Comments on Bernard Avishai Dot Com: J Street And World Order

I should not have read the comments before making ...

2009-10-27T21:20:30.858-04:00

I should not have read the comments before making this comment. My first reaction to the blog entry: it's a part of a cohesive vision that I believe there is a hunger for, that not only makes sense and gives hope but seems like the only positive way out or through or forward. Here Israel fits into the Middle East which fits into an evolved global picture,

Once people see that vision they will choose it. So they have to see it. People are capable of getting the nuance, seeing down the road, making the leap from their fears, their frightened self-protective positions towards the less risky ( every way is risky) and the more broadly embracing. Tell people of something better for their children and they will persist towards that. Religious beliefs blend in because this is never about mere survival. So I also don't see how accountability and atonement) can be avoided.

..question your dismissal of that idea I mean....

2009-10-23T11:56:32.002-04:00

..question your dismissal of that idea I mean....

Mr. Ben-David uses the phrase 'punitive sanctions....

2009-10-23T11:41:38.162-04:00

Mr. Ben-David uses the phrase 'punitive sanctions.' I will ask him, for the sake of argument, to imagine replacing it with 'accountability.' This does not require acceptance of the idea that the state of Israel has something to be accountable for. It is, however, a prerequisite for following this analogy:

Let's pretend we're all a bunch of Jews in some shtetl. A group of some of our more prominent citizens have been accused by some non-Jews in a neighboring village of wrongdoing. Not pedestrian wrongdoing, mind you-- something that, if it is true, goes against our core principles [killing dozens of theirs indiscriminately for the indiscriminate murder of one of ours, for instance]. Now the problem is that we've had trouble with this village. In fact, many of their members would initiate a pogrom if they only had the manpower. We are all in agreement that these are not our friends.
However, many of our own citizens are dismayed by the accusations because they do not seem unfounded. A goverment bureaucrat, one of our own, has said he's looked into it and believes there's something to the claims. Enough to warrant our attention.
Some of us say that if these men are guilty of wrongdoing in their interactions with non-Jews, they should be held accountable according to the law of the land. And if the law of the land in this case is punitive, so be it.

Setting aside the veracity of the claims for a moment, can you imagine someone standing up and saying that it would be bad for the shtetl and bad for the prominent group accused to look into it and hold them accountable [or clear their names, as the case may be]? And if they are indeed guilty of wrongdoing, would someone say that in this case, we should ignore the law of the land because it's not in our best interests and there are people who wish to use it against us on principle?
Unless you are part of a parallel universe-Jewish tradition that is diametrically opposed to the one I grew up in, you'd have to agree that personal accountability is a cornerstone of our identity. Unless you read a parallel universe-version of our history, maintaining autonomy and our own traditions while avoiding conflict with our neighbors whenever possible has been a philosophy that speaks to our very survival. That doesn't mean not defending ourselves, it just means doing so in a way that is in line with our principles and does not invite trouble... the kind of impotent trouble that will erupt when the opportunity presents itself, vis-a-vis Kristallnacht in Vienna. This is not about what we can do at this particular point in history, but what we should do.

Before you rush to dismiss this analogy as politically naive, please remember that my point is only to question the idea that this Israeli regime should be held accountable/punished if it's clear they've stepped over the line.
That a line has been crosssed is clear to pretty much everyone outside of Likud hardliners, the Jews who cry 'self hater' at the first hint of Jewish criticism of Israeli policy, and to people like Dick Cheney.

Has Mr. Avishai seen the Oct. 16 memo from J Stree...

2009-10-19T23:32:12.863-04:00

Has Mr. Avishai seen the Oct. 16 memo from J Street's new policy & strategy director, Hadar Susskind, which in part states:
"[S]hould engagement not produce the desired results, we too believe that the United States should seek hard-hitting multilateral sanctions through the United Nations Security Council. If that course of action proves impossible, then the U.S. should work to build the broadest possible international coalition to back such steps"?
It seems J Street is allowing itself to be sucked into the US-led international "get Iran" economic sanctions campaign (the same strategy used against Iraq in 1990s and Gaza for past 2 years). If J Street goes that route, the chances it can accomplish the worthy objectives outlined in Mr. Avishai's essay are greatly reduced.
JM, Tokyo

Ah, but...seems to me belittling J-Street squeaks ...

2009-10-19T15:54:22.659-04:00

Ah, but...seems to me belittling J-Street squeaks feebly of its incipient power and resounding truth. J-Street is the case of a once-isolate majority finding its consolidated voice. KS

Although your analysis of the growth of AIPAC's in...

2009-10-19T10:04:17.526-04:00

Although your analysis of the growth of AIPAC's influence sounds correct, J-Street simply has too many internal contradictions to become influential. For example, I see that you are on its list of advisors or some such position. You have repeatedly called for punitive sanctions to be placed on Israel in the past in order to convince the "Israelis" (what you call the secular, entrepeneurial crowd) to use force to get rid of the "Judeans" (the right-wing, Orthodox settlers and their supporters). Now, how can the 100 or so Congressman who claim to be supporters of J-Street say that advocating punitive sanctions can appear to be "pro-Israel" to most people? Sure, you progressives have concocted a weird scenario that says punishing Israel is really "good for it". But Israel's outright enemies also want the same thing...to punish Israel. So how is Mr Congressman supposed to make clear the difference if he supports punitive sanctions? There are always going to be pro-Israel people who oppose this approach so J-Street will be painting itself as an incoherent body that has no clear policy.
Similarly, I see many supporters of J-Street supporting putting Israelis involved in the Gaza war on trial for war crimes. Again, is this "pro-Israel"?
J-Street is basically a collection of malcontents who oppose traditional Israeli gov't policy and American policy towards Israel, but who really have nothing in common because some really do care about Israel, others are American Jews who view Israel as an embarrassment and want a political vehicle in which to express their estrangement from it. Thus, J-Street can not survive in the long-term.