Flotilla, Flotilla

Sent  4.June.2010
This Flotilla Festival has had me alternating between moaning, crying, ignoring, agonizing, lots of Facebooking, and also laughing.

Moaning at the incredible blunder which placed our soldiers in an untenable miscalculation, and at our leadership who placed them in that situation.

Crying at the loss of life, at the pain of those wounded soldiers and (well-prepared) activists, at the absurd type of Gaza siege which invited such a confrontation, and at the naivety, hypocrisy, duplicity, and sanctimoniousness pursued by most of the world press and nations.

Ignoring it all for brief moments of tranquilizing calm by shutting down those awful house pets, the TV, radio, computer and Facebook extremists who would appreciate our acceding immediately to the demise of our country.

Agonizing, and lots of it, at how our citizenry has allowed us to be stuck with a government that has brought us this past year to the heights of idiocy. A government whose main concern is "Security", while creating a totally insecure future for us. A government that does what it wants because it says "the whole world is against us anyways"….and is doing everything to make that statement come true.

Facebook-ing a bit in a number of "flotilla" groups defending my country, but not it's policies. Condemning the duplicity of "peace-loving" activists, but also the way the Gaza siege is handled. (it ain't easy in a Facebook full of extremists on all sides.)

Laughing, yes, also laughing. They say that laughing begins when things are too serious for crying…..well, here we are.

Majed Abusalama manages a fairly prolific page on Facebook called “Bridges of Peace between Gaza and Israel”. Some time ago I had joined that page. A few times I wrote to Majed Abusalama complaining about his use of the page to castigate Israel while not at all noting the failures towards peace of the Hamas government in Gaza. (I've never received a response, and it has me questioning the true motives of the Facebook Page. Is the page a "front" or is Majed Abusalama actually afraid to answer...?? ). My latest message to Majed Abusalama (I think I sent him an e-mail) was during the first days of the Flotilla Tragedy and Fiasco. Here it is:

Dear Majed Abusalama.
As I am a long time activist for Palestinian rights in the West Bank against the criminal and immoral activities of Israeli settlers in the West Bank, and as an opponent to Israel's actions and policies towards Gaza, I must admit that the tragedy at sea seems to have been caused by both sides. This, after seeing all the video clips taken by both sides and which have so far appeared for us to see (though I admit to writing this before any inquiry is able to give us even more info on what happened). Israel's actions and policies towards Gaza and the siege are unacceptable and we need to wake Israeli and world public opinion against the siege of civilian progress. By the way, the organizer of the Flotilla said that this was not simply for bringing humanitarian supplies. The main purpose was to break the siege over and over again. That is why they could not accept having the supplies delivered by Israel or the Red Cross. This is definitely justified. What is not justified is the preparation ahead of time to cause a violent incident on one of the boats, using knives-iron bars-chains-Molotov cocktails-etc, essentially trying to maim (and perhaps kill) while fighting in close quarters face to face, before a larger group of soldiers manages to board the boat. To do this and not to expect a violent response is improbable. the violent response came just as was expected and indeed desired by that group of fighters on that one boat. they are as much at fault for the tragedy and the deaths as is Israel for the way it conducts a siege on Gaza.

Therefore, dear Majed Abusalama. I mourn the tragic death of victims in the Palestinian/Israeli conflict. Israel’s policies and actions towards Gaza and the siege are wrong, destructive and counter-productive. But in order to be what you call yourself, “Bridges of Peace between Gaza and Israel”, you cannot see just one side of the conflict. Conflicts move towards peace only when both sides begin understanding each other’s pain. In your many good messages you never call for a mutual end to violence. You never ask for a stoppage of rocket fire from Gaza into Israel, or for Red Cross privileges to a captured soldier, or for a Hamas government which recognizes a permanent two-state resolution of the conflict. In the Flotilla tragedy you very justly denounce Israel’s policy of siege and the tragic deaths, But you evidently accept as legitimate the active preparation to fight the soldiers who boarded the boat with knives-iron bars-chains-Molotov cocktails-etc, essentially trying to maim and (perhaps) kill while fighting in close quarters face to face in order to stop more soldiers from boarding the boat. They meant to initiate violence as a tactic. But it is a tactic that becomes a full partner to the tragic deaths that follow. Violence brings more violence. You will not really become “Bridges to Peace” until you acknowledge and denounce the violence from both sides. Peace will have a chance only thru a mutual rejection of violence. I will continue to be an active opponent of my government’s policies and actions towards Gaza and the siege. Hard as it is, please join me as a Bridge by doing the same on your side of the siege. can you make that happen ??

