The far right ascendancy in Israel continues to reverberate here. It not only threatens the US-Israel relationship, and create tensions between American and Israeli Jews, it is also reshaping the intellectual terrain: how the conflict is being discussed.
For instance, the Washington Post is hosting a forum on the subject: "Israel's real 'existential question' is whether or not to disenfranchise its Arab minority, says Fareed Zakaria in his column this week. Is he right?" Zakaria's question is similar to the questions raised in recent LA Times and Guardian editorials. Zakaria's article "Disowning Israel's Arab Minority" states:
No liberal democracy I know of since World War II has disenfranchised or expelled its own citizens . . . Last week's election has brought the issue into the open. Its
resolution will define the future of Israel as a country, as a Jewish
state, and as a democracy.
There are currently four responses to his column, the most popular (based on comments generated) is Palestinian journalist Daoud Kuttab's, "Equal Rights For All Israel's Citizens." His response calls out the US and cuts to the core of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict:
This particular issue – especially the
description of Israel as a "Jewish state" – almost torpedoed the 2007
Annapolis conference. Palestinians adamantly refused to recognize the
state established on Palestinian land as a Jewish state, because 20% of
that state's citizens are non-Jewish Palestinian Arabs.But former President George Bush would not budge, calling Israel a
"Jewish state" as he spoke in favor of an independent Palestinian state
(which he promised would be realized before his term was up.) While
this was not the first time that a U.S. senior official has referred to
Israel as a religious entity, Bush's insistence on the description
despite Palestinian president Mahmood Abbas's demands that this term
not be used reflected a total U.S. acceptance of the Israeli position.
Calling Israel a Jewish state goes directly against the general U.S.
principle of separating politics from religion and counters the
democratic values that the U.S. is trying to export to the rest of the
world, including the Arab region.After
seeing such support from the U.S., Israeli ideological leaders from
hawks to doves have raised the level of their public propaganda,
pushing for the ethnic cleansing of Palestinian Arabs who are citizens
of the state of Israel. It started with the foreign minister Tizpi
Livni, who said in a talk to high school students that once the
Palestinian conflict was resolved, citizens of Israel would not be
allowed to talk about their national aspirations. She later backpedaled
from those racist-sounding remarks, but right-wing candidate Avigdor
Lieberman did not. His election campaign, which came as the Gaza
assault was taking place, included a call for Palestinian citizens of
Israel to take a loyalty oath to Israel as a Jewish state and to serve
in the army or complete some type of public service.As Palestinian citizens of Israel have repeatedly said, they didn't
come to Israel – Israel came to them. Making non-Jewish citizens swear
a loyalty oath to the Jewish state is obviously unacceptable.
Palestinian citizens of Israel are also angry with Lieberman's call for
them to serve in the Israeli army, fighting against their fellow
Palestinians, while Orthodox Jews are exempt from military and other
forms national service.The new Obama administration, as it weighs its position on the upcoming
Durban II conference on racism, will also be forced to take a position
on the rights of the Arab minority in Israel and the undemocratic
demands that are being forced upon them as part of the package of a
two-state solution. Palestinians living in Israel support the
possibility of the establishment of a Palestinian state alongside the
state of Israel. But they feel that this should not negate their
decision to stay living where they are and to continue demanding rights
equal to those their fellow citizens of Israel enjoy, be they Jews or
followers of any religion or even non-followers of religion.
Kuttab rightly points out how US policy has directly empowered the racist discourse coming to the fore in Israel, and he issues a challenge: how can the US support an ethno-religious state in Israel when that directly contradicts its own values?
This site has continually asked how the Obama administration will respond to the new right wing Israeli polity. One thing that is now clear is that Lieberman's success is erasing the green line in how people understand the conflict. The conflict is not just in the occupied territories but inside Israel as well. Lieberman ran on the belief that a Jewish state cannot accept Palestinian citizens and wide chunk of the Israeli electorate agreed with him leaving these citizens exposed to the very real threat of expulsion. The rights of Palestinians living inside Israel can no longer be ignored and need to be added to the agenda of issues to address in peace negotiations along with the refugees, borders and Jerusalem. The ground has shifted and the Obama administration's efforts to end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict must shift with it.
