To the Editor:

Ethan Bronner's analysis of the Administration's new Middle East policy cites two reasons why there is this new American pressure on Israel ("New Focus on Settlements," June 6). If Bronner is correct, and there is good reason to believe he is, it is important to expose the misguided U.S. thinking involved here.

Bronner says the Administration "wants to send a message to the Arab world that the previous eight years of siding consistently with Israel is over." This is an acceptance of propaganda about where the Bush administration was. Yes, they were great supporters of Israel, consistent with Israel's special relationship with the U.S. It was never, however, so one-sided even in Bush's famous speech in 2002 in which he called for a Palestinian speech. What about the road map and Annapolis?   There is nothing one-sided there. In fact, American policy has not been based on zero sum game approaches, but how both can win. So the notion that now America has to make up on this to the Arab world is chimerical and ultimately won't impress the Arabs who still think of the conflict as a zero-sum game

The second reason he cites as to why the U.S. has focused on Israel is because that is where it has leverage--"given the American backing of Israel, it can push Israel to live up to its commitment far more easily than it can persuade Hamas to abandon violence." We have seen this kind of thinking before, particularly during the Carter Administration. It will only lead to three negative results: unnecessary tension between two allies, the US and Israel; no progress in Israeli-Arab disputes; and a questioning by moderate Arabs of US commitment to deal with Iran, the real threat to their security.

Israel has made offers of peace, concessions on settlements, and a Palestinian state before. It will do so again. The Administration needs to focus its efforts on changing the fundamental attitude of Arab rejection of Israel's legitimacy which remains the core of the problem.