BDS. Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions.

Sent 25.May.2010

I recieved the following question from a friend who works within B'tzelem:

This was my answer:

Aaron - I was wondering what your feelings (gut and reasoned... may not be the same) are about the divestment movement that is stirring (whether targeted at the Occ. Territories or at all of Israel) (I'm taking a poll). I feel very uncomfortable about jumping into bed with the majority of that movement, people who do not support Israel's right to exist, who are exercising the double standard (i.e. why target Israel, of all nations... is there a lack for nations behaving unethically). On the other hand, an end to the occupation is just not going to happen from internal pressures only, and time is precious.

Your query ("just curious"….."taking a poll") is giving me an opportunity to try and put in writing some things I've thought about recently.

BDS. Boycott, Divestment (actually disinvestment), Sanctions.

I find it easy to identify with those words, and I find myself involved with incitement among my friends towards activating the meanings behind those words.

Boycott our companies producing goods in the occupied territories? Of course. Divest ourselves of investments in firms owned by supporters of our Palestinian policies? Of course. These are sanctions I support both as legitimate political activities and as forms of self-decontamination.

But the term BDS is used today by an amalgam of movements and organizations in ways that I cannot be part of nor support.

While I’m a constant critic of our Jewish State, there are clear borders within which I need to come to its defense. No doubt this is an emotional response, but it is one that I’ve had to investigate in order to understand my own self, and to assess whether my sentiment runs contrary to my judgment.

The BDS movement singles out Israel in our less than perfect world, though we are up against a totality of enemies so much larger than us and so much closer to our homes than other nations.

The BDS movement singles out Israel in our less than perfect world, because we are smaller and more vulnerable than other nations who are no less perfect (such as, Russia, United States) but much more formidable.

The BDS movement is crowded with individuals and movements who have no intention of evaluating both sides of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict.

And perhaps most damning in my eyes:

The BDS movement seems to be saturated with individuals and movements who use its moral heading (BDS) to obscure a genuine intention to delegitimize the very existence of the State of Israel. (So is my impression). Perhaps we are the only country in the world today whose very existence is put into question by so many.

Having long ago laid aside my youthful indoctrination as a Zionist, I spent time reinvestigating both my indoctrination and those many missing pieces left out of that indoctrination. As it turns out, in my non-youthful years I re-became a Zionist…..with fewer illusions and many more misgivings, but with a fair certainty that history carved a path that needed to happen, to a place that needed to be the place. Needed to happen one way or another……and certainly the better way was not always taken….but Israel needed to be the place, the only place.

My misgivings are many….how we got here and what we did along the way….where we are and what we’re doing today. Nevertheless, I’ll voice and activate those misgivings directly towards my country, to the Jews in my country and to my people around the world……..and not alongside and through groups who include so many who would prefer to solve the conflict (and the oppression) by the demise of the Zionist State. [and yes, I think a Zionist State can be a democracy, and yes I think a (primarily) Jewish State must have a separation between religion and state. but these matters also need further elucidation.]

We are staged in an end game for a Two-State resolve (I never call it “solution”) to our local conflict. Likely, if it doesn’t happen soon, it will never happen. Time will allow us Israelis to engineer the kind of map which will make that possibility totally unacceptable. We will then be on our way to continue the conflict on the basis of a One-State reality. It’s a reality which will be undemocratic at its worse. It will legitimize a continuation of the conflict and violence. It will eventually (demographically and otherwise) put an end to a Jewish homeland, which will not cause a tear to drop from a great many in the scattered BDS movement. It will soon also have a striking affect on the safety and security of Jews in the Diaspora. Back to square one.

Our struggle against policies and actions of our own country need not combine us with those who may also want to be rid of us. We struggle not simply as liberal cosmopolitans. We struggle as Jewish Israelis who know that our country is doing wrong and are trying to invest the rest of our people with that understanding.

