Occidental Israeli Rotating Header Image

Jewish

Operation Cast Lead – Jewish World

Military and political aspects here, international opinion here, etymology of Cast Lead, and first, second, and third parts about the Arab World’s opinion, and the Israeli public’s reaction (at time of writing).

The reaction of the Jewish world in the diaspora to the events in Gaza has been, frankly, highly disappointing. Not extremely surprising, but disappointing nonetheless. I do not mean that I expected an outpouring of support for Israel, but at the very least, not to take an indefensible stand against Israel. Granted, most young American Jews don’t care about Israel very much, but, as a Zionist, I cannot help but express my disdain for opinions that, in effect, value Israel’s enemy over the lives of fellow Jews.

I attended a rally in support of Israel last week, in Washington D.C. No, I still don’t believe rallies and demonstrations from over here change much over there. However, I was pleased to see that most of the Jewish community and its leaders do support Israel and do support Israel’s self-defense. In the back of the room (the rally took place in a synogogue that is also used to host events from time to time), there were two girls holding up signs saying “Not in my name.” I wanted to say, that if that is how you think, and you say that from over here – then yes, Israel is not acting in your name, for you have effectively cut yourself off from the Jewish people. You have rendered yourself solely part of some amorphous group that calls itself “culturally Jewish,” or “Jew-ish.” Jews are a people, and don’t worry, Israel doesn’t act in your name, Israel acts in defense of the Jewish state.

About eight months ago, an organization by the name of J Street was founded, a left-wing political action committee on issues relating to Israel and the Middle East. They portend to represent the silent majority among American Jews, which I doubt. But if they do, American Jewry is even more hopeless than I thought. Relatively early during the Gaza campaign, they came out with a long statement, calling for an immediate end for violence in the region, and showed their utter lack of understanding when it comes to Israel:

While there is nothing “right” in raining rockets on Israeli families or dispatching suicide bombers, there is nothing “right” in punishing a million and a half already-suffering Gazans for the actions of the extremists among them.

I could go on about how Israel is not “punishing” anyone. Punitive actions have not be carried out by Israel in decades. I could call them on the moral equivalency they, in effect, claim exists between Israel and Hamas’s actions. I could criticize their extreme naviete, at best, and at worst, their willingness to allow Israelis to be targets of Hamas’s antisemitism. However, others have done this for me. First, Eric Yoffie (president of the Union for Reform Judaism), not a man with whom I ordinarily agree, has responded to J Street directly, calling their statement “deeply distressing” and “morally deficient,” and he correctly sees the “Israeli government doing what it must to end rocket attacks against its citizenry.”

Another, much harsher, response to J Street, takes an extra step and calls them anti-Israel. Noah Pollack writes in Commentary’s blog, Contentions, and questions “any limits to [J Street's] capacity for self-delusion about the nature of Hamas,” and declares: “It is time that thinking people started calling J Street what it actually is — an anti-Israel group.” Even Jeffrey Goldberg, on the opposite end of the political spectrum from most of Commentary’s writers, said about their statement: “J Street Blows It.”

James Kirchick, also at Contentions, made the strongest argument against J Street. Since arguing with them point-by-point would be futile, Kirchick said this: “Street has the right to its extreme leftist, capitulationist opinions, but it does not have the right to claim, as Ben-Ami once did, that it represents the “broad, sensible mainstream of pro-Israel American Jews.’” Game. Set. Match. They have every right to their opinions. However, they represent, largely, well, themselves.

Another player on the Jewish world scene is blog, Jewschool. With the start of Cast Lead, this was posted. Advocating against Israeli self-defense, the writer preempts any intellectual discourse, calling it a “perverse game of rhetorical ping-pong,” and accuses Israel of “squeezing the life out of Gaza.” I might be not up to date on the latest terminology, but will someone please explain to me how allowing thousands of tons of medical supplies and food furthers a cause of “squeezing the life out of Gaza”? Not to mention the warnings, so that empty buildings will be hit, or the dud missiles, or the Gazans being treated by Israel, in Israeli facilities. But no, the Jewish world’s reaction is apparently another example of “protest oppression and human-rights abuse anywhere in the world, but are all too willing to give Israel a pass.” He accuses world Jewry of practicing a double-standard against Israel. Unbelievable.

While in France, and in New York people rally in defense of Israel, on sites such as Jewschool and in Canada Jewish groups attack “Israel’s massacre,” effectively in defense of Hamas. The Canadian group is either confusing or practicing demagoguery, drawing a false analogy between targeting civilians and implementing a ground offensive. With regards to larger organizations, here is JTA’s overview of their positions.

