So Peter if your argument here is that Tlaib has been misinterpreted than tell us directly: do you think it’s possible to be progressive and pro-Israel? Is it possible to be progressive and a Zionist (people like Linda Sarsour have already said they don’t think so)? Is it possible to be progressive and support Israel’s government?
By the way, you may not be aware of this, but tonight is Erev Rosh Hashanah, which means you may not hear from actual Jews who care about Judaism on this blog for a while. But I must say it’s interesting that’s how you choose to spend your high holiday carrying water for one of Israel’s most venomous critics, with a history of anti-Semitic comments as well. Fortunately Yom Kippur is right around the corner if you want to try and seek forgiveness.
Oh good you are aware? Then you must also know Jews spend that time preparing for the holiday: cooking, cleaning, visiting family, getting in touch with their spiritual side. You on the other hand spend it defending anti-Semites on the internet. How interesting.
Anonymous: Peter posted this piece this morning (and I'm guessing had it ready before Shabbat). You're spending the last couple of hours before the High Holidays criticizing a blogger you don't know. And you don't even have the courage to put your name on your name on your message. How interesting.
I don’t claim to be a religious Jew, a Jew who takes the high holidays seriously, or even a Jew at all. Nor have I built my entire career upon being a token Jew who can be called upon to defend anti-Semitic people, an anti-Semitic country, or an anti-Semitic ideology. Unlike some other people I can think of.
Anonymous is proving Beinart’s and Orwell‘s point about words like democracy - or, in this case, antisemitism - being used as a hammer, not to advance understanding but to prevent it.
Sorry, you must deal again with anonymous, not a very brave entity. I thought it was very appropriate for us Jews to be in the know about what we have to admit and repair these days; thanks.
Again Professor Beinart I urge you and others here to deal with the facts.
First about Israel within the Green Line where Arab citizens vote almost as often as Israelis (and in a higher percentage than American voters). In fact, Arabs are represented in Israel’s Knesset by 15 representatives and one Arab party was the Kingmaker for the current government in Israel—and Israel’s supreme court has an Arab judge. Trying to compare land laws in Israel to America is a silly idea. In America Turner can buy all of Montana and no one will stop him because in America land is private. In Israel the state owns the lands. And the State plans usage. Many other countries have similar state land controls.
Now let’s go to the territories: Gaza and the West Bank. Israel does not control elections in Gaza Hamas does! Nor does Israel control elections in the West Bank, the Palestinian Authority does. The fact that they don’t have elections has to do with who is in power in those areas NOT Israel.
As for Rashida Tlaib as a Palestinian American she has her perspective. But let’s be clear about one aspect of Palestinian history past and present, Democracy has never been a high priority for them--it' not a feature of the Arab Middle East--it's never been a high value proposition there. In fact, not having locally chosen leaders has cost them dearly over the years, from the 1948 partition to Barak’s and later Olmert’s offers for statehood.
I understand definitions change and you can call Israel Apartheid, but Israel is not an Apartheid state as South Africa was, and it is profoundly inappropriate to tag it as such. The fact that South African leaders call Israel Apartheid has more to do with the fact that they have always sympathized with the Palestinian Narrative—It has nothing to do with apartheid. In Apartheid South Africa blacks could not vote, in fact could not even stay in white cities overnight, could not marry outside their race and all facilities were segregated. None of this feature in Israel but hey today we can redefine everything as George Orwell points out in many of his writings.
Ok. There is so much nonsense here that it is difficult to know where to begin. Here we go.
First the Arab-Israelis. Arab-majority towns like Nazareth and old Akka were essentially cordoned off by Israel in 1948, thereby preventing the Arab population from expanding even a single inch outside of these ‘borders’. Hence, as successive generations were born, families had to build vertically rather than horizontally in order to accommodate their growing numbers.
When a new property development at the adjacent hilltop Jewish settlement of Ilit Nazareth was swamped by hopeful Nasraweh (Arab-Israelis from Nazareth) homebuyers, the marketing campaign was cancelled and the criteria ‘refined’ to ensure that all, or almost all, the houses were sold to Jews.
In virtually every old Arab town inside the Green Line, zoning applications for home building, expansion or refurbishment are routinely rejected by the authorities. This has resulted in so many beautiful old Mediterranean-style limestone block and terracotta tile structures becoming so dilapidated that their Arab owners often have no choice but to sell them to Jewish buyers for prices way below what they are worth.
Such realities on the ground, and other even more important factors such as the dearth of jobs and opportunities, matter far more to Arab-Israelis than voting again and again in elections where they can never hope to gain enough power to have any hope of changing a system whose explicit goal to ensure the perpetual primacy of Jews over Arabs (notable gains, however, have been made by Arab-Israelis in areas such as such as education, medicine and pharmacy). Indeed, this is the one crucial difference between the US and Israel when it comes to disadvantaged minorities: one system, at least on paper, unequivocally embraces the principle of equality for all, while the other enshrines inequality in every aspect of its laws and systems.
As far as the West Bank is concerned, if you believe that free and fair elections could be held there without Israeli consent and control, then there is a bridge over the nearby Jordan river I would like to sell you. Everyone knows that the reason elections haven’t been held for so long is that the PA is so unpopular that the most likely outcome would be a win by forces hostile to the status quo of oppressive security arrangements between the PA and Israel, continued settlement expansion, and zero prospects of eventual self-determination.
