Europe is Not Israel

(Originally published on Israel Hayom)

“France must live with terrorism,” French Prime Minister Manuel Valls said after the massive terrorist ‎attack in Nice last week. Understandably, his statement infuriated the French, who took to social ‎media to express their opprobrium.‎

And French President Francois Hollande, sounding almost as if he was being forced to speak, said, “We cannot deny that it was a terrorist ‎attack.”‎

After the massive Islamic State attacks in Paris in November 2015, political leaders proclaimed ‎themselves “shocked.” Whether this shock was feigned or genuine, at least they made a point, pitiful ‎as it was, of pretending that these massive terrorist attacks were something extraordinary that did not ‎have a habitual place in Europe.

Valls’ resigned declaration of tired surrender after the Nice attack, on the other hand, ‎amounts to the waving of a white flag in submission to the jihadis and is an indication that France ‎has little will to fight.‎

Valls and Hollande sounded like bewildered children at the helm of a ship that they are too ‎clueless to navigate. Imagine Winston Churchill declaring, “Britain must live with ‎Nazism.” ‎

Under its current government, France has busied itself with meddling in Israeli affairs ‎and organizing Middle East peace conferences, instead of spending every waking moment ensuring ‎the proper protection of its own population. It is not ready to fight against the jihad that has been ‎launched against it.

One major factor in this is that its elites blame France.‎ French Ambassador to the U.S. Gerard Araud, for example, wrote on Twitter: “Why is France ‎targeted? History (former colonial power), geography (proximity), first Muslim community of Arab ‎origin sensitive to M.E. issues.”‎

In other words: Colonialism and Middle Eastern “issues” — a diplomatic euphemism for the Israeli-Arab conflict — ‎are to blame, not the Muslims who commit the atrocities and certainly not Islam. A ‎Twitter user from India responded to Araud: “We Indians have been colonized by all European powers ‎including your country. Ever heard of Indian terrorists? Shame on you.” Indeed.‎

One of the best indicators of how massive terrorist attacks have become the “new normal” is the financial markets, famously and hysterically sensitive as they are. One ‎observer concluded after the Nice attack, “Gold is down and the euro is up. Financial markets ‎don’t care because it’s no longer an extraordinary event. Even European travel stocks and French hotel ‎stocks are only down a couple of percent. Because continued terror attacks for years are already ‘priced ‎in.’ According to the stock market, France has now become Israel.”‎

The sentiment that France and Europe have “now become Israel” has become something of a trend on ‎social media in the wake of Nice. But it is very far from the truth.‎

Europe is a dying continent, one that is walking toward its own cultural suicide with eyes wide shut. ‎In Europe, self-loathing began to gain ground over most traditional Judeo-Christian ‎values as long as a century ago. We see the results of that long process today: Official Europe does not ‎believe in anything. The main European project in recent history has as its goal only a vague ‎multiculturalism and the working toward “an ever closer union,” a self-referential and self-serving ‎empty shell of a vision. Ostensibly, the EU was meant to prevent future wars in Europe, but while ‎Europe has lost its taste for war, war — now in jihad style — has not lost interest in ‎Europe. The problem is that Europe cannot fight jihadis — people who believe so strongly in their ‎cause that they will die for it — if it believes in nothing, least of all the legitimacy of its own fight against ‎them. This will not change, regardless how many reservist forces France now calls up to help ‎protect the country. The fight becomes especially tricky, tragicomically so, when it is fought while ‎intensely fearing the causing of any offence.‎

In contrast, Israel is a vibrant place of almost endless faith. Not just in the traditional and religious ‎sense but a general and secular faith in the worth and the future of the country pervades Israeli ‎society. Israel believes in itself and is more than willing to fight for itself, and this belief manifests itself in ‎myriad ways, not only in its military prowess and in the countless innovations for which it has become ‎so famous, but in its celebrations of its Jewish past, present and future at every given ‎opportunity. It is also evident in the high birth rate in the country, while Europeans are not having enough children to maintain their own populations.

Israel may be located in a neighborhood that is full of enemies and terrorists, but Israel is also ‎committed to dealing with those security issues, whatever it takes. Israel is here to stay, ‎and Israelis are determined to keep it that way, never even contemplating resigning themselves to whatever ‎malignant plans others may have in store for them.‎

No, Europe is not Israel. Not even close.