To sum up, most of world Jewry supports the operation, but an increasingly loud minority, claiming to represent more people than they actually do, has come out against Israel, not only from a strategic standpoint, but claiming Israel has no moral standing to act in self-defense.

Haveil Havalim #200

The Harvey Edition, #200 is up, hosted by Jack.

The Value of Birthright?

I actually do think that Birthright has had a lot of positive consequences. While I am not aware of any studies on the topic, I do believe that the increase in North American aliyah is, at least somewhat, a result of Birthright. Many aspects of the program, however, remain unexamined. These include the value of such a massive investment of Jewish communal funds, and the marginal return on this incredible expense (costing the Israeli taxpayer, as well).

Talking:Loud::Saying Nothing raises a lot of these questions, and suggests how these vast sums of money might be better directed. Unfortunately, I do not see anything changing anytime soon, because Talking Loud’s proposal would, in effect, leave the diasporic Jewish organizations and leaders, community-less.

Haveil Havalim #199

It’s up, at Ima on (and off) the Bima – go check it out.

Syria? Peace? Carter? What?

Carter recently visited Syria and met with Bashar Assad. He uttered yet another gem, showing his still has no understanding of world affairs, let alone the Middle East,  “Peace will not be achieved in the region without a full Israeli withdrawal from the Golan Heights and the other occupied Arab lands.” (Hebrew)

The notion of peace with Syria is a myth that has been resurfacing with increasing frequency lately. The idea that Israel should give up a large swath of land, which it won in a defensive war, which does not have demographic dilemmas, in return for an elusive peace, is utterly ridiculous. To begin with, the current situation is not half-bad. There is quiet on the Syrian front, and it is not because of any formal peace agreement. Furthermore, even states with which Syria does have peaceful relations do not really have peace. It continues to harbor various terrorist groups, active against its neighbors  (Turkey, Lebanon), as an insurance policy of sorts. Its determination to keep the upper hand in these political power plays prevent it from ever being a fair partner for anything.

Israel should not sign any agreement with Syria in which it would give up any land. There is simply no compelling interest to do so. Also, Carter’s eagerness to meet even with Hezballah was met with coldness, no one wants him here. He really needs to go back to his peanut farming already.

Haveil Havalim #193

Haveil Havalim #193 is hosted this week by Benji at What War Zone? Check out This is Not Your Father’s Haveil Havalim.

Justice?

It appears that Olmert is not quite coated with teflon, after all. After being investigated for numerous charges of corruption, at least one indictment might actually be handed down. This news comes after the Talansky bribery case fell apart a few months ago. Attorney General Mazuz intends to charge the outgoing prime minister with fraud, breach of trust and tax evasion. Olmert “allegedly” over-billed “abroad sponsored by Jewish institutions, and either pocketed the difference or financed trips for relatives.”

Olmert’s attorneys continue to defend this despicable person, denying the any wrongdoing, and calling the likely indictment “puzzling and unreasonable.” What is unreasonable is that Israel continues to be led by a corrupt individual, who is arguably Israel’s worst prime minister in history.

I only hope that some modicum of justice actually be served, and Olmert will see the inside of a prison cell very soon.

Oy Gevalt, It’s Israel’s Fault

Condoleezza Rice has apparently understood what has been clear well before her latest whirlwind tour of the Middle East. Namely, that an Israeli-Palestinian peace deal by the end of the year is not possible.

However, Rice does not focus on the real issues preventing peace. She has found yet another way to blame Israel, saying it is really largely because of the political situation in Israel.”

Rice cannot possibly believe that a conflict that has lasted for decades could be solved within a few short months if the upcoming Israeli elections were not an issue. Maybe what she really means is that Israeli democracy is the real obstacle?

Haveil Havalim #192

Haveil Havalim #192 is hosted this week by Ima on (and off) the Bima. Check out The Thanks and Giving Edition.

Europe Making Up for Lost Time

It’s been over 60 years, and Europe is back to legislating against Jews. A recent bill proposed in Denmark would ban circumcision for boys under the age of 15. Criminalizing what is possibly the most of basic Jewish rites would, in effect, be an eviction of Jews from Denmark.

The most ridiculous justification for the bill, however, is the Denmark’s National Council for Children claim that “[j]ust like female circumcision was banned five years ago, male circumcision should be banned.” ‘Female circumcision’ is not circumcision at all, it is mutilation of the female body, for misogynistic reasons.