T. Mitchell Reviews Gorenberg's New Book

The Americanization Project in Israel

                                                                        By Thomas Mitchell, Ph.D.

A review of The Unmaking of Israel By Gershom Gorenberg (HarperCollins, 2011 $26.00)

The Israeli Left has been divided, at times, over whether to emphasize the Palestinian problem or religious coercion. In his latest book, American-Israeli journalist Gershom Gorenberg, who is himself a practicing modern Orthodox Jew, links the two issues. His basic theme is that Israel is threatened by anachronistic elements in Zionism, an argument made previously by Bernard Avishai in his first book, The Tragedy of Zionism. 

Both contend that Israel as an independent state should not behave like a national liberation movement. The settlement project in the West Bank is a state effort carried out as if it were still the late 1930s or the late 1940s and the religious settlers were setting the boundaries of the state as the Labor Zionists did in the "tower & stockade" period. 

The core of Gorenberg’s book is about the settlement project on the West Bank and how it threatens Israeli democracy and survival. From there he goes to examining how the settlers have established a presence in the IDF and threaten it as the Etzel (a/k/a Irgun) threatened the newborn state in June 1948 with the Altalena incident (he skims over a similar perceived threat from the Palmakh). Gorenberg makes a good case that, as presently constituted, the IDF will be unable to carry out an order to evacuate settlers from West Bank settlements in the event of a peace agreement with the Palestinians. 

Next he relates how the ultra-Orthodox sector conned the state into funding a parasitic lifestyle for its members that dooms them to a life of poverty but ensures their loyalty. He then ties this phenomenon to Israel’s dysfunctional electoral/party system and to the gentleman’s agreement among Zionist and religious parties to exclude the Arabs from government. He relates how Rabin was willing to have the Arabs as a publicly-acknowledged "mistress" in 1992 but was unwilling to "marry" them. Secular Jews could safeguard themselves from religious coercion if they were willing to cooperate with Arabs. But old habits die hard.

Iran should NOT be attacked, but IT's the problem

It would be a very bad idea for either Israel or the US to attack Iran; today's NY Times op-ed article by Malfrid Braut-Hegghammer, a Norwegian security expert, reinforces this conclusion.  But an article in Salon by Gary Kamiya, "The Boys Who Cry 'Holocaust'," conveys a wrong-headed notion that the crisis about Iran's nuclear program is all Israel's fault.  Yes, Netanyahu and the neocon hawks need to be countered, but not like this, in a way that removes the onus from Iran. 

Jeffrey Goldberg (a liberal, not a neocon) is absolutely correct in that statement quoted by Kamiya only to dismiss it:

“The leaders of Iran are eliminationist anti-Semites; men who, for reasons of theology, view the state of the Jews as a ‘cancer.’ They have repeatedly called for Israel’s destruction and worked to hasten that end, mainly by providing material support and training to two organizations, Hamas and Hezbollah, that specialize in the slaughter of innocent Jews. Iran’s leaders are men who deny the Holocaust while promising another.”

G. Gorenberg on American-Jewish myopia

It's worth looking at snippets from Gershom Gorenberg's newest column at the American Prospect website,  "Why Are They So Angry?"("An Israeli dove visiting Jewish North America can feel he's stumbled into a constricted, out-of-joint alternate universe"). It's based on his experience speaking at a modern Orthodox synagogue (he, himself, is religious): 

..... The moderate Israeli left's argument that West Bank settlements undermine democracy and peace efforts is sometimes greeted in the U.S. as treasonous, sometimes as daringly unconventional. ...

... Jewish politics reflect general American politics, where conservatives hurl forged-in-Fox, counterfactual cannonballs rather than discuss ideas. And the minority of American Jews who are devoted to the single issue of defending Israeli policy, and who can dominate discussion within the Jewish community, inhabit an echo chamber that may be even better sealed than the conservative separate universe in domestic politics. [For example,] Golda Meir—remembered in Israel as the prime minister who failed to see signs of oncoming war in 1973—is still regarded as a hero in America. ...