With regard to Gaza, what possible purpose could elections there serve, when the best possible, or should I say least worst, outcome from an Israeli-US perspective would be a victory by Hamas? What possible improvements in living conditions could any elected government there hope to achieve under the present conditions of total blockade in a territory that has already been deemed ‘uninhabitable’ by the UN?
Remember, of course, that free and fair elections are only desirable in Arab countries when the outcome is the one demanded by the US and Israel. When it is not, such as the one in post-Arab Spring Egypt, then a military coup and restoration of the status quo are usually right around the corner. In physics, this is known as the ‘Law of the Unintended Consequences of Democracy’.
Worst of all is the old ‘backward Arabs and Third World people lack a tradition of elections and democracy and therefore should be denied freedom forever’ trope.
Nations that were under colonial domination until well into the last century cannot be expected to suddenly emerge with stable democratic institutions and traditions. Look how long it took a country like Germany to finally achieve such a system after decades of democratic experimentation interspersed with instability, war, authoritarianism and hyperinflation. The dirty, messy, bloody business of building democracy has just begun in some parts of the Arab world, and would certainly be helped along by less outside interference
When Israel was created it saw itself as the home for the Jews and especially for the refugees from WWII and Arab countries, maybe you are not aware that about 750,000 Jews were kicked out of Arab countries and were absorbed by Israel. Its primary concern at the time was Jewish people. Arabs in 1948 were perceived as the enemy and for good reason they were. Israel rightly sees itself as primarily responsible for creating homes for Jews. And with the rise of fascism both here and Europe Israel will have to be ready to absorb more Jews. Recently a close friend, a progressive highly critical of Israel, has asked me about what it would take to get Israeli citizenship—yes I was surprised—maybe Canada is too cold for him.
What about the Arabs? Arabs in Israel were and are discriminated against we in the US discriminate against people of color. We do our best to stop them from voting. We make sure we do not live next to them. And when their infrastructure fails (Detroit and Jackson) we blame them and are slow to fix it. IS this Apartheid? And please recall in WWII we put Japanese in “internment camps” (putting it nicely) many of them were US citizens. And let’s not talk about the land we took from the first nations people and continue to covet. Did anyone say Apartheid? NOPE that is reserve ed for one country only!
Israel is not perfect, not by a long shot, but recently Israel passed a $10 billion dollars bill aimed solely at improving Arab towns, which indicates Israel’s growing awareness of the needs of its Arab population.
As for elections. The reason they are not held in the West Bank is because everyone knows that Hamas a Fascist theocratic and anti-women rights party (and not to mention anti-Semitic in the Nazi form) would win. Would you like to see that? In Gaza Hamas knows if there were real elections, they would lose so no elections. Go ahead blame Israel.
As for the notion that Israel controls the outcome of elections in Arab countries “that free and fair elections are only desirable in Arab countries when the outcome is the one demanded by the US and Israel.” P-e-l-e-a-s-e. This is precisely the kind of nonsense I rail against. It reminds me how the Jews are accused of controlling the world, world banks and just about everything else. My response to that is: than why do Jews have a tiny country in possibly the worst neighborhood in the world?
As for the “blockade of Gaza” please reacquaint yourself with the map Egypt too shares a border with Gaza. Gaza is perfectly habitable and in the hands of technocrats could become a Singapore overnight. Keep in mind offshore to Gaza is a huge Gas field they are entitled to it as well. All they have to do is agree to become a country and not a terror enclave. Salaam Fayaad (now at Princeton) who was briefly a Palestinian Prime Minister could have done it but alas they got rid of him.
Given the fear, maimings and killings inflicted by the Israeli Defence Forces on the people of the Occupied Palestinian Territories which are on a scale vastly greater than anything perpetrated by Hamas, you have the wrong model for your definition of 'terror'. No nation should see itself as an ethno-religious state, which you are attempting to justify. As for democracy, I don't see it in the USA either, a nation in which vast wealth is needed to get anywhere close to power and in which the wealthy donors to both parties - it has only two - get to pull the strings.
Rebecca, at the end of each conflict with Gaza entities, because Israel is accused of bombing civilians it publishes a list of all the victims. In other words, they know exactly who they go after. They even publish a list of mistakes. Do you know of any other country that does that?
I believe this last event lasted less than a week. Approximately 250 were reported dead in Gaza, more than half were military personnel several groups of dead were listed by Israel as errant rockets fired by Islamic Jihad. And of course, children die because rocket launchers are deliberately placed in schools and playgrounds.
Do you recall a city called Raqqa (in Syria ) its population was 100,000. Its gone! We destroyed it and its occupants.
Daily we hear of the death toll in the Ukraine. Hundreds with no names and no explanation of their roles in the war machine.
Bernie Sanders also thought it was unfair that Israel had a defense system and that Hamas and Islamic Jihad did not. Bizarre. In World War II our armed forces never went up against Germany or Japan unless we had overwhelming odds in our favor—it is why we won!
It's not Israel’s job to level the playing field. To the contrary, it’s their job to make sure the odds are so overwhelmingly lopsided against its enemies that its enemies will think twice before initiating an attack.
