|
Pulse of the Twin Cities Login |
|
If you do not have an account yet
Create One.
|
|
|
Twin Town High (vol. 8) |
|
|
|
|
Response: Criticizing Israel
Wednesday 01 October @ 14:32:54 |
 In response to Lee Ross’ “challenge” to “point out anything that was ever disseminated by WAMM that is anti-Semitic,” I offer that the problem isn’t merely criticism of Israel per se. It’s the manner of that criticism. Is it balanced? Is it presented within context? Is it constructive?
In WAMM’s defense Lee, for example, cites several impressive sounding studies and stats on the dramatic increase of Palestinians’ complaints from 2001 and 2002, complaining that “this hardly speaks well for Israel’s benevolence.” True. But Lee omits some critical information—that during this same time period Palestinian terrorists were relentlessly attacking Israelis in their homes, cafes and city streets. The inclusion of such information provides a clearer picture of the situation and some understanding perhaps as to why it may be difficult for some Israelis/Jews to express compassion for the arsonist while their home is burning down.
Likewise, this past week’s Pulse feature on “The Wall,” a lengthy condemnation of Israel, in three pages doesn’t once make mention of even a single act of Palestinian terrorism, as if this horrendous construction sprang up in some sort of circumstantial void. Omission of the violent antecedents misleads the author and readers to conclude the “security” wall is nothing but a deceptive Israeli/Jewish land/water grab, reviving old conspiracy theories and negative stereotypes.
WAMM’s newsletters (May 2002 issue in particular) and “educational” materials also present only the Palestinian side of the issue omitting critical facts that are not supportive of their position, accusing Israel of horrendous deeds without opportunity for discussion or rebuttal, and Israeli and American Jews of being apathetic, ignorant and unfeeling—and Lee wonders how some, myself at least, could possibly be offended?
Personally I’ve wondered how Israel, a country the size of Rhode Island, came to capture WAMM’s imagination. Israel—comprising 1 percent of the land in the Middle East, the only Jewish nation amid 22 Arab/Muslim nations (23 counting Iraq), some with abominable human rights records where morality police let school girls burn to death and women are treated as chattel—it is Israel that is singled out. Why?
In making its case against Israel, WAMM’s “educational” materials, for example, show how much U.S, aid goes to Israel but omit the amount of U.S. aid that also goes to all the surrounding oil rich fiefedoms and even to Arafat’s PLO. Condemning Israel for having a strong military with the help of U.S. tax dollars, WAMM omits how much it costs in U.S. tax dollars to maintain the many U.S. military bases in the surrounding Arab nations—e.g., Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey, etc. And how many U.S. military bases are there in Israel? None. Zero. Nada.
This is not to say there is not injustice on the part of Israel. Long before Palestinians became a cause celebre of WAMM and other “leftist” groups, Israeli and American Jews along with Palestinians and other people of good heart have been quietly going about the work of building for a more just Israeli society. The contemporary “anti-war” movement, however, which has over-simplified the Israel/Palestinian issue by omitting facts and reducing it to good vs. evil, has no room for individuals to be for Israel and also for justice; if you are for justice then you must be against Israel and for the Palestinians. Likewise opposition to the war on Iraq has also been coupled with protesting against Israel and some groups like the local Anti-War Committee even believe Iraq with all its oil and questionable Halliburton deals is but a smokescreen for Israel/Palestine.
Since WAMM first began organizing on Israel/Palestine, pro-Israel views were (and continue to be) excluded from the dialogue. WAMM claimed there was little opportunity to hear the voices of Palestinians and they already knew all about the Israeli point of view, after all, that’s what the media tells us—although that’s the U.S. media, not Israeli POV; WAMM organized fairness in the media campaigns and ought to know that better than anyone. Jews of course were welcome to attend the dialogue on Israel/Palestine scheduled on a Friday and Saturday, the Jewish Sabbath; one of WAMM’s members was Jewish (guess who, Lee?) and it met with her “approval” they said, dismissing complaints of insensitivity. While it’s true many Jews are “secular,” many are also Shabbat observant and if one is truly inclusive, events—especially on topics affecting a particular segment of the community—can be scheduled to be respectful of differing traditions to allow all to fully participate.