Of course, there are many American Jews whose liberal views on domestic issues are matched by their support of a two-state solution between Israel and the Palestinians. [But] Some feel constrained in speaking as clearly as they'd like about Israel for fear of being identified with another rigidly ideological contingent: Diaspora Palestinians with their own overdone nationalism, and a small coterie of Jews who express their disappointment with Zionism through mirror-image anti-Zionism—as if denying Jewish rights to national self-determination were somehow more progressive than denying Palestinian rights. ...

T. Klug: 'Unitary state' is unfeasible & implausible

Tony Klug is a British-Jewish researcher and writer on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.  I've noticed that he often writes for Tikkun, a venue that I've also been contributing to of late.  Sometimes I disagree with him on nuance or tone, but not with this article in "Open Democracy," based on a talk he gave at the Israel Society of the London School of Economics:

The two-state solution: where next?
... in my view, there is a fundamental flaw at the heart of [a one-state] proposal, for it is predicated on the notion that what, at root, is a historical clash of two national movements can, hey presto, be turned into a struggle for civil rights.
... [But] it is not possible to resolve this conflict without satisfying the common, minimum, irreducible aspirations of both peoples for self-determination in at least part of the land that each has regarded as its own. ... In other words, a unitary state is not just unfeasible but implausible. ...

Iran: Fears and Options

I am very fearful of a possible Israeli attack on Iran's nuclear installations, but (speaking only for myself) I hope that Israel and the US will continue to act in small but effective ways to forestall its nuclear program,  including cyber-warfare and other secretive efforts at sabotage (not to mention strong economic sanctions).  These are far preferable to an all-out air assault, which would only mobilize popular Iranian support for the regime, rallying around the flag, rather than forcing Iran to come to its senses regarding its threats and provocations against Israel's existence; an overt attack would also likely precipitate a broader war against Israel and the United States.

An analytical article by Stewart Ain of the NY Jewish Week reports, "Israel Shifting Tone On Iran: After threats of an attack, a change as the rhetoric softens this week."  Among other things, this article notes the impact of economic sanctions so far on Iran, for example hindering the use of credit cards and quadrupling the price of gasoline. And a new effort at major economic sanctions by Western powers is described in today's NY Times as "a concerted response to the finding this month by the United Nations’ International Atomic Energy Agency that Iran may be continuing to work on a nuclear weapon and delivery system." 

Hillel Schenker's idea of a nuclear-free Middle East is worthy of consideration, but only likely after a peaceful resolution is arrived at for Israel and the Palestinians, when Israel feels comfortable enough to conceivably forego its nuclear defense option (Hillel writes that this is actually Israel's official position).  I don't see Israel conceding its nuclear arsenal while the threat from a hostile Iran remains.

All in all, I don't doubt that most Israelis feel their existence at risk, with Iran's nuclear sword hanging over their collective head.  Although the following letter to the NY Times, dated Nov. 14,

Growing Haredi influence in Jerusalem

Here's a follow-up on the growth of Haredi (ultra-Orthodox) influence in Jerusalem, after reading Anshel Pfeffer's description of its history in Haaretz, "Jerusalem & Babylon / Ultra-Orthodox need not protest Israel, they run it."

Ultra-Orthodox man walks past vandalized poster of a woman.

Since the Palestine-Israel Journal office is in the Wadi Joz neighborhood in East Jerusalem, I have been spending an average of three days a week in Jerusalem in recent years, and my life's circumstances have led me to wander between the neighborhoods of West Jerusalem.

Lately I've been staying over in Rehavia -- and after reading Pfeffer's column, the "ah ha" principle suddenly went into effect. Dwindling parts of Rehavia are still a secular enclave, and now I understand the pictures of Golda Meir and Hanna Senesh, without heads, describing their lives, that are plastered on some cafes. They are a protest against the fact that no women appear on public posters in Jerusalem. I saw the ultimate expression of this in Givat Shaul, where a big poster announces "The largest gathering of women ever!" in some stadium (Teddy?), featuring photos of only male rabbis, with Rabbi Ovadiya Yosef hovering above them.

Slice-of-life on Arab-Jewish relations in Israel

Ibtisam Mara'ana

Partners for Progressive Israel co-sponsored a screening of "77 Steps" at the Other Israel Film Festival in New York on Nov. 14.  It included a Q & A afterwards with the filmmaker, Ibtisam Mara'ana, a 30-something Arab citizen of Israel. 