Vis-a-vis the West Bank with which I do not agree with Israel's policies at all. If I were on the Palestinian side, I would recognize that going up to Israel militarily is a losing card. I would consider a primarily non-violent resistance. It would get a lot more sympathy worldwide and a lot more sympathy in Israel as well.
Israel's so-called enemies are women, children and men, mostly armed with little more than rocks. Your false equivalence of the two sides in this war against the poor by the IDF merely reveals your lack of knowledge and understanding. Thankfully for the Palestinian cause, they pay no attention to apartheid-supporting, centrist liberals who want to restrict those rebelling against a militarised colonial settler regime to non-violence. The Palestinians will choose their own methods.
This is a conflict that needs to be resolved but I don't think it’s a good idea for the women and children to continue to battle in this frankly untenable way. I see and have suggested more than a few alternatives that I think could be much more successful.
Second, are you implying that Israel does not have a right to be or at least not where it is now, since you state that it is a “colonial settler regime”. To complain about colonial settler endeavors while living in the US is a bit rich. All of the Americas were in fact such endeavors and still are. Looking to reverse that? Just Israel? How interesting.
A fine comment. Those in glass houses... is applicable especially to Americans who complain about the lack of true democracy elsewhere. US history and its current status closer to oligarchy are notable for showing its democracy being for the wealthy only.
"The Israeli regime pursues this organizing principle [of apartheid] in four major areas:
Land – Israel works to Judaize the entire area, treating land as a resource chiefly meant to benefit the Jewish population. Since 1948, Israel has taken over 90% of the land within the Green Line and built hundreds of communities for the Jewish population. Since 1967, Israel has also enacted this policy in the West Bank, building more than 280 settlements for some 600,000 Jewish Israeli citizens. Israel has not built a single community for the Palestinian population in the entire area stretching from the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River (with the exception of several communities built to concentrate the Bedouin population after dispossessing them of most of their property rights).
Citizenship – Jews living anywhere in the world, their children and grandchildren – and their spouses – are entitled to Israeli citizenship. In contrast, Palestinians cannot immigrate to Israeli-controlled areas, even if they, their parents or their grandparents were born and lived there. Israel makes it difficult for Palestinians who live in one of the units it controls to obtain status in another, and has enacted legislation that prohibits granting Palestinians who marry Israelis status within the Green Line.
Freedom of movement – Israeli citizens enjoy freedom of movement in the entire area controlled by Israel (with the exception of the Gaza Strip) and may enter and leave the country freely. Palestinian subjects, on the other hand, require a special Israeli-issued permit to travel between the units (and sometimes inside them), and exit abroad also requires Israeli approval.
Political participation – Palestinian citizens of Israel may vote and run for office, but leading politicians consistently undermine the legitimacy of Palestinian political representatives. The roughly five million Palestinians who live in the Occupied Territories, including East Jerusalem, cannot participate in the political system that governs their lives and determines their future. They are denied other political rights as well, including freedom of speech and association."
I disagree with Tlaib in many ways but don't consider her anti-semitic. But it's someone ironic for you to cite Orwell while describing the criticism Tlaib has received as an "assault".
It's legitimate for Tlaib to strongly disagree with Israel's policies even if she is sometimes wrong. It's also legitimate for Tlaib's critics to strongly disagree with her perspective, even if they're wrong.
And while I have no problem with you describing these critics as "intellectually dishonest" if that's what you believe, calling their responses "an assault" is going way too far. Last month we all witnessed an assault on a writer in upstate New York by someone who disagreed with them. Let's not minimize despicable acts like that by confusing strong words, even if they're unfair, with violence.
fair enough. i do think people often use "assault' or "attack" to describe verbal hostility. but there probably are better terms. what would you suggest?
"Attack" yes, but I think describing a written disagreement as an "assault" is pretty rare. Would you think it's fair to describe your response to the folks criticizing Talib as an "assault" on them?
"Diatribe" is probably the best alternative that makes it clear that the disagreement is limited to the page.
Having said that, I think all of those words (but especially "attack" and even more so "assault") paint a picture of the person being described as unreasonably aggressive. And while I get the temptation of doing so, especially for someone like you who has been on the receiving end of many abusive messages, I wonder what purpose it serves (other than angering folks on the other end of the argument).
As someone who is a strong J Street Supporter, I appreciate you contributions to the debate on these issues Peter, even when I disagree with them. However, I think many of these contributions are actually counterproductive. If we're going to get people to be open to solutions that allow all Palestinians to live lives of dignity, it won't happen if we call them names. It requires instead acknowledging their legitimate concerns, while making the case for why there are solutions to these concerns and why we as a Jewish people and the people of Israel specifically need to take these steps if it's going to be the kind of nation that Jews can and should embrace.
Thanks again for an excellent presentation. You might also have commented on the ritualistic evocation of Israel's "right to exist"in the comments you cited.
Well, is the gun the threat or the hand that holds it? Ukraine would not be a threat to Russia without 30 years of US deliberate undermining of Russia with increasing hybrid attacks politically, economically and militarily - but somehow this is almost completely disregarded by the MM media in the US. People look to you Peter to expose the gaslighting not just with respect to Israel - Palestine, but with respect to critical issues such as the calculated vilification of Russia and China in particular that serves the purpose of greasing the skids of war.
