Besides three contributions from the Podhoretz family, the latest Commentary includes a faintly-goosesteppish piece by Michael Oren, the new Israeli ambassador to the U.S., on the existential threats to Israel. It's true I liked Oren's appearance at AIPAC, but this piece creates a weird moral atmosphere. It makes repeated references to the perils posed to "the Jewish State" by Arabs and immoral Jews and even democracy, and thus, without intending to, answers the question of why Zionism finds itself in a spiritual cul-de-sac after a century of relative vigor.
But see for yourself. Ambassador Oren:
Israel, the Jewish State, is predicated on a decisive and stable Jewish
majority of at least 70 percent. Any lower than that and Israel will
have to decide between being a Jewish state and a democratic state. If
it chooses democracy, then Israel as a Jewish state will cease to
exist….
The breakdown of public morality, in my view, poses the greatest single
existential threat to Israel. It is this threat that undermines
Israel’s ability to cope with other threats; that saps the willingness
of Israelis to fight, to govern themselves, and even to continue living
within a sovereign Jewish state….
Preserving Jerusalem as the capital of the Jewish state must become
a policy priority for Israel…. Israeli school children
must make biannual visits to Jerusalem; materials on Jerusalem’s
centrality to Jewish history and national identity must be introduced
into school curricula….
Similarly, to maintain Israel’s demographic integrity, measures must
be taken to separate Israel from the densely populated areas of the
West Bank…. The new
borders should include the maximum number of Jews, of natural and
strategic assets, and of Jewish holy places. [note that natural assets suggests capturing the water supply]…
In the specific case of Israeli Arabs, Israel must adopt a two-pronged
policy of assuring total equality in the provision of social services
and infrastructure while simultaneously insisting that Israeli Arabs
demonstrate basic loyalty to the state.
Imagine if a Christian writer issued such pronouncements about the U.S., or if a French nationalist made these assertions about France. People would find them creepy.
