubious asset but an outright liability to American security interests, both in the Middle East and worldwide." Many Americans, Jews among them, are unhappy with Prime Minister Begin's approach to autonomy for the West Bank. A large number oppose the policy of further Jewish settlements on the West Bank as a true impediment to the attainment of peace in the Middle East. Many Americans, including Jews, would welcome a more forthcoming approach to autonomy and Palestinian aspirations. Surely TIME is aware of the heated discussions and debates on this subject, particularly among American Jews, who articulate the issue out of their great concern for the continued safety and security of Israel. Many Americans, including Jews, were profoundly disturbed by the loss of innocent life by the bombing of Beirut.

Yet, having said all this, most of these same Americans would never reach for the crude solution offered by TIME, that is, holding back economic aid appropriated for Israel in an escrow account, to be paid out only if "genuine progress" is made in the autonomy talks, and withheld as a penalty if Israel sanctions new settlements on the West Bank. This Administration has a multitude of means available to it, short of such blackmail, to make known its views to Israel. No Israeli government ever has been, or conceivably ever could be, blind to the views of an American President, whose friendship and support is vital. The Reagan Administration believes, from all the President and Secretary of State Alexander Haig have said to date, that Israel is a key, if not the central, player in our strategic planning for the Middle East, and, accordingly, full military and economic assistance is a high priority. This does not preclude the Administration from pressing for rapid establishment of a self-governing authority on the West Bank and in Gaza by aiding and assisting the parties to the autonomy talks; nor does it preclude criticism of Israel as to new settlements.

Allies and true friends have disputes. They seek ways to resolve divergent policies. But they do not debate "the fundamental nature of their relationship," for that is not at issue. TIME does grave injury to a strong and solid alliance by its clarion call for such a debate between the U.S. and Israel, whose transcendent common goals and purposes ensure a positive, if not a special, relationship whoever may be in power at any time in either country.

Rita E. Hauser, Vice President American Jewish Committee New York City

Congratulations on your Essay concerning Israel. You raised issues that needed to be examined. For a long time, I have been a supporter of Israel. Nevertheless our relationship with the Israelis should be reviewed and appropriate changes considered to deal with the realities of the 1980s.

Mark D. Scott Miami

Strobe Talbott's Essay deserves a Pulitzer Prize. It is the most in-depth picture of the problem we can get.

Romeo L. von Baumgart-Psayla Dumont, N.J.

Strobe Talbott totally ignores the fact that in its quest for peace Israel is returning to Egypt the Sinai Peninsula, which contains oilfields that Israel developed and that could have made it energy independent.

Alan Stein bach New York City

When you ponder "What to Do About Israel," you miss a key point. Israel is one ally that wins with its own troops. In view of its record, why should Israel heed or need our advice? Or yours?

Bernard J. Gardner Cherry Hill, N.J.

The crux of the Middle East conflict is not Israel's occupation of the West Bank but the Arab refusal to recognize Israel. Only one moderate Arab leader, Egypt's President Anwar Sadat, has had the courage to proclaim "no more war." For that he received the strategic Sinai Peninsula. Israel is still waiting for another farsighted Arab statesman who is able to discuss the West Bank.

(Rabbi) Allan Meyerowitz Spring Valley, N. Y.

You would prefer Israel to behave like a sycophant rather than a friend, and are disturbed when it acts as an autonomous ally instead of a "client state."

Sidney W. Winchell Louisville

Why should Begin's refusal to relinquish the West Bank of the Jordan River, so that it might become an independent Palestinian state, be an irritant in U.S.Israeli relations? The U.S. should ask King Hussein why, when he administered this land between 1948 and 1967, he did not establish an independent state for the Palestinians.

Ted Kolodny Lincolnwood, III.

Our leaders must realize and begin to act on the fact that the interests of the U.S. and Israel are not always and automatically identical. Pretending that they are damages us throughout the world and, paradoxically, damages Israel even more, since it has to bear the brunt of the continued confrontation.

John A. Quatrini Hatboro, Pa.

You correctly suggest that President Truman threw his weight behind the creation of a Jewish state for humanitarian reasons. The U.S. has no historical commitment to support Israeli claims to the West Bank.

William Roger Louis Austin

A more evenhanded approach by the U.S. in the Middle East will no longer be written off as the result of petro-influence. Israeli conduct is earning our displeasure.

G. Leonard Brugnano Mount Clemens, Mich.

The Middle East conflict has no right or wrong. Pain and suffering have been endured and caused by both sides. Why should an American "get tough" policy apply to Israel and not to the Arabs?

Gerald Tepler New York City

Winning Streep

Meryl Streep is an artist, not a celebrity [Sept. 7]. She doesn't play a part-she is the part. That's magic.

Corey A. Zimmerman Lutz, Fla.

Ever since reading John Fowles' The French Lieutenant's Woman years ago, I've been mentally casting a film version. Try as I might, a "right" Sarah never came into focus until the first time I saw Meryl Streep. She is the only actress capable of playing that demanding, elusive role.

Patricia Johnson Sonoma, Calif.

On several occasions I have been told by strangers that I bear a slight resemblance to Actress Meryl Streep. If only they would go on to tell me that I also share her brains, talent and ambition.

Cynthia A. Cooper Findlay, Ohio

Sex in the Playpen

The idea presented in "Cradle-to-Grave Intimacy" [Sept. 7] is also appalling to the vast majority of us in the sex education and therapy field. Yes, children are sexual beings and need to know about sexuality. But youngsters do not need to act this out with adults. All of us are constantly working with patients who were damaged when young by adult-child sex.

Roy G. Gravesen, M.D. Director, Sex Therapy Clinic University of California, Irvine

Children are not miniature adults. They are unique creations who must be allowed to develop without unnecessary risks to their physical and psychological health. Culture has placed a taboo around the specter of childhood sexuality to protect, not inhibit, our young people.

(The Rev.) Stephen M. Bass Chapel Hill, N.C.

Those who advocate child-with-child or child-with-adult sex are psychologically sick and are seeking only to justify what they did, what they are doing, or what they want to do.

Edwin G. Troutman, M.D. Fort Worth

What child can benefit by having sex with an adult who is using him for his own sexual stimulation? What infant can speak up against such abuse? What teenager is emotionally capable of separating his desire to be loved by a parent with that parent's desire for sex with his own child? Charles and Dale Scaglione West Hurley, N. Y.

You don't seem to understand the difference between sexuality and sexual intercourse. Most sex educators believe that everyone is sexual throughout his life. Nearly none advocates that children or teen-agers should engage in sexual intercourse. Nor do we believe that incest is ever a good idea.

Sol Gordon, Professor of Child and Family Studies Syracuse University Syracuse

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so viewer discretion is required.