Left? Right? A Clarification

Inspired by an article by Yehudit Desberg, published in Makor Rishon, 20.02.2009

In my old age I no longer have the energy or the patience to philosophize for hours at a time, searching for the essence of a concept or in a futile attempt to identify the differences between two opposing views.  Today I'm much more likely to read or hear someone else's moment of clarity and tap into it for the tools I need to make sense of the insanity I call reality.  In this week's Makor Rishon I read one such insight that I'd like to preserve in this monologue with myself.  What distinguishes some one or some idea or movement identified with Israel's political 'Left' from a person, movement or idea identified with Israel's political 'Right'?

Although it initially seemed superficial, after thinking through Ms. Desberg's arguments, I believe she has something to contribute to this particular question.  Her work was actually accomplished for her by one of the most iconic of Israel's political movements, my intention is 'Peace Now!'.

Ms. Desberg sums up her analysis of the arguments for and against the release of Gilad Shalit as expressed by Israel's 'Left and 'Right'.  The 'Left' argue - "release at any price!"  It does not matter how many hundreds or thousands of captured, tried and convicted terrorists you release, it is "impossible to stand in the face of a mother's tears."  They see the issue as one of the centrality of the individual.  The single individual and their immediate gratification are the paramount value in their world view.  Nothing else is important, or is as important as this primary overriding value.  It supersedes and determines all else.

The 'Right' don't lack sensitivity and don't feel the grieving mother's anguish.  What they have that the 'Left' doesn't have, is perspective.  They see the tears of one mother, Aviva Shalit, and they also see the tears of the countless other mothers who would eventually cry once hardened terrorists are released to return to their bloody campaign to kill Jews and destroy Israel.  Instead of releasing convicted terrorists, the 'Right' demand that every diplomatic, economic and military pressure be brought to bear upon the Hamas leadership in Gaza until they return Gilad, much like the Philistines returned the Ark of the Covenant.

The 'Left' has no eternity.  Their only interest is in the 'here and now'.  The collective, the "People of Israel", the "Nation" play a role in their public pronouncements, but in truth these concepts play no role in their value system on a day-to-day decision making basis.

The 'Right' sees the present as just one link in a chain of existence.  What we do with our "link", our moment, can positively or detrimentally affect the entire future of the chain.  Therefore our decisions must take into consideration not just the mother standing in front of us, but all the mothers yet to come.

One final aside:  Israel has a great deal of experience with the exchange of prisoners for the release of our soldiers and citizens.  Statistically more than 50% of the terrorists release return to terror.  More importantly.  The higher their rank in the various terrorist organizations, the more likely they'll return to kill, maim and destroy Jewish lives.  This is not an academic debate.  Our lives and the lives of our children are affected by it's outcome.

Open Letter to A Critic of Israel

[ YBA - I have no idea who Annie Lennox is, sounds like a SkyNews journalist.  Similarly I never met the author of this letter Mr. Lipschitz, but due to the severe time restraints of my current occupation, I could never find time to write anything as clear and to-the-point as he has, so I'm sharing this with you, my readers.  All emphasis has been added by myself! Enjoy!]

Dear Annie,

As a long time fan of yours, I must say that I was so disappointed to see you sitting under a Palestinian flag, in the company of “Red” Ken Livingstone, George Gallagher, etc, all of them unabashedly not only anti Israel, but anti Semites to boot.

As well as being beneath your personal dignity to sit with such people you are also placing yourself decisively behind and identifying with only one side in the conflict and have abandoned any pretense of impartiality whatsoever.

I definitely value your concern for human rights and my heart goes out to your obviously genuine heartache for the Palestinian suffering. As do ours. Where, however was that beautiful voice of yours when 6000, yes, 6000 rockets rained down on unprotected Israeli civilian villages, towns and kibbutzim, all of them purposely targeting civilians and only civilians. A whole population lived in fear, children suffering post traumatic stress, economies floundering, and for what?

We unilaterally pulled out of Gaza, uprooted enterprises of 30 years standing, which during that time had prospered and made the previously neglected desert bloom.

