Occidental Israeli Rotating Header Image

Jewish

Religious Soldiers and the Establishment

‍‍יח ניסן תשסט - Apr 12th, 2009
by LB.
2 comments

I’m probably paraphrasing badly, but someone once told me that the true sign of a liberal is that will stand for anyone’s belief – as long they agree they should have it. In other words, freedom of expression does not apply for those who differ from you. I would hope that is not true for all (who claim to be) proponents of civil liberties and freedom of speech, but it certainly seems to be the case when it comes to the criticism of religious soldiers in the IDF.

A few weeks ago, in an event marking the brigade’s performance in Operation Cast Lead, a group of religious, observant paratroopers left the event, in order to avoid listening to a woman singer. This was not out of protest, but because their belief is that halacha forbids for men to listen to a woman singing.

In response, the IDF chief education officer, Brigadier-General (tat-aluf) Gen. Eli Shermeister, “called the incident a ‘worrisome phenomenon’ that ‘should not be accorded continued legitimacy.’” Why should religious practices be delegitimized, according to an officer in the army of the Jewish state? Because allowing participants to leave an event “designed to foster group cohesion” would “defeat the purpose” of such an event. I don’t understand, if group cohesion is so important, wouldn’t an event acceptable to all members of the group be best suited to achieve such a goal?

Mordechai Keidar, in an opinion piece in Ynet, hits the nail on the head, “In a liberal state with free media, I would expect open and innovative thinking that would show tolerance to different people.” Where is this is tolerance?

Dr. Esther Herzog does not agree (Hebrew). She attributes “gross and ugly contempt exhibited by [Keidar's] column towards the secular culture and educational system, that points more to ignorance and close-mindedness than to openness and cultural-social sensitivity.” How is she able to say that with a straight face? The only ones who exhibited a lack of sensitivity and close-mindedness here are those who dare to say that religious soldiers should not be permitted to practice religion.

Herzog continues, in essence calling Judaism chauvinistic, mischaracterizing the soldiers’ actions as “boycotting women.” She claims that accusing the secular community of a lack of values is a smokescreen for “discrimination, deprivation, and exploitation of women.” The differences between the religious and secular communities are much more than gender-based, and by characterizing everything she does not like as sexual discrimination, Herzog is crying wolf, and badly.

Keidar’s accusation that “a cultural vacuum [has been] imparted to a whole generation of young people by the secular education system” because of its “drugs, alcohol, promiscuity, and the club culture,” is one that needs to be addressed, not deflected. It needs to be examined, for secular need not mean value-less, and should not mean anti-religious, either. And if Israel is really the “liberal state” it claims to be, then freedoms need to be accorded even to those with whom IDF event planners disagree.

There is No War on Israel’s Campuses, but Why?

‍‍י ניסן תשסט - Apr 3rd, 2009
by LB.
10 comments

The fact that there is an ongoing PR war for Israel on campuses is no secret. A multitude of speakers, social events, editorials, student groups on both sides – all devoted to protecting or harming Israel’s reputation on campus in the West.

Much less known is how tarnished the image of Israel is in Israel itself. During Operation Cast Lead large demonstrations were held in places like the University of Haifa and Hebrew University, waving enemy flags and accusing Israel of committing massacres in Gaza.

If it were simple that then it would not be so alarming. Freedom of speech is an important value, and protesters, comprised of a minority group of enemy sympathizers, will only anger the Zionist majority, thereby undermining their own cause. However, these sentiments are not checked at the door to the lecture hall.

A recent study by Im Tirtzu illustrates a worrisome picture of higher education in Israel. The study is not short, and is important for the understanding some of the reasons behind the abandonment of Zionism in favor of pseudo-universalism. However, the most important findings concern materials assigned in classes that deal with the Arab-Israeli conflict.

