Ten reasons the left hates Israel - five good, five bad (bad title)
Apart from the highly contentious title - "the left hates Israel" is a ludicrously broad generalisation which negates the fact that many on the left are simply critical of some aspects of Israeli foreign policy and hatred just doesn't come into that - Bradley Burston get's it right on his assessment of five good reasons to be critical of Israel's policies on the Israel/Palestine conflict and his five bad reasons. It will be interesting to see if he will follow-up with an assessment of the right's 'undying (and sometimes unedifying) love of Israel'. I'm not holding my breath though...
By Bradley Burston
A few thoughts engendered by the controversy over Alvin H. Rosenfeld's article "'Progressive'" Jewish Thought and the New Anti-Semitism."
Five of the following are reasonable. Five are not.
This is a reflection, if nothing else, of the duality of leftist criticism of Israel. There are leftists whose critiques are clear-eyed, factually valid, morally on point. And then there are those for whom Israel represents a blood-boiling factory of evil, an entity whose very existence is an affront, an abomination. Those who are convinced, and seek to convince the world, that the Jewish state should cease to exist.
Why does the left hate Israel? Here are five good reasons:
1. Because Israel's policies are frequently marked by gratuitous humiliation of and disdain for the Palestinians.
2. Because Israelis can live with this.
If the policies hinted at in 1. above are associated with a status quo which Israelis find tolerably calm and Palestinians find unbearable, even lethal, Israel's leaders often view this as a viable and even optimal outcome.
3. Because Israel, in practice, values settlements more than it values social justice.
The right will tell you that there is contradiction between settlements and social justice. Which would be true if there were no Palestinians, and if the Palestinians did not view the land occupied by settlements as theirs, historically, legally, and morally. And which would be true if the same consideration offered settlers in fixing the route of the West Bank fence were applied to Palestinians, that is, were farmers not cut off from their fields, pupils from their schools, and close relatives from one another.
The right will tell you that the settlements are no obstacle to peace. But that same right will also argue that the settlements are the only real bulwark between the Palestinians and an independent Palestine.
4. Because Israel, even in withdrawing from Gaza, has left it to die.
It is not lost on leftists that many Israelis reap a distinct satisfaction from the Palestinians' inability to help themselves, govern themselves, save themselves. Leftists may note that Israel has done everything in its power to convince the world to deny much-needed aid to a democratically elected government, and that Israel has not acted as a neighbor whose primary concern is an eventual peace.
5. Because of the propensity of Israel's leaders to demonstrate arrogance, claim a monopoly on the moral high ground, set non-negotiable demands to which Palestinian politicians cannot agree, then condemn Palestinians for intransigence.
Here, then, are five bad reasons:
1. The Palestinian cause is inherently progressive.
As currently constituted, Palestinian governance is marked by institutional graft, widespread human rights violations, curbs on press freedoms, tribalism, blood feuds, murders of women on the basis of contentions of preservation of family honor, and celebration of the targeting and killing of non-combatants as a legitimate form of resistance to occupation.
2. Israel remains the sole root cause of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and the reason it remains unresolved
As root causes go, both sides have demonstrated profound intransigence, both sides have violated agreements with abandon, both sides suffer from extremists whose power to destroy a peace process far outweighs their proportion of the population.
In addition, the contention that Israel is solely responsible suggests that the solution of the Mideast conflict is the dissolution of Israel. This brings us to:
3. Israel is a Jewish state.
For a vocal minority of leftists, this fact alone ? coupled with the following two arguments - is enough to call into serious question Israel's right to exist. This argument, which holds that the formally Jewish nature of the state enshrines an unconscionable level of racism, dovetails with:
4. Israel is an apartheid state.
See Occupation: It's horrid, but it's not apartheid
5. Israel's actions are comparable to those of Nazi Germany.
This contention may be the genuine litmus test for anti-Semitism on the left.
In the end, the compulsion to accuse Israel of genocide, while turning a blind eye to wholesale slaughter in Darfur and elsewhere, tends to say a great deal more about the accuser than the accused.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home