Ms. Mara'ana is a lovely young woman, someone who ably articulates and embodies the problems and hope for coexistence between Arabs and Jews within Israel.  Her seventh film, "77 Steps," documents the difficulties in her romantic involvement with a Canadian-Jewish oleh (immigrant), a neighbor in Tel Aviv.  It's a testament to her filmmaking skill that she was able to unobtrusively film their lives together, winnowing down 60 hours of footage into a totally natural, unscripted one-hour story.

What doomed them was the harsh backdrop of the Gaza war of Dec. 2008-Jan. 2009.  Mara'ana was recruited for the 12th slot on the Meretz electoral list in the 2009 elections, from which she resigned in protest to the initial support for the war voiced by some Meretz leaders in statements to the press.  Yet every official party position opposed a ground invasion and called for a quick ceasefire.  So Meretz suffered both from "the left," punishing it for being "pro-war," and the mainstream of Israel's electorate for being too dovish or "leftist," which together reduced Meretz to a bare three seats in the current Knesset. 

Mara'ana is feisty, passionate and charming, but it seemed clear from the discussion after, as well as her participation a few days earlier in a discussion on Israel's social protest movement at the Manhattan JCC, that her political perspective is not analytical.  What clinched this for me was her response to someone in the audience at this screening, who asked if it didn't make sense for Jews and Arabs to all coexist in "one state" rather than to create two.  She responded on a visceral level to this naive question, saying simply that she "agreed" that one state would be a good thing and leaned over to where he was sitting nearby to shake his hand.

16th Rabin Memorial Rally: 'We are here, we have no fear'

No matter what, I planned to go to the 16^th annual memorial rally in memory of assassinated Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin.   Just as I have for the past 15 years. Just as I did on that fateful Saturday night, November 4^th, 1995, when I went to the mass rally For Peace and Against Violence that was organized to counteract the slander campaign being carried out against the Prime Minister.  It was at the end of that rally that Rabin was shot three times by Jewish terrorist Yigal Amir.  

This year the Rabin family decided not to head the organizing committee for the rally, as they had for the previous 15 years.   Perhaps they were afraid that the people wouldn't come.  Perhaps they felt it was time to move on.

In their place, a 4^th of November 1995 non-profit organization was established, and the baton was passed on to them to keep the flame alive. Heading it was Hemi Sal from Kibbutz Ein Shemer, who runs a production company and was involved in the organization of all of the previous rallies, including the original 1995 demonstration.

Hagit Ofran; podium reads "Yes to Peace!"

The quote in the headline, "We are here, we have no fear," comes from the courageous Hagit Ofran.  Ofran is head of Peace Now's Settlement Watch Committee, and she told the crowd that she had been at many previous rallies, but this was the first time she was ever on the stage.  Everyone knew why.   She has been targeted by the extreme right, because of her diligent watchdog work following the settlement activities in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.  The week of the demonstration, graffiti was written on the stairwell to her home "Ofran, Rabin is waiting to meet you"-- a clear death threat.   

'Zionism': passé for secular Israelis?

While it was quite sobering to learn that the proportion of non-Orhodox American Jews immigrating to Israel (olim) have shrunk in "three decades" from 65% to 20% of their cohort, it's still worth noting that they are disproportionately represented in Israeli social change movements -- from peace, to the environmental movement, to women's rights, to Jewish-Arab rapprochement, etc. 

Here is an excerpt from the Haaretz article, "Leaving Zionism in the Diaspora":

... according to sociologist Chaim Waxman, it is increasingly rare to find immigrants who move to Israel not because they are motivated by religious faith or pushed out by financial or political instability, but just because they are − dare the word be spoken aloud? − Zionists.
And when non-Orthodox Zionists do move to Israel, they often find themselves brushing up against a reluctance on the part of secular Israelis, especially leftist ones, to identify with the term "Zionism," which many consider outdated or too closely associated with the right wing.
"I absolutely think ‘Zionism’ is a dirty word to Israelis," says Anita Shapira, a history professor at Tel Aviv University’s Chaim Weizmann Institute for the Study of Zionism and Israel. "’Zionism’ has been appropriated by the right and vilified by anti-Semites on the left. The time has passed for this term."