Six well known, and relatively well-represented, scholars were chosen and syllabi from classes at Israeli universities were examined to see which of these scholars’ work was assigned, and how many times. These scholars are, on one side, Baruch Kimmerling (read Benny Morris review, destorying Kimmerling’s book), Uri Ram (proudly “post-Zionist”), and Edward Said (need I say more?). On the other side, are Amnon Rubinstein (legal scholar, former Meretz MK, who has written widely on Zionism), Ruth Gavison (law professor who has also written on the dilemma of Jewish-Democratic state), and Shlomo Avineri (written widely on political philosophy, as well as Zionism).

Of these scholars, Kimmerling’s work was assigned 23 times, Uri Ram’s 10 times and Edward Said – four times. Ruth Gavison, Amnon Rubinstein and Shlomo Avineri’s work, combined, was only assigned seven times.

The study also looked at academic publications by the political science departments of universities, and found that, overall, nearly 80% of studies published are either anti-Zionist or anti-nationalist in general.

Academic freedom is important. Very important. Repressing that freedom is bad. However, if Zionism stands on solid grounds, and is based on historical facts (and it does), then Israel’s students are being taught by professors who harbor more than just a bias against Israel. They are misleading, at best, and at worst – lying.

In any case, the question must be raised – how is it, that in Israel, of all places, this is happening practically unnoticed?

Publish It Not in the Streets of Ashkelon

‍‍כ שבט תשסט - Feb 14th, 2009
by LB.
3 comments

I’ve waited a few days to post this, in hopes that an English-language newspaper will pick it up, but it appears to be completely off the radar. Israel prides itself on being the Jewish home, where Jews always have been and always will be welcome, regardless of any other factor. Especially the color of their skin. Nevertheless, the residents of at least one neighborhood in Ashkelon seem to think they are living in the past. America’s past.

Ynet published an article (but only in Hebrew) about a couple trying to buy a home in Ashkelon. Their real estate agent tried to inquire about an apartment, on behalf of the couple, who are of Ethiopian origin, and was given a rather rude awakening by the owner who was trying to sell his apartment.

“There are no Ethiopians in this area. Never have been and never will be. That is our policy…anyone can come, but not Ethiopians. The whole building is like this. I hope so, at least, in order to maintain the value of the apartment and the value of the building.”

Apparently, this is not news to city hall. Former Deputy Mayor Avi Vaknin said he has “encountered this phenomenon numerous times, and shocked every time.” He also added that it is good that it is being “revealed in all of its ugliness because only [that] will help fight such ugly phenomenons.” Really? That’s the only way to fight this? This, coming from a city hall official (albeit former). I don’t understand.

Not only has this been going on for years, but the media does not think it is even newsworthy. That’s a great aliyah draw.

Preliminary Elections Analysis

‍‍יז שבט תשסט - Feb 10th, 2009
by LB.
3 comments

googleelectionsEarly results are trickling in (official Knesset site, but only in Hebrew), and calculations of electoral math has begun. Results, which have been relatively stable seem to suggest that the largest party will be Kadima, headed by Livni, with 28 seats. Yet, she will only be able to claim the premiership if one of the parties to her right sells out.

Right now, the Left-wing bloc (Kadima, Labor, Meretz, Hadash, Ra’am-Ta’al and Balad) has 55 seats. In theory, this would mean Livni has seven fewer seats than she needs for a majority. However, Ahmed Tibi, of Balad, said before the elections that the Arab parties would not help Livni form a bloc, no matter the price. This effectively leaves Livni with a 48-seat bloc.

In the past, Shas has joined a Left-wing government, and seemed willing to do so only a few short months ago, when Livni was tasked with forming a coalition following Olmert’s resignation. She refused to give into Shas’ demands (monetary and Jerusalem), and today was the result. One of her biggest selling points during the campaign was that she refused to capitulate to Shas.

Furthermore, Shas chairman, Eli Yishai (projected: 11 seats), said tonight that “there is no doubt that the people have chosen the Right,” (Hebrew source) implying they would throw their support behind Netanyahu, and not Livni. Then again, Shas has shown in the past that in return for Shas’ support, one must only, literally, pay a price. And even then Livni will only have 59 seats (maybe 63, if Hadash votes along with Shas).