Kuttab ends by calling for equal rights for all Israel's citizens. As far as policies go, this sounds as American as apple pie, but of course it is considered a radical position. The Obama administration will have to decide whether it stands for or against equal rights for Israel's citizens. This as an important opportunity for US leadership that will help define Obama's legacy in Israel/Palestine.
{ 27 comments }
Maybe we will be reshaped to fit Lieberman's worldview: Jeff Ballabon was just appointed a Senior VP at CBS news.
I don't think the Arab Israelis are going anywhere. Just my opinion. We shall see.
Zakaria is a good critical thinker–so I rarely take issue with anything he says.
However, he should (and I believe he does) realize that the reason this issue is even on the table is because Israel's geopolitical reality is different from any other liberal democracy.
The only way to make a substantive comparison is to put another liberal democracy in the same predicament and take notes. Which country wants to volunteer? :-)
By the way, Muslims seem to be a bit concerned with Italy's attitudes towards them (not the first time I've heard this before)–Europe has their own Islamist concerns, I guess…
Italy: Minister says govt must expel immigrants who fail to integrate
Looks like Netanyahu is offering a lot to Kadima, in order to solidify around the center-right, instead of the Lieberman-right. http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1065925.html
I personally think this would be strategically wise, and wonder if the US is exercising any "diplomacy" in an effort to influence the direction this goes. If so, this could be an early strong indicator of a new realistic and activist or engaged approach by the Obama Administration. Assuming this is so – that George Mitchell/Rahm Emanuel/David Axelrod/Clinton/Obama, have been working their levers of power to influence the factions of Likud and Kadima to bring them together, to exclude Lieberman, what would this look like? Stories for underemployed journalists to pursue? It seems to me that strong US reaction, in the media broadly defined, demonstrating clear fault-lines along the US-Israeli alliance over issues of racism, Apartheid, oppression, could have an effect, could be important at this crucial juncture. This blog has certainly done its part. But is there more? Perhaps we should write our Congress persons and Senators, particularly the many Jewish ones, and make clear that we do not want to send aid to Israel if Avigdor Lieberman and his racist policies are incorporated into the Israeli government. My own experience writing my own elected officials is that the Jewish Congressional leadership are more sensitive to these issues, are more nuanced in their statements in response, more evolving in the things they say, and would be more likely to see the potential problems that could come from "Loose Cannon" Lieberman speaking for our "client" government. Now is the time make noise!
"The only way to make a substantive comparison is to put another liberal democracy in the same predicament and take notes. Which country wants to volunteer? :-)"–Suzanne
How about the former Weimar Republic of Gemany?
Good luck with that. Our own Lieberman is in Israel making nice to Netanyahu — and schmoozing with the Israeli Lieberman — promising that the US government would be have fine relations with an overtly Right-wing Zionist regime. (Of course, "Right-wing" characterizes all the Zionist parties to one degree or another).
Lets hope it's a case of whistling past the graveyard. . .
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1233304846734&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
The prime minister-designate spoke ahead of a meeting with visiting US Senator Joe Lieberman, who said a Netanyahu-led government would enjoy good relations with Washington.
"Our enemies, unfortunately, are as common as the values and the interests that have united us for all these years," Lieberman told reporters. "I have no doubt that with Netanyahu's government here we will have good and positive relations with the Obama administration in Washington and with members of Congress, and I look forward to playing my part in contributing to that."
Lieberman also met with Israel Beiteinu leader Avigdor Lieberman. The US senator said that "based on his success in the elections," it was vital to become familiar with Israel Beiteinu's head.
Doppler, I agree but, so far, the USA Congress is hanging on AIPAC's tit. The standard AIPAC talking points is how it responds to constituent pleas in the matter–Phil and the regular commenters gave typical examples
of this tax-paid charade not long back.
'Equal rights for all Israeli citizens' would mean an even-handed, religion-blind immigration policy. Heavy Arab immigration from the territories into Israel, in search of job opportunities, family reunion, and ancestral lands, would surely result. This would mean the end of Israel as a Jewish state.
Of course, that's the same dilemma which faced all European colonial projects. European political control was incompatible with local democracy; suppression of local democracy was incompatible with liberal democratic values at home. The circle couldn't be squared. As a result, the British left India and Palestine; the European powers decamped from Africa; even South Africa, whose European settlers had 'gone native' and couldn't return, adopted one-person/one-vote democracy.