We pulled out with peace in our hearts, and the deeds to prove it. We left behind, intact, the most technically advanced hothouses in the world. We were prepared to train Palestinians and conglomerates of American Jews (please check the facts) were offering to do joint venture with these Palestinians to help them develop their economy. This would offer unheard of opportunities in the ‘refugee’ world which I might add would really defeat the aim of the Islamic nations who USE these poor people as pawns.

Gaza was presented an opportunity to have become a thriving tax free port city and we could have been living in peace and trading (this is the best method of peace) with a prosperous Gaza. The Gazans unfortunately strengthened the old adage “The Palestinians never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity” and alas, the hothouses were looted and wantonly destroyed and we were met with a barrage of rockets instead of joint ventures.

Foreign aid was spent on deadly weapons. Even when we had a “cease fire” rockets rained in on a daily business and the Hamas interpreted our incredible restraint as weakness. We pleaded, we threatened, until our threats had lost all meaning. Enough was enough.

Where were you (and Sky News for that matter) when we were shown gruesome live footage of an Israeli boy screaming on the floor of a Supermarket. Yes, a Supermarket where civilians do their shopping, subsequent to an unprovoked rocket attack.. His leg had been sheared off by an assault calculatingly and cynically targeting civilians. The stories are endless.

Military might doesn’t solve anything. The answer is in diplomacy suggests Miss Lennox. Annie, who with? The Hamas will neither speak to us nor even recognize our basic right of existence. Like their Iranian masters they steadfastly call for our utter and total destruction. Nothing less.

It is said that they are holding out for open border crossings.

They had open crossings till they started bombarding us. The crossings were never permanently closed but their temporary closures were vainly and ineffectively used as a deterrent. They even bombed the crossings!! Go figure.

Is all of this madness in order to gain what they already had, and could have had way back then by doing one simple thing. Stop bombarding us!

Israelis yearn for peace and have proved with deeds that we are prepared to pay a high price for this. Our peace treaties with Jordan and Egypt are living proof. The Gazans will not talk peace, at very best a truce. The last “truce” with Hamas was exploited in their smuggling weapons, building tunnels, training shock troops in Iran and building fortifications, as well as maintaining their daily bombardment of Israeli civilians. Hamas, Hizbollah, Al Quaida, etc. not only call for the destruction of Israel but mock the Western democracies, which they have also openly promised to demolish. These threatened Democracies call for even handedness in the region which is also perceived gleefully in their eyes as weakness. Did we learn nothing from Chamberlain? 

Why is it that you, and other “liberal” people like yourself so savagely condemn Israel , with its democratic government, vocal opposition, free press, a world respected legal system, rights for minorities, etc? In short the only people in the Middle East, who adhere by YOUR standards, are vilified whilst you defend the people who trample on democracy, human rights, woman’s in particular, freedom of religion, freedom of speech. Need I go on with the list?

We have tried restraint, negotiations through 3rd parties, (as they won’t speak to us) cease fires (albeit one sided) nothing worked, all the above were seen as weakness. Like feeding the proverbial lion in order to get him to leave you alone it only increased their insatiable appetite, and so the time had come to act, and act strongly. Was our reaction disproportionate? Maybe we should have emulated them. For every Kassam rocket fired indiscriminately into a civilian population, should we have replied by sending helter skelter a rocket aimed into civilian areas and trust to luck where it falls? What would you, Red Ken and the gang have said about us then?

Hamas is to be judged, not only by its hideous actions but also by the company it keeps, Iran, Hezbollah, Syria, El Qaeda, all “giants of democracy and human rights,” all reviled by the democracies of the world, which nevertheless combine in a knee jerk reaction to malign Israel, when it eventually does what any other country would have done ages ago. Exercise its right of self defense and fulfill its obligations to its beleaguered citizens.

Annie, unfortunately you too, whom I so admired, must ultimately be judged by the company you keep.

Stanley Lipschitz

Jerusalem

The Sternhell Travesty

Israel Prize winner Professor Ze'ev Sternhell was lightly wounded after a small pipe bomb at the entrance of his home in Jerusalem exploded overnight Wednesday. He was taken to a Jerusalem hospital early Thursday. (JPost.com Sept 25, 2008)

It of course is fascinating to see how the Left fights for the rights of the Arabs dedicating to destroying Israel, yet when someone supposedly attacks them, you should see the gloves come off!

