Indefensible Borders

Harvard law professor and noted Israel advocate Alan Dershowitz has said that the best way to win over the ‘undecideds’ when he’s speaking in universities on ‘the case for Israel’, is to show that the ‘pro-Israel’ crowd are also in favor of a two-state solution to the conflict, whereas the ‘pro-Palestinian’ supporters are not.  In other words, whereas the Jewish student society is willing to see a Palestinian state established alongside Israel, the collection of far-leftist, (allegedly) liberal and Muslim students who support the Palestinian cause cannot reconcile themselves to Israel’s existence.

Having been involved in Israel advocacy in universities myself in Britain (a country where the campus anti-Zionism makes the average US university look like an AIPAC conference) I broadly agree with Professor Dershowitz.  There is no question that the best hasbara tool Israel has is the Arab world’s history of rejectionism and its repeated preference for continuing the fight to eliminate the Jewish state, rather than compromising on the land and finally giving the Palestinians a state of their own alongside Israel.

Zionism, religion and the modern State of Israel

BACK IN the UK I was a Zionist.  I supported the right of the Jewish people to a state of their own in their historic homeland.  Now I’m an Israeli, it seems I can’t define myself that way anymore without being thought of as either hopelessly anachronistic, or avowedly right-wing.

Sections of the Israeli right have made Zionism synonymous with support for the settlement movement, while sections of the left have acquiesced in this fiction by abdicating ownership of the term.  (It is worth noting that Zionism was originally a progressive liberation movement with its roots in enlightened 19^th century liberalism; closer in spirit to those supporting an end to the occupation of the Palestinians than to the West Bank settlers.  Even the father of what became the Israeli right, Vladimir Jabotinsky, was an avowed liberal who insisted on democratic rights for all the citizens of the putative Jewish state and who spoke resolutely against expelling Arabs from their homes).

The lies they teach their children

I was sitting in a church in Jerusalem’s Old City with participants on a program I work with; young Jews from around the globe, living here for a year to learn about Israeli society and politics.

We wanted them to hear from different religious leaders, and here we were, meeting with a young, Palestinian Christian priest.

He called for an end to Israeli control of the Old City saying that under Arab control “all religions would be respected”.  One of my group remarked that Jews could be forgiven for being sceptical given that no Jew was allowed to set foot in the Old City during the years of Jordanian control between 1949-1967.  Our speaker’s response?  “I’ve never heard of this before.  I’m sure that’s not how it was.”

And the world is silent…

Three events, occurring over the same 48 hours, in three different locations:

In New York, the UN General Assembly endorsed the Goldstone Report into Israel’s ‘Operation Cast Lead’ against Hamas terrorists in Gaza.

In the waters off the coast of Cyprus, the Israeli navy intercepted a vessel containing 300 tons of weaponry and explosives destined for Hizballah, dispatched by Iran.

In Iran itself, mass crowds gathered to curse the ‘Great Satan’, the United States, on the 30^th anniversary of the US Embassy hostage crisis which followed the revolution that overturned the Shah’s secular autocracy and ushered in the Islamist reign of the Ayatollahs.

Remembering Rabin

Last week Israel commemorated 14 years since the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin.  Predictably, there was much discussion in the press – and I dare say in the cafes and on the street – about his legacy.

The left have claimed his memory – he did, after all, begin the peace process with the Palestinians and make peace with Jordan.  However, prior to his (second) premiership in 1992 he was not part of the ‘Peace Now’, anti-occupation left.   Rabin was a tough, security-obsessed military man – a hero of the War of Independence, IDF Chief-Of Staff during the Six-Day War and a hawkish Defense Minister.

UN-surprising

Israel’s relationship with the United Nations has been turbulent to say the least.  In 1947 the UN General Assembly (GA) passed resolution 181 dividing what had been the British mandate of Palestine into a Jewish state and an Arab state. At that point the new international body was a hero for the Jewish people, granting international legitimacy to the notion of a Jewish state in Eretz Yisrael.

However, the GA is entirely a reflection of its members – the nations of the world.  If in 1947 those countries were well-disposed towards Zionist aspirations, it did not set a precedent. The Soviet Union, which was the first country to voice support for the partition plan, would, within a decade of that vote, have thrown its support behind the Arab states committed to Israel’s destruction.  Before long, the Soviet bloc and the Arab and Muslim world could command an automatic anti-Israel majority in the GA.  The nadir was reached in 1975 when resolution 3379 was passed, equating Zionism with racism.  Although the resolution was rescinded in 1991 (against the backdrop of the USSR’s collapse and an Arab world courting American approval) it would serve as a warning of what was to follow. In the years since, Israel has been subjected to more condemnatory GA resolutions than any other country; while there has never been a single GA resolution condemning any act of violence or aggression by any Arab state or terror organization against Israel.

Return of the rejectionists

A quick history lesson.

1937: The British government recommends partitioning Palestine into an Arab state on roughly 80 percent of the land and a Jewish state on the rest.  The Zionist leadership accept this offer of a mini-state on 20 percent of the territory.  The Arabs refuse.

1947: The UN votes in favour of Resolution 181 – the partition of Palestine into a Jewish state and an Arab state, this time roughly 50:50. The Jews accept, the Arabs refuse and, for good measure, declare that they will strangle the new Jewish state at birth.