Israel cannot square the colonial circle either. Starting a colonial project in the post WW II era, while the rest of planet was decolonizing, was an epic strategic blunder. Zionist ideology and unrealistic hopes blinded Jewish immigrants to the factual reality that a 'Jewish state' was an extremely long-shot gamble.
'Equal rights for all Israeli citizens' are of course the correct policy. South Africa's democratization provides some guideposts — for instance, a Truth and Reconciliation Commission to air the absues of the past. Also, statutes to protect minority rights, including the rights of a future Jewish minority.
Further desperate attempts to defend the indefensible Israeli status quo will be an example of the 'sunk cost fallacy' — continuing to throw good money after bad, rather than accept the inevitability of change in the wake of a serious error in judgment. The main objective of Americans should be to restrain the already insolvent U.S. government from escalating its subsidy of the Israeli status quo.
If I were a Palestinian legislator, I would introduce in the Knesset a bill styled the 'Civil Rights Act of 2009,' directly referencing the eponymous U.S. act of 1964 — and then challenge Obama to support the civil rights of Israel's second-class citizens. Is Obama a black man, or an Oreo? We shall see.
The Basque people in Spain…
The Irish Catholics in Britain…
The Corsicans in France…
… as one can see, actual democracies don't disenfranchise parts of the population just because they are "troublesome". Indeed, as anyone who has actually understood what a democracy is, the very idea is anti-democratic.
Except the Palestinians wish to over run Israel and turn it into an islamic nation.
As per usual, the denialists skipped right over my link concerning Muslim concerns about being expelled from Italy–FOR EXACTLY THE SAME REASONS the Israelis are contemplating it.
Speaks volumes.
Jim:
I thought he was "black messiah". Arabs in Israel have the vote. And nobody stop them. And they don't seem to be fleeing the terror of the Zionist jackboot, how come. Is it because they have better lives than living in any of the surrounding countries. Unless your a Saudi prince of course then you can continue fucking your mutliple 9 yr old brides, going to camel races and using your left in hand instead of toilet paper.
'[Arabs] don't seem to be fleeing the terror of the Zionist jackboot, how come. Is it because they have better lives than living in any of the surrounding countries.' — Sword of Gideon
Probably. But this in no way invalidates the struggle of Israeli-Arabs for equal rights … any more than Jewish immigrants' prosperity in mid-20th century America under WASP political rule somehow justified the continuance of 'gentlemen's agreement' Jewish quotas in certain institutions.
Your argument is a non sequitur.
@suzanne, I usually skip your entries and never read SOG of the pointy-head and chris the addled one. I would add that we only have opinions here and our opinions are only maybe symptoms of the american israeli situation.
As per usual, the denialists skipped right over my link concerning Muslim concerns about being expelled from Italy–FOR EXACTLY THE SAME REASONS the Israelis are contemplating it.
Speaks volumes.
Well, Citizen offered you to consider this as a replay of the Weimar Republic dynamics. I am assuming he had in mind especially the parties that preached the Jewish danger slogans. And yes, it speaks volumes, you ignore his reply.
I just checked via Google news, the link you provide slightly misrepresents the larger situtation. As everywhere in Europe there is quite a bit of resistance against the building of Mosques.Andrea Rochi surely does not want to deport "the Muslims". But obviously European states have no interests to harbor preachers of hate speech, it is against the law to stir hate against anyone here. Remember? But we all know you aren't too interested in anything that goes a little deeper, are you?
Do you think the Muslim want to take over Europe? They are a replay of the "Jewish danger" scenario, only that the Jewish danger was a myth, while the Muslim danger is real?
"And they don't seem to be fleeing the terror of the Zionist jackboot, how come."
Well, keep praying to your "God" (sorry, "G-d"), maybe it will happen. After all, he promised all the land just for you.
Leander–the point I was trying to make is that Israel's concern, like Europe's is about radical Islamist elements .
I still have my doubts that Muslims (Armenians and Christians aren't included in this so-called campaign) are going to be expelled.
The problem, lea, is that Muslims actively preach taking over europe. I certainly don't recall any Rabbi in any synagogue in Europe ever advocating Jewish take over of any European country, ever.
Perhaps you have such a link in your files? Or perhaps this is not a replay of the antisemitic "Jewish danger" that came out of feral imaginations like most of Phil's phools are famous for?