Israel and US Liberal Jews

The real reasons for the rift: Incredibly, according to Israel’s “liberal” detractors,  the only remedy for Israel’s “democracy deficit” is to establish yet another Muslim-majority tyranny.

Israel’s accomplishments have been remarkable.  Israel has created a thriving economy, and has been a refuge for hundreds of thousands of the displaced and the needy. Israel has generated a rich and diverse cultural life and its scientific and educational achievements have been exemplary.  In spite of these achievements, however, Israel in my view has gone astray…sadly, after a life and career devoted to Jewish community and Israel, I conclude that in every important way Israel has failed to realize its promise for me. A noble experiment, but a failure.

– Rabbi David M. Gordis, Reflections on Israel 2016, Tikkun, February 22, 2016

Like the United States of America, the modern state of Israel is a country born from the aspiration for freedom, and standing out among the nations as a beacon of democracy and humanity. Israel is…an exceptional country that shares our most essential values. It is the only country in the Middle East where freedom of speech and freedom of religion are found. Therefore, support for Israel is an expression of our Americanism

–  Republican Party’s 2016 Platform

‘Name a single country in the history of the world faced with internal and external threats comparable to those faced by Israel that has ever had a better record in human rights; a better record with compliance of the rule of law; a better record of concern for civilians?’ I have been asking that question now for 20 years probably to a million people around the world, and I’ve never gotten a single person even to stand up and name a country, because you can’t do it.

– Alan Dershowitz, a longstanding supporter of Democratic Party, Jerusalem, June 9, 2015

In recent years there have been frequent reports of a growing rift between liberal Jewry in the US and Israel, and of the increasing difficulty liberal American Jews—particularly the younger generation—have in identifying with the Jewish state.

Neither inevitable nor irreversible

This is of course an entirely absurd state of affairs.

After all, if logic, common sense and truth had any significant role to play in determining the “liberal” discourse on Israel or “liberal” attitudes toward it, Israel would be enthusiastically embraced by all who purport to cherish liberal values, such as civil liberties, socio-cultural diversity and religious tolerance.  Indeed, Israel would be held up as source of pride, celebrated as a shining example of how such values can be sustained in the most inclement of circumstances, which in many other places might well have been considered justification for considerably more authoritarian governance (see Dershowitz’s quote above).

Various profound explanations have been proposed to account for the emerging disconnect between the “liberal” Jews in the US and Israel, ranging from philosophical differences to divergent societal shifts in both countries. But while there might be some measure of validity to these claims, to my mind, they largely miss the point and the dominant reason for the rift is far more mundane.

Accordingly, this alleged “animus” is neither inherently inevitable, as several pundits appear to have to resigned themselves to, nor is it inherently irreversible—other than by some far-reaching transformation of Israeli society.

Narcissistic hypocrisy vs indolent incompetence 

At the root of the “liberal” Jews disaffection with the Jewish nation-state lies a dual fault—the one of “liberal” Jewry, the other of the Jewish nation state itself.

On the one hand, liberal Jewry in the US has been gravely afflicted by a narcissistic hypocrisy, which sets unattainable standards for the Jewish state to avoid being the target of its disapproval. On the other hand, Israel, as the nation-state of the Jews, has been deplorably derelict in presenting its case to the world in general and to US Jewry in particular. This has left them gravely misinformed, allowing disapproval of its policy and disinformation as to its nature to go unchallenged—and hence to flourish.

Indeed, much of the disappointment expressed by liberal Jewry is rooted in a misperception of what Israel once was, and what it has become today.

In order to illustrate this, the moronic—and often self-contradictory—lament by David Gordis (not to be confused with his nephew Daniel Gordis) as to Israel’s alleged moral degradation, is perhaps a good place to start (see introductory excerpt).

After summarily dismissing Israel’s “remarkable  accomplishments” in creating  “a thriving economy”, providing  “refuge for hundreds of thousands of the displaced and the needy” and generating “a rich and diverse cultural life and…scientific and educational achievements [that] have been exemplary”, Gordis perversely declares Israel a failed experiment—despite its staggering successes.

Totally detached from fact & reason

Gordis then goes on to elaborate on his abstruse indictment of Israel today:Jewish life and thought have successfully navigated between three pairs of values that are in tension with one another. First, the Jewish experience has balanced the rational with the affective, the assertion with the question…Second, it has embraced both particularism with universalism, probing Jewish interiorities but looking out to the larger world, recognizing the common humanity of all people. Third, it has shaped positions which looked to the past for sources and inspiration but at the same time projected a vision for a world transformed in the future into something better than its current reality.”