And finally, a direct answer to your original question:

I will “jump into bed” with any non-Jewish partner who also accepts my Zionism, and who also appreciates the complexity of both sides of the conflict. With such a partner I will B-D-S (such as, I saw Obama as a partner). But most of all I’ll look for partners within our people both in Israel and in the Diaspora. Mostly through these will a change of policy come via understanding rather than via coercion or arm-twisting. For that reason I am slightly encouraged by the advent of JStreet in America and JCall in Europe. You are right in saying that time is precious, but how we get there is usually no less important than where we’re going. It generally affects the outcome.

This is longer than I meant for it to be. Yet so much is still left out. As always.

More on "Justification thru Misinformation"

Sent 18.May.2010

After sending my previous letter, "Justification thru Misinformation", I recieved the following interesting remarks from a friend (and my response to those remarks):

After reading Ahad Ha’Am on workshop, Peter Geyl’s book about Napoleon and wading through Sholmo Sand’s book “The Invention of the Jewish People” it is hard for me to understand the ‘lie’ concept. All peoples who ultimately believe that that are a ‘nation’ create a collective persona which for some is real, for some is make believe and for the majority is a cornerstone for what they were going to do anyway. While I think I understand your objection for believing our own lies as the beginning point in any debate, that form of self delusion seems to me should be taken as a given so that you can move beyond it rather than attempting to pursue a policy of changing the minds of those who have already accepted the mindset. I think it was Shimon Peres who is quoted as saying that he looks to the future to make a difference not the past.

If your objective is to make a more tolerable society which is humanitarian driven, better to proffer honest solutions based upon ‘best practice’ than try to quilt, either way, the followers to move forward. Maybe that is why I personally have such a hard time using the Shoah as a basis for Israel’s existence but then again some ‘story’ needs to be made up, doesn’t it?

To which I respoded:

Dear J----,

Thanks for your comments on my latest diatribe. Actually, I agree with quite a lot….. But you are perhaps confusing the conceptual “non-lie” of how a people see themselves (for example: as a nation), and the “lie” that is born out of a policy of “deception” in order to portray as a “lie” someone else’s “non-lie”. I hope you followed that.

We see ourselves as a “nation” (the Reconstuctionists call ourselves a Civilization). Perhaps others see us merely as a "religion”. What counts, as you rightly say, is our own assertion of our “collective persona”. This is what we and others need to work with regardless of past (historical) interpretations of how we created our belief in the particular “collective persona”. In the same light our collective persona is imbued with a series of beliefs regarding our property rights to the Land of our Forefathers. That, too, is all right (regardless of internal disagreements as to the validity of one belief or another). While others may or may not see this as self-delusion, for us this is completely real, our artistic and beautiful creation sculptured through centuries of historical and emotional illusions. These are our Truths.

……Unless……..or until…….we run into someone else’s “collective persona” which drastically conflicts with our own and is imbued with it’s own set of Truths.. At that point we leave the realm of “Truth” (for there are more than one, and they conflict), and enter the world of politics, the interaction between people (and peoples) in the present, often in order to influence (or manipulate) a particular future. This is not a world of historical and emotional creations rooted in a conception of the past (though perhaps greatly influenced by it). This is a world accustomed in the use or misuse of power, a world of honesty and dishonesty, integrity and knavery, deception and candor. This is the Israeli/Palestinian world which I live in, travel in and, once in a while, write about.

Justification thru Misinformation

Sent 16.May.2010

Many of us receive and abundance of "I Love and Justify Israel" mail. Some of it is informative and worthwhile reading. Unfortunately, a goodly portion of the mail is a patchwork of gross misinformation at best, and misleading lies at worst.

Recently a friend forwarded one such e-mail entitled “Top 10 Anti-Israel Lies”. I reciprocated with the following response:

Thanks for sending us the informational file about the “Top 10 Anti-Israel Lies” (see attachment). I too see in the world media, the internet, and other propaganda material so many attempts to defame and malign our country through the use of lies, half-truths and devious misinterpretations of reality. We need to answer these accusations through our own media and propaganda tools. The above mentioned file attempts to do just that.

However, when disputing our antagonist’s lies and half-truths, we should not resort to our own lies and half truths. Otherwise we essentially arm our enemies with more propaganda ammunition. Unfortunately, the above file, released by the prestigious Simon Wiesenthal Center, does just that. Almost every one of the file’s rebuttals to the “Top 10 Anti-Israel Lies” contains either outright lies, half-truths, or contorted misrepresentation of real issues. These are so easily exposed, and will be used by our enemies to show how “the Zionist Propaganda Machine” deceives the world.

