Friday, February 5, 2010
[Crossposted from JStreetJive]
Out of the spotlight for a number of months since its disastrous October 2009 national conference which went unattended by scores of congressmen including Senator John Kerry, J Street attempted to thrust itself back into media prominence last night by kicking off "J Street Local", a two hour convocation of the faithful in 21 cities around the U.S.. The highlight of the evening was The Leader himself streamed live from Philadelphia. Most of the local events featured the alliance between J Street and two other left wing groups: Brit Tzedek v'Shalom and The New Israel Fund (often referred to as The No Israel Fund). The timing couldn't have been worse for the self-anointed, "Pro Israel-Pro Peace" group.
Just two days ago, the head of the NIF in Israel, Naomi Chazan, was forced to cancel her trip to Australia over the growing scandal that groups funded by her organization provided dubious "evidence" of Israeli atrocities to the discredited Goldstone commission. Daniel Sokatch, the Director of the American NIF, assessed the situation and decided that attack was the best defense when he said the report - apparently confirmed - was "the worst kind of vicious hate speech." Another hard left Knesset member went even further dubbing the revelations a "show trial" (an odd choice of words, considering that the antecedents of his party, Meretz, were enthusiasts for the original Stalinist show trials of the 1930's).
And now, this morning comes the news that Ms. Chazan has been fired from her position at The Jerusalem Post. According to an analysis by Im Tirtzu, the new grass roots, Israeli Zionist movment, the groups funded by the NIF supplied 92% of the negative references about the IDF to Goldstone "researchers." Needless to say, none of this important, breaking news was conveyed by either NIF staffers or Jeremy Ben Enemy to the faithful around the U.S. In fact, his constant invocation of that organization and its alliance with J Street may well come back to bite him. NIF's embarrassment, however, proved no deterrent to Israeli Consul, Nadav Tamir, embracing their regional director.
Ben Enemy's performance was more negative than upbeat. He sounded almost bitter that his prophecies weren't being taken as holy writ by the American Jewish community. The evening - at least in Boston - was more about process than substance. We heard all about building local constituencies, organizing university chapters and so on. Of course, substance had to be avoided, considering the moribund efforts and results of the Obama-Mitchell initiative that has produced exactly zero for Israelis and Palestinians. The Middle East peace process has obviously become a back burner issue for a beleaguered President facing the worst economic crisis in decades, not to mention the Scott Brown embarrassment.
At one point, The Leader let slip his frustration with Obama's apparent, unshared obsession with applying more pressure on Israeli Jews when he half-jokingly said "Well, Mr. President, with all due respect, we're going to hold you to that (Obama's commitment to resolve the conflict)..but expect us to press you to do more - a lot more. As a community organizer, you would expect no less from us." And there you have it: Israel's existence is really all about making American left wing Jews feel empowered through community organizing.
I recall a telling comment from Ben Enemy's colleague, Dan Sokatch of the New Israel Fund at the October conference. Commenting on the controversy at last summer's San Francisco Jewish Film Festival (the Festival decided to feature the intensely anti-Israel film, "Rachel") when he was CEO of the San Francisco Jewish Community Federation, Mr. Sokatch said that the forces critical of him were enemies of "community organizing." A bizarre accusation, but now fully understandable and revealing of his and J Street's primary, radical focus.
Departing from his upbeat style back in October, Ben Enemy decided to invoke the full array of "victim" imagery. If J Street was not being embraced by every American Jew as he had planned, then, clearly, it was a result of "enemies all around." He began his talk by a wave of the bloody shirt, claiming that his prophecy was being "demonized, ostracized and shut out" from the American Jewish dialogue. It was a bitter, angry speech designed to paint a picture of the faithful as victims of an oligarchic, censorious Jewish "right wing."
It was a classic of demagoguery - rallying the troops by pointing out the Zionist barbarians at the gates. After all, J Street has always been primarily about the perceived, existential, Left-Right struggle and less about Israel's survival. The assembled crowd looked more like an SDS or CPUSA reunion than the "Pro Israel" supporters they claim to be. This was really all about the struggle against the fanatics of the Right.
If one can characterize the outlook of the American Jewish Left in a single phrase, it's all about demolishing the colonialist notion of "The Other". Yet, how ironic this evening was which amounted to constructing,defining and labeling the Bad Jews -"Settlers" and the "Pro Settler Movement" - as "The Other." In spite of George Soros' millions (I presume, absent J Street's opaque refusal to disclose its major donors) it's a product that more and more Americans aren't buying.
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: J Street: The Prophet Outraged [Hillel].
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.solomonia.com/cgi-bin/mt4/mt-renamedtb.cgi/17431
IN case you missed the reference in Hillel's post below, here's an article about Namoi Chazan's firing from the Jerusalem Post: Amid row over contentious ad, Jerusalem Post fires Naomi Chazan of New Israel Fund The trouble with the NIF... Read More
Let me add some notes to Hillel's post about yesterday's J Street launch. Last week's Jewish Advocate had a profile of the local Boston head: J Street opens in Boston (requires paid subsciption) The signpost is up: J Street is... Read More
Mr. Sokatch said that the forces critical of him were enemies of "community organizing."
As one of the local "forces" critical of the Film Festival, I say we were prime examples of community organizing in action. And I'm proud of it.
I'm a little disturbed by this characterization of J Street and other left wing Jewish organizations and people as "the enemy".
There is plenty of room for dissent in any democracy is there not? and I don't see why various opinions can't be heard.
Frankly the firing of Chazen left a bad taste in my mouth.
There is something ugly about this, about an unwillingness to listen to different opinions or even to tolerate their publication which is anti-democratic and also, at bottom, it may reflect an unwillingness to do business with the Palestinians in order to try and make a settlement with them.
Or am I misreading this?
Is the anti J Street business at bottom reflecting a desire to hang on to every last square inch of the West Bank? because if so, Israel will inevitably become a binational state.
That might well mean it wouldn't be majority Jewish for very long. That might be OK (in the best of all possible worlds) but it might not - it would depend on whether people would be willing to adapt to a modern, primarily Western culture that respects Jews and our need for a homeland and a refuge.
I think it would also probably mean that all the Palestinian "refugees," including the generations descended from the original refugees, would have the right to return also. You guys better think hard about this.
Most likely this would result in Lebanon - potentially a confessional state prone to civil war, and encompassing not a few people who aren't facing West and not interested in modernity OR secularism.
It could on the other hand become a model for multicultural cooperation around the world. The Palestinians focus on education, like Jews, they are highly literate and who knows, maybe we could all get along together.
Miracles are possible and many have happened in the Land of Israel so - anything is possible even a peaceful, democratic binational Israel.
But let's face it - for a binational state to work in Israel especially with Jews becoming a minority it might well take a miracle so those of you who are against a two-state solution better start praying.
Meanwhile, re Chazen, this piece in Ha'aretz is quite strong I think:
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1147783.html
Especially in regard to the Goldstone Report, the writer points out that most of the allegations about the IDF could have been read in the Israeli newspaper.
On that issue, this isn't going to go away. The response to the UN looked strong but it needs to be stronger, ie an independent investigation. If there were war crimes they must be addressed. If not, Israel will be exonerated.
There is no exoneration for the Hamas and other rockets, etc, from Gaza - those were clearly aimed at civilians from amidst a civilian population, putting them at risk - and I don't see how there is any wriggle room at all for that and for the fact that these attacks were reason for Cast Lead in the first place.
People, don't be afraid of free speech and don't be afraid of sunlight.
Isn't what we say in America?
Sophia - thanks for your comment. I don't know if you were in attendance at the J Street event last night, but I assure you that the tone of the evening and most certainly that of Mr. Ben Ami was unmistakably one of demonizing what was perceived as "The Right". He began and ended his speech railing against those Zionists who he determined were the enemy.
If anyone threw down a gauntlet, it was J Street. Indeed, their entire raison d'etre has been to identify and demonize their perceived opponents on the "Right." I don't know about your idea of right and left, but I assume that if you consider your views "progressive" then virtually every aspect of Palestinian Arab society must be anathema to you: treatment of women, gays and lesbians, abuse of minorities and advocacy of a uni-religious state - all elements that the Left has been fighting for decades. As for a "bi-national state" you must realize that this is coded language for elimination of Israel as a Jewish state; even the most severe critics of Israel concede this point.
Now, if you wish for Jews to return to the state of a subject, abused people living under a Muslim theocracy, then come out and say it. Perhaps the paradigm would be Egypt where the Jews could return and live in a constant state of threat like the Copts? Or Syria or Iran where the Jews are virtual hostages. No one is trying to stifle free speech in this discussion. But it is our obligation to expose that speech to the cold light of reality.
Sophia,
ie an independent investigation.
And who do you propose for an independent investigation that will be acceptable to the UNHRC and co?
The Jpost lives by its sales and those who buy it woke up to the reality, although it took some 12 years or so after Beilin and co., misled them with Oslo.
Anyway what credibility does she have with the public now after she was fooled into associating with people working for the destruction of the state, which is basically what NIF's sponsors are after?
Sophia, I'm going to say this as nicely as I can.
The reason that some people consider J Street an adversary is because they propose policies which, if implemented, would lead to the destruction of Israel and possible genocide. The fact that they receive ten if not hundreds of thousands of dollars from Saudi and Egyptian lobbyists and others who have expressed hatred for Israel reflects that. Take a look at the links in the leaflet Sol put up.
And when you talk about "possible unwillingness to do business with the Palestinians", what about their willingness to business with Israel? They won't stop terror attacks even to 'do business' and they loudly proclaim their desire to kill every Jew on the planet. Can you see any problem with this?
I'm sorry but just the first couple of sentences of your post reflect a delusional system of thinking. You are living in fantasyland. Thank goodness not everyone is or you, and many others, would have been long dead or never have been born.
All of you make good points.
Allow me to respond: I don't respect the demonization of the Right or the stereotyping of Israeli settlers. I think this is a real problem. Their humanity is frequently overlooked as are Jewish ties to Judea and Samaria let alone Jerusalem.