I very much appreciate your intellectual honesty which is in very short supply among the commentariat. And I certainly agree that progressive values cannot be reconciled with any apartheid government, including Israel's. The political pushback, piling on, and hysterics is quite surreal given that Rep. Tlaib's statement is irrefutable. But then one must be very careful not to say what cannot be said as determined by the dominant zeitgeist. You've given me a good reason to read Orwell's essay again.
But I do disagree with your Putin analogy because there is a strong factual basis supporting Russia's claim that Ukraine is a threat to its national security. The steady eastward expansion of a hostile military alliance to Russia's borders, the U.S. engineered Maidan coup and resulting civil war in the Donbass, the Western sabotage of the Minsk Agreements, the Rand study recommending the break-up of Russia into smaller states to serve U.S. national security interests, NATO's massive build-up of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, NATO's training and arming of those troops, and the Western sabotage of a Russian/Ukrainian peace agreement negotiated last April in Istanbul can be fairly interpreted as presenting a threat to Russia's sovereignty and territorial integrity.
Peters analysis of the response to Rashida Seems quite clear and understandable. What I find mystifying is how he dismisses Russia’s justifications for its invasion as being the same kind of repetitive sloganeering, while it seems that this is exactly what the United States is doing sloganeering without ever addressing the facts that Russia and Putin have detailed in justification for the invasion.
fair enough. i have written at some length about that. i specifically mentioned Putin's claims that Ukraine--not NATO--is a threat. I don't think Ukraine remotely threatens Russian sovereignty.
I appreciate your earnest efforts to throw light on the issues you take up, Peter Beinart. I have a small comment: please resist the tendency to punctuate your remarks with "right?" "right?" that so many speakers fall into these days. I find it an off-putting habit.
Thanks so much for this beautiful piece. Eloquently described. I am not in politics at all, just a poet, yet I can feel that same political pressure not to write poetry that touches on this subject, although I notice Palestinians who do face worse consequences. Of course, it’s easier to say “poetry shouldn’t be political” and not sound “Orwellian.” (Maybe we shouldn’t name this after him.) Or simply, not publish it. “It’s subjective.” But my point is this pressure is felt in weirdly pervasive ways across quite a spectrum. There’s something threatening about this kind of speech that doesn’t just threaten politicians. It feels, without being one, like a death threat. And it’s been going on for years. We used to be neighbors with a congressman back in the 80’s who confided in my husband that nobody in Congress can say anything in favor of Arabs or Palestinians, and to criticize Israel was absolutely verboten. He was privately critical of this, but wanted to keep his political job. I suppose this is now hardly a secret. So I can’t help but admire Rashida Tlaib and others for speaking out on this.
"It is all a world turned upside down with Israel controlling Washington, as former prime ministers Ariel Sharon and Benjamin Netanyahu have boasted, and part of the control mechanism is to manage the narrative so the American public never really sees what is going on. But what is really interesting is how so-called peace activists, like at the gathering I attended, toe the line and are terrified of offending Israel or the powerful domestic Jewish groups that use their money and political access to promote the wars in the Middle East as well as against Russia in Ukraine. Some of them clearly are fearful of being labeled anti-Semites, which is the weapon most frequently used by groups like ADL to ward off criticism of the Jewish state."
Thank you, Prof. Beinart, for bringing attention to Orwell's brilliant essay. I feel out of my depth with regard to the history and politics of Israel and Palestine, but I appreciate your commitment to intellectual honesty, factual truth, and democracy. For my own thoughts on a radical, promising model of democracy, see my Substack post on Democracy-by-Lottery. Perhaps an answer to the intractable situation in the region of Palestine: https://nickcoccoma.substack.com/p/to-save-america-we-need-democracy
Orwell's political writings are more necessary than ever these days, what with the rise of the far right at home and abroad. I especially revere his review of Mein Kampf and his essay "The Lion and the Unicorn." I recently listened to Nineteen Eighty-Four in the car (you know, just for kicks). Hadn't read it since high school and found it even scarier now. I try to weave in Orwell in my own Substack posts, such as a recent one on politics and the power of story: https://nickcoccoma.substack.com/i/70024356/iii-whoever-tells-the-best-story-wins.
Perhaps you might plug it with your readers. Shanah tovah!
So Peter if your argument here is that Tlaib has been misinterpreted than tell us directly: do you think it’s possible to be progressive and pro-Israel? Is it possible to be progressive and a Zionist (people like Linda Sarsour have already said they don’t think so)? Is it possible to be progressive and support Israel’s government?
By the way, you may not be aware of this, but tonight is Erev Rosh Hashanah, which means you may not hear from actual Jews who care about Judaism on this blog for a while. But I must say it’s interesting that’s how you choose to spend your high holiday carrying water for one of Israel’s most venomous critics, with a history of anti-Semitic comments as well. Fortunately Yom Kippur is right around the corner if you want to try and seek forgiveness.
If you don't think I know its erev chag you really don't know anything about me at all
Oh good you are aware? Then you must also know Jews spend that time preparing for the holiday: cooking, cleaning, visiting family, getting in touch with their spiritual side. You on the other hand spend it defending anti-Semites on the internet. How interesting.
