Regarding the article "Mideast Talks Hinge on Clinton," Nov. 10: I find it distressing that "Clinton's own definition of Palestinian self-determination" does not entail Palestinian statehood. What then does it entail? What does President-elect Clinton think is the appropriate resolution for the question of Palestine? It is unwise for Mr. Clinton to make statements concerning such a delicate and complex matter without being informed of the facts and realities of the situation.
His understanding of the situation does not take into account prevalent, accepted positions and decisions of the international community or statutes of international law. This includes his position on Israeli settlements in the occupied territory, on Arab East Jerusalem, and on the right of Palestinians to self-determination.
The settlements are illegal, according to international law and are major obstacles to peace. The overwhelming majority of the nations of the world, including the nation Clinton will lead, does not recognize Israel's annexation of Arab East Jerusalem, and the right to self-determination is an inalienable right to all human beings.
In this regard, it is imperative that Clinton appoint specialists who understand the history, politics, and culture of the region and its people to advise Clinton and enable him and his administration to deal with the issue in a responsible manner. F. Abdelhadly, Cliffside Pk., N.J.
Letters are welcome. Only a selection can be published, subject to condensation, and none acknowledged. Please address them to "Readers Write," One Norway St., Boston, MA 02115.