Police speculated that the attack against Sternhell was "ideologically" motivated and was likely carried out by extreme Right wing activists. Police and Shin Bet officials announced the establishment of a special task force to investigate the attack.

Pamphlets calling for physical assault of Left-wing activists were found near the professor's home on Wednesday night, reportedly promising a NIS 1,100,000 reward to anyone who murdered someone associated with the Peace Now organization.(JPost.com Sept 25, 2008)

How pathetic. Even the Nazi's had more finesse when trying to tie the burning of the Reichstags to the Communists. The best response to the entire sad story was written in a TalkBack by someone from the UK.

This egregious double standard beggars belief ...
A 'task force' no less ...for a petty pipe bomb ... and listen to these leftist prima-donnas screaming foul about 'existential threats' and the need to put the 'miscreants' away for many years. What a contrast to the 500 kg bombs that maim Jewish children and for which these professors petition early release in exchange for dead Israeli soldiers. How about a task force for them? No-one condones such criminal activity, but it is bound to repeat itself if the establishment keeps dehumanising and discriminating so openly and harshly against Jews who cleave to their legitimate homeland.
UK (09/25/2008 11:22)

Why I Am a Zionist

The following is a powerful "I believe ..." statement by a man I only know by name, but respect and to a great extent, agree with. My Yom HaAtzmaut contribution to "Second Thoughts" this 60th Independence Day, 2008.

Today, too many friends and foes define Israel, and Zionism, by the Arab world's hostility. Doing so misses Israel's everyday miracles, the millions who live and learn, laugh and play, in the Middle East's only functional democracy. Doing so ignores the achievements of Zionism, a gutsy, visionary movement which rescued a shattered people by reuniting a scattered people. Doing so neglects the transformative potential of Zionism, which could inspire new generations of Israeli and Diaspora Jews to find personal redemption by redeeming their old-new communal homeland.

Tragically, Zionism is embattled. Arabs have demonized Zionism as the modern bogeyman, and many have clumped Zionists, along with Americans and most Westerners, as the Great Satans. In Israel, trendy post-Zionists denigrate the state which showers them with privilege, while in the Diaspora a few Jewish anti-Zionists loudly curry favor with the Jewish state's enemies.

Jews should reaffirm their faith in Zionism; the world should appreciate its many accomplishments. Zionists must not allow their enemies to define and slander the movement. No nationalism is pure, no movement is perfect, no state ideal. But today Zionism remains legitimate, inspiring, and relevant, to me and most Jews. Zionism offers an identity anchor in a world of dizzying choices - and a road map toward national renewal. A century ago, Zionism revived pride in the label "Jew"; today, Jews must revive pride in the label "Zionist."

