I tend to approach writing about the Middle East with a bit of trepidation. For obvious reasons. The region--physically and figuratively--is full of extremists eager to blast away at any perceived enemy. To wit:
On January 8, I posted a piece taking issue with David Frum. This neocon commentator and former George W. Bush speechwriter ("axis of evil" was his handiwork) had claimed that Democrats "recoil" from the Israeli military action in Gaza because "Democratic attitudes are poisoned by the influences of an anti-Zionist hard left, a vociferous faction whose ideology can bleed into outright anti-Semitism." I contended that Frum was trying to poison the policy debate with an irresponsible j'accuse. After all, I asked, "Might the recoiling he speak of...be due to a legitimate concern about the proportionality of the military action, the wisdom of this attack, or the humanitarian toll of the operation?" I concluded:
There is a legitimate debate to be had on the morality and wisdom of Israel's operation in Gaza. Yet Frum, a friendly fellow I have enjoyed debating on television, is attempting to taint that debate by suggesting that anti-Semitism is a major factor prompting Democrats (and others, presumably) to question the assault. That is the last refuge of someone who doesn't want to see a real discourse on this touchy but crucial matter.
Now comes James Kirchick, an assistant editor at The New Republic to misconstrue the case I presented. In an article carried by the National Post of Canada, Kirchick set me up as a representative of Israel's "critics" and excoriated me for being soft on Hamas:
In order to make the "disproportionate" argument, Israel's critics must first minimize the threat that Israel responded to in the first place. "Before proceeding, let me state that the Gaza rocket attacks are human rights crimes, and Israel has the right to defend itself," Mother Jones writer David Corn wrote -- before proceeding to explain why Israel didn't have a right to defend itself: "But that does not mean that in retaliation for about a dozen deaths caused by the rockets from 2004 on, the Israeli Defense Force ought to blow up schools and hospitals in Gaza and kill scores of civilians."
Note how casually Corn dismisses the cold-blooded and unprovoked murder of 12 innocent people, as if they were expendable in the greater quest for a nonexistent "peace process" with a terrorist organization constitutionally committed to Israel's destruction.
That passage causes me to wonder about Kirchick's reading comprehension skills. How much plainer might I have been? There is nothing inconsistent about noting that a party has a right to self-defense and criticizing a particular act of self-defense as excessive and counterproductive. As I've noted before, not every thing that is justified is wise. And when I refer to an action as a human rights crime that is hardly downplaying it.
Kirchick is certainly free to argue that the Israeli assault was proportionate. But in slamming those who raise questions about its size, nature, intensity, and the collateral damage it yielded, he takes a stance that resembles the one Bush adopted prior to the invasion of Iraq--and afterward. Repeatedly, Bush said that he had no choice but to invade Iraq, declaring that doing nothing was not an option. But regarding Iraq (and the potential Saddam Hussein posed), there had been a range of options between doing nothing and launching a full military invasion followed by an occupation of a country Americans knew little about. Yet, in a similar fashion, Kirchick is suggesting that this particular Israeli attack was the only alternative to taking no action. That is certainly not the case. But if Kirchick wants to apply Bushian math to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, that's his prerogative. He should, though, realize that others are more willing to wrestle with the complexities of the situation.
By the way, the other day I watched a short animated film by Israeli animator Yoni Goodman, who created the Oscar nominated Waltz with Bashir. In 90 seconds, Goodman seeks to create sympathy for Gaza civilians who are subject to the Israeli blockade. You can judge for yourself if it's effective. But let's remember that its author is an Israeli. If Israelis can debate (and question) Israeli actions in Gaza, so can Americans.
You can follow my postings and media appearances via Twitter by clicking here.
More from CQ Politics
Comments
David, equating criticism of policy/actions by the state of Isreal with anti-Semitism is central to the silence the opposition strategy of die-hard Isreal supporters. Trying to argue that BOTH sides of the issue have sins to answer for automatically engenders the response that you are a terrorist sympathizer and/or Jew hater. The conflict will never be solved until we take off the kid gloves we treat one side with and acknowledge both the Palestinian AND the Isreali leadership are guilty of actions which perpetuate the circle of violence.
As long as our government assures Israel of unqualified support we are guilty of encouraging the Israeli RWNJ's - here we are with another RW government being formed who will not even support the "Bush Roadmap" of a two state solution. They have gone as far as encouraging more settlements?
We should be less involved if we can't offer a solid solution. IMO
Yes. No doubt, but the debate will be panned by one or the other side. The debate has to be honest enough to endure the expected challenge from both or either side.
The truth needs no agreement and reality needs no supporters to be.
