A couple months back the New York Review of Books published an important, but pursy, piece on the Gaza war by Michael Walzer and Avishai Margalit (pictured) saying that the force used in Gaza was unjustified because Israel would never have used such force in civilian neighborhoods in Israel. I say pursy because there was no outrage. The tone of the piece was legalistic, and did not reflect what must be a dramatic internal struggle in Walzer’s soul, the soul of a Zionist. (Indeed, the strongest condemnation of Gaza in NYRB has come from Roger Cohen, who said some months ago he was "shamed" by it.)
Subsequently the NY Review ran a letter objecting to Walzer and Margalit’s analysis, written by a professor, Asa Kacher, and a Major General, Amos Yadlin. They are both Israelis.
Then in the latest issue, the NY Review follows up with two letters. From Shlomo Avineri, and the great Zeev Sternhell. Only Sternhell approves of the analysis, and takes it further, with appropriate outrage, at last.
Margalit is an Israeli. So are Sternhell, Avineri, Kasher and Yadlin. Michael Walzer spends a great deal of time in Israel. Where are the non-Israeli voices on the question of the Gaza slaughter? Where are the non-Jewish Americans? Where are the Palestinians? Can you imagine the New York Review of Books, our most important intellectual journal, publishing a forum on Tibet written by the Chinese? Never. But on this issue the great leftleaning NYRB is tortured (and PEP, and captive to the Israel lobby). Do you understand how significant Zionism is in American Jewish life, and therefore in U.S. intellectual culture? Let us change that, you and I, now that the discourse is laid out upon the sky like a patient etherized on a table.
(P.S. Note that the NYRB ran an excellent piece on journalism in the blogosphere by Michael Massing!)
Where are the Palestinians here?
You complain about NY Review of Books not having Palestinian writers, but even here, the principals are Jewish, American, upper-middle-class.
The patient may be etherized on the table, but the table is in a room without windows and the lights are out, the door locked. Outside the people come and go, speaking of Jacko Jackson and how can they fit into a minority group benefits pool.
Richard, Seham is a Palestinian. Though I take your point! We need more non-Jews! Phil
Phil, it’s good that Seham is palestinian and her viewpoint is much appreciated. But the sad truth is that many Americans with palestinian background are simply afraid to speak out. She is young and perhaps braver than some. But palestinians in the US do have a reason to be afraid that their lives could be disrupted at a drop of a hat. For example, it is supposedly a crime to in the US to give “material support” to, say, Hamas – as the recent arrests in NC demonstrate. There are no doubt law enforcement agents who patrol this site for comments. As long as you are Jewish or even a regular white or black american , chances are you’ll be left alone. Though let’s not be under any illusions that comments made on this blog – or elsewhere – are truly annonymous. Nothing is, any longer. Still, the minute one suspects there’s a muslim in the room, all bets are really off. They (palestinians, muslim arabs) know they are monitored. And one who may come out as a palestinian better not make any comment anywhere suggestive of the fact that a rapproachment with hamas might be a good idea.
Who’s monitoring what? that I don’t know, of course, but we do know that zionist agents are here in force, trolling and patroling, and though some may be silent, they are at the ready to spill beans on anyone potentially guilty of being muslim while speaking out. The fear factor is very real, and the patriot Act empowers the FBI to seize anyone they remotely deem a security threat. Based on something I read, it appears for example that the person who was just arrested in NC was considered sympathetic to Hamas. The official complaint specified only that he – and his sons – were giving “material comfort” to violent jihad. He was accused apparently of no other crime. He had a collection of arms. So do many people in rural NC, IA, IN OK and what not. Yet all we see around is silence – hardly a peep or a voive raising questions. To me this smacks of a warning.
I also know of at least one person who’s been residing in this country as a citizen but was originally from Gaza. He keeps a low profile out of fear not because he has nothing to say.
Sad as it may be, for now, given the climate, it is incumbent upon the Jews and the Christians and the seculars of all sorts to speak on behalf of the palestinians. As best they can – and knowing full well their voices are not as authentic as those of the people who are from there.
Well done on the mention in the NYRB article by Michael Massing.
Agree completely with your frustration with the NYRB’s PEP mental wall, though it seems to be a little lower than that of the New Yorker’s (which I gave up on years ago).
Finally, congratulations on the new-look blog and, even better, the new comments policy which makes all the difference in the world.
I also gave up on the NYRB years ago. For decades I loved its dissection of the right wing
as it pertained to literature and the arts, artists, ideas over time. But, gradually, over time, I realized it was purely PEP. A high falutin rag in that respect. So I threw the NYRB baby out with its bath water. I’m sure the beacons there have no idea why. What’s worse,
a Nazi rag such as Julius Streicher’s, or the NYRB? In terms of subscribers, neither ever had much. When you think of it in terms of a tradition of Free Speech in the homeland, the NYRB comes
off really bad, more irresponsible in fact. The whole point of the NYRB is that it was, is above yellow journalism, more a font of the play of ideas. W & M had to go to London to get their book reviewed and published, yes?
Phil,
You missed an important point in your post. Asa Kasher (not Kacher, as you spelled it the first time) is more than simply a “professor” in Israel. More significantly, he is the author of the IDF “code of ethics”. I’m not surprised you didn’t mention it since the NYRB fails to mention this also, so you may not have been aware of his significance and his bias. He is essentially justifying his own conduct in the response letter, but the NYRB does not let the reader know this.
See this article in Haaretz for more background on Kasher:
The philosopher who gave the IDF moral justification in Gaza
Long snippet here:
I’m an Arab Muslim. The reason that you don’t hear us as much is simply because we WANT to talk, but who is there to LISTEN without thinking, “Take everything they say with a grain of salt. The fact that they are Arab and or Muslim MUST mean that they really are not on the side of ‘Human Rights’. There must be ulterior motive.”
I cannot tell you how many times this has happened. I don’t even have to have someone tell me about it…I can FEEL that vibe coming from people.