32 Comments

The "pro-Palestinian" and anti-Zionist Left have for decades depicted religious Jews as nutjobs from the Dark Ages and the Torah as nothing more than a bunch of ancient superstition and claptrap. Certainly no one on the Left gives any credence to the numerous passages about Jews originating in Israel and God designating that land for the Jewish people (maybe Beinart can weigh in on those passages and why they shouldn't be listened to?). But now we're suddenly supposed to believe a very creative interpretation of one particular Torah passage, solely because it suddenly can be seen as helpful for Palestine's narrative? Ridiculous.

Even taking the entire argument at face value (which we should not based on the larger context), Beinart fails entirely. The Israelites were enslaved by Pharaoh and the Egyptians for no reason, while the Palestinians and their Arab allies started the war "of extermination" against Israel and succeeded in killing 1% of Israel's population. Usually it's the people who start the war that pay the reparations. Just ask the Germans and the Japanese.

Furthermore, even if you think Israel should pay reparations to Palestine, the Torah literally says "gold and silver." It doesn't say land and houses, and in Exodus the Egyptians didn't give the Israelites their houses. They let them go live in a country of their own. But let me guess, that part of the Torah isn't relevant any more?

Face it, Peter, you're just doing what people have done for thousands of years: picking and choose parts of the Bible to justify your pre-existing narrative. You would laugh out of the room a Zionist commentator who quoted Genesis 15:18 "On that day the Lord made a covenant with Abram and said, "To your descendants I give this land, from the Wadi of Egypt to the great river, the Euphrates"". Enough with the double standards.

Expand full comment

Apparently Beinart isn’t very familiar with the population he’s endeavoring to speak for. Some data for his education:

‘Two-thirds of Gazans say Palestinians should accept that the “right of return” not apply to Israel, but only to the West Bank and Gaza, if that is the price of a Palestinian state. When asked about their own personal preferences, a mere 14 percent say they would “probably” want to move to Israel, even if they could. Moreover, the overwhelming majority, 79 percent, would accept the “permanent resettlement” of Palestinians from other countries in just the West Bank or Gaza, “even if that is not where their families originally came from.” A solid if somewhat smaller majority, 59 percent, say it would be a good idea if “Arab states offered extra economic aid in order to resettle Palestinian refugees in the West Bank or Gaza, but not inside Israel.” ‘

‘Attitudes on these questions are also relatively moderate, though more mixed, in the West Bank. West Bankers are approximately evenly split on the suggestion that refugees not enter Israel: 48 percent would accept this suggestion, though 52 percent are opposed. But a mere 5 percent say they would probably move to Israel even if they could. Moreover, two-thirds would accept the permanent resettlement of diaspora Palestinians in the West Bank or Gaza even if their families originated inside Israel.’

https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/state-palestinians-would-cede-right-return-and-more

Furthermore, Beinart’s assurances that a “one state” would result in peace and human rights instead of civil war and ethnic cleansing would be laughably naive if it wasn’t so obscene. Some more poll results:

As of 2021, only 10% of Palestinians want a one state with equal rights between Jews and Muslims:

https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/what-do-palestinians-want

89% of Palestinians want Islamic law - Sharia - to be the law of their state.

https://www.pewforum.org/2013/04/30/the-worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-beliefs-about-sharia/

Let’s ask some Palestinian and Arab thought leaders, one would think that Beinart would listen to them if no one else:

"It worries me a great deal. The question of what is going to be the fate of the Jews [in a one state solution] is very difficult for me. I really don't know." -Edward Said

“If the refugees were to return…you’d have a Palestine next to a Palestine.” –Omar Barghouti quoting Sari Nusseibeh, President of Al Quds University.

"In demanding the return of the Palestinian refugees the Arabs mean their return as masters, not slaves, or to put it more clearly - the intention is the extermination of Israel." - Salah al-Din, Egyptian Foreign Minister, October 11, 1949

"If the refugees return to Israel - Israel will cease to exist." - Gamal Abdel Nasser, 1961

"The day on which the Arab hope for the return of the refugees to Palestine is realized will be the day of Israel's extermination." - Abdallah al-Yafi, Lebanese Prime Minister

But why should Beinart care? He doesn’t live in Israel. He won’t be the one at risk of “extermination” should the one state solution fall apart. It isn’t his sons and daughters at risk of being blown up, shot or stabbed to death because they aren’t Arabs. He won’t be thrown out of his house because it was “stolen” from a Palestinian.

The idea that anyone should listen to him when he says “just let the Palestinians in and everything will be fine” is absurd. The Palestinians say the exact opposite. As I said last time, maybe Beinart should delete his substack and make room for actual Palestinian voices in the media, since he clearly is out of touch with what they actually want and actually think. It’s very ironic that after complaining just a few days ago about how Palestinian voices aren’t represented, he’s now trying to speak for them.

Expand full comment

I like where you’re going with the idea of how such a magnanimous gesture of reparations, rooted in Torah, could inspire a paradigm shift in relations and reconciliation. However, what is missing here is the culpability of other Arab state actors in this. These reparations are not the responsibility of Israel alone. Egypt, Jordan, and Syria should be part of the offering plan. Furthermore, I think your frame is a bit anachronistic in that your looking at things from a 2021 perspective, where a chasm of power and societal development has grown quite wide since 1947. We must not forget the balance of power between the warring parties in 1947. Your presentation makes the Palestinians absolutely acted upon, as subjugated entirely against their will. That stripping of their agency in the roots of the conflict helps no one to better appreciate the complexity.

Expand full comment

I don't read Moses' directive in Deuteronomy as requiring "reparations." Slavery and other forms of servitude were an accepted part of ancient societies. Instead, the directive is more likely to simply mean that releasing a slave without providing some way for them to survive would be cruel and inhumane, in some ways worse than remaining a slave, since the master had some obligation to provide at least subsistence. This is similar to efforts to provide transition and support to convicts after they are released from prison. Reparations are something else, and would be relevant in the case of people who were wrongly imprisoned.

Expand full comment

Typo to correct for posterity: "The Israelites were saying the Egyptians from being hated" saying s/be saving

Expand full comment

"Israel believes “the influx of millions of Palestinians into Israel would pose a threat to its national security.”" No doubt that is true from the perspective of a Zionist who wants Israel to remain as it is: an undemocratic, apartheid, ethno-nationalist state which privileges white Jewish people well above any other. The question is, of course, whether that is a valid state for any nation to defend.

Expand full comment