• I AM a Zionist because I am a Jew - and without recognizing Judaism's national component, I cannot explain its unique character. Judaism is a world religion bound to one homeland, shaping a people whose holy days revolve around the Israeli agricultural calendar, ritualize theological concepts, and relive historic events. Only in Israel can a Jew fully live in Jewish space and by Jewish time.
• I am a Zionist because I share the past, present, and future of my people, the Jewish people. Our nerve endings are uniquely intertwined. When one of us suffers, we share the pain; when many of us advance communal ideals together, we - and the world - benefit.
• I am a Zionist because I know my history - and after being exiled from their homeland more than 1900 years ago, the defenseless, wandering Jews endured repeated persecutions from both Christians and Muslims - centuries before this anti-Semitism culminated in the Holocaust.
• I am a Zionist because Jews never forgot their ties to their homeland, their love for Jerusalem. Even when they established autonomous self-governing structures in Babylonia, in Europe, in North Africa, these governments in exile yearned to return home.
• I am a Zionist because those ideological ties nourished and were nurtured by the plucky minority of Jews who remained in the land of Israel, sustaining continued Jewish settlement throughout the exile.
• I am a Zionist because in modern times the promise of Emancipation and Enlightenment was a double-edged sword, often only offering acceptance for Jews in Europe after they assimilated, yet never fully respecting them if they did assimilate.
• I am a Zionist because in establishing the sovereign state of Israel in 1948, the Jews reconstituted in modern Western terms a relationship with a land they had been attached to for millennia, since Biblical times - just as Japan or India established modern states from ancient civilizations.
• I am a Zionist because in building that state, the Jews returned to history and embraced normalcy, a condition which gave them power, with all its benefits, responsibilities, and dilemmas.
• I am a Zionist because I celebrate Israel's existence. Like any thoughtful patriot, though I might criticize particular government policies I dislike - I do not delegitimize the state itself.
• I am a Zionist because I live in the real world of nation-states. I see that Zionism is no more or less "racist" than any other nationalism, be it American, Armenian, Canadian, or Czech. All express the eternal human need for some internal cohesion, some tribalism, some solidarity among some historic grouping of individuals, and not others.
• I am a Zionist because we have learned from North American multiculturalism that pride in one's heritage as a Jew, an Italian, a Greek, can provide essential, time-tested anchors in our me-me-me, my-my-my, more-more-more, now-now-now world.
• I am a Zionist because in Israel we have learned that a country without a vision is like a person without a soul; a big-tent Zionism can inculcate values, fight corruption, reaffirm national unity, and restore a sense of mission.
• I AM a Zionist because in our world of post-modern multi-dimensional identities, we don't have to be "either-ors", we can be "ands and buts" - a Zionist AND an American patriot; a secular Jew BUT also a Zionist. Just as some people living in Israel reject Zionism, meaning Jewish nationalism, Jews in the Diaspora can embrace it. To those who ask "How can you be a Zionist if you don't make aliya," I reply, "How will anyone make aliya without first being a Zionist?"
• I am a Zionist because I am a democrat. The marriage of democracy and nationalism has produced great liberal democracies, including Israel, despite its democracy being tested under severe conditions.
• I am a Zionist because I am an idealist. Just as a century ago, the notion of a viable, independent, sovereign Jewish state was an impossible dream - yet worth fighting for - so, too, today, the notion of a thriving, independent, sovereign Jewish state living in true peace with its neighbors appears to be an impossible dream - yet worth seeking.
• I am a Zionist because I am a romantic. The story of the Jews rebuilding their homeland, reclaiming the desert, renewing themselves, was one of the 20th century's greatest epics, just as the narrative of the Jews maintaining their homeland, reconciling with the Arab world, renewing themselves, and serving as a light to others, a model nation state, could be one of this century's marvels.

Yes, it sometimes sounds far-fetched. But, as Theodor Herzl, the father of modern Zionism, said in an idle boast that has become a cliche: "If you will it, it is no dream."

The writer is Professor of History at McGill University and the author of Why I Am A Zionist: Israel, Jewish Identity and the Challenges of Today. This is an updated version of an essay he first wrote for Independence Day in 2001.

The U.S. Congress in 1922 - Jewish Rights to the Land

A moment of history from the annuals of the U.S. Congress in 1922

On June 30, 1922, a joint resolution of both Houses of Congress of the United States unanimously endorsed the "Mandate for Palestine," confirming the irrevocable right of Jews to settle in the area of Palestine�anywhere between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea:

"Favoring the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people.

"Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled. That the United States of America favors the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which should prejudice the civil and religious rights of Christian and all other non-Jewish communities in Palestine, and that the holy places and religious buildings and sites in Palestine shall be adequately protected." [italics in the original]

On September 21, 1922, the then President Warren G. Harding signed the joint resolution of approval to establish a Jewish National Home in Palestine.

Here is how members of congress expressed their support for the creation of a National Home for the Jewish people in Palestine - Eretz-Israel (Selective text read from the floor of the U.S. Congress by the Congressman from New York on June 30, 1922). All quotes included in this document are taken verbatim from the given source.

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
1922 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

NATIONAL HOME FOR THE JEWISH PEOPLE

JUNE 30, 1922
HOUSE RESOLUTION 360
(Rept. NO. 1172)

want to make at this time, Mr. Speaker and gentlemen of the House, my attitude and views upon the Arab question in Palestine very clear and emphatic. I am in favor of carrying out one of the three following policies, to be preferred in the order in which they are named:

(1) That the Arabs shall be permitted to remain in Palestine under Jewish government and domination, and with their civil and religious rights guaranteed to them through the British mandate and under terms of the Balfour declaration.