Then in a wild diatribe, totally divorced from any semblance of reality, he blares:

“Present day Israel has discarded the rational, the universal and the visionary. These values have been subordinated to a cruel and oppressive occupation, an emphatic materialism, severe inequalities rivaling the worst in the western world and distorted by a fanatic, obscurantist and fundamentalist religion which encourages the worst behaviors rather than the best”.

In reality, “present day Israel” is—demonstrably—far closer to the model of Gordis’s ideal than it ever was, certainly far more than it was back in the days for which he allegedly yearns.

Wrong on every count

Today Israeli society is driven far less by ideological zeal; it far less ideologically monolithic, far less under the sway of a doctrinaire socialistic hegemony, for which Gordis waxes nostalgic.  How does that make it less rational?

Israel has been in the forefront in extending aid to “the other” whenever disaster has struck: In Nepal, in Haiti and even in providing life-saving medical treatment to the victims of the Syrian civil war–to name but a few of present day Israel’s humanitarian initiatives. How is that indicative of “the worst behaviors rather than the best”?

Israeli innovation and inventiveness in medicine, agriculture, water conservation is saving/improving the lives of multitudes across the globe? How is that indicative of Israel discarding the “universal?”

And Israel’s cutting edge activities in the field of space research and exploration have put it in the world’s top five countries in this sphere of human endeavor. So has Israel really discarded the visionary?

This is merely a small sampling of how intellectually dishonest the derogatory drivel of Israel’s “liberal” detractors has become.

This narcissistic hypocrisy was aptly exposed in a perceptive piece in a Washington Post blog by David Bernstein, professor of Law at George Mason University. He wrote:  “Israeli Arabs have never been more integrated into Israeli society, or made more rapid economic and social progress, than…under Netanyahu… surrounded by hostile enemies, absorbing about four times its original population in refugees, very few of whom came from countries with a longstanding liberal or democratic traditions, expecting a progressive utopia to emerge was ridiculous. Creating a reasonably liberal, multiethnic, democratic state with religious freedom in a region where there aren’t any others should be more than enough to satisfy all but the most starry-eyed idealists.”

Indeed, it should.

Beneath the disingenuous gobbledygook

Of course, denigrating Israel because it fails to meet some unattainable criteria of human behavior, conjured up by disenchanted “liberal” Jews, serves no useful purpose other than to expose their self-centered insincerity—especially when they refrain from applying the same stringent standards to any other country, including their own.

For, once one strips away all the disingenuous gobbledygook, one comes to the core reason for “liberal” chagrin with Israel. This has nothing to do with how diverse or tolerant Israeli society has become, or the level of humanitarian relief it may extend to others, or how Israeli enterprise contributes to the betterment of mankind at large.  It has to do with one – and only one—politically partisan issue—Israel’s interaction with the Palestinian-Arabs across the pre-1967 Green Line (a.k.a. the “Occupation”).  The only remedial measure that “liberals” advance to deal with the “undemocratic blight” is to implement a “two-state-solution”.

Incredibly therefore, according to Israel’s “liberal” detractors,  the only panacea for Israel’s “democracy deficit” is to facilitate the establishment of yet another Muslim-majority tyranny, whose hallmarks will be homophobic persecution of homosexuals, misogynistic discrimination against women and girls, intolerance of religious diversity, and repression of political dissent.

But this is not only wildly irrational in terms of its internal logic, it is equally imprudent in terms of its operational implications. After all, every time Israel has transferred territory to Arab control, it has sooner or later, become a platform to launch deadly attacks against it. Yet with unswerving doctrinaire zeal “liberals” cling to the perilous prescription of touting tyranny and bringing hundreds of kindergartens within the range of rockets and mortars along Israel’s eastern flank.

Down to the last Israeli

It would thus seem that much of US Jewry is so blinded by its obsessive attachment to the failed formula of two-states-for-two- people that they are prepared to defend it—paradoxically under the banner of liberal political philosophy – down to the last Israeli. Indeed, in its mindless subscription to the two-state notion as the touchstone of Israeli democracy, “liberal” Jewry  disregards Israel’s many merits and highlights its inevitable defects—thus greatly contributing to its international de-legitimization across the globe. After all, who better for the Judeophobes to cite than the Jews themselves?