I'm also aware of Israel's security needs which are profound. I don't think the Green Line provides security, nor does UN 242 demand that this be the border, certainly it isn't a border by law or otherwise. So, rational plans need to evolve that will satisfy both sides and Arab threats to ignore the Oslo Accords altogether are making me very nervous as are the ROR issues along with recent demands that the Green Line be followed exactly - which could well result also in the ethnic cleansing of hundreds of thousands of people - Jews - which I think would be abominable.
By the same token, I think that any Palestinian state should welcome Jews who want to live there. This would increase the security of both states plus it would only be fair. I don't think deliberately dragging hundreds of thousands of Jews out of Judea is a good idea in any sense.
That said I think there's a problem on our side in respecting the Palestinians or even in trying to learn about Arab culture in general, with which we share many common roots.
This is particularly true of the Sephardim, Mizrachim and Yemenite Jews, for whom Arab and Turkish tradition isn't at all foreign and of course there are many African and Iranian Jews in Israel as well.
We could do more to try and lower our fear level - plus there's much to love and respect in those traditions.
This in itself would help build bridges to other Middle Eastern peoples - and we should not underestimate the existence of open-minded people in those cultures too - most of whom are probably longing for peace.
Yet, we tend to stereotype them just as Israelis and Jews are stereotyped.
So, to the degree that we can see with less bias and less fear, we should and we should make sure that people realize the door is open and that reconciliation is possible and desireable.
I'm aware that there is also much in various cultures that isn't in line with modern, Western or Jewish philosophy.
This is a primary reason to work hard to reach a workable peace resolution that would allow co-existence. Otherwise I fear the extremists will get the upper hand not only over us but within their own cultures.
Just today for example there were two separate bombings - one in Iraq, one in Pakistan - with a great loss of life. This is dreadful - and surely the victims just wanted to go about their daily affairs.
They are victims too, just as we have been - victims of bigotry, extremism and hate. Imagine too what could happen if King Abdullah of Jordan were overthrown or if the Hezbollah got even more power in Lebanon - things could get really bad.
I am also painfully aware of the barriers to peace from the Arab side.
This isn't news to me and I also think it's ridiculous to accuse me of living in fairyland or whatever. I probably know more about Israeli history than many including pre-Israel, anti-Jewish violence.
That doesn't mean, however, that it's time to stop working for peace.
And, while it's true that many on the Left demonize the Right, the reverse is also true. This of course extends well beyond Jewish and Israeli matters.
We need each other, all points of view should be heard and respected.
The tone of political discourse in recent years has not been civil and there's a real trend to be full of rage and have ears firmly shut and mouths wide open, which isn't productive.
It would be good if we could give each other some space and some respect I think, and try to pull together toward a moderate path.
For that reason, it's necessary to hear many points of view - some of us might be from a different end of the political spectrum but that doesn't per se make us wrong.
This works both ways of course - many of the Leftists are indeed blind to other points of view and vice-versa.
But the one thing we shouldn't do is try to shut each other up! When newspapers, universities, even blogs try to attack people with different points of view - that's really a bad sign and it's against all our traditions, both as Westerners and especially though as Jews.
Finally as to Goldstone - there are many people in Israel who could form a commission that wouldn't be directly tied to the IDF but which would be balanced and knowledgeable.
Personally I trust the IDF to police itself, I think the vast majority of soldiers and officers believe in their very high moral code.
But - the media war is real, UN bias is real, and so are the dead people, the injured, the bereaved.
Whether Cast Lead was an overreaction or not, the mud is sticking and nothing less than an open, full-on self-investigation of possible war crimes will suffice.
We ourselves should not fear the consequences because Jews, and Israel, have ourselves based our very existence on a very stringent ethical code.
If we have violated this, even in the heat of battle, we should not be afraid to confront it.
We should fear the opposite - trying to hide what might have been excessive violence.
Well stated.
Also, Sophia is not in any way advocating a 'bi-national state'. Rather, she is warning that this will be the inevitable (and probably undesired) result if Israel insists on holding onto all of the occupied territory and expanding the settlements in that territory.
Sophia,
This doesn't make sense to me:
"I think there's a problem on our side in respecting the Palestinians or even in trying to learn about Arab culture in general, with which we share many common roots.
This is particularly true of the Sephardim, Mizrachim and Yemenite Jews, for whom Arab and Turkish tradition isn't at all foreign and of course there are many African and Iranian Jews in Israel as well.
We could do more to try and lower our fear level - plus there's much to love and respect in those traditions.
This in itself would help build bridges to other Middle Eastern peoples - and we should not underestimate the existence of open-minded people in those cultures too - most of whom are probably longing for peace."
Are you saying that Mizrachi Jews "need" to learn more about Arab culture? The ones I knew when living in Israel, or more accurately their parents, have had plenty of experience with "Arab culture". That's why they live in Israel now, and why Mizrachi Jew in general tend to distrust Arab promises the most. Think about it. The people who know the Arabs best trust them the least. That ought to tell us something about the Arab traditions you think we should learn to "love and respect".
As for those Arabs you believe are "probably longing for peace", polls show that the majority of Palestinian Arabs still want to get rid of Israel. I have no doubt that Arabs in other places feel the same way, especially as the government of every single Arab nation promote antisemitism and anti-Israelism. The existence of a large, hidden population of "peaceful Arabs" is just another example of naivety and wishful thinking.
And while individual Arabs may be victims of injustice in their own lands, to describe all Arabs as "victims" is absurd. The Arab world has tremendous natural wealth in oil, minerals, and other areas. I don't see that they have done much good with it. The only thing "victimizing"
Arabs is themselves.
Thank you Ron Newman!
No, Happy and Proud - I mean Western Jews need to learn more about Arab, Turkish and Persian culture - not that the Mizrachim, et.al., don't know already.
I am sorry if I was unclear.
I believe you also misunderstood my comment about extremism.
Please re-read - again I apologize if it's unclear:
(we need) to work hard to reach a workable peace resolution that would allow co-existence. Otherwise I fear the extremists will get the upper hand not only over us but within their own cultures.
Just today for example there were two separate bombings - one in Iraq, one in Pakistan - with a great loss of life. This is dreadful - and surely the victims just wanted to go about their daily affairs.
They are victims too, just as we have been - victims of bigotry, extremism and hate. Imagine too what could happen if King Abdullah of Jordan were overthrown or if the Hezbollah got even more power in Lebanon - things could get really bad.
***
Sophia, Why do you think that Western Jews "need to" learn more about Arab, Persian, and Turkish cultures, especially with respect to encouraging peace in the Middle East, which is what you seem to be talking about? Really, how is that going to help? This is a perfect example of muddled thinking and PC-speak which is allowing radical Islam to run all over us and allow deluded, self-hating idiots like J Streeters to flourish.
(For the record, I worked in Turkey for several months some time ago and have some familiarity with Persian culture as well, so I am not ignorant about these topics and do find much to respect. But that's not the point here - the issue is why on earth you think we "need" to learn about this more than, for example, studying our own Jewish heritage).
Are you talking about Americans/Europeans or Israeli Jews of European origin? If you're talking about Americans/Europeans, your argument is even more ludicrous - how is my or my children's learning about Turkish culture (especially in the surface way this would happen) going to help resolve the Arab-Israeli conflict? And if you're talking about Israeli Jews, do you not realize that about 1/2 of Israel's Jewish population is from Arab/Persian/other 'Eastern' cultures? Don't you think that there would be some amount of 'learning' going on through interaction with that 50%, as well as the 20% Arab population? Really, your thoughts make no sense of any kind.
In my opinion, what is really going to help bring about peace, which will only come from strength, is for more Jews to study and learn about JUDAISM, about which many of us are sadly lacking in knowledge.
Sophia,
You write: (we need) to work hard to reach a workable peace resolution that would allow co-existence.
I'm not trying to be nasty when I ask If you are awake and aware of the attempts at a "reachable" peace the "we" tried over and over again only to be rebuffed by the Arabs over and over again.
Yes, a lot of Americans not just Western Jews "need to" learn more about Arab, Persian, and Turkish cultures and then they won't ask What did we do to deserve this? when attacked but will understand the nature of the culture attacking them.
Your writing displays an intelligent and educated person and not naive, but your beliefs and emotions have come between you and reality. You are basically clutching at straws. Why are you afraid of calling a spade a spade?
If I may use an analogy employing "The Dog Whisperer": Encountering a woman holding a problem pup in her arms he chided her for the way she was handling it, like a baby. That she was dealing with a dog and that dogs when dealing with pups hold them differently.
He then proceeded to demonstrate how to handle the pup and keep it as a dog and not a schizophrenic projection of a human.
Basically too scared to treat a culture that does not live up to our cultural norms in an honest and sincere way we prefer to castigate ourselves.
Why, to avoid hearing libelous accusations of being racist, discriminatory etc?
That's just plain nuts. We are demonstrating the fear of defending ourselves.
Ron Newman,
if Israel insists on holding onto all of the occupied territory
Where do you get this from, Jstreet?
Do all the offers of returning the occupied territories in return for peace not count?
Can you not keep the context in focus?
Expanding the settlements. Ah yes and your president includes the settlement of Jerusalem where no expansion by Jews should be permitted.
Happy and Proud,
It's precisely the interaction in daily life of Israeli Jews with the other cultures that has formed their outlook.
Not only do they meet in the workplace but they also see them through their media not just translations distortedly presented by Haaretz.
And of course they come with centuries old baggage of living under the boot of those cultures.
Ron Newman, if you really are against occupation, please end your brutal occupation of North America and return to the entities your parents, grandparents, great-grandparents fled from.
Eddie, but that would most likely return Ron Newman eventually back to the land of his ancestors - making him in the process the oppressor of the poor helpless innocent "Palestinians" ...
Sophia, I usually find your postings useful and informative. This in spite of the our political differences - you are center-Left, whereas I am center-Right. However, this last long response of yours simply doesn't make much sense. There are so many things wrong with it that I had no choice but to do as thorough a fisking as I could. Please don't take it personally - we are talking about ideas here rather than personalities. This will be a long one, for it takes many statements to disprove just one. Bear with me, please.
