Typically, because I saw so much wisdom in it, I pushed Bruce Wolman to publish the short note he sent me yesterday, It's gotten a lot of comment, as you can see. Wolman is a more considered writer than I am, and he wanted the opportunity to expand and respond:
I wrote this note to Phil based on my own experiences. After decades living overseas, I returned to the US and spent a great deal of time studying the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and in particular the peace negotiations. It was my original intention to join and contribute to the debate within the Jewish community.
Much to my surprise (call it naiveté), I discovered there was almost no willingness to have open discussions in any of the mainstream Jewish organizations and media. Even more shocking was the McCarthyite tactics used to shut up opponents of Israeli policies. Finding yourself listed on a public website as a "Self-Hating Jew" is a wake-up call, I can assure you.
My extended family is probably split 80% liberal, 20% conservative, but all except maybe one or two are only comfortable talking within the confines of the hasbara narrative. They may be unhappy with what they hear about Gaza and the new Israeli government, but none of them wants to receive e-mails which might create any cognitive dissonance with their picture of Israel.
As a result I am here on Mondoweiss talking with Phil.
It's not that I wouldn't want to have a non-coercive discussion with the Jewish community, but time and resources are limited. Being pragmatic, if we want to be agents for real and timely political change, there is no evidence to suggest that we will be able to convince mainstream Jews within the necessary time period. Leave it to J Street to fight that battle, and I wish them the best of luck and will even give them limited support.
On the other hand most non-Jewish American liberals I know are either not that interested in Israel-Palestine or have become reluctant to speak out, especially when in the presence of Jewish Americans. They are, however, very bummed out by the Iraq war, and they need to understand that Israel and the major Jewish organizations in the US this time are pushing openly and hard for military confrontation. The media and the politicians are falling in line on Iran just like they did during the run-up to the Iraq war, on just as flimsy false intelligence. This time actually contradicting the published viewpoint of our own CIA.
Obama has filled his administration with both Israel-firsters and "realists", the latter viewing our current level of support for Israel as counter to American interests. These two groups are fighting it out to shape Obama's Iran strategy. This is why we are seeing conflicting signals out of the Administration. Obama may feel he can control the situation, but he has contributed to the debased public discussion with his politically calculated, false pronouncements of Iranian intentions.
Military action against Iran is as serious an issue as there is out there, and that is why I urged Phil to use it as the wedge to raise the Israeli-US relationship. Discussions on all aspects of I-P will naturally follow.
The other reason I suggest concentrating on non-Jews is that I believe the mainstream Christian churches can serve as natural allies in demanding fair treatment for Palestinians. Unlike the fundamentalists, fair treatment is consistent with their theology. Check out the positions on I-P of the Methodist Church for example. With some investment, there are good possibilities for joint efforts to lobby Congress and alter the media bias, countering the AIPAC-Christian Zionist axis.
Finally a reply to Richard Witty:
"Progressive anti-Zionist is also an oxymoron" is an empty sound bite. It might have meaning, but you have not provided any. At least explain how it is such.
I was not suggesting Phil should not focus on Gaza. Phil is exactly right in raising Gaza as much as possible, although I can see why you would prefer the topic buried. Gaza is the turning point as far as faith in Israeli hasbara is concerned. Even my Hadassah-member mother no longer believes what is coming out of the mouths of IDF spokespeople.
Phil needs to ground all his writing with the concrete. When it comes to Israel-Palestine there is too much arguing over the abstract. For me, much of what you write fails to influence as it is all too often devoid of the concrete, with no attempt to quantify your equivalences. Do what I did: go through the entire list from B'Tselem of deaths from this conflict since 2000 and their sequence, and then draw some conclusions based on all your ethical pronouncements.
Charging Phil with flirting with fascist themes is a slur. You need to be much more specific to make that charge. I saw quite a good deal of fascist rhetoric over at Realistic Dove as the commenters piled on Mondoweiss, but I didn't see you warning them of their fascism.
And as Americans, the issue is the relationship between Israel and the US, and the Palestinians and the US. Our demand for US government action/non-action is based on the fact that America is intervening to the hilt in the disagreement between the Israelis and the Palestinians, and that the intervention is decidedly one-sided and unjust. Without US support, world politics would have forced the Israelis to compromise decades ago. Your warnings about intervention are absurd.
Persuasion is good, but it can only occur in a non-coercive environment. The use of military and economic power to determine issues negates the effectiveness of persuasive dialogue. Until you provide us with some method of dealing with the fact that the United States and Israel want an I-P settlement to be based on which parties have the most power rather than based on rights under international law, your recommendations sound more like cover. How about advocating for compulsory arbitration of the conflict based on international law? That is how civilized states settle conflicts. I doubt the Palestinians would object.
To MRW:
As I explained above, I believe there is more to be gained by concentrating on the mainstream churches initially. The fundamentalists appear to have a heavy theological investment in Greater Israel.
