“I am not a Jew”, said an Arab radio journalist in Jerusalem to the New York Times.
“How can I belong to a Jewish state? If they define this as a Jewish state, they deny that I am here.”
Israel’s 60th anniversary has generated mountains of international news coverage that highlights the achievements of the state since 1948 and the many challenges facing the relatively new nation. The Australian echoed the general pessimism by predicting ongoing conflict with the Palestinians and the Arab world.
Absent, however, from a great deal of Western reporting is an honest appraisal of Israel’s ongoing strangulation of the Palestinians in the occupied territories. Neither major side of Australian politics dares speak out against this travesty and the director of the Australian Centre for Jewish Civilization at Monash University today in The Age completely ignores the occupation altogether.
The Washington Post this week repeated the usual mantra of blaming the victims for their predicament, perhaps only bettered by a former editor-in-chief of the Jerusalem Post who managed to celebrate Israel’s birthday in the Wall Street Journal without once mentioning that Israel’s colonisation of the West Bank is growing by the day. Haaretz reports that the world head of Likud is even demanding that the Palestinians be banned from commemorating their “Nakba Day”.
Acknowledging the birth of a nation, not unlike Australia, requires understanding the peoples who suffered from the outset. For hardline Zionists, the Palestinians are sore losers while a prominent Israeli intellectual tells The Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg that the Palestinians are dedicated to “bringing chaos” to the Jewish state. The Australian Jewish News strongly implied in their editorial last week that the mainstream media should only publish articles that praise the Jewish state. “Bias” is seen around every corner.
Ariel Sharon’s former advisor Dov Weisglass wrote this week in Israel’s biggest selling daily that Hamas must be destroyed, “in line with humanitarian limits” even as the international community begins to understand the futility of this policy.
9/11 has merely reinforced these racist stereotypes about Arabs, although former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu recently said the attacks were “benefiting” the Zionist cause.
60 years after Israel’s birth, the two peoples have never been further apart. The Israeli press is barred from entering Gaza, so we rely on Gazans to explain their suffering at the hands of a Washington-led economic blockade. The Guardian is one of the few Western media outlets that regularly publish these accounts, including news about the allocation of building permits in the West Bank to only Jewish settlers.
The anniversary celebrations have revealed a growing number of Diaspora Jews speaking critically of their supposed homeland. Britain and America are witnessing growing media coverage of these dissident positions. Jewish voices are now some of the strongest advocates in challenging the “peace process” fraud.
Within Israel itself, the mainstream media is thriving with debate.
Haaretz, arguably the finest newspaper in the world, proves that a news outlet can honestly describe the truth about the Jewish state. This week has been no exception. Pro-Zionist, anti-Zionist, pro-Israel and pro-human rights all exist harmoniously. An eloquent essay in Haaretz, by Israeli human rights lawyer Daphna Golan, articulated the true message of Israel’s 60th anniversary:
We must speak out loudly and openly with everyone — about the past, present and future, about a life of fair, decent neighbourly relations. Without red and green lines and with no prior conditions. Only about how we will live here together and separately, Jews and Arabs, in reconciliation.
Antony Loewenstein is gutsy. He alone amongst Australian Jews is somehow succeeding in bringing balance and humanity to the Israel/Palestine tragedy. May the logic and reason he is bringing to the debate be recognised by our elected government members.
I am saddened by the above article and my sadness is for all the “reasonable” people effected on all sides of not just this debate, regardless of race, faith or nationality but also the debate of Black – White, Christian – Muslim, Catholic- Protestant, Rich-Poor … you get the idea. Reasonable people dealing with reasonable people – if that is ever possible could theoretically arrive at reasonable outcomes. But sadly we are, in the main, un-reasonable for so many different personal and collective reasons. To try to offer Daphna Golan’s admirable and most reasonable “statement of intent” and to try to apply it in practical scenarios, under the umbrella of our collective vested interests, is in my opinion impossible and that saddens me. I am sure that 99% of all people would like to be reasonable and if you are in doubt what being reasonable means – it’s easy. It is what is least advantageous to you at the expense of another, is being reasonable.
I still remember a Palestinian lawyer giving a lecture in the mid 80ies to ANU law school though I don’t remember exactly what was said. I imagine about the need for a rule of law per se. Which bring me to a direct challenge to the loyal supporters of Israel – am I correct to say there is no written constitution for the State of Israel? Happy to be told I am wrong, but my understanding is that if there were it would be necessary to codify a non racial and maybe non religous social contract, or at least delimit rights accruing to such race or religion … transparently, and legally enforeable. It’s true the UK doesn’t have a written constitution but that seems to be the exception in democratic jurisprudence. Indeed isn’t this all a rotten trick on democratic western allies when as Lowenstein here says “including news about the allocation of building permits in the West Bank to only Jewish settlers”. In Australia we have the Racial Discrimination Act. What say you?
A more refreshing account of the Israeli Palestinian issue I have never read. Crikey speaks without fear when the main stream media runs for cover in fear of powerful special interests and the Zionist bought and paid for main stream media. The world needs to acknowledge Israel exists. After 60 years the Jewish people cannot be displaced from Palestine. Two wrongs will not make a right. Australia’s aboriginal legacy has elements of the Israeli occupation of another people’s land. Many good Jewish people are morally tortured about the Palestinian issue. Clearly Antony Loewenstein is one of these. It’s their voice which isn’t being heard above that of Zionists. Israel and Zionism are two very separate entities. The world needs to understand this. It also needs to understand Israel is not going to go away and nor should it now. The Palestinians need to acknowledge this too. The past cannot be undone. We should all wish Israel well and hope the forthcoming Bush visit finds a new solution. T
Antony,
The Jewish state could not have been created in 1948 by the British had it not been for Australians spearheading the invasion of Palestine in 1917. At the time Australia did not have independent powers to enter treaties etc. and did not attend the Peace Conferences. Nevertheless Australia does have considerable responsibility for unknowingly giving a helping hand to British Imperialism in Palestine although in the name of’ ‘winning the war to end all wars.’ What the Brits did is create a great tragedy out of the sacrifice of our Light Horsemen.