Since then, WAMM and other “anti-war” groups as well have stonewalled requests to be more inclusive, to present a balance of perspectives, and temper their tactic of pitting themselves against Israelis, and Arabs against Jews, when they should be working instead towards reconciliation and a greater understanding of both sides of the issue.
There is danger when a community—WAMM, the activist community, the Jewish community, any community, to the political “right” or “left”—closes itself off to the views of others. Ironically, the “left” has been lambasting the mainstream Jewish community for being seemingly apathetic to the plight of the Palestinians while sticking pencils in their own ears.
There is an even greater danger when people start abdicating their basic beliefs in order to accommodate a particular point of view. The “peace” movement which had a moral basis has morphed into the “anti-war” movement, with pacifists relinquishing their stance against violence in order to justify terrorism against Israelis/Jews. Some have even argued there would be no need for suicide bombers if the Palestinians were as well armed as the Israelis; others believe Palestinian’s legitimate grievances entitle them to mass murder Jews. Are we that much out of imagination that violence, at least violence committed against Israelis/Jews, is now an acceptable means to peace?
Maybe that’s not anti-Semitism. Maybe I’m the one who’s got it all confused. Truth is it could have been talked about over a coffee. It’s not like these women don’t know me. They do. But rather than a latte they choose instead to try to publicly humiliate, the very thing they accuse the Israelis of doing to the Palestinians.
Finally, regarding Lee’s comments on “good Germans” — it is the analogy to the Holocaust that I object to. To share a personal story, as a youngster my mother would frequent a little handbag shop in Beverly Hills with me and my sister in tow. It was the tiny, dimly lit storeroom in the back of the shop that held my fascination, with boxes and suitcases neatly stacked to the ceiling and an old green metal file cabinet that stood behind the little well-worn wooden service counter. It was here that Mr. Page (Prof. Leopold Pfefferberg) was re-compiling Schindler’s List with the encouragement of his shop patrons. Initially his German accent scared me but then my mother asked where was he from, conversing in Yiddish, exchanging names of distant places and relations. On one such visit I remember Mr. Page leaning over the counter-top above which I could barely see at the time and peering into my face with his soft gentle eyes to make sure I heard his message — “There are good German people.” Indeed, righteous gentiles are much honored in the Jewish community. So save the patronizing lectures, Lee. The “bona fide” Israeli woman whom Lee credits for the remark comparing Israelis to “good Germans” was not referring to the Oskar Schindlers of the world but rather to those who stood by and did nothing. The comparison was intended to denigrate.
Nobelist Elie Wiesel, who was the first to use the word “Holocaust” to describe the genocide of World War II, was recently in town speaking and when asked how he felt about others using analogies replied, “I don’t believe in analogies… We should not compare,” adding that we should also “try to have more respect for language” and not “use it to hurt others.”
We are fortunate to have such teachers as Mr. Wiesel and Mr. Page (of Blessed Memory). And we have many other excellent teachers here in this community who can speak simply, eloquently and knowledgably on the issues of Israel/Palestine. Many excellent dialogues between Jews and Christians have long been taking place. Mr. Wiesel said that in retrospect he regrets that the Muslim community wasn’t also part of these dialogues—How different might the world be today?
WAMM dedicated the past month to exploring “racism,” a good start. In the future perhaps they will be more inclusive of Jewish/Israeli perspectives and invite them into their mostly Christian/Muslim dialogue on Israel/Palestine?
Mr. Wiesel expressed that we need to “teach” others “to be sensitive to other people’s pain” as the world is “suffering from indifference.” Indeed, Israelis/Jews need to be more aware of Palestinian pain, but so too the local activist community needs to be sensitive to how their actions impact others, especially those in their own community.
I apologize to any I may have offended by expressing these views and in the spirit of Rosh Hashana (the Jewish New Year), hope this year shall bring peace and possibilities for respectful dialogues.
Cheryl Lewis Fields
|
|
 |
|
|
Comments -
Post Comment |
|
The comments are owned by the poster. We are not responsible for its content.
NO comments yet! Be the first!
|
|
|