A couple of blatant examples will perhaps clarify the type of assertions which cause undue damage to our honesty and credibility:

In “Lie #1” the writer asserts that “Reclamation of the largely vacant land by pioneering Zionists blossomed into a Jewish majority long before the onset of Nazism.” This is not a half-truth nor a distortion. This is a lie. Or, can the writer be so ignorant?? “long before the onset of Nazism”???....by 1922, in the wake of the first, second and third Aliya, we Jews numbered about 10% of the Palestine population. In 1929, immediately before Hitler’s Nazi Party mustered 20% of the votes to the Reichstag, we numbered a little over 17% of the Palestine population. By 1939, at the outset of our Shoa in Europe by the Nazis, our Jewish population in Palestine rose to about 30% . In 1948, eve of our War of Independence, there were about 850,000 Arabs in the area that was to become Israel (not including the rest of Palestine.) There were about 650,000 Jews in the same area. We became a majority only after close to 700,000 Arabs fled or were evicted as a result of the war. True, there are marginal disputes on numbers, but nothing to change the overall statistics. “a Jewish majority long before the onset of Nazism”??? This blatant lie or ignorance portrays the accuracy and candor of much of the rest of the file.

Seemingly, much of what is asserted prefers distortions to lies, but these too are quickly sniffed out by our adversaries and used to show our lack of honesty. For example: In confusing East Jerusalem with “Jerusalem is Holy” there is an intentional attempt to blind the reader to the fact that most of East Jerusalem was never part of the East Jerusalem municipality prior to 1967, and was never part of the biblical “Jerusalem is Holy”. In fact, most of today’s “East” Jerusalem is made up of 28 Arab villages and their lands which had always been outside of the Jerusalem municipality.

As a Zionist and as a resident Israeli citizen (also native-born), I am daily involved with the need to struggle against the attempts at delegitimizing our right to a Jewish State. I have always felt that this can be done with integrity, honesty and truth. Truth often needs to be searched and researched, and at times an issue will have more than one truth because life and history can weave complicated scenarios. I am certain that our own use of lies and half-truths have a greater affect on delegitimizing us, than our adversaries’ propaganda. Therefore I am woefully distressed that such is the propaganda coming from the respectful Simon Wiesenthal Center.

Zev Jabotinsky is the father of our right-wing political party (Revisionism to Herut to Likud). In the 1920’s or 30’s he commented on our Palestinian-Jewish confrontation by stating that both peoples have a justified cause to see Palestine as their own. Jabotinsky was an honest leader. I fear many of his successors today are not.

Once again, I thank you for the material sent and the opportunity given to respond.

East (?) Jerusalem and Sheikh Jerach

Sent 22.April.2010

To my friends both across the sea and here in Israel,

This is a political letter. I apologize if you prefer that I keep my thoughts to myself. (if so, delete now. I won’t even know.) But as at previous occasions, I feel the need to share with friends things other than family affairs, health and well wishes. Be patient with me. As in the past, I don’t know how to shorten my letters.

Last week I packed a few sandwiches along with a couple of bottles of cold water and drove southward to Jerusalem to join the protest against expulsion of Arabs from their homes in the Sheikh Jerach section of East Jerusalem. The demonstration was in late afternoon. I used the morning for a refresher tour of East Jerusalem, its various villages and neighborhoods and the surrounding Wall. It’s not enough to hear about, not enough to read about, not enough to watch internet doco-clips. There are things which need to be re-seen and re-explained on location in order to be hit once more with the full impact of our national lunacy, a lunacy driven by both covert and overt policies of our various government agencies.

Jerusalem is a city of friction and contradiction, with conflicting passions and desires between ultra-orthodox, orthodox, the vaguely devout, the merely impious and the sophisticated secular. It’s a city of contradiction between Arab and Jew, Palestinians and Israelis, Left and Right and something nebulously called Center. It’s the city which will have the heaviest impact on our ability to move towards a Two-State resolution of our territorial conflict. Meanwhile its impact is woefully negative, backed by the execution of policies aimed at scuttling possibilities of Two-States for two peoples.