But beyond disregard for Israel’s virtues, US liberal Jews seem to be blind to the nature of its adversaries. Despite ample evidence, they refuse to acknowledge that Arab (including Palestinian Arab) animosity is not rooted in anything the Israel does—or does not do; but in what Israel is: Jewish. Concessions will not satiate Arab appetites, only whet them.

But if US “liberal” Jews frown upon the coercive measures that Israel is compelled to use against the Palestinian-Arabs, were they to apply the same criteria to their own country, they would have good reason to feel even more disenchanted.  For when faced with threats far less severe than those faced by Israel, the US has responded far more vigorously and less discriminately than Israel, whether in the Balkans, Iraq, Afghanistan and even Yemen, with “collateral” civilian casualties dwarfing anything Israel has been accused of.

Yet strangely, few if any, embittered Jewish liberals have distanced themselves from the USA because they have been disappointed by American brutality and its failure to live up to their immaculate standards of state behavior.

Expose and inform

Given the facts on the ground, Israel should in fact be the proverbial “apple of the eye” of US liberal Jewry, an object of pride it is eager to be identified with—especially in light of the harrowing circumstances under which it is forced to exist.

Sadly, Israel has done inexcusably little to harness the facts to rebuff the attacks on its democratic credentials and has allowed imperative coercive actions to ensure the security of its civilians against an implacable foe, to be portrayed as racist brutality.

Thus, Israel is losing the support of the US diaspora by default. By spending a pittance on public diplomacy, it is by its own incompetence and impotence fostering the narratives of its adversaries.

The Spring 2016 edition of the Columbia University journal, “Current”, ran an interesting piece entitled “Reclaiming Alienated Liberals: Israel’s Imperative for Diaspora Jews” by Benjamin Davidoff, self-professed pro-Israel advocate.  There are many things I disagree with in the article -such as the need for a Palestinian state and the call for Israel to empower J-Street, but on one matter Davidoff was spot on.  He conveyed the feeling that pro-Israel advocates had been abandoned by Israel. He aptly notes: “Israel has an obligation to aid in pro-Israel advocacy on university campuses. Israel has largely ignored those fighting for Israel on campus and has failed to offer any true support for diaspora Jews… this issue directly affects the viability of the Israeli state in the future and should be of primary concern for Israel.”

On this he is quite right – and Israeli officialdom will ignore this obligation at the nation’s peril.

Boris Johnson, Israel, and the Shifting Sands of Global Leadership

Boris Johnson is an unconventional politician.  After successfully leading the Brexit camp to the victory, he has now been named as Theresa May’s new Foreign Minister. Boris Johnson is not only an unabashed nationalist in the British mold, he has recognized that the world has changed.  During the Brexit campaign Johnson and politician Nigel Farage rightly argued that an overly bureucratic European Union stuck in a 20th Century paradigm was choking Britain and holding it back from dealing with a rising China, Russia, India, and Israel.

By naming Boris Johnson as her foreign minister, May essentially sends a signal that the game the Europeans have been playing with the world is up.  Afterall, when the game turns deadly, what else can be expected.  Britain has always had two sides to her.  One as the highly manipulative colonial overlord and the other being the liberty seeking altruist. Neither is 100% representative of Great Britain’s demure, but Boris Johnson’s ascendency to the face of the Kingdom seems to be an acquiesence that Britain can no longer remain attached to the ideas of old.

Afterall, Johnson himself caught much flack when he slammed the BDS movement. “I cannot think of anything more foolish” than to boycott “a country that when all is said and done is the only democracy in the region, the only place that has in my view a pluralist open society,” he said.

Britain as a partner rather than an unwanted interloculator  is of course a postive step. Yet, as has been noted in the past, Britain ends up doing whatever is good for Britain and by whatever means is necessary.  Right now those that control the purse have decided to let the liberty contingent assume power, yet if May and Johnson rock the  boat too much their control won’t last long.

The British elite which are the ones who have set policy since the beginning of the kingdom have always had to bend at times of rising populism.  The tide right now seems to be going in that direction.

Israel must not forget that it was Britain, as colonial master in the Land of Israel, incited Arabs to inflict maximum damage to Jews, while preventing the Jews from defending themselves.  It was the British government which actively blocked Jews from coming to the Land of Israel only to be sent back to Europe to die. It was the British who armed and directed the Arab armies against the young Jewish State. The same British overlords reveled in the the choas they created here in Israel and across Africa and the Middle East in order to ensure maxmum profit without the obligations of justice. They shifted populations and aided Arab allies in migrating, conquering, and controlling much of the indigenous non-Arab populace.

