I just got off the phone from a conference call with Daniel Levy of the New America Foundation. It was arranged by Brit Tzedek, and it was just a beautiful call. We really have to honor the Jews who are deeply engaged in Jewish organizational life who are appalled by the slaughter and who refuse to condone it, who condemn it. Levy is one. God/Allah bless him.
I'll have a fuller report tomorrow, including his deep chagrin at Rabbi Eric Yoffie's attack on J Street–"It's easy for the Reform movement to talk about Darfur. This is the time you're tested. [when it's your own tribe]…I think he got this terribly wrong." Including his belief that Israel is deeply damaging its international reputation (duh) and that the mainstream American Jewish lobby is "driving Israel toward national suicide." Wow. And also Levy's fabulous comments on the Israel lobby and its role in denying Palestinians statehood forever. (Echoing me here, in his own way).
But I want to focus tonight on one beautiful and helpful statement this guy made. He said: We all hear, oh, the U.S. would do the same thing if Canada or Mexico were firing rockets at us. We would have a duty to respond. And yes, I think, Israel has a duty to respond, Levy said.
But then he went on to explode that analogy, and get at the core issue: Lack of Political Sovereignty. Canada and Mexico are states. Palestinians have no state. Remember, he said, that Gaza is just 4 percent of the Palestinian territories. The other 96 percent are still occupied. They have been for 40 years. And imagine that the 4 percent had been under siege, since they were unoccupied 3 years ago. And the occupied parts were crisscrossed with checkpoints and colonies.
Would it really be that surprising if in Canada or Mexico there was a hardline opposition that took over the government? And was deeply opposed to the occupier? "I'll leave that to your imagination."
I will get the transcript tomorrow and expand those comments. Taking notes by hand tonight. But what a bold act of humanization Levy was undertaking. Yes, obvious. But from inside the Jewish community. Of course: denied self-representation for 40 years, of course some of us would take up arms.
And others of us, terrorized by that monstrous power, would hide in international schools.
Daniel Levy is indeed one of the good guys Phil, but he has already been ripped as a facist by your merry band of commenters.
Israel just shelled a UN school in Gaza, killing dozens. When will the madness stop?
Levy's point about Palestine's lack of sovereignty highlights how grossly mistaken the US and Israel were to nullify Hamas's victory in the Jan. 2006 election.
Had Hamas been recognized, they likely would have gone through the same evolution as other formerly violent movements did after going legitimate. The Irish IRA; the South African ANC; yes, even Israel's Irgun, which later produced a prime minister, Begin.
In the event that rockets were still fired from Gaza, Israel would have had a strong case that it had been attacked without justification by the legitimate government of a neighboring quasi-state — a case which could have been taken to the UN Security Council.
Like most governments, Israel and the US display a strong preference for dealing with state actors, instead of subnational movements. This is evident in their propping up of Abbas, as a Palestinian figurehead. Had Hamas assumed office, USrael would have had a government that they could either deal with, or 'take to court' [as in the UN Security Council] if it refused to refrain from illegal attacks.
As matters stand, it was USrael which flagrantly violated international rules with a brutal siege — to such an extent that Hamas's own violation of allowing rocket fire looks minor by comparison. Just as if your neighbor's dog bites you, you probably will not succeed in filing 'dangerous dog' charges if you respond first by charging in and murdering the owner before involving the authorities. By acting like violent outlaws, the US and Israel have destroyed any legal or moral claim they might have had against Hamas.
The US/Israeli siege of Gaza has proven to be a spectacular policy failure — comparable only to Algeria's blood-drenched blunder of nullifying an Islamist victory in 1991 elections, at an eventual cost of 250,000 lives. The Gazan death toll isn't that high yet. But it took the Algerians a decade to lose that many, so be patient.
Here's some Americans who are quite happy with what's going on in Gaza–
RALLIES THIS WEEK Across the U.S., Canada, & U.K.!!
Just as if your neighbor's dog bites you, you probably will not succeed in filing 'dangerous dog' charges if you respond first by charging in and murdering the owner before involving the authorities.
Priceless.
By acting like violent outlaws, the US and Israel have destroyed any legal or moral claim they might have had against Hamas.
Not to mention any hope for being appointed the World's Dogcatchers.
'Americans'?
Why they wavin' foreign flags?
Stoopid immigrants.
Looks like finally "Change has come to America" — South America.
Non-zionist –
Don't lump us all into the same category, though I agree that there are some around here whose antisemitism drags the site down. We've also got a liberal Zionist who virtually never criticizes Israel and one anti-Arab racist to balance off the antisemites.
Still, there are also some worthwhile comments and interesting links from time to time.
And yes, Daniel Levy is one of the good guys, whether or not I agree with him on all points.
I'm not non-zionist up above but I appreciate that. I (like many) need to take a clearer more honest look at this issue but I always let the scumbags who inevitably gravitate to sites like this put me off. This is cowardice though. Sticks & stones.
Texas, we need to spend more time worrying about folks like these–
The Rebbetzin's Husband
I wrote Two Weeks in September based on my experiences during the period when I was working off and on in Israel and the Occupied Territories (1990-2002).
I took part in a discussion of "Occupied America" at Hebrew University. It starts on p.40 more or less verbatim with the qualification that I moved it to the University of California (to make it easier for an American audience to identify with the characters).
Neither responses are surprising.
I obviously disagree with most comments on the relative importance of the Hamas CHOICE to escalate.
Phil,
I thought you described Brit Tzedek as limp, rather than effective.
Richard, I think it's good he keeps slipping out of the proverbial pigeonhole you desperately want to confine him in.
In one thing he is rather constant. He praises who, he thinks, deserves to be praised. Beyond that he seems rather flexible. Non-ideological,I would say. Pragmatic along fake it till you make it. Turn the tide.
Litmus tested along trivial lines.
The significance of litmus testing, is that it excludes.
Phil has offended so many in his screeds, intimate and distant.
Its a reason that Stephen Walt has a Chair and Phil has a chair. (To refer to an earlier post of his.)