Read more online....

The Other Iranian Option

During the past year I have been involved in a very interesting and innovative initiative, the CSCME (Conference on Security and Cooperation in the Middle East)civil society initiative, together with my colleague, Palestine-Israel Journal (PIJ) co-editor Ziad AbuZayyad.

       Originally conceived by Prof. Mohssen Massarrat, a professor in Germany who was born in Iran, and has spent his adult years in Europe. Modeled on the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, which contributed to the end of the Cold War, we had a preliminary two-day workshop on the initiative with people from the region in Germany in January, 2011.

       Two weeks ago the CSCME initiative held a two day workshop in London, in conjunction with the 6th annual London Conference on Middle East Security and a Weapons of Mass Destruction Free Zone co-organized by the SOAS Centre for International Studies and Diplomacy and the British Pugwash Group.  I used the public conference to speak primarily about the implications of the Israeli social protest movement, but the workshop was aptly titled Towards the 2012 Conference on a Nuclear and WMD Free Zone in the Middle East.

         I wrote the following article based upon the spirit and the content of the discussions that we had at the workshop, and it was published in the weekend edition of Haaretz.

'Occupy Oakland, Not Palestine'

There's a video with the above title featured on the "Tikkun Daily" blog site, where I also blog.  From the succession of "Occupy Oakland" activists voicing their views-- earnest and well-intentioned as they are-- you'd have no idea of this conflict's complexities, as I indicate in a comment there:

The solution remains as it has been for a long time: two states living side by side in peace. I don’t think that this one-sided argumentation advances this goal. For example, there is no acknowledgment here of Israel’s complete withdrawal from Gaza in 2005, of the fact that a racist anti-Jewish movement won the Palestinian election in 2006 and then seized total power in Gaza in a violent coup in 2007.
And there is no recognition that the people of southern Israel have been under frequent attack from Gaza since that withdrawal. Violence begets violence. This conflict is a two-way street and this one-sided presentation (albeit well intentioned) does not advance a humane and fair resolution.

Abbas admits Palestinian responsibility

Could this be a sign of hope?  Just when I was giving up on any solution, see this Ha'aretz article by Carlo Strenger  ("Mahmoud Abbas' crucial message to Israel") on an  interview with Abbas that aired both in Israel and on Palestine TV.  This is the heart of Strenger's piece:

.... Almost two years ago, Abbas said that the second intifada was the greatest mistake the Palestinians ever made. This admission, unfortunately, is all too true: the second intifada has made most Israelis profoundly unwilling to take risks for peace. They wonder why they should, once again, trust Palestinians who blew up hundreds of Israelis when the peace process came to a standstill after the failed Camp David summit.

In his interview ... a few days ago on Israel’s Channel 2, Abbas took a second step of possibly even greater importance. He explicitly said that the Arab world and the Palestinians made a crucial error by rejecting the UN partition plan in 1947.

Eyewitness to Mass Protest in Tel Aviv

I was at last Saturday night's demonstration. Although there is some controversy about the numbers and the degree of success, I think it was a success, with Rabin Square filled with some 70-80,000 people (there were counterclaims of 20,000). 

Dafni Leef

There was an array of speakers: a Sephardi single mother from Jerusalem, an articulate Tel Aviv U. Arab student from Nazareth, one of the leaders of the parents "stroller protest", briefly Stav Shaffir and a primary speech by Dafni Leef. Paraphrasing her words: This is not a protest of parties, but of the people -- we're in it for the long hall.  And there were the artists: Carolina, Mizrachi singer Eli Luzon, the historic reunion of the Cameri 5 satirical troupe doing a sketch by Etgar Keret, and an appearance by Shalom Chanoch singing his popular 1985 song "Waiting for Messiah" (Michakim L'Mashiach), with the punch line: "Counting the money I don't have/ Messiah hasn't come/ He hasn't even phoned".


Haaretz columnist Gideon Levy is right that there was less spark than the "Million Man March" of Sept. 3, but the feared failure that people wouldn't come out did not happen, and all of this despite the firing of missiles in the south.