Anonymous: Peter posted this piece this morning (and I'm guessing had it ready before Shabbat). You're spending the last couple of hours before the High Holidays criticizing a blogger you don't know. And you don't even have the courage to put your name on your name on your message. How interesting.
I don’t claim to be a religious Jew, a Jew who takes the high holidays seriously, or even a Jew at all. Nor have I built my entire career upon being a token Jew who can be called upon to defend anti-Semitic people, an anti-Semitic country, or an anti-Semitic ideology. Unlike some other people I can think of.
You are just full of bullshit, even if you are a Jew.
Anonymous is proving Beinart’s and Orwell‘s point about words like democracy - or, in this case, antisemitism - being used as a hammer, not to advance understanding but to prevent it.
Sorry, you must deal again with anonymous, not a very brave entity. I thought it was very appropriate for us Jews to be in the know about what we have to admit and repair these days; thanks.
Again Professor Beinart I urge you and others here to deal with the facts.
First about Israel within the Green Line where Arab citizens vote almost as often as Israelis (and in a higher percentage than American voters). In fact, Arabs are represented in Israel’s Knesset by 15 representatives and one Arab party was the Kingmaker for the current government in Israel—and Israel’s supreme court has an Arab judge. Trying to compare land laws in Israel to America is a silly idea. In America Turner can buy all of Montana and no one will stop him because in America land is private. In Israel the state owns the lands. And the State plans usage. Many other countries have similar state land controls.
Now let’s go to the territories: Gaza and the West Bank. Israel does not control elections in Gaza Hamas does! Nor does Israel control elections in the West Bank, the Palestinian Authority does. The fact that they don’t have elections has to do with who is in power in those areas NOT Israel.
As for Rashida Tlaib as a Palestinian American she has her perspective. But let’s be clear about one aspect of Palestinian history past and present, Democracy has never been a high priority for them--it' not a feature of the Arab Middle East--it's never been a high value proposition there. In fact, not having locally chosen leaders has cost them dearly over the years, from the 1948 partition to Barak’s and later Olmert’s offers for statehood.
I understand definitions change and you can call Israel Apartheid, but Israel is not an Apartheid state as South Africa was, and it is profoundly inappropriate to tag it as such. The fact that South African leaders call Israel Apartheid has more to do with the fact that they have always sympathized with the Palestinian Narrative—It has nothing to do with apartheid. In Apartheid South Africa blacks could not vote, in fact could not even stay in white cities overnight, could not marry outside their race and all facilities were segregated. None of this feature in Israel but hey today we can redefine everything as George Orwell points out in many of his writings.
Ok. There is so much nonsense here that it is difficult to know where to begin. Here we go.
First the Arab-Israelis. Arab-majority towns like Nazareth and old Akka were essentially cordoned off by Israel in 1948, thereby preventing the Arab population from expanding even a single inch outside of these ‘borders’. Hence, as successive generations were born, families had to build vertically rather than horizontally in order to accommodate their growing numbers.
When a new property development at the adjacent hilltop Jewish settlement of Ilit Nazareth was swamped by hopeful Nasraweh (Arab-Israelis from Nazareth) homebuyers, the marketing campaign was cancelled and the criteria ‘refined’ to ensure that all, or almost all, the houses were sold to Jews.
In virtually every old Arab town inside the Green Line, zoning applications for home building, expansion or refurbishment are routinely rejected by the authorities. This has resulted in so many beautiful old Mediterranean-style limestone block and terracotta tile structures becoming so dilapidated that their Arab owners often have no choice but to sell them to Jewish buyers for prices way below what they are worth.
Such realities on the ground, and other even more important factors such as the dearth of jobs and opportunities, matter far more to Arab-Israelis than voting again and again in elections where they can never hope to gain enough power to have any hope of changing a system whose explicit goal to ensure the perpetual primacy of Jews over Arabs (notable gains, however, have been made by Arab-Israelis in areas such as such as education, medicine and pharmacy). Indeed, this is the one crucial difference between the US and Israel when it comes to disadvantaged minorities: one system, at least on paper, unequivocally embraces the principle of equality for all, while the other enshrines inequality in every aspect of its laws and systems.
As far as the West Bank is concerned, if you believe that free and fair elections could be held there without Israeli consent and control, then there is a bridge over the nearby Jordan river I would like to sell you. Everyone knows that the reason elections haven’t been held for so long is that the PA is so unpopular that the most likely outcome would be a win by forces hostile to the status quo of oppressive security arrangements between the PA and Israel, continued settlement expansion, and zero prospects of eventual self-determination.
With regard to Gaza, what possible purpose could elections there serve, when the best possible, or should I say least worst, outcome from an Israeli-US perspective would be a victory by Hamas? What possible improvements in living conditions could any elected government there hope to achieve under the present conditions of total blockade in a territory that has already been deemed ‘uninhabitable’ by the UN?
Remember, of course, that free and fair elections are only desirable in Arab countries when the outcome is the one demanded by the US and Israel. When it is not, such as the one in post-Arab Spring Egypt, then a military coup and restoration of the status quo are usually right around the corner. In physics, this is known as the ‘Law of the Unintended Consequences of Democracy’.