It is good to talk about the issue of equal rights in Israel, but we Americans really need to ask ourselves whether US law is currently enforced equally for Jews and non-Jews. See One Law for All Americans.
Leander:
A lot of my relatives fought under Pilsudski at the Miracle of Warsaw.
It is simply too glib to assume that the Jewish danger was a myth before WW2 or that it is simply anti-Semitic paranoia today.
At least 8 of the 12 leaders of the Bavarian Communist Coup after WW1 were either German Jewish or ethnic Ashkenazi. The leadership of the Hungarian Communist coup was even more Jewish.
If we look backward from WW2 in the Czarist Empire, we find that ethnic Ashkenazim engaged in a tremendous amount of sabotage, radical violence and target assassinations. At the same time period there was already a tremendous amount of Jewish financial corruption, conspiracy and manipulation from N. American through Europe and into the Czarist Empire.
Bolshevik ethnic Ashkenazim made possible the Russian Communist Party, the theft of the Russian Revolution, and the consolidation of the Soviet Union.
By January 1, 1933, Soviet ethnic Ashkenazim were up to their eyeballs in mass murder, ethnic cleansing and genocide.
In Palestine from the 1890s through the 1930s ethnic Ashkenazim were brutalizing, plundering, and terrorizing the native population. The latter half of the 1930s saw the creation of terrorist Jewish Special Night Squads to carry out targeted assassinations of the native population.
At the same time period in N. America and Europe there was a tremendous amount of espionage and subversion on behalf of the Soviet Union.
In Re: Partition Still Casts Shadow On India-Pakistan Ties discusses the dangerous conspiratorial politics in which Jews engaged from WW1 through the Partition of India and right up to today.
The collapse of the US and world financial system is directly attributable to Jewish Zionist financial manipulation since the 1980s. (I am not suggesting that such manipulation did not exist before 1980. It was just on a much smaller scale because of ideological differences between Labor and Jabotinskian Zionists.)
1/2 to 3/4 of the US national debt is directly attributable to the cost of the alliance of the USA with the State of Israel. See Blaming Jews for Financial Meltdown.
In reality it is not really an alliance with Israel but is actually the subordination of the USA as a dependent and intimidated client state to the Zionist Virtual Colonial Motherland or Judonia.
In Palestinian Dream, Zionist Hasbarah, America, I discuss the dystopic future to which Jewish Zionists are bringing the USA and the world.
I have no doubt whatsoever that the whole planet today is faced by a grave Jewish threat, and I feel it is incumbent for good decent Jewsstand to take an uneqivocal stands against the criminals within the Jewish community.
Yet I have to point out that 71% of US Jews supported the recent Zionist rampage in Gaza. Thus only 29% of American Jews count as good and decent. The rest are evil-doers at the very least engaging in conspiracy by aiding and abetting a criminal terrorist genocidal regime.
I am fairly certain that LeaNder will freak out because she is German and I am discussing Jewish conspiracy.
Despite common prejudice discussing Jewish conspiracy is not anti-Semitism. My main undergraduate interest was Eastern European and Jewish studies. Conspiracy was (and still is) endemic to the politics of Eastern Europe and Russia. Eastern European historians talk about political conspiracy all the time. Jewish Zionist politics definitely belongs to the Eastern European tradition of political conspiracy.
The historical anti-Semitic discourse about Jewish conspiracy differs from the factual discussion in the assumption that there was one overarching Jewish conspiracy when there were actually many often acting at cross-purposes to one another.
Today, the Jewish Zionist conspiracy by for the most part succeeding in eliminating or absorbing the other Jewish political and financial conspiracies has probably become the greatest peril the world has ever faced.
The Arabs are unwilling to serve in the army and defend Israel. Why should they get the same benefits as those who put their lives on the line?
Suzanne ignores the content thrust of both Citizen and LeaNder. Chris Berel just slings names like a child.
The average German during the Weimar Republic had a real fear of the reds (many red leaders were jewish), who proclaimed their world revolution constantly, and took over the local government in some parts of Germany (e.g., Bavaria), Hungary, etc. After the war, the USSR took over how many countries?
the counterpoint point to Suzanne's intended point that Israel's concern, like Europe's is about radical Islamist elements, is that the USA's informed citizens' concern, like the Palestinians, and Syria's, for example, is about
radical zionist elements infecting Israel and the world jewish diaspora organizations.