"... rational plans need to evolve that will satisfy both sides and Arab threats to ignore the Oslo Accords altogether are making me very nervous ..."
When you're talking about rationality, you are probably referring to our Western rationality. What Arabs (or other cultures) consider rational may not be necessarily considered rational by our standards. For example, we have the notion of positive sum gain. People in other cultures (such as Arabs or Russians, for example) do not necessarily subscribe to this. Theirs is either a zero sum gain, or worse yet, a negative sum gain. Numerous anecdotes abound about this. Thus, you are engaging in moral projectionism (akin to anthropomorphism), ascribing the qualities of our culture to that of others. This is wrong on many levels, and sometimes may even smack of racism, even if unintentionally.
Nothing short of Israel's demise will satisfy the Arabs. They will only calm down when either Israel is no more, with Jews dead or gone, or when the (former) Israeli Jews become dhimmis in their own land once again, under the control of Sharia. Your statements appear to ignore all the evidence to the contrary staring us in the face, screaming loud and clear. Oslo was an unmitigated disaster, and we would do well to abandon it altogether, having learned the valuable, costly and bloody lessons thereof.
"... I think that any Palestinian state should welcome Jews who want to live there. This would increase the security of both states plus it would only be fair. ..."
This is pure wishful thinking on your part. According to Jordanian law, for example (where 2/3 of the population are Palestinian Arabs, and the rest are Arabian Bedouin Arabs), Jews are NOT allowed to own land. According to PA law, a sale of land to a Jew is a crime, sometimes punishable by death. What makes you think that this situation would change? Fairness? What fairness? This is yet another Western notion, hardly applicable here.
"... I think there's a problem on our side in respecting the Palestinians or even in trying to learn about Arab culture in general, with which we share many common roots. ..."
No, Sophia, there is no such problem on our side in general. What we have a problem with is the murderous and barbaric medieval aspects of Palestinian and other Arab/Muslim cultures, which place a very low value on human life and other values we hold as self-evident in the West. THIS we cannot respect - this we should fight and eradicate. Or wait until they crawl out of the caves and grow up, while protecting ourselves from their onslaught.
"This is particularly true of the Sephardim, Mizrachim and Yemenite Jews, for whom Arab and Turkish tradition isn't at all foreign and of course there are many African and Iranian Jews in Israel as well."
As already elucidated by other respondents, Jews from the Muslim countries know those cultures all too well - this is the main reason they overwhelmingly vote for the Right in Israel. It is the Ashkenazi Jews, with their naive delusions based on ignorance and wishful thinking, that engage in suicidal delirium, not the Mizrachi ones. They know (as do I, having grown up in Russia) that the only way to deal with a bully is to be stronger than him, to let him know that, and occasionally to beat him up real good so as to let him know where things stand. Your Western sensibility may be appalled by such barbarity, but unfortunately this is the ONLY thing that works in this neighborhood, I'm very sorry to report. It's either this, or subjugation, or death. And most of us want to live, so we prefer to carry a big stick and speak not-too-softly so that the other side has no mistakes about it.
"We could do more to try and lower our fear level - plus there's much to love and respect in those traditions. This in itself would help build bridges to other Middle Eastern peoples ..."
Yes, we can do more to try and lower our fear level - however, the recipe for attaining this worthy goal is to improve our education, advance our technological abilities, build better weapons (and more of them), and make sure our soldiers are the best-trained ones in the world. We should not forget diplomacy, of course, but it should be based on our strength and deterrent capabilities. Love and respect may work in the parallel reality of San Francisco and some parts of New York City or Boston, but not in the Middle East for sure. You want to build bridges? Then you have to speak THEIR language, lest you be perceived as weak and defenseless.
"... we should not underestimate the existence of open-minded people in those cultures too - most of whom are probably longing for peace."
Like someone already pointed out, this is an imaginary group of people. The overwhelming majority of our enemies want us dead, whereas the overwhelming majority of us just want them to leave us alone. Those few individuals who think otherwise are highly irrelevant in their societies and anyway are too afraid to voice such opinions for fear of reprisals from the majority and/or the regime.
"... we should and we should make sure that people realize the door is open and that reconciliation is possible and desireable. ... This is a primary reason to work hard to reach a workable peace resolution that would allow co-existence."
The whole world knows by now just how broadly our door is open, as we keep pestering them with our honorable intentions and desire for peace - but our enemies just don't want to enter. Can't you just accept this reality, as unpleasant and painful as it is? No matter how hard you want somebody to change, there is nothing you can do until and unless they want to change. And you can either choose to wait until they want to change, or you could try to force them to change. Neither scenario is perfect or even desirable, as the consequences in either case are rather bloody, but this is the reality, sad as it is. We should just try to find a modus operandi that works best for US (rather than us AND them), and we should stop worrying too much about what THEY think, lest we be perceived as weak and seeking accommodation. We have nothing to apologize or feel guilty for - let THEM change.
"Otherwise I fear the extremists will get the upper hand not only over us but within their own cultures."
NEWS FLASH: They already have done so a long time ago (in their own cultures). As for us - we are democracies, so no real worry here.
"Just today for example there were two separate bombings - one in Iraq, one in Pakistan - with a great loss of life. This is dreadful - and surely the victims just wanted to go about their daily affairs."
They've been killing each other for a long time. It's sad, it's bad, but there is very little WE can do about it. THEY have to change.
"They are victims too, just as we have been - victims of bigotry, extremism and hate."
They are victims of their own sick culture and the bloody heritage that comes with it.
"I ... think it's ridiculous to accuse me of living in fairyland or whatever. I probably know more about Israeli history than many including pre-Israel, anti-Jewish violence."
Knowing a lot about history is no replacement for common sense, I'm afraid :-) Although such knowledge can come in handy indeed IF one is realistic instead of naive and wishful-thinking.
"That doesn't mean, however, that it's time to stop working for peace."
Like someone wise said a long time ago in Rome, "if you want peace, prepare for war." Another smart ass noted that "fighting for peace is like f*cking for virginity." To really work for peace one needs to be strong, brave, armed to the teeth, and preferably have a lot of reliable friends and allies who can cover your ass when the shit hits the fan, as it inevitably does.
This, btw, is what Lieberman is doing quite well: at the last U.N. vote there were many more countries voting with Israel than before. It wasn't just the U.S., Canada and Micronesia - now there were Italy, Poland, Czech republic, et al. - all in all, over 15 countries. THIS is how one works for peace. Once we have India (which is just a matter of time, as they are already mostly on our side) and China (maybe, it's a long haul), and possibly even Russia (Lieberman is working on that, too), then together with the U.S. we could wipe out Islamism.
Only now the U.S. has Hussain O'Bummer for a president, which is just too bad. But he's just a glitch on the radar, a weird (if regrettable) aberration destined to go down in infamy and shame. But then again, it took 4 years of Jimmy Carter to get to 8 years of Ronald Reagan :-) We SHALL overcome someday - and that shall be on Super Tuesday in November of 2014.
"We need each other, all points of view should be heard and respected."
No, Sophia, we need THEM as we need another hole in the head, which is what they are providing aplenty these days. It is THEY who need US - and not the other way around. We may need their oil, true - all the more reason to find alternative energy solutions.
"The tone of political discourse in recent years has not been civil and there's a real trend to be full of rage and have ears firmly shut and mouths wide open, which isn't productive. It would be good if we could give each other some space and some respect I think, and try to pull together toward a moderate path."
Nice, warm and fuzzy. And detached from reality. The Left has gotten used to their long dominance in the media and the academia. Now that things are changing, the Left is screaming "foul" - too bad for the Left. Time to change and adjust the mental model of the world.
"For that reason, it's necessary to hear many points of view - some of us might be from a different end of the political spectrum but that doesn't per se make us wrong."
Two things: first, you may finally be able to begin what we on the (sensible) Right have been saying for years. As for your side of the story - we've known it for years, nothing new here. And second, being within certain parts of political spectrum DOES make one wrong. Not all opinions and points of view deserve serious discussion.
"When newspapers, universities, even blogs try to attack people with different points of view - that's really a bad sign and it's against all our traditions, both as Westerners and especially though as Jews."
NEWS FLASH: The Left has owned owned the newspapers and the universities since forever, and have been shutting the (sensible) Right for years. Blogs and Conservative talk radio and FOX TV are a relatively new phenomenon, which has finally allowed the Right to express itself.
"Finally as to Goldstone - there are many people in Israel who could form a commission that wouldn't be directly tied to the IDF but which would be balanced and knowledgeable. Personally I trust the IDF to police itself, I think the vast majority of soldiers and officers believe in their very high moral code."
First of all, there were all sorts of commissions of inquiry in Israel - no shortage of that. Bending over backwards just to prove to the world that the Israelis don't drink the blood of Arab children doesn't get us anywhere, as it only reinforces the negative image of us as being weak and uncertain of ourselves in the eyes of the enemy.
"Whether Cast Lead was an overreaction or not, the mud is sticking and nothing less than an open, full-on self-investigation of possible war crimes will suffice."
Wrong again. No more self-investigations, no more appeasing our adversaries and critics. We are right, we are moral, and our arms (both hands and weapons) are clean. If you don't believe us, and if you don't believe our free, open and critical media, if you don't believe our democratic institutions, feel free to go and f*ck yourselves. We don't owe you an explanation or apologies. YOU are the ones who owe us all that.
"We ourselves should not fear the consequences because Jews, and Israel, have ourselves based our very existence on a very stringent ethical code."
Hear-hear (or is it here-here?). And since this is indeed so, we have no compelling need to be afraid of anything but our own fear and indecisiveness. Leave the unhealthy excessive introspection to the Jews of the Diaspora :-)
"If we have violated this, even in the heat of battle, we should not be afraid to confront it."
Time and again it has been shown that various allegations against the IDF have been blood libels - even when coming from within the ranks of IDF. We have no shortage of leftist "useful idiots" here, I'm afraid.
"We should fear the opposite - trying to hide what might have been excessive violence."