(2) That if they will not consent to Jewish government and domination, they shall be required to sell their lands at a just valuation and retire into the Arab territory which has been assigned to them by the League of Nations in the general reconstruction of the countries of the east.

(3) That if they will not consent to Jewish government and domination, under conditions of right and justice, or to sell their lands at a just valuation and to retire into their own countries, they shall be driven from Palestine by force.

"Mr. Speaker, I wish to discuss briefly each of these alternatives in order. And first let me read the now celebrated Balfour declaration of date of November 2, 1917, during the progress of the Great War, and afterwards incorporated in the preamble of the British mandate authorized by the League of Nations. The Balfour declaration was in the following language:

His Majesty's Government view with favor the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people and will use their best endeavors to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine or the rights and political status enjoyed by the Jews in any other country.

"If this is not a condensed and at the same time a complete bill of rights both for the Arabs of Palestine and for the Jews who intend to remain in their present homelands outside of Palestine, I have never read or seen one. It is conceded by the Arabs themselves that the present government of the country under the British mandate and through the Zionist organization as an administrative agency is infinitely better than the government of the Turks who were chased out of the country by Allenby, the British general. It is probably better than any that the Arabs could create and maintain for themselves.

"I respectfully submit that the Arabs in Palestine should be and would be happy and content under the present government of that country if it were not for Turkish and Arab agitators, who travel around over the land stirring up trouble by making false representations concerning the true character of the Zionist movement, and by preaching a kind of holy war against the immigrant Jews who arrive from day to day. The Arabs are well represented in the personnel of the present Palestine administration, which has recognized their language as one of the official languages of the country, and has given official standing to the Moslem religion.

"In the second place, if the Arabs do not wish to remain in Palestine under Jewish government and domination there is plenty of room outside in purely Arab surroundings. The British Government and her allies made overtures and gave pledges to the Arab people to furnish them lands and protect their freedom in consideration of Arab alliance with the Allies during the World War. That pledge has been kept. The Hedjaz kingdom was established in ancient Arabia, and Hussein, Grand Sheriff of Mecca, was made king and freed from all Turkish influence. The son of King Hussein, Prince Feisal, is now the head of the kingdom of Mesopotamia [Iraq], and Arab predominance in that country has been assured by the Allies to the Arab people.

"Mesopotamia is alone capable of absorbing 30,000,000 people, according to a report submitted to the British Government by the Great English engineer, Sir William Wilcocks. Arab rights are also fully recognized and protected by the French mandate over Syria. There are also several flourishing Arabic cultural and political colonies in Egypt. In short, the Arab-speaking populations of Asia and Africa number about 38,000,000 souls and occupy approximately 2,375,000 square miles, many times larger than the territory of Great Britain. In other words under the reconstruction of the map of the east, the Arabs have been given practical control of Greater Arabia, Mesopotamia, Syria, and parts of Egypt, which gives them an average of 38 acres per person. If the Arabs are compelled to leave Palestine and turn it over entirely to the Jews, it is admitted that the Arab race would still be one of the wealthiest landowning races on the earth. Therefore, I contend that if they will not consent to live peaceably with the Jews they should be made to sell their lands and retire to places reserved for them somewhere in Arabia [Saudi], Syria, Mesopotamia, or Egypt, that suit them best, and where they can worship Allah, Mahomet [Muhammad], and the Koran to their heart's content. After all is said, the fact remains that the Arabs have more lands than they need, and the Jews have none. I am in favor of a readjustment under the Balfour declaration, without too great regard to nice distinctions in the matter of the question of self-determination. This thought brings me to my third proposal heretofore mentioned, that the Arabs should be driven out of Palestine by the British and Jews, or by somebody else, if they will not listen to the voice of reason and of justice.

"I shall probably be told that, regardless of the question of land and property rights, the Arabs have an interest in the holy places around Jerusalem. Admitting that their claims in this regard are just, there should be no trouble along this line. There is no reason to believe that Jews and Christians would deny them access to the holy places in the pilgrimages that they might desire to make from their Arab countries. But if the rights of the Jews to their ancient homeland are to be made dependent, as a final question, upon Moslem interests in the holy places around Jerusalem, I am willing and prepared to repudiate these rights entirely and to shut the Arabs out altogether."

Hat tip to Eli E. Hertz