"Honest disagreement is often a sign of progress" ~ Ghandi
Israel is more efficient at destruction than Hamas.
Since Hamas launched several thousand missiles into Israel over a multi-year span, it seems that Israel's attempt to stop such bombing must needs be violent.
The population of Gaza elected Hamas to be its government. The old rule is that you get the governemnt you deserve. Gaza elected and deserves a government whose charter clearly states it will destroy Israel.
If Hamas must sacrifice thousands of Gazan lives to achieve its stated aim, then so be it. Those Gazans will be sacrificed.
Hamas bombed Israel in the full knowledge that at some point Israel would retaliate. As soon as Israel began to retaliate Hamas leadership scurried and hid underground and sent off its troops to die and to place civilians in harm's way. This was no accident. Hamas's intention was to create a massive loss of Gazan lives so as to develop a public relations problem for Israel.
If Hamas is willing to see Gazan civilians killed why should Israel not be willing to help Hamas in its mission of harming as many Gazans as possible?
Hamas is not sufficiently adroit to effectively attack Israel so it must force Israel to kill its own brothers in Gaza. This it accomplished by using the citizenry as human shields and by firning missiles from heavily populated areas they were sure would be counetrattacked.
Is there any doubt that Hamas intended to see Gazans dead by any means fair or foul? None that I can see.
Hamas achieved its aims. Israel did not. Had Hamas not gone underground to hide like scared mice, they would have died. Hamas is led by a cowardly group that wishes to see blood flow. Whose blood is no consequence until it might be theirs.
""poisoned by the influences of an anti-Zionist hard left""
ya right.
"I am a zionist!"
....Joe Biden.
""Hamas launched several thousand missiles into Israel over a multi-year span""
you might launch rockets as well if you had been subjected to 60+ years of occupied brutality as the palestinians have.
so why are there never any photos of these alleged rocket attacks?
there are, however, many documentation of israeli brutality.
"Every time we do something you tell me America will do this and will do that . . . I want to tell you something very clear: Don't worry about American pressure on Israel. We, the Jewish people, control America, and the Americans know it."
- Israeli Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, October 3, 2001.
The Israeli Jerusalem municipality hands out demolition orders for 36 More Palestinian families
The Israeli Jerusalem municipality handed out demolition orders for 36 additional Palestinian families in the city on Thursday. The families live in two buildings located at the Al Abasiya neighborhood just out side Jerusalem's old city.
The orders gave the families 10 days to evacuate their homes. On Wednesday when the Israeli municipality issued orders to demolish 55 more homes, owners of the homes near the old city set up a protest camp.
The Fed refused yesterday to disclose the names of the borrowers and the loans, alleging that it would cast “a stigma” on recipients of more than $1.9 trillion of emergency credit from U.S. taxpayers and the assets the central bank is accepting as collateral.
You nailed it kalpal. The only thing you left out is... hamas stole the relief supplies for Gazans. That proves beyond a doubt hamas doesn't give a shyt about Gaza Palestinians except as sacrificial lambs to make political points. They got Palestinians killed, their homes demolished, and THEN stole their food as well.
*sorry bastards
I agree, the debate should be done HONESTLY and based upon facts, but it is so hard when one side bases justifies it's actions on the notion that Israel should not exist and should never have - not that rocket attacks are illegal or that Israel has been attacked any times by its neighbors etc.
I see we have someone who likes to use fabricated literature here. Why don't we look at this Sharon quote, honestly:
"These quotes originated with the pro-Hamas American group Islamic Association for Palestine in an Oct. 13, 2001 press release, which claimed its source as Israeli radio Kol Yisrael:
According [to] the Israeli Hebrew radio, Col Yisrael Wednesday, Peres warned Sharon that refusing to heed incessant American requests for a cease-fire with the Palestinians would endanger Israeli interests and turn the US against us. At this point, a furious Sharon reportedly turned toward Peres, saying “ . . . I want to tell you something clear, don't worry about American pressure on Israel, we the Jewish people control America, and the Americans know it.”…
Elsewhere in the press release, the quote was repeated, albeit slightly altered to: “we control America.”