You can be sure that the Israeli MSM (most of which tends to be left-leaning anyway) would uncover all such alleged instances and would scream bloody murder.
Sophia, I mean no disrespect, but imho you've gone too far this time - too far left and too far away from facts, logic and common sense - and thus I felt compelled to spend the time rebutting most of your unfounded (or poorly founded) statements and pronouncements. Don't take it as an ad hominem attack on you - but do feel free as an attack on your ideology and world view :-)
Israel can ill-afford to play "nice" and "fair" - we must be strong and assertive. Most of our problems with our neighbors stem from our repeated show of weakness. And the Oslo disaster was but one (actually, two) episode in the PR war. We should learn lessons from history. After the 1967 Six Day War Israel was treated with respect - by allies and enemies alike. It is when we got too soft and complacent that the situation changed for the worse. But it is not irreversible - we should just start respecting ourselves a little more.
And no more "land for peace" - peace for peace or land for land. Basta. "Land for peace" doesn't work around here. You wanna fight? We'll give you a fight you won't forget for generations to come. You want to trade? By all means, as we believe in positive sum gain. But ... No more unilateral concessions and shows of good will. No more mixed and schizophrenic messages, which make our enemies go berserk. Basta. We should speak with one calm but firm voice.
And THEN they will listen, I assure you. Peace through strength and self-respect should be our motto. And our democratic traditions, humanistic values and inherent basic decency will lead us down the path of the righteous to the victory of fairness and civility. We simply can't get there by wishing the problems away.
Seva, RIGHT ON!
And when it comes to "anti-war", when did you ever see an "anti-war" march/demonstration rail against alqada, muslim racism, saddam hussein, the genocidal iranian regime?
"anti-war" activists are deceitful supporters of islamofascism, marxism, stalinism.
If Israel were "the problem", then Muslims would be living in peace with their non-Muslim, non-Zionist neighbors. Is that the case?
Are different sects within Islam living in peace, or are they murdering fellow Muslims with suicide bombings in Iraq and Afghanistan?
Hi guys, thank you for all the comments.
First in regard to the response to Ron Newman, about holding on the to territories:
YES there have been several peace offers, including the Khartoum "No, no and no" situation, in which the Israelis offering to return ALL the lands taken in 1967 in exchance for peace and recognition and more recently, the Clinton offer and apparently one, also quite extensive, from Ehud Olmert.
All have been rejected.
I know this. I also know there are movements that wish to prevent ANY withdrawals from the West Bank, and I think that is counterproductive IMO.
Regarding Happy's comment about how we should focus on studying Judaism rather than M.E. cultures - I disagree for the following reasons (I am not saying we don't need to study Judaism - OF COURSE WE DO but):
Israel is in the Middle East.
Many, many Jews come from the Middle East and share cultural ties with other Middle Eastern people. This is a valuable resource and you're wrong if you assume that these Oriental Jews have nothing but bad memories of their neighbors. That is simply untrue.
There is also a tendency to stereotype everybody in the region as barbaric, backwards and cruel.
That's a little OTT isn't it? Plus, that kind of attitude makes it very difficult to continue working for peace in the region - we criticize the Arabs but our attitudes are important TOO.
When people read sites like this, or feedbacks on Israeli papers and get the impression we all hate Arabs or disrespect them - or are ignorant of them - this is really very harmful.
Now - it's one thing to say, leadership and government in the post-Ottoman world hasn't been ideal, in fact it's often been terrible - but - to be honest - some of that is the fault of the West.
For example we armed Saddam Hussein. The Ba'ath Party itself was based on Western (fascist) models and may have been formed by agents of Vichy France. The Soviets obviously played a role also, in funding and arming PLO, Libya, UAR. Before that though the Brits armed and even led some of the Arab armies which attacked Israel.
We (the US) also funnelled a lot of money and arms to the mujeheddin in Afghanistan, some of whom were al Qaeda and Taliban - when it was convenient in order to harm the Soviets - and who are now biting us in the tush.
So if there are bad leaders and extremists in the modern Middle East, well outside players have a lot to answer for.
Democracy is a new idea in the Middle East as are nation-states - and also it's a fact that extremism is common in MENA - but to say that all the people are bad and that we can't communicate with them, or even to claim that all the leaders are bad - ditto - is just wrong.*
In fact, Israelis go back and forth to Jordan all the time and there are ties to other Arab states as well, including Egypt and even some of the Gulf Arab states - definitely Morocco, Tunisia - probably more extensive than people realize.
Progress may seem slow compared what we'd like but Europe isn't a bastion of perfection either is it?
Importantly - we can't continue the magical thinking that the rest of the Middle East will just disappear and/or that Israel is in Brooklyn. It isn't.
Further to the above:
Much Jewish culture is linked to Middle Eastern cultures to this day, including Hebrew and other languages still alive in Jewish culture including Azkenazi - in fact - Jews were regarded as "Oriental" in Europe and in the US until very recently. Our music, and of course our history, are rooted in the Middle East.
So obviously we should study that aspect of Judaism - that is where we come from! And Christianity and Islam, the other two primary monotheistic religions, derive from Judaism - they evolved in the same place and from the same roots, including perhaps Zoroastrianism which remains alive in Persia.
It's important to learn about this and about the people in the region.
I don't see why this is a controversial statement.
*And I also don't understand why people find it surprising that the post-Colonial Middle East might be a bit of a wild west show.
The Arabs haven't been self governing for centuries. Their way of life has been confronted with dramatic change that has thrown Western people into confusion too - why shouldn't they be similarly disoriented?
That's a primary reason fundamentalist religion has become a focal point - things are changing so fast - going from a camel world to a 747 world practically overnight - and also - not everybody agrees that the 747 is preferable. Not everybody agrees that nation-states are preferable either, but they were imposed on these people willy-nilly with borders that make no sense at all.
Also - categorizing Middle Eastern people or cultures as uniquely barbaric is absurd given what the rest of us have been up to. Just look at the 20th century - at what supposedly civilized cultures can and did do and not that long ago.
Seva, thank you for your thoughtful response. I would like to respond to it but I want to give it the thorough reading it deserves.
Briefly, just one comment though: referring to Barack Obama as "Hussein O'Bummer" is extremely disrespectful and also it implies that he is a Muslim.
Can we please agree that he is a Christian? What's wrong with that? He shouldn't have to constantly reassert his faith any more than we should have to defend ours.
Also, trying to move the peace talks back on track isn't anti-Israel.
I agree that demanding total settlement freezes in Jerusalem and within existing communities was overreaching. Also it put the Palestinians in a corner, which was counterproductive, thus nothing has been accomplished.
I do think it's good that Israelis and Palestinians are planning a mixed community:
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1147781.html
More in a bit, when I have read your comment again.
Thanks!
Dear Sophia et al.,
The most sensible suggestion about what to do with "Palestine", known in Israel and to many other sensible people outside of Israel as Judea and Samaria, lands historically within the scope of the Jewish state, which were supposed to be given back to the Jews by the British Mandate after the Balfour Declaration, along with the East Bank of the Jordan River - btw, the actual Northern border of the Jewish state was supposed to be the Litani River, believe it or not, as per the agreement with the British, etc. - but I digress.
Anyway, the most sensible proposal I've heard so far was the cantonization of the territory presently under the control of PA, rather than the creation of a hostile Palestinian Arab state, making Israel virtually indefensible.
In other words, there'd be would be city-states, like Shkhem (aka Nablus, which is a distorted Arabic version of Byzantine Neapolis), Beit Lechem (aka Bethlehem), Jericho, Ramalla, etc. They would have autonomy and self-governance, complete with local police, etc.
This would be a more natural fit to the clan mentality of the Arabs. The idea of a state is not one that Arabs relate to very well. Not yet. They are still medieval in that sense (as in many others).
Something like this was successfully tried before the Oslo Accords, which have led to the second intifada. At that time, those cities had local Arab police and other symbols of self-rule and power. Those policemen were allowed by Israel to carry weapons and they did a decent job policing the "disputed territories" which at the time were not so hotly disputed, as the status quo was welcome by both Israel and the majority of the local Palestinian Arabs.
There was little crime and a lot of commerce. Arabs were making a good living, and Jews benefited from the generally peaceful and industrious neighbors, the differences of cultures be damned.
Money talks, and whatever the anti-Semites say about the Jews and our relationship with money, they don't know what they are talking about. Arabs are much more fond of money than Jews - thank God for that, too, since this is how Shabak and Mossad are able to protect Israel by bribing so many Arabs and hiring so many agents, informants and collaborators from among them.
Incidentally, if my memory serves, Jamal Al Dura, the father of Mohammed Al Dura, was one of them, too, which is why he's got so many bodily injuries (which were eventually treated by an Israeli doctor) once his brethren found out what he was up to - he was hacked with an ax.
To continue with the story, Israeli Jews and others (tourists, etc.) would constantly travel to the Arab cities, such as Jericho, Bethlehem, etc., go to their cheap markets and excellent restaurants (with generally better service than one can get at an average Israeli restaurant), hire Arab workers, who could travel freely, as there weren't so many checkpoints and restrictions due to terrorism. Everybody was content and productive.
Enter the Left - Rabin, Beilin, Peres & Co. In one brilliant move designed to achieve peace forever, they brought back Arafat with his murderous thugs from Tunisia, to which they were successfully expelled at substantial cost in terms of the loss of human life (both Jewish and Arab) by the IDF back in 1982.
There was very little Arab terrorism back in those days, as most of the worst murderers were thrown out of the West bank and Southern Lebanon, which they turned into their military base (or rather a paramilitary state of their own).
And then the Left, first through secret and illegal negotiations with the enemy, and then openly through Oslo, brought us all a disaster of enormous proportions. Jews were attacked and killed, checkpoints began multiplying and restrictions were being imposed, etc. We all know what happened then.
What many in the West don't know, however, is that the "ordinary" Arabs were bemoaning this sad state of affairs, asking us quietly why we had to bring back the thugs, thieves and the bullies.
