Sunday, March 6, 2011

Progressive Israel-Scolds Inadvertantly Support Conflict

Yaacov Lozowick
Yaacov Lozowick's Ruminations
04 March '11

http://yaacovlozowick.blogspot.com/2011/03/progressive-israel-scolds-inadvertantly.html

I was a bit surprised when a number of readers responded earlier this week to a post on J-Street by apparently saying that J-Street doesn't entertain the positions it entertains. I may have played into their hands, however, by focusing on marginal issues such as the number of participants at the J-Street conference. In a week where yet another poll of American public opinion found that 60-plus% of Americans (most of whom can't be Jewish) support Israel, and fewer than 20% support the Palestinians, it doesn't make much difference if the radical wing of American Jewry can convene 1,000 people or 5,000. You get the feeling, these past two years, that even the Obama White House has understood that the votes aren't in that particular political camp - though the chattering classes in Europe agree wholeheartedly with the J-Street agenda.

What is the agenda? As David Suissa has put it, there are two planks to the platform: It is really, really, really, really important that Israel reach a peace agreement with the Palestinians... [and] the underlying assumption is always that the major obstacle to peace is Israel. Israel Matzav dug up a short video in which some participants at the conference said predictable things such as that Hamas isn't as bad as the IDF. It's the usual Mondoweiss fare.

This week also saw the publication of an 11,000-word article by the New Yorker's David Remnick, fawning over Haaretz and describing it as the best of Israel. I mention it here because Remnick's piece is a fine demonstration of how the J-Streeters see Israel; along the way it also shows why they're irrelevant for almost all Israelis. According to Remnick, Haaretz is alone in Israeli society in its willingness to face the reality of Israel's wars, its conflict with the Palestinians, its occupation of them, and all the things that are wrong with Israel's politics in matters of war and peace. Alas, he continues, not only are Israelis not willing to listen, but even most of the political left cannot abide with Haaretz, because, as he repeatedly tells, it lacks empathy with the Israeli side of the story, and refuses to offer any sort of consolation for their suffering at times of terror attacks. It's position is principled, and the principles cannot change merely because people are frightened, say, or bereaved.

The arrogance of Haaretz, of Remnick, and of the many non-Israelis who allow themselves this train of thought is always aggravating, but hardly unusual. Only once in the entire article does Remnick very briefly allude to a different dynamic:

Since the talks between Arafat and Barak collapsed, a decade ago, mainstream public opinion in Israel has become a paradox: majority support for the idea of a two-state solution, but a generalized distrust of Palestinian intentions. Middle Israel feels that it left Lebanon, in 2000, and got rockets from Hezbollah; left Gaza, in 2005, and got rockets from Hamas. The peace camp, despite occasional demonstrations and displays of vitality, is depleted.

Let's see. What parts of the story does that little paragraph overlook, even though every Israeli can reel them off in her sleep? The steep rise in Palestinian terror from September 1993 and the beginning of the Oslo process, so that in each of the years 1994, 1995, and 1996 there was more terror than in any previous year of the conflict since 1948.Then there was the offer by an Israeli prime minster of ceding all of Gaza and at least 89% of the West Bank, along with division of Jerusalem, so as to enable the Palestinians to have a sovereign state with no Jews in it. The Palestinians responded to that one by launching the 2nd Intifada. There was the one about how Israel built a defensive fence that proved its value in saved lives but also drew a line on the ground that Israel was willing to retreat to even without peace, which caused the Palestinians to launch their "apartheid wall" lie. There was the time Israel moved out of southern Lebanon in return for a promise from the international community as expressed by the UN Security Council that Hizballah wouldn't be allowed to re-arm. That didn't work so well, did it. And so on.

My ever-repeated point being that the reason a very large majority of the Israeli electorate has given up on any chance for peace with the Palestinians is that the Palestinians and their supporters have been working long and hard to convince us there's no peace to be had.

There won't be peace because the Palestinian's national aspiration isn't to have a small state divided into two sections alongside a larger Israel, thus in effect affirming the historical victory of Zionism. The Palestinian national aspiration is to roll back Zionism, to rectify its injustice as they define it, and to have their state on the entirety of their land. Not to mention the aspirations of hundreds of millions of Muslims beyond the Palestinians, who are also an irremovable part of the equation.

The really pernicious thing about the position that Israel is the prime culprit for the lack of peace is that it re-affirms the fundamental position of the Palestinians and apparently most Arabs. This is that Zionism is a crime against the Arabs and against the Palestinians. Zionism was a crime in 1897, it was a crime in 1917, it was a crime in 1947, and in 1967, and remains a crime till this very day. I don't know if people like David Remnick, or the leaders and public of J-Street, or Barack Obama, or all the millions of others who insist the Israelis are the reason there's no peace intend to be saying this, but the reality is that the message they're sending to the Palestinians is that Zionism remains the culprit, the criminal, the aggressor who caused the entire conflict by being so cruel to the victimized Palestinians.

The fact that thousands of Jews in America say this about Zionism isn't frightening -they don't make much difference - but it is depressing.

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

No comments:

Post a Comment