The other kingmaker in these elections is the man the media loves to hate – Yisrael Beitenu chairman, Avigdor Lieberman, and his projected 15 seats. While he did say that he prefers a Right-wing coalition, he refused to endorse either Netanyahu nor Livni. I think that is more of a power play than anything else. The odds of Livni forming a coalition with him are not particularly high. Livni would have a hard time convincing Labor, not to mention Meretz (3 seats), to join such a coalition. This coalition would be pretty unstable, only narrowly adding up to a majority, with 63 seats (unless pigs start flying and Hadash sits in the same government with Lieberman, making it 67). It is more likely that Lieberman is trying to play hard to get, in order to squeeze a better coalition deal out of Netanyahu.

There are two remaining scenarios paving Livni’s way to the Prime Minister’s Office. The first is highly unlikely – Likud joining a Kadima-led coalition. The scenarios I have already described, all lead to a quick collapse of the government and the Knesset, with elections yet again on the horizon. If he joined Livni’s government, he would only be breathing life into a government comatose before it would even be sworn into office, not to mention he has already declared victory.

The last option Livni has is a rotation government. In such an arrangement, she would serve as PM for two years, and then Netanyahu would serve for two years (or vice versa), or some other similar schedule of rotation. This sort of agreement would not be unprecedented, as Yitzchak Shamir and Shimon Peres had a similar agreement in the early 1980s.

This would only happen, though, if Netanyahu would truly be convinced that he could not form the coalition on his own. Despite calls for a unity government during the campaign, if Netanyahu is able to maintain the support the 65-seat Right-wing bloc, Peres will have no choice but to nominate him to head the next government. In the meantime, however, more chaos shall ensue.

EDIT: The soldiers’ votes will only be counted Thursday, and with nearly 200,000 votes (though many vote in their regular polling places, so the numbers are still unclear) they have the potential to change the results by a few seats.

EDIT2: Numbers have been changed to reflect the latest, slightly different results (100% in, as of now – but in Israel, as in Israel – numbers are not yet final).

EDIT3: It should be recalled that, in 2001, Netanyahu essentially gave up the premiership to Sharon, arguing that he could not form a coalition on the basis of already formed Knesset (elected in 1999, with Barak). Considering Sharon’s meteoric rise and mega-stature since, one can only assume that he has regretted that moment ever since. History is a powerful motivator. He will not let this one slip by, and I think he will do everything in his power to prevent Livni from assuming the country’s highest office – even if the current chaos deteriorates into new elections without any new government.

UPDATE: Jameel adds an accurate clarification, that the “100%” of votes tallied, does not include special ballots (soldiers, diplomats, sailors, prisoners and hospital patients.)

Celebration of Democracy?

‍‍טז שבט תשסט - Feb 10th, 2009
by LB.
No comments yet

Israel pretends to be a free country. However, it seems that when things get a little difficult, the authorities prefer to capitulate in the face of threats, rather than live up to their responsibilities.

Last week, Justice Eliezer Rivlin turned down Mazuz’s request to deny Baruch Marzel from officiating as chairman of the ballot committee in Um El-Fahem. Rivlin, head of the Central Elections Committee was exactly right when he said “it was the authorities’ job to keep the peace regardless of those present at the ballot boxes.”

In spite of this, the police decided they were not part of these authorities, those who have a responsibility to actively keep the peace, and Marzel was banned from entering a city in the State of Israel. Israel is now an independent state, but an Israeli citizen can be banned from traveling lawfully around his own country, because of views he harbors. If there is legitimate fear his appearance will cause riots – those who riot need to be arrested and brought to justice. Apparently not in Israel.