But the Israeli Left-wing literati apparently knew better than the common people. Ergo all the subsequent tragedies with tremendous loss of life, not to mention the near-total radicalization of Palestinian Arabs by the Arafat and his gang of thugs and thieves, collectively known as the Palestinian Authority, or PA.
THIS, btw, is the main reason that the Israeli Left is all but virtually non-existent and utterly irrelevant today. We the People have finally figured things out on our own and would have none of it anymore. Good bye Meretz, good bye Avoda (Labor), etc.
Does anybody out there claim to know better, to have all the right solutions to this non-solvable problem? Well, screw you, OK? This suggestion, btw, includes Hussain O'Bummer and his bunch of incompetent cronies.
Any action begets a reaction. Ergo, more fisking for Sophia :-)
"Many, many Jews come from the Middle East and share cultural ties with other Middle Eastern people. This is a valuable resource and you're wrong if you assume that these Oriental Jews have nothing but bad memories of their neighbors. That is simply untrue."
Yes, many Jews do come from the Middle East, and have mixed memories. One thing they do remember very well is how they were treated as dhimmis, they know how Arabs habitually lie when it suits them, they know the barbarity of the culture they came from - just like I remember the barbarity of the Russian culture that I came from. THIS is what we're talking about here - not the pretty buildings and good restaurants with tasty food and courteous staff.
"There is also a tendency to stereotype everybody in the region as barbaric, backwards and cruel. That's a little OTT isn't it? Plus, that kind of attitude makes it very difficult to continue working for peace in the region - we criticize the Arabs but our attitudes are important TOO."
No, Sophia, this is not off the track at all - this is the crux of the matter and the main reason for all the bloodshed. And like I suggested before, we should stop worrying about "working for peace" and should instead worry about how to best protect the West from the barbaric Middle East.
"When people read sites like this, or feedbacks on Israeli papers and get the impression we all hate Arabs or disrespect them - or are ignorant of them - this is really very harmful."
If you wrote the following in the years 1939-1945, "When people read readers' comments in Jewish [feel free to substitute American, or Russian, or British, etc.] papers and get the impression we all hate the Germans [feel free to substitute Germans] or disrespect them - or are ignorant of them - this is really very harmful", you'd be driven out of town in an eye blink. During WWII, both Germans and Japanese were seen as the epitome of evil - not because of some inherently German (or Japanese) traits (although they do have those), but because of what they were doing to the rest of the world on account of their sick ideology. Well, Sophia, the same is true now - just substitute Arabs for Germans, and Islamism for Nazism, and keep the rest.
"Now - it's one thing to say, leadership and government in the post-Ottoman world hasn't been ideal, in fact it's often been terrible - but - to be honest - some of that is the fault of the West."
Same here - just replace Ottoman with German or Nazi, and you'll get the picture. Blaming the West for the problems of the East is an old canard. Grown people, given complete independence, are responsible for themselves and shouldn't go around blaming others for their own woes. It's like trying to find excuses for an adult criminal by saying that he's had a tough childhood, and that his parents are to blame for all the harm he's done to others.
Yes, sometimes we deal with some unsavory characters, like Saddam Hussein - because he was the enemy of our enemy (Iran). Or the Afghani Mujahadeen, who were the enemy of the USSR. And sometimes such things backfire. But that's politics, for better or for (often enough) worse. And I doubt you could deny the inherent goodness of the fact of the fall of the Soviet empire, or the fact that the Mujahadeen hastened its demise.
"So if there are bad leaders and extremists in the modern Middle East, well outside players have a lot to answer for."
Yes, Sophia, there are bad leaders, and extremists, and cultures in the "modern" Middle East (what a misnomer!). And the West has made its share of mistakes, too. However, one should look at the underlying principles of our culture vs. theirs, and then all doubt should vanish.
"Democracy is a new idea in the Middle East as are nation-states - and also it's a fact that extremism is common in MENA - but to say that all the people are bad and that we can't communicate with them, or even to claim that all the leaders are bad - ditto - is just wrong."
Well, what makes you so sure, Sophia? Just how do you know that the majority of the people in the Muslim Arab world are NOT bad - at least from our Western point of view - when all the evidence points to the contrary? Yeah, not all Arabs (Muslims) are terrorists, but most terrorists are Arabs (Muslims). And these terrorists get a lot of moral support from their brethren and financial support from the leaders. And then common Arabs/Muslims die by their hand in an act of divine justice (in Iraq, Afghanistan, etc.).
The place (Middle East) is sick, badly needs urgent reforms and change of mind, etc. - and then you come and with self-righteous indignation insist that all people are good and that there are just some rotten apples. Well, not all Germans were Nazis or members of the SS, but they all bear collective responsibility. The same is true here.
"In fact, Israelis go back and forth to Jordan all the time and there are ties to other Arab states as well, including Egypt and even some of the Gulf Arab states - definitely Morocco, Tunisia - probably more extensive than people realize."
Yes, Israelis do travel to Jordan and Egypt (I did, too) - but this in no way implies that the Jordanian and Egyptian regimes (or people, for that matter) are all that nice. Yes, we (Israel) do have peace treaties with them, which is not to imply that there is peace and kumbaya - no, we are in a state of cold war with these countries. I could tell you numerous stories of how both Jordanians and Egyptians view Israel, the U.S. and the West - or you could read about it on your own. Don't delude yourself - these countries are no friends of ours, not by a stretch.
"... Zoroastrianism ... remains alive in Persia."
Well, that depends on whom you ask. I know some Zoroastrians from Iran - they had to escape to the West. Most of the Zoroastrians were either exterminated by the Muslims, or fled to the more tolerant India, where they are known as Parsis.
"The Arabs haven't been self governing for centuries. Their way of life has been confronted with dramatic change that has thrown Western people into confusion too - why shouldn't they be similarly disoriented?"
I hope you are not using this as an excuse for their backwardness, extremism and barbarity. As for "What went wrong?" there - one can read Bernard Lewis' book with the same title.
"That's a primary reason fundamentalist religion has become a focal point - things are changing so fast ..."
OK, now I see that you ARE using it as an excuse. Sorry, but I don't buy it - the main reason(s) are to be found in the Koran, which charted out the course of their history and culture.
"Also - categorizing Middle Eastern people or cultures as uniquely barbaric is absurd given what the rest of us have been up to."
No, they are not uniquely barbaric - but they sure are a prime example of barbarity. There were genocides in Rwanda, etc. There was Yugoslavia (but much of that, again, has to do with Muslims, too), and Darfur (ditto). The war between the Hindu and the Tamil in Sri Lanka was also very bloody, etc. Yet, if one looks at todays geo-political map, it's Islam that is the main threat.
"... referring to Barack Obama as "Hussein O'Bummer" is extremely disrespectful and also it implies that he is a Muslim."
First, I don't really respect Obama, and thus see no reason to refer to him respectfully - respect is earned, not granted automatically. He's earned nothing but scorn from me so far. As for whether he's a Muslim or not-- that's your interpretation, not mine. I just like the nickname I gave him, and use it a lot.
"Can we please agree that he is a Christian? What's wrong with that? He shouldn't have to constantly reassert his faith any more than we should have to defend ours."
Hmmm, well, if he is a Christian, then so is David Duke. Or are you forgetting who Obama's mentor was for over 20 years in that Chicago Church? Does the name of Rev. Jeremiah Wright ring a bell? Is this Christianity, or is this hatred?
"... trying to move the peace talks back on track isn't anti-Israel."
Unfortunately, it is - "in effect, if not in intent." It always leads to the same thing - more dead Jews and even more dead Arabs (after all, we've got bigger and better guns).
As for that "mixed community" you referred to (via Haaretz) - it's but an extension of Har Homa, which is already there. I don't believe in these "coexistence" projects - they simply don't work. There was another much-touted one, at Neve Shalom (Wahat al-Salam), which its creators and supporters call an "Oasis of Peace" - that was a complete failure. I am not much into Kumbaya, sorry - it's nothing but wishful thinking and naiveté, and as such it simply doesn't work.
Sophia, I suggest we stick to the facts. Let us abandon all the ungrounded and unfounded notions and visions, and be realistic, with a healthy doze of skepticism and even a bit of cynicism. The world isn't quite what we would like it to be. And looking at it through rosy glasses can only lead to more misery, as reality has a tendency of "biting us in the tush" indeed.
Don't get me wrong - I, too, want peace on Earth, I love hugging trees (I am an ardent environmentalist, after all), I love interacting with all sorts of people (including Arabs, Muslims, et al.). But my bullshit-meter is very fine-tuned, and I usually detect nonsense and silliness right away, and call on it. So watch what you say, sister :-) Lofty pronouncements will elicit a reaction and response. Therefore, please try to be cognizant of how we should best spend our time.
Seva,
#22 What many in the West don't know, however, is that the "ordinary" Arabs were bemoaning this sad state of affairs, asking us quietly why we had to bring back the thugs, thieves and the bullies.
What was not reported by the media was how many Palestinians Arafat had murdered by his thugs when they returned.
#23 but this in no way implies that the Jordanian and Egyptian regimes (or people, for that matter) are all that nice. Yes, we (Israel) do have peace treaties with them, which is not to imply that there is peace and kumbaya - no, we are in a state of cold war with these countries.
You could tell the story of the Egyptian journalists being punished for having contacts with Israel:
Two Egyptian editors punished for dealing with Israel
Cairo: Two senior Egyptian editors - one a member of the country's ruling party and the other an expert on Jewish affairs - have been punished by Egypt's Journalists Union for violating its ban on contacts with Israel, in a case that underlines the country's ambivalent policies toward its neighbour
..............
On Tuesday, however, the union reprimanded Hala Mustafa, editor in chief of the state-run weekly Democratiya, or Democracy, for meeting with Israel's ambassador in Egypt. Hussain Serag, the expert on Jewish affairs and deputy editor of the weekly magazine October, was suspended from writing for three months.
...........
"My field of specialty is Israel and Hebrew. If I don't visit Israel how can I understand these people?" Serag said. "This is hypocrisy, pure and simple."
Bam, and there goes that kumbaya moment.