Worst of all is the old ‘backward Arabs and Third World people lack a tradition of elections and democracy and therefore should be denied freedom forever’ trope.
Nations that were under colonial domination until well into the last century cannot be expected to suddenly emerge with stable democratic institutions and traditions. Look how long it took a country like Germany to finally achieve such a system after decades of democratic experimentation interspersed with instability, war, authoritarianism and hyperinflation. The dirty, messy, bloody business of building democracy has just begun in some parts of the Arab world, and would certainly be helped along by less outside interference
When Israel was created it saw itself as the home for the Jews and especially for the refugees from WWII and Arab countries, maybe you are not aware that about 750,000 Jews were kicked out of Arab countries and were absorbed by Israel. Its primary concern at the time was Jewish people. Arabs in 1948 were perceived as the enemy and for good reason they were. Israel rightly sees itself as primarily responsible for creating homes for Jews. And with the rise of fascism both here and Europe Israel will have to be ready to absorb more Jews. Recently a close friend, a progressive highly critical of Israel, has asked me about what it would take to get Israeli citizenship—yes I was surprised—maybe Canada is too cold for him.
What about the Arabs? Arabs in Israel were and are discriminated against we in the US discriminate against people of color. We do our best to stop them from voting. We make sure we do not live next to them. And when their infrastructure fails (Detroit and Jackson) we blame them and are slow to fix it. IS this Apartheid? And please recall in WWII we put Japanese in “internment camps” (putting it nicely) many of them were US citizens. And let’s not talk about the land we took from the first nations people and continue to covet. Did anyone say Apartheid? NOPE that is reserve ed for one country only!
Israel is not perfect, not by a long shot, but recently Israel passed a $10 billion dollars bill aimed solely at improving Arab towns, which indicates Israel’s growing awareness of the needs of its Arab population.
As for elections. The reason they are not held in the West Bank is because everyone knows that Hamas a Fascist theocratic and anti-women rights party (and not to mention anti-Semitic in the Nazi form) would win. Would you like to see that? In Gaza Hamas knows if there were real elections, they would lose so no elections. Go ahead blame Israel.
As for the notion that Israel controls the outcome of elections in Arab countries “that free and fair elections are only desirable in Arab countries when the outcome is the one demanded by the US and Israel.” P-e-l-e-a-s-e. This is precisely the kind of nonsense I rail against. It reminds me how the Jews are accused of controlling the world, world banks and just about everything else. My response to that is: than why do Jews have a tiny country in possibly the worst neighborhood in the world?
As for the “blockade of Gaza” please reacquaint yourself with the map Egypt too shares a border with Gaza. Gaza is perfectly habitable and in the hands of technocrats could become a Singapore overnight. Keep in mind offshore to Gaza is a huge Gas field they are entitled to it as well. All they have to do is agree to become a country and not a terror enclave. Salaam Fayaad (now at Princeton) who was briefly a Palestinian Prime Minister could have done it but alas they got rid of him.
Given the fear, maimings and killings inflicted by the Israeli Defence Forces on the people of the Occupied Palestinian Territories which are on a scale vastly greater than anything perpetrated by Hamas, you have the wrong model for your definition of 'terror'. No nation should see itself as an ethno-religious state, which you are attempting to justify. As for democracy, I don't see it in the USA either, a nation in which vast wealth is needed to get anywhere close to power and in which the wealthy donors to both parties - it has only two - get to pull the strings.
Rebecca, at the end of each conflict with Gaza entities, because Israel is accused of bombing civilians it publishes a list of all the victims. In other words, they know exactly who they go after. They even publish a list of mistakes. Do you know of any other country that does that?
I believe this last event lasted less than a week. Approximately 250 were reported dead in Gaza, more than half were military personnel several groups of dead were listed by Israel as errant rockets fired by Islamic Jihad. And of course, children die because rocket launchers are deliberately placed in schools and playgrounds.
Do you recall a city called Raqqa (in Syria ) its population was 100,000. Its gone! We destroyed it and its occupants.
Daily we hear of the death toll in the Ukraine. Hundreds with no names and no explanation of their roles in the war machine.
Bernie Sanders also thought it was unfair that Israel had a defense system and that Hamas and Islamic Jihad did not. Bizarre. In World War II our armed forces never went up against Germany or Japan unless we had overwhelming odds in our favor—it is why we won!
It's not Israel’s job to level the playing field. To the contrary, it’s their job to make sure the odds are so overwhelmingly lopsided against its enemies that its enemies will think twice before initiating an attack.
Vis-a-vis the West Bank with which I do not agree with Israel's policies at all. If I were on the Palestinian side, I would recognize that going up to Israel militarily is a losing card. I would consider a primarily non-violent resistance. It would get a lot more sympathy worldwide and a lot more sympathy in Israel as well.
Israel's so-called enemies are women, children and men, mostly armed with little more than rocks. Your false equivalence of the two sides in this war against the poor by the IDF merely reveals your lack of knowledge and understanding. Thankfully for the Palestinian cause, they pay no attention to apartheid-supporting, centrist liberals who want to restrict those rebelling against a militarised colonial settler regime to non-violence. The Palestinians will choose their own methods.
