In response, many critics of Israel have defended their position by contending that the extent of Palestinian suffering compares with or even exceeds the misery of other global victims. While I find this argument to be factually convincing, there is something fundamentally unsound in engaging in such comparisons at all. Why should activists who seek to change Israeli policy be expected to first familiarize themselves with every other worldwide human rights violation, and resolve those that are deemed more pressing, before they can legitimately attend to the Palestinian situation? In any other context, such demand would be considered unreasonable, even ridiculous. For example, the Olympic games in Beijing were met with demonstrations all over the world against China’s oppressive policies. The Chinese government defended its suitability as an Olympic host, but never accused protesters of anti-Asian racism because they were ignoring greater evils.
But in the service of Israel, no argument sinks to a level that is unutterable. If it can be imagined, it can be articulated, because there are legions of the willingly gullible who are eager to grasp any line of reasoning to shield the moral superiority of their beloved country from challenge. All skepticism is tossed aside. There is no recognition that this claim is analogous to that of the hapless lawyer who argues that his client should not stand trial for burglary because there are murderers at large. And that analogy holds only if the questionable factual premise is true, and the suffering of others greatly exceeds that of the Palestinians.
The China-Darfur distraction serves the additional purpose of reinforcing the conviction that "the world’s oldest hatred" is the ubiquitous explanation for protest of Israeli policies. "You are singling out the Jewish State for condemnation while letting much worse violators of international law and human rights off the hook." The target audience, predisposed to swallow any pro-Israel argument, will be especially happy to embrace one tinged with implications of anti-Semitism.
The accusation is cynical as well. Those who make it are not agitating for relief for the unfortunate whose suffering supposedly outranks the Palestinians’. They are defending Israel from pressure to remove its stranglehold on Palestinian life, and exploiting the misery of other human rights victims as a convenient pretext for portraying protesters against Israel as anti-Semites. They can make no credible claim that the Israeli critic’s attention would be better spent elsewhere, since their attention is also focused on Israel, but in defense of "second-rate" oppression rather than opposition to it.
So regardless of whether you believe that Palestinian suffering is the single most troublesome international tragedy, the fifth worst, or the fiftieth worst, there is no need to justify efforts to alleviate it. Israel’s treatment of its own Palestinian citizens is reminiscent of the era in American history that gave rise to the Civil Rights Movement, and its treatment of non-citizen Palestinians under occupation is far, far worse. If it’s broke, it should be fixed, notwithstanding dubious claims that there are more urgent wrongs in need of repair. Those who bring up China or Darfur in defense of Israel are just engaging in the world’s most common faux accusation of racism. Their time and energy would be better spent actually working to solve those other problems, instead of adding to this one.