I read this week of Eli Wiesel’s passionate letter about Jerusalem in the N.Y. Times and the Washington Post. Wiesel is unable to understand why we Israelis are being asked by Obama to stop (even temporarily) building Jewish neighborhoods in East Jerusalem. I was saddened at the lack of knowledge by one of my treasured icons about what the East Jerusalem “building” conflict is really all about. I also realized that while I am constantly angered by the cynical use of “Jerusalem Eternal” as our pious “right” to build anywhere in East Jerusalem, others may be totally unaware of the absurd use of that infernal/eternal excuse.

In 1967, immediately after an amazing and well earned victory over a number of Arab armies, we reunited a divided Jerusalem. We were elated and exuberant at being the supermen of the neighborhood, and were certain that now our Arab neighbors will have seen the need to make their peace with us. It took another much bloodier war to show us how fragile our self image really was. But in 1967 we reunited Jerusalem forever and ever (we supposed).

But, wait. What did we actually do? In 1967 the city boundaries of East Jerusalem encompassed about 6 or 7 square kilometers. Within these boundaries, the Old City is about one square kilometer. This is also about the total area of our “Eternal City” of two thousand years ago with its surrounding neighborhoods. For those of us who perhaps truly believe (Eli Wiesel??) in the concept of Jerusalem Eternal belonging to us and ONLY US, these are the boundaries of our Eternal City. But in 1967 we annexed to the city limits of Jerusalem about 70 (yes, seventy!) square kilometers’ instead of only 7 (seven), including 28 Palestinian villages which were never within the city limits. We did so for a number of reasons, the primary one being the creation of a security area around the city which includes a circle of mountain heights. But also simply because we wanted to annex as large an area around the city as may still be called a “reasonable” annexation. For example: a long fat finger extends the new city limits northward almost up to Ramallah. Why?... In order to include the small airfield of Atarot within the city limits. (The story goes that Teddy Kolek wanted to have a large international airport within the city limits. This hasn’t happened.) But here’s the rub: meanwhile the entire 70 square kilometers annexed to the city limits have been politically labeled “Holy” and became part of that “Eternal Jerusalem” which belongs to us and only to us for ever and ever. From the neighborhoods of Ramot Alon and Pisgat Z’ev in the north to those of Har Choma and Gilo in the south of the new city limits, we have built most (almost all) of our new Jewish neighborhoods outside of “Eternal Jerusalem” by cynically using the pretext of returning to our ancient capital – where we claim to have full historical rights to live and build as we choose. (Who do we think we are fooling, other than ourselves?)

……And those 28 Palestinian villages (neighborhoods) which ended up within the municipal boundaries? Legally, morally and in any democratic society they would receive the same city services as other neighborhoods within the city limits. They don’t. From sewage to education they’ve been neglected for years and have remained with their dowry from the Jordanian government of 43 years ago. All new Jewish neighborhoods come complete with municipal investment and services. Palestinian neighborhoods remain woefully neglected. It seems strange to admit that Jordan invested far more in the municipal infrastructure of these villages during 19 years from 1948, than we have in the 43 years since annexing them into the city limits of Jerusalem.

Why is all this happening? Eli Wiesel naively turns to Obama with a desire to keep Jerusalem “above politics”, while it is actually we Israelis who insist on using our contrived Jerusalem ethos as a political tool – as an excuse for not stopping the erection of new Jewish building in the greatly expanded city limits of East Jerusalem. (And, no doubt, the Palestinian Authority is no less political in its use of religion as a basis for its own historical rights in Jerusalem.)

And why are we doing all this (building more and more in the expanded E.Jerusalem)? And why are we not doing all that (developing the Arab neighborhoods in E.Jerusalem)? …………it becomes so simple to me while driving around the area with map in hand, with a blue line for the city limits and a red line for the Wall around it.

We evidently have three basic goals being fed by so many of the policies and directions of our government agencies:

1. Build maximally so that no future “agreement” will be able to claim back that which has been added to the municipal boundaries.

2. Do our best to encourage Arabs of East Jerusalem to leave, by not giving building permits, by evacuation via immoral but legal discriminatory laws, by withholding municipal funding of investment and services, and by etc..etc..(the list is long and frightening).

3. Use Jerusalem as a tool that will inhibit the possibility of drawing a map with boundaries that will be acceptable to the Palestinian Authority for a Two-State solution. This goal is further accentuated by our government’s desire (and plans) to extend the city limits of Jerusalem eastward (an area called E-1) up to the Jewish settlement of Maaleh Adumim, and our government’s plans to extend the surrounding Wall half-way eastward to the Jordan River and the Dead sea – essentially splitting the Palestinian West Bank into two sections. Fortunately, these plans have meanwhile been held up mostly by American insistence, but the goal is clear and evident.

