This post is part of Marc H. Ellis’s “Exile and the Prophetic” feature for Mondoweiss. To read the entire series visit the archive page.
My history lesson for the day, from an unknown admirer, via email. As you read it and learn remember, it’s better than a death threat.
Regarding your book about “Israel and Palestine,” “Palestine” is a historically illegitimate European name for Israel dating back to the Romans briefly renaming Israel “palaestina” and the British later anglicizing it into “palestine” during the British Mandate. Palestine does not appear even once in the Hebrew Bible, Christian Bible nor even in the Quran, while Israel appears 2500 time. Your history lesson for the day.
Thank you “Michele” for reminding me how entangled the Israel/Palestine issue is.
The New York Times is at least one step ahead of my unknown admirer when it defines the Israeli diplomat, Michael Oren, aka Michael Scott Bornstein, as “the man in the middle.”
So thinks the New York Times. However, what we find in Oren’s biography is that though functioning as Israel’s ambassador to America, he’s really an American. After all, he was born in New York and raised in New Jersey. All his university degrees are from American universities. His father served in the Korean War.His wife is from San Francisco. Why, then,such a Times fuss about Oren’s perfect American accent?
He’s an American, stupid!
I’m not delving into the double loyalty debate which sounds an awful like the Obama Birther issue. I don’t want to go Donald Trump and besides when I hear comments like “Israel is our 51st state” or references to politicians as “Our Senator from Tel Aviv,” I think stupid. I also think anti-Jewish.
My point is much more complicated and important than that silliness. To start, and apropos of the High Holidays, the Times reports Oren attending highly politicized Rosh Hashanah celebrations with side trips to an Israeli arm producer in Maryland and J Street in Washington. Like the term Palestine, Rosh Hashanah is a tangled web for sure.
Here’s the Times take:
He has run up to Washington for damage control. He has spent hours with reporters making Israel’s case against Tehran. He went to a Rosh Hashanah party celebrating the Jewish New Year at Vice President Joseph Biden Jr.’s house. He had the White House chief of staff and hundreds of others over for Rosh Hashanah at his house. He went to ribbon-cutting ceremony in Maryland to open the North American headquarters of an Israeli military contractor. He even made a quiet trip to press his arguments about Iran at J Street, the dovish Jewish lobbying group.
Talk about politicizing the Jewish calendar. This is the same accusation that the Jewish establishment often makes about Jewish dissidents. As in, how dare you talk about the need for a collective confession on Yom Kippur?
In reality, we’re talking about which kind of politics the High Holidays are played for rather than whether Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur are politicized. If you ever want a text book case for the intersection of religion and politics here it is.
Also note how high Jewishness rates on the Washington food chain. Vice President Biden – as far as I know he isn’t Jewish – hosts a Jewish New Year’s gathering. Obama’s chief of staff, Jacob (Jack) Lew, an Orthodox Jew, attends the New Year’s bash at Oren’s residence. Then there is the ribbon cutting at the Israeli military contractors. What kinds of armaments are being made there?
J Street is a “quiet” visit, though it’s difficult to understand why. J Street is so mainstream Michael Lerner was forbidden entry there.
In a nutshell, there you have it. An American Jew becomes Israel’s ambassador to the United States. With his perfect American accent he hobnobs with the American political elite, reciprocating Rosh Hashanah party favors. He makes sure that the Israeli military is on American shores. On the QT he meets with J Street Israel enablers. Wonder of wonders, then, America’s “unshakable” support for Israel.
Would Palestinians, Muslims and every other religion, people and nationality change places with Israel in the Washington circus? Of course, they would. Would they have the internal critique generated by Jews of Conscience over the years? An interesting question. Yet the issue isn’t what could or should be. We have to stay with the High Holiday facts on the ground.
Establishment Jewish influence on American foreign policy is here to stay. Israel support by the United States government is here to stay. Obama is correct when he brags that the American-Israeli relationship has never been stronger. He could add that the relationship has never been more technologically sophisticated, more integrated or more empowered than it is now.
In the next four years look for more of the same on the High Holidays – whoever is President.
So tell me, which entanglement is worse, more detrimental and decisive. Is it my new email admirer who can’t find Palestine in the Bible or our sophisticated elite that enables Israeli power?
The strange thing is that once upon a time – when those of us at a certain age were growing up – recognition of our High Holidays at the national level was important. It made us feel accepted in America.
Once upon a time, the Jewish southpaw, Sandy Koufax, sat down on Yom Kippur. He refused to pitch in the first game of the 1965 World Series. Koufax’s statement: Jews are part of the American mosaic.
Now our “acceptance” has a much more militant tone. Michael Scott Bornstein is one link in the Americanization of Israeli power. He represents the militarization of American Jewish life.
The charge of double loyalty should be reinterpreted. The question for Jews has always been which side of the Empire Divide we choose. The two choices – empire or community.
When Sandy Koufax sat down for Yom Kippur he stood up for the Jewish community. When the powerful flock to the (American) Israeli ambassador’s residence they stand up for empire.
The question isn’t the Ambassador’s American English. The question is what became of Michael Scott Bornstein.
That question provides a snapshot of the American journey from community to empire. It is highly charged and infinitely more important than the English ability of a born and bred American.
Regarding the email you received, it seems to be a common idea by proponents of the current state system in the Holy Land that “Palestine” is just a made up name by the Romans with no relation to ancient history. I would point out that Herodotus referred to the area as Palestine, well before the Romans, and that the Zionist movement itself often called the land Palestine, including on their campaign posters.
I don’t see it as “bad” much more than it would be bad to call France “Gaul.” The English were Germanic people, but they kept the name “British” from the Celts before them.
To me, “Zion” is a religious term for the land, while “Israel” is the term for the people. Thus: the Land of Israel is Zion.
Regards.
Do you also insist on referring to Kareem Abdul Jabbar and Muhammed Ali as Lew Alcindor and Cassious Clay, respectively? For younger MW readers, they Islamified their names in the late 60s early 70s.
Establishment Jewish influence on American foreign policy as well as U.S. government support for Israel are here to stay? Permanently? Forever? Well, if that’s so, what’s the purpose of MW, anyway? To bay at the moon? Guess I’ve been mistaken, because from the start my take on MW has been that the intent of its founders/co-editors is to shatter Zionist control of American foreign policy and the U.S.-Israel special relationship. Hope that’s still what MW is about. Otherwise, best I look for another site upon which to speak out for a just and peaceful world.
The charge of double loyalty should be reinterpreted. The question for Jews has always been which side of the Empire Divide we choose. The two choices – empire or community.
If the choice for Jews is empire or community, what is the choice for gentiles?
I’d be much more impressed by an article titled “The Israelification of American Power”. Even if that would be “anti-Jewish” according to our self-proclaimed prophet.