Next Monday, there’s a debate about Israel’s policies at Columbia University that features three Zionists, and no Palestinian. Hussein Ibish, the Lebanese-American author who works for a two-state Palestinian group, will join liberal Zionist Peter Beinart, in opposing two neoconservatives, in a debate at the Diana Center at Barnard.
Columbia University Debate: “Are Israel’s Policies Justified in Light of the Security Issues it Faces?”
Join us for a powerful debate on Israel’s policies as they relate to security threats facing the country. The debate is being put on as a partnership with the Columbia International Relations Council and Association (CIRCA), Mayanot and This World: The Values Network.
America’s Rabbi and bestselling author, Rabbi Shmuley Boteach, along with Wall Street Journal Foreign Affairs columnist, Bret Stephens, will debate against Hussein Ibish, Senior Fellow at the American Task Force on Palestine, along with author and political commentator, Peter Beinart.
This is more evidence of the complete polarization of the issue, with mainstream groups carrying on a conversation in which Israel is a model democracy and grassroots groups having a conversation in which Israel is losing legitimacy. It’s about time the mainstream reflects that powerful grassroots criticism. (Beinart will voice it by proxy, in disagreeing with it.)
Who’s sponsoring this debate? This World is the shop of Shmuley Boteach, a giant self-promoter (America’s Rabbi). Mayanot appears to be this Zionist organization. But the Columbia International Relations Council and Association (CIRCA), would seem to have a neutral mission.
CIRCA’s mission, as articulated in the preamble of the constitution, is “entrenched in its principles, and manifested in all of its activities. The central goals are of an educational nature, particularly with regards to engaging with the world, its numerous cultures, social and political systems, in hopes of fostering a deeper understanding and active cooperation among people of all backgrounds.
Why are they staging such an imbalanced debate?