I made my way to Sheikh Jerach, a neighborhood built in the 20’s for and by some of the well-to-do Arabs of Jerusalem, though appended to it is also a small area of a few homes built yet in the 1890’s (some by Jews). Today it is still considered to be good real-estate in East Jerusalem (some very respectable consulates are there). Three Arab families were recently evicted from their apartments in Sheich Jerach after their homes were legally returned to private buyers who bought the deeds from previous Jewish owners till 1948. The Arab families fled their homes in the Israeli sector and were given these apartments legally by the Jordanian government. Nearby, also in Sheich Jerach, are Jewish squatters/settlers in a building which the High Court has ordered to be evacuated and torn down. The Jerusalem municipality has successfully held off this verdict for a number of years now. The two cases depict and exemplify some of the normal policies and realities of East Jerusalem.

I came to Sheikh Jerach to join other demonstrators against the above depiction of normal policies and realities in East Jerusalem. Why demonstrate? Well, our laws and our policies state that a Jew who owned property in East Jerusalem prior to the State in 1948, can claim and get back his property no matter who is living in it today. However, an Arab from East Jerusalem, now a legal resident of Israel, who had property in West Jerusalem (or anywhere else), but fled (or “was fled”) in 1948, cannot have his property returned under any conditions. We can…..they can’t. simple. Evict Arabs – yes. Evict Jews – no way. This is the micro reason for the demonstrations. In the macro, we are demonstrating against the three goals stated above, and the policies that support them.

There were about two hundred of us at the demonstration. It felt cozy….intimate…my kind of people. We all knew we were doing something important, but I still drove home with an empty feeling. Two hundred (or even three) demonstrators, coming to Sheikh Jerach every Friday afternoon will ultimately accomplish little in today’s political world. It will give us (the demonstrators) a feeling of doing something, but more….???? I am reminded of the “orange shirts” in the Ukraine and of the “red shirts” in Thailand. Perhaps if we had 20,000 demonstrators, each with our Israeli flag, sitting and demonstrating in Sheikh Jerach, without going home, cuddled in sleeping bags on-site for the night, continuing for days and even weeks non-stop…….perhaps then, and only then, could we get the attention needed to affect changes in basic policies and their execution. But meanwhile, most of us leftist, humanistic, liberal do-gooders are armchair supporters who think of today's demonstrators as good people who just don’t know when to leave well enough alone.

If ever a miracle happens, and we do get our supporters out of their armchairs and into their sleeping bags on the streets of a place like Sheikh Jerach, I hope to be with them….sandwiches in one bag, all my prescription medications in another, laptop with extra power supply, borrowed sleeping bag, and lots of hope. Yes, I’ll be there rooting for the very legitimate rights of Palestinians, but most of all I’ll be there because I’m a Zionist Jew, and because I know that the destruction of a Two-State possibility will bring upon us the disastrous result of One-State for Two Peoples (with no equality for all), and also the end of the Zionist dream.

Fewer and Fewer of Us ??

Sent 18.March.2010

A dear person who was a role model for me many years ago in Washington D.C. during my early years in the Habonim Labor Zionist youth movement, has been very generous by sending some of my letters and comments to a sizable “political” e-mail list of her own. Recently I received a pessimistic mail from her about the future of the Israeli Left. She titled the e-mail subject heading with: “Frankly, I’m not sure if there is anyone else to talk to.”

I wrote her back:

My response is …..riddled with the difficult task of reacting to some of the very short but terribly troublesome things you wrote:

“Frankly, I’m not sure if there is anyone else to talk to.” (that was the subject heading of your e-mail.)

“You must be suffering.” (meaning me, and you are so right.)

You also wrote: “My feeling is that it feels nuts to work for a two state solution here [in the U.S.], ie. J street, while in Israel less and less people believe that it is possible, ve' tov lehem kmo she zeh achshav.”

First, be rest assured, I am definitely suffering as each year places me within a smaller political minority and puts into further question my ability to foresee any possibility of a political and social turning point within our Israeli public.

We are evolving into a racist public. I include here those of us who are openly and actively racist, those of us who passively support our racism, and also those of us who are not happy with our racism but are too passive or seemingly too busy to come out openly and actively to refute and oppose our racism.