#23 The war between the Hindu and the Tamil in Sri Lanka was also very bloody, etc. Yet, if one looks at todays geo-political map, it's Islam that is the main threat.
Now a lot of people need to be introduced to Pakistan's massacre of Bengalis in what was known as East Pakistan now Bangladesh. How many millions from the late 1940s to the early 1960s. There go those barbarians again.
As for Obama being a Christian,how can one be so sure of what he truly feels given his education as a child in Indonesia and the indoctrination applied by Muslims there. His step father as a Muslim would not have sent him to a Christian school.
What are the facts relating to this?
Cynic and Sophia,
I need to make one correction: I mixed ethnicity and religion when referring to the civil war in Sri Lanka, which has been going on since 1970s, if I'm not mistaken. I should've said "Sinhalese and Tamil" as opposed to "Hindu and Tamil".
This was mostly an ethnic conflict, where the minority (!) Tamil wanted independence from the majority (!) Sinhalese. Looks like this war may be over by now.
And just how was that accomplished, my liberal friends out there? By brutal suppression and wholesale extermination of the Tamil guerillas/freedom fighters/militants/terrorists (pick your favorite term). The army just wiped them out, like one would deal with pestilence.
Needless to say, many innocent, peaceful and unarmed civilians were inadvertently killed - hospitals were bombed, etc. Well, them's the breaks - after all, it WAS a war, you know.
Except that we didn't hear much condemnation in the world media, did we? No International Court of Justice, no U.N., no Goldstone, no NGOs - nothing, in spite of the atrocities committed by both sides and the very high civilian casualty count. Any guesses as to why?
Lemme give you a hint: when one group of third-world colored people is killing another group of third-world colored people, who are we to judge those indigenous cultures?
As for Obama, I am not going into detailed discussions - suffice it to say that when this man opens his mouth, I have a deja vu, as he immediately reminds me of the Soviet agitprop, which instantly makes me wanna puke.
As for Egypt and Jordan, I didn't want to go into details here, suggesting that Sophia could find a lot of stuff online, although I did have those Egyptian journalists in mind. However, your mentioning them brought back a story I was told by an Israeli patent attorney:
So this guy, Jeremy Ben-David, goes to some IP (intellectual property) conference somewhere outside Israel (maybe in the US, I don't remember). There, he meets and schmoozes with a bunch of colleagues from all over the world. He also meets a nice Jordanian patent attorney, and they strike a conversation and exchange business cards. It's all nice and cordial and polite and professional.
When Jeremy returns home to Israel he contacts his colleague in Jordan to suggest to him to do business together. Now, this is pretty standard and routine in the legal field, when there is a commonality of interests, but limited jurisdiction for practice, attorneys need to find local colleagues to do business with. All this is merely a licensing issue, as local bar associations control access to the market.
Here is what his nice Jordanian colleague says in response: Jeremy, as much as I like you personally, and as much as I would love to do business together with you, I simply can't, lest the Jordanian Bar Association throws me out and takes away my license to practice law.
BTW, Jeremy was interviewed on Israeli radio about this incident, and I heard it myself. If anyone doubts the veracity of my report, I could send links to Hebrew sources (including the audio of that interview).
So, Sophia, are Egypt and Jordan our friends, or even friendly neighbors? You tell me ...
Well, it's good that this conversation has sparked so many interesting remarks!
OK I want to say one thing about Obama and then I'll move on because really this is silly.
He is a Christian, he believes in Jesus, whether or not he had childhood experiences in Indonesia, with Muslims, although I will say this - even if he self-identified as a Muslim - SO WHAT.
After all, though, people of other faiths, such as Hindus, Jews, Buddhists etc become Christians and nobody is concerned about THAT so why is everybody all worried about Obama's faith?
It's silly. People have Obama Derangement Syndrome now, just as folks got all crazy about Bush. We can live without this.
Also even saying the words "Obama" and "David Duke" in the same sentence is really outrageous.
***
Next: in regard to the conflict on Sri Lanka. I sincerely hope nobody is advocating a massacre?
Just because other people do bad things doesn't mean we have to. There are other ways to solve conflicts, as I'm sure you are all aware.
Also - if we start thinking along those lines - we've lost.
***
Re Jordan and Egypt: alas, relations could be warmer although individual Jordanians and Egyptians surely have friendships and business relations with Israelis. There are economic zones, some sponsored by the US and also regional economic interests - for example the Red Sea/Dead Sea project. In fact, without regional cooperation nothing can get done over the long run so building relations is vital.
Unfortunately however there are problems.
Recently an Egyptian journalist was suspended for contacts with Israelis, which is outrageous. Antisemitic propaganda is prevalent. The fallout from both the Intifadas and the Lebanese war and Gaza have been very bad because TV networks show images of injured and dead children and grieving relatives 24/7, without context. There is also a growing sense of a religious war.
Dealing with incitement and antisemitism is vital and so is not giving up on building relationships.
"Cold peace" is more or less what prevails at the moment. Hopefully things can be normalized eventually but the situation as it stands is a beginning at best and unfortunately things could get worse.
That's why making progress with the Palestinian issue is so important.
***
Now - I'm sad that the darkest possible interpretation of human intentions are seen as "realism" whereas more hopeful visions are considered "fantastyland" or "delusional".
Excuse me?
Without hope and - beyond that - the certain knowledge that other human beings are also good hearted and that not everybody on the planet is a violent jerk, we won't get anywhere.
Sometimes, this dark vision of other people creates a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Beyond that - when we project a dark vision of others we're certainly going to get one in response.
People will mirror our good intentions in time, if we give them a chance - but first we can't proceed from a place where we are stereotyping them - for example, Seva, with respect your characterization of Arabs really echoes some stereotypes of Jews.
Also, with respect, saying the Palestinians should only have "cantons" because they are "clannish" is demeaning. Think about it.
It's a real put-down and doesn't reflect a realistic view of their own nationalism and desire for self-determination, which is something Zionists of all people should understand.
As far as Oslo - well bringing Arafat and his fighters back into the mix was a huge mistake.
On the other hand, PLO was the only body recognized by the Arab League, apparently, to speak for the Palestinian people as a whole, and Arafat was the head of the PLO.
Probably they should have left him in Tunisia. The results were a disaster obviously. In hindsight, surely there were better spokespeople - but who? PLO and Arafat were the recognized leaders.
This is a huge problem and Hamas are worse because of their ideology - but Fatah's corruption was a primary reason people voted for Hamas in the first place. However, there are courageous and creative Fatah members, like Salam Fayyad:
http://aawsat.com/english/news.asp?section=2&id=19780
and also, just the difficulties of running Gaza are probably forcing Hamas to be more pragmatic (I hope).
But, as far as the idea of the peace process itself, that is still worth pursuing - in fact it's vital - unless everybody is prepared eventually to create a binational state.
The Palestinians aren't going away. City-states and state-building, building an economic base on the West Bank and in Gaza are good interim steps but eventually, borders are going to have to be drawn and a state created, with a link to Gaza and land exchanges where required -
- or the Palestinian Arabs in Judea and Samaria will need to become citizens of Israel, which they might not want to do in any case - though - one thought is to ask them vote on the matter and see where people really stand of the issue.
Similarly, the people of Israel could vote on whether to offer citizenship to the Palestinians in Judea and Samaria - or - start drawing up a border, pdq, and go talk to the PA, immediately and without conditions (assuming they will talk, which they might not).
Am I wrong? What is the alternative?
As a first step, to demonstrate the viability of an INCLUSIVE, SECULAR, MULTI-CULTURAL "Palestine", let the "Neturi Karta" move to the West Bank or Gaza, build a "Neturi Karta" community, with all the infrastructure to support an "Authentic Jewish" spiritual and day to day life.
It's called confidence building.
Let's see how well that goes.
Yes, Sophia, you are wrong.
Why do you think that "borders are going to have to be drawn and a state created, with a link to Gaza and land exchanges where required"? The world won't come to an end if you fanciful (and I believe suicidal) plan isn't adopted, things will continue the way they are. Why do "borders HAVE to be drawn"? Who says so? You? Sorry, but your beliefs and those of a couple of thousand J street anti-Jews don't amount to much of a reason to do anything.
"or the Palestinian Arabs in Judea and Samaria will need to become citizens of Israel" Again, why do they NEED to become citizens? Because you say so? Again, not a good enough reason.
The alternatives - well, there are a few, most of them not very good. The best alternative, IMHO, is the 'cantonization' idea Seva discussed. It seems is in many ways (please correct me if I'm wrong, Seva)to be a formalization of the situation as it now is, with possibly some 'land swaps'. Or the UN/US/EU could try to impose of "two-state" solution, which will most likely lead to an attack on Israel, prolonged and bloody war with a result no better than we have now (at best), or the destruction of Israel and another genocide. So take you pick. A bad current situation (in terms of security and true peace) or an even worse one. Because unless there's some unprecedented and truly miraculous change among Arabs, things will not improve.
Cantons already exist in other countries.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canton_(administrative_division)
belgium, Boliva, boznia, herzegovina, Canada, Costa Rica, Ecuador, El Salvador, France, Luxemborg, Switzerland...
Happy, et.al., the problem with NOT drawing borders and also not granting citizenship to the Arab citizens of Judea and Samaria is that the war will never end under those circumstances.
Israel will be forced into the role of an occupier forever, the Palestinians don't want to be occupied and even Bibi (let alone a couple thousand J Street Jews) realizes this. It's a highly undesirable situation in which Israel is forced into an oppressive role.
The two-state solution is also international concensus, even in the Arab League, a consensus which I don't think can be ignored.
Kadima was elected on this premise and, I believe, even Likud is beginning to move in this direction because nothing else makes sense.
For one thing consider the cost in life, limb and military hardware - it is enormous. If a reasonable peace can be achieved, it will liberate everything else and people can live normal lives without a war every five minutes.
Now, the canton idea would work IF people agree to it. It they don't, and I think they won't, we're back to square one.