CAMERA received confirmation from Kol Yisrael political correspondent Yoni Ben-Menachem, who reports on Cabinet meetings, that he never made such a broadcast and that Sharon never made such a statement. "
I did not start out this way but I am seeing zionists as Jews who cannot settle any argument except by fighting. Our America Jews seem to support this notion in there lobbiest Think tanks and Newspaper articles. It is no secret that these neocons are putting out alot of pressure right now for someone to start a war with Iran.As with Iraq in the early 90s they are printing alot of false ideas and rumors.This worries me because they seem to care little about a life if it is not Jewish.In Gaza, if a little Palestinian boy had run out of a school and thrown a knife at one of them,they would have blown up the school and all the children in it. Like many commoners I have asked the question,Why are jews hated so much in the world.But then I read articles that display the Zionists as only caring about themselves and there goals.If American lifes are lost in Iraq,So be it! If the Unites States goes broke.To Bad! If 800 Gazans are killed to revenge 12 Israelies killed.No problem.
Quote: "During the last seven years, 14 Israelis have been killed by mostly homemade rockets fired from the Gaza Strip, while more than 5,000 Palestinians were killed by Israel with some of the most advanced US-supplied armaments in the world. And while no rockets are fired from the West Bank, 45 Palestinians have died there at Israel's hands this year alone. The issue is of course not just the vast disparity in weapons and power, but that one side is the occupier, the other the occupied."
![[RSS]](http://blogs.cqpolitics.com/templates/images/rss_icon.gif){kind=icon}
![[ARCHIVES]](http://blogs.cqpolitics.com/templates/images/archives_icon.png){kind=icon}
Comments
David, equating criticism of policy/actions by the state of Isreal with anti-Semitism is central to the silence the opposition strategy of die-hard Isreal supporters. Trying to argue that BOTH sides of the issue have sins to answer for automatically engenders the response that you are a terrorist sympathizer and/or Jew hater. The conflict will never be solved until we take off the kid gloves we treat one side with and acknowledge both the Palestinian AND the Isreali leadership are guilty of actions which perpetuate the circle of violence.
Posted by: eyes_open
| March 5, 2009 2:16 PM
As long as our government assures Israel of unqualified support we are guilty of encouraging the Israeli RWNJ's - here we are with another RW government being formed who will not even support the "Bush Roadmap" of a two state solution. They have gone as far as encouraging more settlements?
We should be less involved if we can't offer a solid solution. IMO
Posted by: capt
| March 5, 2009 3:06 PM
"Can It Be Done Honestly?"
Yes. No doubt, but the debate will be panned by one or the other side. The debate has to be honest enough to endure the expected challenge from both or either side.
The truth needs no agreement and reality needs no supporters to be.
"Honest disagreement is often a sign of progress" ~ Ghandi
Posted by: capt
| March 5, 2009 5:19 PM
More correctly:
"Honest differences are often a healthy sign of progress."
~ Mahatma Gandhi (1869 - 1948)
Posted by: capt
| March 5, 2009 5:26 PM
Israel is more efficient at destruction than Hamas.
Since Hamas launched several thousand missiles into Israel over a multi-year span, it seems that Israel's attempt to stop such bombing must needs be violent.
The population of Gaza elected Hamas to be its government. The old rule is that you get the governemnt you deserve. Gaza elected and deserves a government whose charter clearly states it will destroy Israel.
If Hamas must sacrifice thousands of Gazan lives to achieve its stated aim, then so be it. Those Gazans will be sacrificed.
Hamas bombed Israel in the full knowledge that at some point Israel would retaliate. As soon as Israel began to retaliate Hamas leadership scurried and hid underground and sent off its troops to die and to place civilians in harm's way. This was no accident. Hamas's intention was to create a massive loss of Gazan lives so as to develop a public relations problem for Israel.
If Hamas is willing to see Gazan civilians killed why should Israel not be willing to help Hamas in its mission of harming as many Gazans as possible?
Hamas is not sufficiently adroit to effectively attack Israel so it must force Israel to kill its own brothers in Gaza. This it accomplished by using the citizenry as human shields and by firning missiles from heavily populated areas they were sure would be counetrattacked.
Is there any doubt that Hamas intended to see Gazans dead by any means fair or foul? None that I can see.
Hamas achieved its aims. Israel did not. Had Hamas not gone underground to hide like scared mice, they would have died. Hamas is led by a cowardly group that wishes to see blood flow. Whose blood is no consequence until it might be theirs.
Posted by: kalpal
| March 5, 2009 7:49 PM
""poisoned by the influences of an anti-Zionist hard left""
ya right.
"I am a zionist!"
....Joe Biden.
""Hamas launched several thousand missiles into Israel over a multi-year span""
you might launch rockets as well if you had been subjected to 60+ years of occupied brutality as the palestinians have.
so why are there never any photos of these alleged rocket attacks?
there are, however, many documentation of israeli brutality.
