Well, not really, but maybe this will contain some food for
thought. I consider myself both roughly paleo and pro-Israel and
don't see any contradiction. Israel is a friendly, Western country
that had some common interests with the United States during the
Cold War and continues to have common interests today. I do not
think there are any negotiating partners on the Palestinian side
who can deliver anything approaching lasting peace because they
either have no real clout among the Palestinian people or they
ultimately have bad intentions toward the Israelis (wanting to
drive Israel into the sea is not exactly a fringe position among
Palestinians today, I'm afraid). Palestinian leaders have fostered
a climate of hatred that has frustrated their people's legitimate
ambitions at key moments of the peace process. Israel has the right
to defend itself and the United States should not encourage
Israelis to endanger their own security.
But I don't deny that the Palestinians have some real historical
grievances and present suffering, not all of their own making. I
also acknowledge that the Palestinians' plight both fuels and helps
people try to justify hatred of Jews and pro-Israel Americans
throughout the world, especially among Muslims. If the conditions
were right and there was responsible Palestinian leadership, I
would favor the creation of a Palestinian state. I had high hopes
that as leadership transitioned from Yasser Arafat to Mahmoud Abbas
that such conditions might begin to develop and we could move
forward to creating such a state. Instead Abbas has proved
ineffectual at best and Hamas -- whose victories were secured after
the United States pushed for their inclusion in the Palestinian
elections -- has gained power.
My point? There are many people whose views are similar to those
I sketched above who might disagree on questions like the
settlements, the Oslo accords, Ariel Sharon's disengagement plan,
the level of foreign aid to Israel, and any number of other
specific areas concerning the Middle East. Many of the people who
supported the peace process in the 1990s, of which I was deeply and
in my view rightly skeptical, considered themselves friends of
Israel. That doesn't mean that all these viewpoints are equally
valid or likely to work out in the real world. But it does mean
there is a much wider and varied debate about Israel than a debate
between Israel's defenders on side and Hamas and its anti-Semitic
amen corner on the other side. Some people favor policies toward
Israel that Phil or even I would oppose because they are sincerely
convinced such policies are in Israel's interest.
The Israel-Palestine question is emerging as a permanent
partisan dividing line in American politics after years of
bipartisan pro-Israel consensus. The Republican Party is likely to
identify more with Israeli security interests, the Democrats with
Palestinian aspirations. We're going to have to find a way to
debate these issues that recognizes the real breadth of views and
motivations that exist.
topics:
Israel