More than half our Jewish high school students think that Arab Israelis should not have equal rights to Jewish Israelis. This is no surprise in a country where children of Ethiopian Jews are quarantined in separate schools by some communities or sit at home in some others while searching for schools ready to accept them. Our Media vilifies and our politicians decry the occurrences, but the reality continues to exist and grow.

There is no active “leftist” opposition within our national politics. Our government is leading us to a scenario where there will be no viable two-state modus-vivendi. We seem to be straying into a swamp which will be called a “one state solution” with a tremendous amount of discriminatory policies and laws, backed up by “necessary” oppression of Palestinian “citizens” or “non-citizens”, and constantly peppered by internal underground movements permeated with a belief in the effectiveness of violence as therapy for despair or vengeance.

As a Zionist I came to a realization long ago that a national consciousness is not a matter of “right” or “wrong”. Also, one national consciousness can have a completely different set of roots and rules than another, and still be true and real. Our own national consciousness is seeped in a combination of history, religion, fate, suffering, and long-term memory. These elements gave us the “need” and created the "will" to seize the historic opportunity that was offered us by a world that didn’t want us but was entering an age of nationalism and self-determination. But our voyage into modern nationalism is no truer nor more real or more justified than the national consciousness of the Palestinian people who were ripped apart from the larger Arab-Moslem consciousness, as were all other Arab nations in the Middle-East at the end of the First World War. Their newer and more localized national consciousness was born within borders foisted on them by colonial powers, was created out of the torn remnants of a greater Arab consciousness, was instigated further through their antagonism to our own reignited national consciousness within the same borders, and was sealed with the trauma created by the success of our own national aspirations. Our national consciousness may be thousands of years old, and theirs barely one hundred. Yet one is no more just or righteous or deeply felt.

Till we Israelis recognize and come to terms with the symmetric “validity” of both our and their national consciousness, we won't readily make the steps needed for a mutual arrangement with the Palestinians; till the Palestinians gain their aspirations for national self-determination, they will be unable to come to terms with the reality of an Israeli nation. Unfortunately, both these conditions seem to be floating hopelessly further and further away.

With a government and its policies that are supported by a stable majority of our Israeli public, and with no strong and loud political opposition, we have no intention of creating the conditions for a viable two-State reality. We temporarily freeze some expansion in the conquered territories in order to show how good we are, while actually continuing to build and expand and expropriate under the guise of various sundry (il)legal excuses. By doing so, we are hastening the day when a one-state solution will be the only default left for us. That One-State will either contain a true Apartheid concoction of sorts, or will be some type of democratic formation that will erase the last vestiges of a Jewish Homeland. Neither case will be void of constant and abundant internal violence and bloodshed.

There is therefore much possible justification when you write me: “that it feels nuts to work for a two state solution here, ie. J street, while in Israel less and less people believe that it is possible, ve' tov lehem kmo she zeh achshav. ”

And yet…….it may be a false appraisal of what people believe and what is yet possible. I don’t think our problem is based on Israelis who don’t believe a two-state solution is possible. That would be like saying most Israelis believe there is “no one to talk to”. And the truth is that most Israelis today do think there is “someone” to talk to in the Palestinian Authority. But the loud voices of leadership on the political scene make it consistently and constantly clear that they do not want to talk about the things which need talking about. And this vocal leadership is the backbone of our government and its policies. This leadership, taking along with it so much of our public, fears the concessions that result out of compromise, but is also wary of the condemnations which result out of a one-sided refusal to negotiate and compromise. It is much better to raise the ante to a point where “the other side” will be unable to accept participation in a dialogue. Then we could always claim “Its not our fault. Its them!”

