“The first thought that enters an Israeli’s head when he wakes up in the morning is, Fuck you. It’s there before he even has an idea to whom he wants to say ‘Fuck you.’” - Israeli academic Dan Schueftan
Of course, the above could be equally attributable to Palestinians, and I guess that’s really our essential problem.
One of the issues most pertinent to those interested in liberty in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is not centered in the Middle East at all. Ironically, it’s easier for Israelis themselves to criticize their government’s policies (and many do) than it is for an American or really anyone from any other country to criticize Israel’s policies without a news release blasting them as anti-Semitic from what are usually American groups. While private groups have the right to say anything they want, that doesn’t mean they should. Yes, Jews have historically (and tragically) been victimized in countries around the world, for their beliefs or their culture, or their occupations they were forced into anyway. That doesn’t mean that everyone in the world is an anti-Semite or that the only reason someone would criticize Israel is because Israel is a Jewish nation. Even odder, AIPAC has itself disagreed with Israel. Is AIPAC therefore anti-Semitic by its own definition?
But aside from being too quick to judge anti-Semitism, is AIPAC really so bad? In some ways, I don’t think it’s any worse than some academics I’ve encountered who blindly back the Palestinian side no matter what develops in the conflict. It seems that for both sides, facts are less important than demonizing the other side.
While I don’t think members of Congress should pay any attention whatsoever to lobbyists, it’s clear lobbyists should be able to exist. At heart, and ignoring their often nefarious goals, they’re Americans representing a point of view to Congress. AIPAC says it represents support of Israel within Congress, and that’s fine in and of itself (although it has in the past been more hawkish than some Israeli governments, so it doesn’t limit itself to what the Israeli government wants, but what AIPAC wants.)
I think the best way to solve the issue is not for AIPAC to cease, but for the Palestinians to begin to develop their own equivalent American-based lobbying group (the American Association for Palestinian Equal Rights is trying to do just that). Whether you “side” with Israel or the Palestinians, it’s clear the Palestinians have been disadvantaged in a few important ways since the beginning– and it’s certainly clear that today, they are not the ones bargaining from a position of power. It’s undeniable that outside of American and European academia, the Palestinians have an image problem.
Excessive partiality for one foreign nation and excessive dislike of another cause those whom they actuate to see danger only on one side, and serve to veil and even second the arts of influence on the other. Real patriots who may resist the intrigues of the favorite are liable to become suspected and odious, while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people to surrender their interests. ~ George Washington’s 1796 Farewell Address
America, the most powerful country in the world, by default tagged with fixing this problem, doesn’t have a population that sympathizes with the Palestinians, even moderate Mahmoud Abbas, who commands a 14% approval rating in the US. No doubt this stems from the primary images Americans received over many years about Palestinians– hijacking planes, killing Olympic athletes, refusing to negotiate. The Israelis are not just a powerful and wealthy state, but they can say that God chose them as His chosen people, a “light unto the world.” How can the Palestinians possibly compete with that, especially when their primary newsmaking consists of allowing terrorist groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah to undertake activities on their behalf? Sure, remaking the Palestinian image would be a tough row to hoe in America, but the thing is– the Palestinians have never even tried. Neither have the Arab states, with whom the Palestinian states tragically aligned themselves at the beginning of this mess.
At first, it seems almost an impossible task. How can the images of guns, black hoods, and militancy be overcome? There are actually a few ways I think Palestinians could market themselves that would have resonance with the American public.
1. Emphasize the lack of access Christians have to certain Jerusalem holy sites within Israel compared to pre-state Palestine. Of course, Palestinians themselves were not ncessarily in charge during pre-state Palestine, but that could easily be left out and give the appearance that the Palestinians (many of whom are indeed Christians) respect Christian holy sites and traditions more than the Israelis (who banned all Christian holy site tourists from the Church of the Sepulchre during Easter last year. Church members were prevented from praying (one of the things that set off pre-state Palestinian Jewish settlers against the Muslims who controlled access to the Wailing Wall), had to go through checkpoints, and were barred from “practicing ancient traditions” despite there never being a security problem in any site of Christian worship in Jerusalem. This would deal head-on with a few ongoing issues: making a case that the Palestinians should have East Jerusalem as their capital, that Palestinians might be better stewards in certain areas than Israelis are, that Palestinians are not just all Muslim extremists, and that Christians should support Israel just because Israel is Israel.
We can all relate to the suffering of a Palestinian child.
2. In the areas where public opinion has swayed to the Palestinians, it’s been because of the pictures of dying Palestinian children. To a libertarian (and a Christian, and to a human being…) a Palestinian’s life is necessarily worth the same as a Jewish life or an Israeli life, and it is especially easy to make this connection in the case of children. Children are not terrorists, can’t help where they live, can’t fight back, and since we were all children at one time, they’re easy to relate to. Often dismissed as “collateral damage,” Palestinian children are sympathetic figures.
Other libertarian-related issues I’ll address in future posts:
What happens to the foreign aid we grant to Israel — and the Arab nations? Why do we want to impose further economic sanctions on Iran through the front door while we enrich Iranian businesses through the back door?
What about Iran, and how is it different from North Korea?
What about Benjamin Netanyahu?
Leave a Reply