This is a conflict that needs to be resolved but I don't think it’s a good idea for the women and children to continue to battle in this frankly untenable way. I see and have suggested more than a few alternatives that I think could be much more successful.
Second, are you implying that Israel does not have a right to be or at least not where it is now, since you state that it is a “colonial settler regime”. To complain about colonial settler endeavors while living in the US is a bit rich. All of the Americas were in fact such endeavors and still are. Looking to reverse that? Just Israel? How interesting.
A fine comment. Those in glass houses... is applicable especially to Americans who complain about the lack of true democracy elsewhere. US history and its current status closer to oligarchy are notable for showing its democracy being for the wealthy only.
B'Tselem stated on 12 January 2021:
"The Israeli regime pursues this organizing principle [of apartheid] in four major areas:
Land – Israel works to Judaize the entire area, treating land as a resource chiefly meant to benefit the Jewish population. Since 1948, Israel has taken over 90% of the land within the Green Line and built hundreds of communities for the Jewish population. Since 1967, Israel has also enacted this policy in the West Bank, building more than 280 settlements for some 600,000 Jewish Israeli citizens. Israel has not built a single community for the Palestinian population in the entire area stretching from the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River (with the exception of several communities built to concentrate the Bedouin population after dispossessing them of most of their property rights).
Citizenship – Jews living anywhere in the world, their children and grandchildren – and their spouses – are entitled to Israeli citizenship. In contrast, Palestinians cannot immigrate to Israeli-controlled areas, even if they, their parents or their grandparents were born and lived there. Israel makes it difficult for Palestinians who live in one of the units it controls to obtain status in another, and has enacted legislation that prohibits granting Palestinians who marry Israelis status within the Green Line.
Freedom of movement – Israeli citizens enjoy freedom of movement in the entire area controlled by Israel (with the exception of the Gaza Strip) and may enter and leave the country freely. Palestinian subjects, on the other hand, require a special Israeli-issued permit to travel between the units (and sometimes inside them), and exit abroad also requires Israeli approval.
Political participation – Palestinian citizens of Israel may vote and run for office, but leading politicians consistently undermine the legitimacy of Palestinian political representatives. The roughly five million Palestinians who live in the Occupied Territories, including East Jerusalem, cannot participate in the political system that governs their lives and determines their future. They are denied other political rights as well, including freedom of speech and association."
https://www.btselem.org/apartheid
One only has to read Gideon Levy’s regular articles in Haaretz to find out what goes on in Istael/Palestine, and it is not nice reading.
Agreed.
I disagree with Tlaib in many ways but don't consider her anti-semitic. But it's someone ironic for you to cite Orwell while describing the criticism Tlaib has received as an "assault".
It's legitimate for Tlaib to strongly disagree with Israel's policies even if she is sometimes wrong. It's also legitimate for Tlaib's critics to strongly disagree with her perspective, even if they're wrong.
And while I have no problem with you describing these critics as "intellectually dishonest" if that's what you believe, calling their responses "an assault" is going way too far. Last month we all witnessed an assault on a writer in upstate New York by someone who disagreed with them. Let's not minimize despicable acts like that by confusing strong words, even if they're unfair, with violence.
fair enough. i do think people often use "assault' or "attack" to describe verbal hostility. but there probably are better terms. what would you suggest?
"Attack" yes, but I think describing a written disagreement as an "assault" is pretty rare. Would you think it's fair to describe your response to the folks criticizing Talib as an "assault" on them?
"Diatribe" is probably the best alternative that makes it clear that the disagreement is limited to the page.
Having said that, I think all of those words (but especially "attack" and even more so "assault") paint a picture of the person being described as unreasonably aggressive. And while I get the temptation of doing so, especially for someone like you who has been on the receiving end of many abusive messages, I wonder what purpose it serves (other than angering folks on the other end of the argument).
As someone who is a strong J Street Supporter, I appreciate you contributions to the debate on these issues Peter, even when I disagree with them. However, I think many of these contributions are actually counterproductive. If we're going to get people to be open to solutions that allow all Palestinians to live lives of dignity, it won't happen if we call them names. It requires instead acknowledging their legitimate concerns, while making the case for why there are solutions to these concerns and why we as a Jewish people and the people of Israel specifically need to take these steps if it's going to be the kind of nation that Jews can and should embrace.
Thanks again for an excellent presentation. You might also have commented on the ritualistic evocation of Israel's "right to exist"in the comments you cited.
Shanah tovah
yes, good point
Well, is the gun the threat or the hand that holds it? Ukraine would not be a threat to Russia without 30 years of US deliberate undermining of Russia with increasing hybrid attacks politically, economically and militarily - but somehow this is almost completely disregarded by the MM media in the US. People look to you Peter to expose the gaslighting not just with respect to Israel - Palestine, but with respect to critical issues such as the calculated vilification of Russia and China in particular that serves the purpose of greasing the skids of war.
another great commentary. I am really enjoying the video format.
I also want to wish you Shana Tova, and all the best for the coming year.
very glad to hear it
I very much appreciate your intellectual honesty which is in very short supply among the commentariat. And I certainly agree that progressive values cannot be reconciled with any apartheid government, including Israel's. The political pushback, piling on, and hysterics is quite surreal given that Rep. Tlaib's statement is irrefutable. But then one must be very careful not to say what cannot be said as determined by the dominant zeitgeist. You've given me a good reason to read Orwell's essay again.