Arieh Eldad, National Union Knesset Member, went to Um El-Fahem, as Marzel’s replacement on the ballot committee. Yet, it seems that even an MK cannot be safe in Um El-Fahem, and he had to request a police escort, in order to leave the city safely.

The city’s leadership, however, responded in favor criminal activity, “they tricked us and brought in Eldad instead of Marzel,” said Apu Agbaria, a representative of Hadash. If you do not like what he has to say, or what he stands for – protest, vote, go on strike. Do not, however, try and claim that banning him from entering Um El-Fahem is, in any way, acceptable. If Ahmed Tibi were banned from entering Modi’in, for example, because of fear of rioters, what would the public’s reaction be?

Tu Bishvat and Haveil Havalim #203

‍‍טו שבט תשסט - Feb 8th, 2009
by LB.
No comments yet

Over at Esser Agaroth, the 203rd edition of Haveil Havalim.

Happy Tu Bishvat!

Mazuz v. The Law

‍‍יג שבט תשסט - Feb 7th, 2009
by LB.
5 comments

Politics as usual. That’s what I should think. It happens all the time. People who hold important positions in the government of Israel act out of self-interest, for cheap political ends, as opposed to representing the people.

Attorney General Menachem Mazuz has long been a particularly disgusting individual of this sort. This past week he made an official request to bar Baruch Marzel from chairing the ballot committee in Um El-Fahem for “security concerns.” Mazuz is concerned that Marzel will offend the residents of Um El-Fahem to the level that the state is concerned for his safety. In this case, the police is responsible to prevent criminal activity. The police is required to stop anyone who want to harm Marzel. Mazuz is not supposed to instruct the state’s institutions to cave in the face of criminal threats.

If, as Mazuz claims, “Marzel’s very presence in the Arab village would be enough to set off a riot” then the legal issue is with said “Arab village” and not with Marzel, whose service as committee chairman is perfectly legal.

In spite of Mazuz’s attempt to evade responsibility, Eliezer Rivlin, who heads the Central Elections Committee turned down the Attorney General’s request. Rivlin is right on the money when he said “it was the authorities’ job to keep the peace regardless of those present at the ballot boxes,” and that if there is “evidence of a brewing riot the State should take the necessary measures to prevent it.”

The city of Um El-Fahem has announced that it will deliberately act the laws of Israel, “block all the entrances to the town and the police will bear the full responsibility for what goes on that day.” What is it that will happen that day? And why will it happen? “We shall urge all city residents to hit the streets and not allow him to enter.” A premeditated riot. So Mazuz has decided to attempt to capitulate, not deal with rioters.

Threats should be met with force, not with attempts to curtail Jewish freedom of movement in the Jewish state.

Dati or Torani?

‍‍יא שבט תשסט - Feb 5th, 2009
by LB.
6 comments

The community known as “national religious” (dati leumi) has been undergoing many changes over the past 30 or so years. This community, largely congruent with the religious Zionist movement, prides itself for having a “mixed community.” This means that men and women are not completely shielded from one another. However, over the years, a disconnect has been forming between the leadership and the members of the community. It has become more en vogue to be “more religious.” Bnei Akiva used to be an a priori desegregated youth group. Now, it is more prestigious in many places for a Bnei Akiva branch to be segregated. Group activities in such places are conducted for boys and girls separately. These communities usually also have segregated schools, as well, and not for pedagogical reasons.

In recent years, this trend has manifested itself in yet another way – the surge of Torani schools. This labeling carries with it yet more coercion. When such a school surfaces (usually by way of converting a Mamlachti Dati school), boys and girls are forceably segregated, and a community who had thought of itself as a dati leumi, wakes up and sees it has become hardal. Members of the community are afraid to speak up, for fear of public censure, for being seen as not religious enough.

Efrat Shapira-Rosenberg has written about such an experience, of waking up and finding she is suddenly “not religious enough.” (Hebrew) “The prevalent position in the dati community today is that torani people are the serious ones… Someone needs to get up, stop the flow, stop the inferiority feelings and the apologetics, and to stand proudly for what we are, and in what we believe.”