The only other alternative is to redraw the map and create a place for the Palestinians that is part of several states including parts of the West Bank, and that is a tall order, considering that not one of them is willing to give up a square inch.
And, that still leaves the problem of the "refugees," who after several generations number in the millions.
So, even at best a two-state solution doesn't cover everything.
But, a one-state solution will leave Israel with a minority Jewish population in the not-so-distant future, or, an endless occupation, which sucks.
Now - let me be clear. I don't think that a two-state solution should mean that "Palestine" would be judenfrei. I think this issue really needs to be clarified.
Eddie, go reread the Ha'aretz article about Jews and Palestinians on the West Bank, who actually do co-exist as neighbors and who are getting to know each other. It is indeed possible.
Yes, Sophia, you are wrong - on most, if not all, counts. Let me try to show you why - once again, disproving someone in the fuzzy fields of history and politics usually takes more effort, time and number of words than making false claims. But I already warned you about this, haven't I? So you can only blame yourself for the diatribe which is about to follow :-)
"Well, it's good that this conversation has sparked so many interesting remarks!"
Not necessarily. This feels like having to explain the obvious, which in turn makes it feel mostly as a waste of time.
As for Obama, like I said before, I have no desire to discuss him at all, other than mentioning that I hate his demagoguery and muddled thinking with a passion. As for whether he's a Muslim or not - there are many blogs and articles dedicated to that topic specifically, so we need not spend our time here debating it. And I won't.
However, I do take an issue with your objection of my mentioning Obama and David Duke in the same sentence. Let me quote myself from my previous post: "are you forgetting who Obama's mentor was for over 20 years in that Chicago Church? Does the name of Rev. Jeremiah Wright ring a bell? Is this Christianity, or is this hatred?" Now let me try to explicitly decipher what this means:
1. David Duke claims to be a good Christian. But he preaches hate. And Christian dogma does not accept hate. This makes him a non-Christian.
2. Rev. Wright considers himself a good Christian. But he preaches hate. This makes him a non-Christian.
3. One of Rev. Wright's parishioners / disciples for over 20 years was Obama. If Obama chose, of his own free will, Rev. Wright as his spiritual mentor and did not leave that church in disgust after the first outburst of hatred from this mentor that he heard, this makes Obama an accomplice to Wright's hatred. Ergo, this makes Obama a non-Christian. Q.E.D.
Are we clear on this one now? I sure hope so.
"Next: in regard to the conflict on Sri Lanka. I sincerely hope nobody is advocating a massacre?"
And I sincerely hope that nobody is making silly inferences, which some people seem to have a propensity for.
The main reason I spoke of Tamil vs. Sinhalese violence - and vice versa in response - was to show that the world simply doesn't care. Because the "civilized" world is racist in a very weird way, as I have already explained. But then the world cares way too much about what's happening here in Israel vis-a-vis her nasty neighbors. Which shows duplicity, hypocrisy and double standards.
"Re Jordan and Egypt: alas, relations could be warmer although individual Jordanians and Egyptians surely have friendships and business relations with Israelis."
Again, wishful thinking and moral projectionism on your part, Sophia. You assert a hypothesis, presenting it as the whole truth. Please leave such tactics to the likes of Noam Chomsky. " [I]ndividual Jordanians and Egyptians SURELY have friendships and business relations with Israelis"? What makes YOU so SURE? Where do YOU get your information from?
Yes, there are some limited business relations - hell, event the USSR at the height of the Cold War had business relations with the West, selling them raw materials and buying industrial equipment. Financial interests often trump hostility and distrust.
As for friendships - that's a whole other matter. It depends on how you define friendship. I am quite SURE that my definition (having grown up in the USSR) may be vastly different from yours.
"without regional cooperation nothing can get done over the long run so building relations is vital."
I agree. But money talks, and if money is allowed to talk, people will follow. Problem is, though, that both the Jordanian and Egyptian regimes (I dare not use the term "governments" for these autocratic states) do not really allow a free flow of goods, money and services, which would ultimately lead to better relations. And why not? Precisely because that would lead to better relations. Which, in turn, would turn them into "Zionist collaborators" in the eyes of the rest of the Arab League and the Organization of Islamic Conference (57 members, no less). And THAT is more important to them than good relations with their Jewish neighbors.
"Dealing with incitement and antisemitism is vital and so is not giving up on building relationships."
Yeah, well, the ball is in their court. We cannot force them to like us, no matter what we do. It's about time the Left has learned this simple truth. It takes two to tango.
" 'Cold peace' is more or less what prevails at the moment."
I think a more apt description would be Cold War. But it's OK, I could live with your description, too - it doesn't change things much, as long as we both agree what we are talking about.
"That's why making progress with the Palestinian issue is so important."
THIS, Sophia, is another leap of logic on your part. Or is it a leap of blind faith? Or dogma? Why is it that the Left continuously fails to apply the simplest logic? Maybe it's because of the basic differences in the brain structures of the Left vs. the Right? As in, the dominance of one side of the brain (creative/emotional) over the other (logical/spacial)? Dunno, but this would make for a very interesting investigation.
For the record, nobody likes the "Palestinians" (a more proper term would be "Palestinian Arabs") - and that list includes their Arab brethren, including Egypt and Jordan (which is 2/3 "Palestinian"), as well as many other (if not most) Arab states. And it's not an ethnic issue - it's a cultural one. For all we know, many (if not most) Palestinian Arabs may be our close lost relatives, as I've discovered in the following fascinating video:
Palestinians of Jewish Origin
Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AenISgolLe0&NR=1
Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C3gGinwyNYE
"I'm sad that the darkest possible interpretation of human intentions are seen as 'realism' whereas more hopeful visions are considered 'fantastyland' or 'delusional'."
Believe me, Sophia, I am sad, too. But I'd much rather be sad and alive than naively hopeful and dead.
"Without hope and - beyond that - the certain knowledge that other human beings are also good hearted and that not everybody on the planet is a violent jerk, we won't get anywhere. Sometimes, this dark vision of other people creates a self-fulfilling prophecy. Beyond that - when we project a dark vision of others we're certainly going to get one in response."
All I can say in this regard is hope for the best, but prepare for the worst. Just like if you want peace, prepare for war. Unfortunately, history (if one chooses to learn from the totality of circumstances, rather than picking and choosing what one likes) teaches us much about the human nature. Fact is, most people are NOT evil - there are very few truly evil people in the world. However, most people are stupid, lazy and therefore ignorant. And most of the man-made disasters stem from these three attributes, which form a 3-D vector space, which can be collapsed into a 2-dimensional one, since ignorance is a derivative of stupidity and/or laziness.
One should not allow one's hope to so run away as to make one blind (and eventually dead). Natural selection usually does not treat people with unjustified high hopes very kindly, eliminating them from the gene pool.
"People will mirror our good intentions in time, if we give them a chance"
Once again, another moral projectionism, so typical of the Left, which goes something like this: "we are good; and since humans are basically the same, they are good, too." Well, hmmm, ... HORSESHIT!!! Yes, we are biologically 99.99% the same. But not culturally - not by a stretch. And it's the culture that defines politics and economics. The American culture, as defined by the U.S. Constitution and the traditions of the people who built the country, is basically good - democratic, pluralistic, tolerant, etc. The Arab culture, on the other hand, is defined by the Arab history and the Muslim conquest. Which makes it authoritarian, intolerant, brutal, etc.
"first we can't proceed from a place where we are stereotyping them - for example, Seva, with respect your characterization of Arabs really echoes some stereotypes of Jews."
Yeah, well, tough cookies. As long as the stereotypes are largely correct, and as long as the generalizations are based on the totality of facts, I have no problems with them. Yes, it's politically incorrect to say such things in polite circles of liberal literati. Well, sorry, I am not from that circle, thank God. I have no patience or tolerance for all this naive and suicidal PC bullshit. If the cops used such thinking and stopped racial or ethnic profiling, there'd be a lot more crime on the streets, and a lot more dead cops.
So we'd better learn to differentiate and discriminate. Ooooh, I know what you're thinking now: "he's such a racist!" If so, you'd be engaging in yet some more inference. Differentiating and discriminating means making the right choices, based on facts and merit, rather than on wishful thinking. Evolution taught us that. But the Left today, in a true Marxist-Leninist fashion, is trying to undo this inherently human biological programming by a lofty self-righteous fiat. Well, if you want to die, go ahead. But don't expect others to die with you and on your terms, OK?
"Also, with respect, saying the Palestinians should only have "cantons" because they are "clannish" is demeaning. Think about it. It's a real put-down and doesn't reflect a realistic view of their own nationalism and desire for self-determination, which is something Zionists of all people should understand."
Au contraire, mon chéri - saying so is not demeaning, but as Happy and Proud correctly pointed out, reflects facts on the ground. Now, YOU may not like such facts, but denying them is ridiculous. ALL Arabs are clannish - this is the prevailing mentality in the WHOLE of Arab world. Does this make them more barbaric than us? You bet it does! Are they to blame for it, though? Well, that depends on how one chooses to view history and mankind.
Yes, they have a shorter history than we do, and they still have not gone through all the stages of civilizational development that the West has gone through. They are not to be blamed for that, of course. However, the choice of whether to join the civilized world or to remain ignoble savages, locked in their Medieval mindset - this choice is entirely theirs to make. We can't force them to choose one or the other, but we could try to influence them in various ways, including the use the carrot and stick approach (learning from Dr. Pavlov, child psychology and anthropology).
"As far as Oslo - well bringing Arafat and his fighters back into the mix was a huge mistake."
You are saying this in retrospect. However, there were many voices that were screaming bloody murder (which is exactly what happened later on a grand scale) against such decisions and policies. Only the wishful thinking won the day. Incidentally, it's the same kind of wishful thinking you are engaging in here, on this blog, in these very comments. There is a book about people like you by Dr. Kenneth Levine, who is both a practicing psychiatrist (an M.D.) and a Ph.D. in history from Harvard, and it's called "The Oslo Syndrome - Delusions of a People Under Siege". It's mostly about the Israelis, but could apply in large measure to the American Left (or any modern Left, for that matter).