But I do disagree with your Putin analogy because there is a strong factual basis supporting Russia's claim that Ukraine is a threat to its national security. The steady eastward expansion of a hostile military alliance to Russia's borders, the U.S. engineered Maidan coup and resulting civil war in the Donbass, the Western sabotage of the Minsk Agreements, the Rand study recommending the break-up of Russia into smaller states to serve U.S. national security interests, NATO's massive build-up of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, NATO's training and arming of those troops, and the Western sabotage of a Russian/Ukrainian peace agreement negotiated last April in Istanbul can be fairly interpreted as presenting a threat to Russia's sovereignty and territorial integrity.
Great arguments as usual. It is sad to see democrats playing the game of an authoritarian state. Great job Prof Beinart!
thanks!
Yes Democrats need to stop playing Palestine’s game.
Peters analysis of the response to Rashida Seems quite clear and understandable. What I find mystifying is how he dismisses Russia’s justifications for its invasion as being the same kind of repetitive sloganeering, while it seems that this is exactly what the United States is doing sloganeering without ever addressing the facts that Russia and Putin have detailed in justification for the invasion.
fair enough. i have written at some length about that. i specifically mentioned Putin's claims that Ukraine--not NATO--is a threat. I don't think Ukraine remotely threatens Russian sovereignty.
I appreciate your earnest efforts to throw light on the issues you take up, Peter Beinart. I have a small comment: please resist the tendency to punctuate your remarks with "right?" "right?" that so many speakers fall into these days. I find it an off-putting habit.
i'm not even aware I do it!
Thanks so much for this beautiful piece. Eloquently described. I am not in politics at all, just a poet, yet I can feel that same political pressure not to write poetry that touches on this subject, although I notice Palestinians who do face worse consequences. Of course, it’s easier to say “poetry shouldn’t be political” and not sound “Orwellian.” (Maybe we shouldn’t name this after him.) Or simply, not publish it. “It’s subjective.” But my point is this pressure is felt in weirdly pervasive ways across quite a spectrum. There’s something threatening about this kind of speech that doesn’t just threaten politicians. It feels, without being one, like a death threat. And it’s been going on for years. We used to be neighbors with a congressman back in the 80’s who confided in my husband that nobody in Congress can say anything in favor of Arabs or Palestinians, and to criticize Israel was absolutely verboten. He was privately critical of this, but wanted to keep his political job. I suppose this is now hardly a secret. So I can’t help but admire Rashida Tlaib and others for speaking out on this.
I admire her too, especially given the abuse she endures.
Me too, I especially admire all the comments she's made in support of the Iranian women.
Sarcasm is not your strong point, Winters.
Thank you for another fantastic contribution, Sean.
I knew it would take your breath away.
You wish.
Thanks for this Peter.
A few other resources addressing the same Israeli Hasbara, planned, structured, and funded:
Israel’s Linguistic Acrobatics [Book Review]
https://sbahour.medium.com/israels-linguistic-acrobatics-book-review-fef9cf79991d
The Idea of Israel: A History of Power and Knowledge
https://www.versobooks.com/books/1117-the-idea-of-israel
Great suggestions!
Hardly a conspiracy theory, more a fact.
"It is all a world turned upside down with Israel controlling Washington, as former prime ministers Ariel Sharon and Benjamin Netanyahu have boasted, and part of the control mechanism is to manage the narrative so the American public never really sees what is going on. But what is really interesting is how so-called peace activists, like at the gathering I attended, toe the line and are terrified of offending Israel or the powerful domestic Jewish groups that use their money and political access to promote the wars in the Middle East as well as against Russia in Ukraine. Some of them clearly are fearful of being labeled anti-Semites, which is the weapon most frequently used by groups like ADL to ward off criticism of the Jewish state."
The Best Congress AIPAC Can Buy. https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2016/03/22/the-best-congress-aipac-can-buy/
Thank you, Prof. Beinart, for bringing attention to Orwell's brilliant essay. I feel out of my depth with regard to the history and politics of Israel and Palestine, but I appreciate your commitment to intellectual honesty, factual truth, and democracy. For my own thoughts on a radical, promising model of democracy, see my Substack post on Democracy-by-Lottery. Perhaps an answer to the intractable situation in the region of Palestine: https://nickcoccoma.substack.com/p/to-save-america-we-need-democracy
Orwell's political writings are more necessary than ever these days, what with the rise of the far right at home and abroad. I especially revere his review of Mein Kampf and his essay "The Lion and the Unicorn." I recently listened to Nineteen Eighty-Four in the car (you know, just for kicks). Hadn't read it since high school and found it even scarier now. I try to weave in Orwell in my own Substack posts, such as a recent one on politics and the power of story: https://nickcoccoma.substack.com/i/70024356/iii-whoever-tells-the-best-story-wins.
Perhaps you might plug it with your readers. Shanah tovah!
will take a look, thanks
Thank you Peter, despite giving Bret Stephens a voice and prominence here, you have done the right thing by publishing Said's essay.
Amen, brother! Amazing how Orwell just gets better and more relevant with time. Beinart too!
Very kind of you, thanks