Well, history buff, Suzanne, I think the most important thing about the link is what kind of political world view Suzanne by linking indirectly supports. Andrea Ronchi is a member of the Alleanza Nationale founded out of the dissolved ex-fascist party Movimento Sociale Italiano (MSI). After this party had lost voters in the 80's
So it is interesting what kind of European parties our hawkishly pro-Israel forces consider the right choice for us from Old-Europe, or suggest as a bright future in the War on Terrorism, or the fight against the pan-Islamic threat.
I would say. No thank you.
Leander, don't attempt to smear me, thank you. That's pretty desperate of you. That is not Andrea Ronchi's blog. I posted it simply as a blog that was reporting news events about European attitudes towards Muslims. In fact, at first glance, I thought it was a Muslim site.
The problem, lea, is that Muslims actively preach taking over europe. I certainly don't recall any Rabbi in any synagogue in Europe ever advocating Jewish take over of any European country, ever.
Perhaps you have such a link in your files? Or perhaps this is not a replay of the antisemitic "Jewish danger" that came out of feral imaginations like most of Phil's phools are famous for?
Phool is a word you use to suggest both children versus warriors in combination with Pakistan? or Muslim forces? Thus: childish Muslim lovers? While the only respectable position is nuking them into dust?
feral imagination? Sounds good to me. Versus a civilized world view? "Civilization" seems to become a standard cover for older not so lovely warrior world views.
Most Muslim I know here in Cologne, are owners of bigger or smaller business in all kind of fields–it's not just the restaurant or the vegetable shop anymore–and employees, who pay their taxes and in raising numbers send their kids to university. The question is have they been ignored and left alone for too long, concerning their special problems and questions, especially the laborers, who didn't at one point realize it was better to get self-imployed? It's a complex matter. …
But I am sure you like the Daniel Pipes approach. That is picking out the most glaring incidents, the honor murders. Yes, that is a problem I can see. I know Muslim women who are quite active in the field. In Hamburg a guy who killed his sister just got a life-sentence and raged against the court. Believe it or not we have quite prominent Turkish German writers, musicians, film makers … too by now. So Muslim can't be reduced to being a problem only anymore. That's just nuts.
The kids of the Russian Germans weren't exactly a group that was always easy to integrate. And the difference between the problems of some lower strata of the German society and the immigrant society do not seem so different to me.
But what stunned and disgusted me most lately were the racist ravings of a Jewish German writer here in Cologne concerning the building of a mosque here, it was really peculiar to hear the language he used. It is absolutely hard to wrap your head around this phenomenon. This doesn't mean there aren't problems that need to be addressed. But what they hell is going on in the head of all the Jewish German Bush lovers?
Leander, don't attempt to smear me, thank you.
Since when is it smearing, if one points out details about the person you link to and complain no one cares? Don't you think it is important "who" says what?
Could we please stay rational?
Can you point out which of the criteria below would fit in this case:
Smear
VERB:
smeared , smear·ing , smears
VERB:
tr.
1.
1. To spread or daub with a sticky, greasy, or dirty substance.
2. To apply by spreading or daubing: smeared suntan lotion on my face and arms.
2. To stain by or as if by spreading or daubing with a sticky, greasy, or dirty substance.
3. To stain or attempt to destroy the reputation of; vilify: political enemies who smeared his name.
4. Slang To defeat utterly; smash.
VERB:
intr.
To be or become stained or dirtied.
NOUN:
1. A mark made by smearing; a spot or blot.
2. A substance to be spread on a surface.
3. Biology A sample, as of blood or bacterial cells, spread on a slide for microscopic examination or on the surface of a culture medium.
4.
1. Vilification or slander.
2. A vilifying or slanderous remark.
Suzanne is no match for LeaNder. LeaNder actually wants to help the world, while Suzanne just wants to do anything at all in the service of what she thinks will help "the jooooos." She clearly demonstrates over and over she has neither the brains, education, or moral integrity of LeaNder.
Israel cannot be considered a genuine democracy until this fundamental issue is resolved. All residents must have the same and equal rights regardless of religion,ethnicity or gender. [Even among non Palestinian residents of Israel this is not true] Israel is a pariah state until it obeys international law Boycott and divestment are a powerful way to pressure Israel to admit the truth of it's brutal occupation of Palestine. And to bring about genuine and open debate and negotiations for peace.
Comments on this entry are closed.