Much has been made in recent years of the fact that members of this community have taken up so many key leadership positions in the army, that so many serve in elite units, and so many volunteer and go to officers’ school. This community, however, is eating itself from the inside out. A move towards stringency is not always a good thing, andif you are strong in your beliefs, moving to the right does not make you stronger in those same beliefs.

People who do believe that being torani is good have every right to hold these beliefs. However, much more is happening here. New communities are not being founded on the basis of this ideology. Established communities are being told they are not truly religious, and being forced to change, against the will of most. The consequences of this coercion are manifold. At the very least, when the children in these places will see one thing at home, and learn another in school, many more will choose to just leave everything behind.

The religious Zionist community is an important part of Israel. However, sometimes the self-proclaimed leaders, “the Rabbis”, don’t always know best. Very often, in fact. As the Rabbi of my community once said, if we all listened to the Rabbis, there would be no State of Israel today. So if “the Rabbis” do not stand down, there will soon be a lot of people who are without a community, and the happily torani community will bear more than a passing resemblence to simply haredim who do serve in the army.

What Now?

‍‍כג טבת תשסט - Jan 19th, 2009
by LB.
No comments yet

I’m still trying to figure out how enormous of a mistake was committed by entering into this “unilateral truce.” I’m afraid that in our neighborhood, where image sometimes matters more than the facts on the ground, the politicos may have undone any good the IDF worked so hard to achieve.

Apart from all of the lives lost and hurt on the Israeli side, there were many civilians killed. Yes, legally, those responsible for those deaths are Hamas, and no one else. Nevertheless, those death were justified in the name of removing the threat against Israel. What does it mean if we did not remove the threat? If the government did not even really try? Israel’s political system is beyond corrupt and self-serving. There is no accountability (and no, there really isn’t a word for accountability in Hebrew). More on that, though, in another post sometime soon.

In the meantime go check out a few blog carnivals / roundups:

Truce? What Truce?

‍‍כב טבת תשסט - Jan 17th, 2009
by LB.
1 comment

Ynet reports: “Israel declares unilateral Gaza truce.” Wrong. A truce cannot be unilateral. A truce is agreed upon. This a capitulation, yet another mistake in a long line of errors, collectively known as Olmert’s policies.

Regardless of why this operation was initiated, or why now, Hamas is an enemy that doesn’t only need to be “hit hard.” It needs to go. That is not an easy undertaking, but it is necessary. Nevertheless, the Israeli government is cowering in the face of international opinion, instead of even completing the limited task they set out for the IDF: stopping the rockets. How does Hamas respond? In their words – “The victims of this war will be the basis for the continuation of the fighting and hostility vis-à-vis the Israeli side.” And in actions – only today, several more rockets were launched at Be’er Sheva.

Finally, a military operation was finally started, again (as in 2006), and again the IDF will cease its fire while Gilad Schalit is still held by the enemy. The reason for Cast Lead is the same as the reason for its end: politics. The troika (Olmert, Livni, Barak) do want to lose to the Likud next month, and after Hamas did not cease its murder attempts for the past few years, they thought they could gain popular support by appealing to what the public wants just before the elections. Nevertheless, their campaign failed. Labor did rise slightly in the polls, but Kadima stayed at more or less the same level, still trailing Likud.

If this is the end of Cast Lead then it is a failure. Yes, many battles were won. Yes, Hamas’ capabilities have been severely damaged, and numerous key figures have been eliminated. However, if they still refuse to surrender, if they still disparage Israel by declaring “if this is all the strength they have, they failed in defeating the Palestinian people,” then Israel cannot claim to be victorious.

This “truce” will only serve to hurt Israel in the future. It will cost more Israeli lives. There was no legitimate strategy, were no real aims, from the very beginning. Nor is there a legitimate strategy in endng now. This is all very disheartening.

← Earlier Posts Newer Posts →