“Our army is big, we have this atom bomb, but the inner feeling is of absolute fragility, that all the time we are at the edge of the abyss.”That sobering sentiment is offered by Israeli author David Grossman in Jeffrey Goldberg's cover story for this month's Atlantic, which I mentioned earlier. The article asks what seems like the eternal question: "Is Israel Finished?"
Israelis have violently contradictory feelings about their future. Their country is, by almost any measure, an astonishing success. It has a large, sophisticated, and growing economy (its gross domestic product last year was $150 billion); the finest universities and medical centers in the Middle East; and a main city, Tel Aviv, that is a center of art, fashion, cuisine, and high culture spread along a beautiful Mediterranean beach. Israel has shown itself, with notable exceptions, to be adept at self-defense, and capable (albeit imperfectly) of protecting civil liberties during wartime. It has become a worldwide center of Jewish learning and self-expression; its strength has straightened the spines of Jews around the world; and, most consequentially, it has absorbed and enfranchised millions of previously impoverished and dispossessed Jews. Zionism may actually be the most successful national liberation movement of the 20th century.This article, which also discusses the fact that Jews main soon become become the minority in Israel, is far from the first to raise these issues. Avraham Burg, once a strong voice of Zionism, shared the same sense of failure last summer, a change of heart compared to "the Pope giving sex tips.”
Yet 60 years of independence have not provided Israel with legitimacy in its own region. Two of its neighbors, Egypt and Jordan, have signed peace treaties with Israel, but it is still a small Jewish island in a great sea of Islam, a religion that seems today more allergic than ever to the idea of Jewish independence. Iran poses the most ruthless threat to Israel’s existence—no other member of the United Nations has so insistently, and in such baroque terms, threatened the destruction of another member state.
The internal threats to Israel’s existence are severe as well. Israel’s greatest military victory, in 1967, led to a squalid and seemingly endless occupation, and to the birth of a mystical, antidemocratic, and revanchist strain of Zionism, made manifest in the settlements of the West Bank. These settlements have undermined Israel’s international legitimacy and demoralized moderate Palestinians. The settlers exist far outside the Israeli political consensus, and their presence will likely help incite a third intifada. Yet the country seems unable to confront the settlements.
Israel’s people are among the world’s most patriotic—in a recent survey, 94 percent of Jewish Israelis said they are willing to fight for their country (by contrast, 63 percent of Americans are willing to fight for theirs), but 44 percent of Israelis said they would be ready to leave their country if they could find a better standard of living abroad. There are already up to 40,000 Israelis in Silicon Valley (and more than a half million across the U.S.), and the emigration of Israel’s most talented citizens is a constant worry of Israeli leaders. “Jews know that they can land on their feet in any corner of the world,” Ehud Barak, the defense minister and former prime minister, told me. “The real test for us is to make Israel such an attractive place—cutting-edge in science, education, culture, quality of life—that even American Jewish young people want to come here. If we cannot do this, even those who were born here will consciously decide to go to other places. This is a real problem.”
(Image: Richard Silverstein's Tikun Olam blog)
2 comments:
"...and to the birth of a mystical, antidemocratic, and revanchist strain of Zionism, made manifest in the settlements of the West Bank. These settlements have undermined Israel’s international legitimacy and demoralized moderate Palestinians. The settlers exist far outside the Israeli political consensus, and their presence will likely help incite a third intifada. Yet the country seems unable to confront the settlements."
Nonsense. Israel, or more specifically, Israelis, are not only able to confront the settlers, they are ready to do so right now. They understand that such a confrontation will be violent. They understand that what will start out as numerous Waco-like stand-offs with deranged, fanatical, seditionists(heavily financed by American-Jewish money)could very well end up as a civil war. They know this and yet they are still willing to do so. They understand, as do I, that the alternative is unthinkable. Unfortunately they never seem to elect leadership,(either from the right or the left)with the physical guts or the political will to do so. Olmert is the last in a long line of Israeli Puppet Prime Ministers since 1977, who takes his marching orders from New York (Rabin decided at long last to tell them to piss off and it likely got him killed)and who's political campaigns are financed by 47th St. diamond merchants and revanchist billionaires such as our friend Moskowitz of Hawaian Gardens fame.
A recent development that I find disconcerting is that a subtle switch, reliant on double-speak and with implications for the future of the Jewish state, has occurred in mainline Protestant discussion on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. "End the Occupation" used to carry the sense of ending the Israeli occupation of territories outside the Green Line. The call increasingly takes on overtones of questioning the legitimacy of a Jewish state, what with a growing insistence upon "justice for Palestinian refugees" and upon "a democratic state of Israel" (with the latter seldom referred to as a "Jewish state").
Post a Comment