Therefore we announce our agreement to a two-state solution, while demanding not only that they recognize the legitimacy of the State of Israel, but that they announce Israel to be the Jewish State. (regardless of the 20% Arab-Israeli citizens; regardless of the fact that the State of Israel can define itself from within itself, and with no need of a definition by a neighboring state; regardless of the fact that till now it sufficed us to define the State of Israel as the Jewish Homeland, but also the State of all its people.) Therefore we announce a temporary freeze on building of Jewish settlements in the occupied territories, while also announcing as loud as we can that building will continue with extra vigor as soon as the freeze period is finished. Therefore we exclude Greater Jerusalem from the freeze and openly, vocally and physically, step up our Jewish building and settlement in East Jerusalem, even into the very confines of Arab neighborhoods, and meanwhile also doing our best to enlarge the borders of Greater Jerusalem within its occupied territory. Therefore we take no steps whatsoever to encourage some belief within the Palestinian leadership that we are serious about moving to a two-state solution (such as depopulating the so-called illegitimate settlements, or curbing all announcements of new building in east Jerusalem, or a long list of other trust-building possibilities). We are consciously and deliberately trying to pay lip-service to what the world wants to hear, while programmatically and just as deliberately demanding and doing everything that will make it difficult or impossible for the Palestinian Authority to trust in our honest intensions towards a two-state solution. This is how we’ve kept them away from any official or non-official negotiation table since the Netanyahu government took office.

Today there is “someone” to talk to more than ever before. Today (even more than in the past) we are the ones who are looking for ways not to talk to that “someone”. And we are succeeding very nicely.

In other words, it is not true that “less and less people believe that it is possible” to create a two-state solution. In truth, less and less people WANT that creation and are quite satisfied with our government’s successful attempts at avoiding such a creation.

The Messianic fringe movement of Zionism which erupted to the forefront of Israeli politics in 1967 was fueled by all sectors of our political scene – branches of religious Zionism, offshoots of the Revisionists, and an emotional sector of Labor. Religious Zionism adopted the premise that God had begun the process of our Final Redemption (Geula) and will lead us now to the fulfillment of His contract with Abraham which will widen our borders from the Euphrates and unto the stream of Egypt. This fulfillment will also bring the nations of the world to recognize the righteousness of Israel and will bring peace and justice and wellbeing unto the world. Therefore we have no right to oppose this process of redemption, and we cannot give back any land which is part of our promise from God. There is no need to debate the rights and wrongs or the possibilities of compromise. With the advent of Zionism, the miracle of the State in ’48 and our expansion in ’67, we are now bound to God’s process of redemption.

So many of us “left-wing humanistic/secular” Jews assume the above paragraph belongs only to a fringe element of our Jewish society in Israel. That assumption is false. The belief that we are in the midst of God’s process of “Geula”, a process we are forbidden to divert, and therefore All Will End Well, has permeated the bulk of Religious Zionism. It has also profoundly affected the bulk of right-wing traditional and secular Jews here in Israel, some consciously and many more sub-consciously. It is a concept which goes beyond our historical bond to the Land of Israel. It is a concept not in the hands of man, but one that emanates from God. It is therefore a concept that doesn’t rely on reason, nor even on morality. It relies on belief alone. This is a concept which underlies so many of the other (and louder) reasons for being uncompromising in our political stance towards the Palestinians (reasons such as: security, “no one to talk to”, etc…). This is the concept which has driven Religious Zionism since ’67, and has infected the veins of traditional and secular right wing politics. This is what we’re up against.

Can this be changed ??

During our lifetime changes occurred that seemed far from imminent only moments before they occurred: The Walls of Berlin fell along with the Cold War; South Africa and apartheid………..; a black President in the U.S.?? Evidently, much of history can only be learned backwards. Forecasters of both weather and history can be wrong.

I think we haven’t yet progressed beyond the point of no return, though who knows how close we are to that destination. It means the voice of our dwindling minority group needs to hold its head above water and continue to write and to whisper and to talk and to yell and to act and to organize and to reorganize until either history passes us by or history suddenly decides to try a minority opinion.

But I also don’t think History will change course without helpful outside interference, including by the world Jewish public (J-Street seems to be one good example), and including by supporting countries (e.g. the U.S.A. ……is there anyone else ??), and including by economic pressure (yes, my fingers trembled a little as I wrote that. Though I’d prefer the use of carrots rather than the stick. But will carrots work?). Unfortunately things may change only once our Israeli public begins understanding that things are not going well for us (once again my fingers tremble at these words). And I do think things will get worse. This is not meant as a wish! Perhaps it’s a foolish attempt at forecasting history.

Evidently, I’ve rambled way more than I meant to when at last responding to your letter. I guess you simply gave me the opportunity to tell someone what I think. Because here too “frankly, I’m not sure if there is anyone else to talk to.” (that was the subject heading of your e-mail.) I guess I've poured it all on you.

It was good hearing from you. Wish you all the best,

aaron