"On the other hand, PLO was the only body recognized by the Arab League, apparently, to speak for the Palestinian people as a whole, and Arafat was the head of the PLO."
Hey, the Nazi Party was the only body recognized as the ruling party of Germany once, apparently authorized to speak for the German people as a whole, and Hitler was the head of that party. So freaking what? Yeah, history be damned - the only thing that history teaches us is that it teaches us nothing.
"Probably they should have left him in Tunisia."
PROBABLY? No shit!
"The results were a disaster obviously. In hindsight, surely there were better spokespeople - but who? PLO and Arafat were the recognized leaders."
You remind me of a conversation I had once at 126 High St. with Nancy Kaufman, the head of JCRC. I accused her of engaging in dialogue with the enemies of the Jewish people. To which she responded defensively and in desperation: "But they are the only ones we can talk to! Who else is there to talk to?" To which I replied that if there was nobody to talk to, the most sensible thing would be NOT to talk to anybody at all.
"... there are courageous and creative Fatah members, like Salam Fayyad: http://aawsat.com/english/news.asp?section=2&id=19780"
Hmmm, let me see - who is calling Salam Fayyad a "courageous and creative Fatah member"? The Israelis? The West? Exactly who? Well, let's follow the link and see for ourselves: why, if it isn't a Saudi Arabian journalist in a popular Arabic daily. Well, if this isn't objective, then I don't know what is. Duh ... Oh, wait, Shimon Peres said something nice about Fayyad and even compared him to Ben Gurion (yet another non-democratic authoritarian). Oh, how sweet and moving ... Sources ARE important, you know.
Also, allow me to remind you that Fatah is a genocidal Marxist terrorist group. Are we on the same page here?
"... as far as the idea of the peace process itself, that is still worth pursuing - in fact it's vital - unless everybody is prepared eventually to create a binational state."
Says who? According to whom? What makes YOU so SURE? Where is all this coming from, anyway? Amazing ...
"The Palestinians aren't going away. City-states and state-building, building an economic base on the West Bank and in Gaza are good interim steps but eventually, borders are going to have to be drawn and a state created, with a link to Gaza and land exchanges where required"
Maybe. And then again, maybe not. What makes YOU so sure? Where do YOU get your certainty from, anyway?
"... or the Palestinian Arabs in Judea and Samaria will need to become citizens of Israel, which they might not want to do in any case - though - one thought is to ask them vote on the matter and see where people really stand of the issue. Similarly, the people of Israel could vote on whether to offer citizenship to the Palestinians in Judea and Samaria - or - start drawing up a border, pdq, and go talk to the PA, immediately and without conditions (assuming they will talk, which they might not)."
These are but SOME of the options available. Status quo is also an option. City-states is another one. Jordanian citizenship for the Arabs of Judea and Samaria and a limited self-rule is another one. There are other options, too. Israel should decide what is in its best interests - and this is done by its leaders through the process of democratic elections, etc. I think it best to leave this to the Israeli electorate, don't you think?
"Am I wrong? What is the alternative?"
By now, in view of the above, I will treat this question as purely rhetorical, if I may :-)
Oh, wait, there is more now - right before posting I decided to see if there were more responses, and I see that you did another one. Gotta respond to it, too. Oy ...
"... the problem with NOT drawing borders and also not granting citizenship to the Arab citizens of Judea and Samaria is that the war will never end under those circumstances."
Says WHO? What makes YOU say that?
"Israel will be forced into the role of an occupier forever, the Palestinians don't want to be occupied and even Bibi (let alone a couple thousand J Street Jews) realizes this. It's a highly undesirable situation in which Israel is forced into an oppressive role."
Even if so, this may be the least harmful scenario. No telling how long this situation would persist, but until/unless the Palestinian Arabs grow up culturally, status quo may be the best non-solution.
"The two-state solution is also international concensus, even in the Arab League, a consensus which I don't think can be ignored."
What the Arab League thinks can (and should) be ignored. As for the alleged international consensus, the Americans, the Chinese, the Russians, et al. won't have to live under constant Arab attack, so while we should pay attention to what they may want, first and foremost we should take care of ourselves, the international consensus be damned. History teaches us that much. Yes, one person can be right, and all the others can be wrong. The same goes for countries and peoples.
"Kadima was elected on this premise and, I believe, even Likud is beginning to move in this direction because nothing else makes sense."
"Nothing else makes sense" to whom? To YOU? Well, not to me - or any number of other sane, sensible, decent people. There ARE other options.
"For one thing consider the cost in life, limb and military hardware - it is enormous."
Well, let's see now. Until Arafat and his thugs were brought back from Tunisia, the cost in life, etc. was minimal. Then the Left (Rabin, Peres, Barak, Beilin, et al.) brought the PLO back. As a result, the cost escalated enormously.
Now the Left is telling us that well, they may have been wrong, but now we all have to live with the consequences of their mistakes (blatant idiocy would be a more apt description), implementing yet more idiotic decisions and policies of the Left? They phucqued up more than once - is this the reason to keep following their advice? Should we reward failure?
"If a reasonable peace can be achieved, it will liberate everything else and people can live normal lives without a war every five minutes."
Again, according to WHOM? What makes YOU so sure of this?
"Now, the canton idea would work IF people agree to it. It they don't, and I think they won't, we're back to square one."
But the cantons are already working - these are clan people, remember? At this point, the cantons are the only thing that's working. If they grow up culturally, then maybe they could move on to autonomy, and then to having a state of their own. But this remains to be seen. What Israel should NOT do is creating another enemy state at the cost of creating indefensible borders.
"The only other alternative is to redraw the map and create a place for the Palestinians that is part of several states including parts of the West Bank, and that is a tall order, considering that not one of them is willing to give up a square inch."
Well, Jordan can have them - they can either take them all, or at least give them all citizenship, and we'll give them autonomy. After all, Jordan IS Eastern Palestine (and a part of historical Palestine), and as such was promised to the Jews by the British, who then decided to change their mind for political expediency, and imported a Bedouin ruler along with his clan from the Arabian desert, who was supposed to be their ally.
"And, that still leaves the problem of the "refugees," who after several generations number in the millions."
Well, that depends on who you ask. If you ask me (and many others), there is no refugee problem. Some may claim that there is such a thing, but there are also those who claim that the Earth is flat. So what, who cares?
"Now - let me be clear. I don't think that a two-state solution should mean that "Palestine" would be judenfrei. I think this issue really needs to be clarified."
Good luck with that.
"Eddie, go reread the Ha'aretz article about Jews and Palestinians on the West Bank, who actually do co-exist as neighbors and who are getting to know each other. It is indeed possible."
Of course it is possible - individual people usually find a way to coexist. There are West Bank "settlers" who have Arab neighbors as friends. So what? This, in and of itself, matters little - it's what the leadership decides that's important.
The Jewish leadership (aka the Israeli gov't) is benign, humane and generally civilized, save for occasional brawls in the Knesset, or a handful extremists (including Arab ones). However, the Palestinian Arab leadership is far from benign. Moreover, most of the Arabs themselves are far from benign, too. Therein lie most of our problems. Or haven't you been paying attention?
Sophia, shouldn't we just stop here? It seems to me that we're going in circles. We are unable to convince you, and you have no impact on us, other than rubbing our hair the wrong way. In the end, we are all just wasting time, it would seem.
Sophia, this one appears to be taylor-made for you:
http://www.solomonia.com/blog/archive/2010/02/great-palestinian-authority-economic-mir/index.shtml
Read Comment # 19, too.
And another one on the same topic:
The Region: Salam Fayyad cannot deliver
BY BARRY RUBIN
07/02/2010 21:16
http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/Article.aspx?id=168049
PM is the most moderate PA official, but doesn't represent Palestinian thinking.
Sophia,
As far as Oslo - well bringing Arafat and his fighters back into the mix was a huge mistake.
On the other hand, PLO was the only body recognized by the Arab League, apparently,
Go and start with James (FtJ) Baker and his pals when together with Europe crowned Arafat prince of the Palestinians and told Shamir, whom they didn't want to play golf with, that Arafat was his only partner for a peace deal with the Palestinians.
They basically forced him onto the Israelis and Bailin and co., too ignorant about the cultural differences to start with, jumped in and sank.
By the way if you can read French here's a very nice story about a Christian Arab girl who volunteered to serve in the IDF in a combat unit.
"Kravi zé a'hi, ou'hti" *
L'itinéraire exceptionnel d'une soldate israélienne arabe chrétienne
After reading Seva's long post I'd like to add that you should spend some time in an Arab kfar or town and experience the tribal/clan machinations.
With respect to the link I posted above, I feel sorry for those Arabs who do feel the way that particular girl does because the "elders" are not going to be too happy with it, her parents maybe but the hypocritical church certainly not (Vatican, Anglican and Orthodox, from back in the 70s when it became visible to the street, sacrificed their flocks on the altar of the PLO.)
and then will come the pressure from the Muslim side.
Go live in Nazareth for a bit and feel the tension between the cultures and the clans.
Cynic, Sophia et al.,
You can read the story about this Arab Christian Israeli girl serving in the IDF here:
http://israelity.com/2010/02/08/a-scoop-in-the-family/
here:
http://www.netvibes.com/hcp#ISRAEL
and here (Ma'ariv in Hebrew):
http://www.nrg.co.il/online/1/ART2/050/556.html
A concise summary of the Ma'ariv article is this:
A Female Arab Combat Soldier in the IDF - Chen Kotas-Bar (Maariv-Hebrew, 5 Feb 2010)
IDF Cpl. Elinor Joseph was born in Gush Halav in the Galilee to an Arab Christian family. Her father served as a paratrooper in the IDF.
She identifies herself as "Arab, Christian, and Israeli."
"I was born here. The people I love live here - my parents, my friends. This is a Jewish state? True. But it's also my country. I can't imagine living anywhere else."
"I believe that everyone should enlist. You live here? Go defend your country. So what if I'm Arab?"
Joseph serves in the Caracal battalion, which operates on the Egyptian border to block the entry of terrorists and smugglers into Israel.