Posted by: as_if!
| March 5, 2009 9:39 PM
"Every time we do something you tell me America will do this and will do that . . . I want to tell you something very clear: Don't worry about American pressure on Israel. We, the Jewish people, control America, and the Americans know it."
- Israeli Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, October 3, 2001.
Posted by: as_if!
| March 5, 2009 9:54 PM
The Israeli Jerusalem municipality hands out demolition orders for 36 More Palestinian families
The Israeli Jerusalem municipality handed out demolition orders for 36 additional Palestinian families in the city on Thursday. The families live in two buildings located at the Al Abasiya neighborhood just out side Jerusalem's old city.
The orders gave the families 10 days to evacuate their homes. On Wednesday when the Israeli municipality issued orders to demolish 55 more homes, owners of the homes near the old city set up a protest camp.
http://tinyurl.com/bytjoe
Posted by: as_if!
| March 5, 2009 10:05 PM
ISRAEL AND PALESTINE IN 2 MINUTES:
http://tinyurl.com/7nn9mc
Posted by: as_if!
| March 5, 2009 10:09 PM
The Fed refused yesterday to disclose the names of the borrowers and the loans, alleging that it would cast “a stigma” on recipients of more than $1.9 trillion of emergency credit from U.S. taxpayers and the assets the central bank is accepting as collateral.
http://tinyurl.com/an47bb
Posted by: as_if!
| March 5, 2009 10:55 PM
You nailed it kalpal. The only thing you left out is... hamas stole the relief supplies for Gazans. That proves beyond a doubt hamas doesn't give a shyt about Gaza Palestinians except as sacrificial lambs to make political points. They got Palestinians killed, their homes demolished, and THEN stole their food as well.
*sorry bastards
Posted by: Alan
| March 5, 2009 11:05 PM
I agree, the debate should be done HONESTLY and based upon facts, but it is so hard when one side bases justifies it's actions on the notion that Israel should not exist and should never have - not that rocket attacks are illegal or that Israel has been attacked any times by its neighbors etc.
I see we have someone who likes to use fabricated literature here. Why don't we look at this Sharon quote, honestly:
"These quotes originated with the pro-Hamas American group Islamic Association for Palestine in an Oct. 13, 2001 press release, which claimed its source as Israeli radio Kol Yisrael:
According [to] the Israeli Hebrew radio, Col Yisrael Wednesday, Peres warned Sharon that refusing to heed incessant American requests for a cease-fire with the Palestinians would endanger Israeli interests and turn the US against us. At this point, a furious Sharon reportedly turned toward Peres, saying “ . . . I want to tell you something clear, don't worry about American pressure on Israel, we the Jewish people control America, and the Americans know it.”…
Elsewhere in the press release, the quote was repeated, albeit slightly altered to: “we control America.”
CAMERA received confirmation from Kol Yisrael political correspondent Yoni Ben-Menachem, who reports on Cabinet meetings, that he never made such a broadcast and that Sharon never made such a statement. "
What is this other solution you favor, Mr. Corn?
Posted by: TGoodman
| March 6, 2009 1:51 AM
I did not start out this way but I am seeing zionists as Jews who cannot settle any argument except by fighting. Our America Jews seem to support this notion in there lobbiest Think tanks and Newspaper articles. It is no secret that these neocons are putting out alot of pressure right now for someone to start a war with Iran.As with Iraq in the early 90s they are printing alot of false ideas and rumors.This worries me because they seem to care little about a life if it is not Jewish.In Gaza, if a little Palestinian boy had run out of a school and thrown a knife at one of them,they would have blown up the school and all the children in it. Like many commoners I have asked the question,Why are jews hated so much in the world.But then I read articles that display the Zionists as only caring about themselves and there goals.If American lifes are lost in Iraq,So be it! If the Unites States goes broke.To Bad! If 800 Gazans are killed to revenge 12 Israelies killed.No problem.
Posted by: keith
| March 6, 2009 4:09 AM
THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STORY:
http://tinyurl.com/a4ujc5
see the damage that BOTH sides have done to each other.
Posted by: as_if!
| March 6, 2009 10:13 AM
The Guardian, Tuesday 30 December 2008
Quote: "During the last seven years, 14 Israelis have been killed by mostly homemade rockets fired from the Gaza Strip, while more than 5,000 Palestinians were killed by Israel with some of the most advanced US-supplied armaments in the world. And while no rockets are fired from the West Bank, 45 Palestinians have died there at Israel's hands this year alone. The issue is of course not just the vast disparity in weapons and power, but that one side is the occupier, the other the occupied."
http://tinyurl.com/7uw9qo
Posted by: as_if!
| March 6, 2009 10:20 AM
Post A Comment