Can Theresa May and Boris Johnson rectify the past sins of the old order without being thrown out by the British elite?  This is highly doubtful, but for now though Boris Johnson becoming Foreign Minister is at least an acknowledgement that global leadership may be shifting away from Europe and shifting fast.

Terrorism is a Mindset

(Our correspondent from Pashtun Times shares his thoughts on the source of radical Islam)

Terrorism. Extremism. Fundamentalism. Violence. Killing innocents. What exactly do we talk; or justify about? Is it the act of it? Or is it the thought process? Is it the action? Or is it the thinking and ideology behind the action? Is it really the 72 virgins or is it just the self-satisfaction of being harmful? Is it about trying hard to show how we can dominate the others to respect us of fear? Thinking fear is the only ultimate way to enforce a belief? Or are the 72 virgins more important than the family and the crying mother he is leaving behind? Is it the crying mother or actually a proud mother who is by thinking her son did a great job and maybe the son also knows about it? And if so why? Because this world is not giving her son the virgin when he needs? Or is it that he has nothing in life to do except read just one book in life and stay worthless and jobless? Therefore before dying herself the mother wants to see the end of her son’s struggle on earth? Whatever is the reasoning, these are not individualistic one off cases- as such cases are so many. And it is not just any result of just a few individual’s or family frustrations. It is a common phenomenon seen.

First let us get a few fundamental concepts right. Poverty is not an excuse for crime. And war is not a reason for producing future criminals. Bin Laden belonged to a very rich family and so do many other terrorists. There are millions of poor Muslims in India too. If war would have created terrorists then Vietnam would have been hub of global terrorists and a few other nations too. So stop blaming USA and any local civil war either. Of course Islam as a whole can never be blamed either because 200 million Malaysians and almost 175 million Indian Muslims are not terrorists. More importantly, only handful and very few brainwasher Imams and Molvis cannot be blamed alone either. Equally responsible are the societies where these people are born; the people they grow up with; the things they see and hear around them, throughout their lives. In the lands of Wahabis there are very few blasts. Why? Only because their law and order, police and army are more strong and strict? Or because they keep their land safe and fund terrorism outside in other Muslim countries? Even if that is true what is it that provokes people of those other countries to do the acts of terrorism? Is it only the misinterpretation of a holy book? Is it really that simple? Even if we accept that they are taught these things and are trained from childhood in Madrassahs then the question is whom to blame eventually? The preachers or the parents who are willingly sending their children there? Doing suicide blast is equal to burning after death which is Haram. How that will give Jannath/paradise? Plus if they are not Muslims after hanging let their bodies be burnt.

A Hindu friend, Prithwi Banerjee, told me that he is living and working in Afghanistan for over 7 years  with so much of pleasure, happiness and friendliness with all the Muslims around him. He said that he knows very well how much the Muslims in Afghanistan hate terrorism.

So, it also does not look good that the entire community is blamed for a few people. Moreover, it looks worse when people give justification of Islam is religion of peace as there is no need of that. Rather such justification makes things worse. If few people start saying that some of us are really so very bad people and are motivated by some of us only; then and only then they will start getting the proper empathy from everyone else globally. Justification makes them more close to the criminals. And telling all that terrorists have no religion is also like giving another unnecessary justification which does not change anything. More justifications like only 1 out of 10,000 are like this, Muslims are killing only Muslims so how you call them they are Muslims, and Islam prohibits killing of innocents; makes things worse. Everyone knows that. No need to justify. Are you saying that if they kill non-Muslims then we can call them to be true Muslims? Statements like ‘If the killers kill in the name of Allah or kill those people who does not know Kalma that does not make them followers of Allah’; this is not required. What is required is very sensible thinking for the entire society.

It has to be accepted that just doing blast, suicide attack or any other sort of attack on innocents are not the only part of terrorism. The real sort is in thinking process. Did the misinterpretors of the Koran come from Mars? No. Did those disciples of such hate preachers come from Moon? No. Are they creating any book of their own and misinterpreting it? No. Do they have any print media of their own and is it a global nexus of any sort? No. Then from where such thoughts of such acts are coming? It is coming from basic core thought process of the society. And that has to change. That social thought process is provoking the misinterpretations of the Koran. Even if the 1400 years old context means something drastic, today’s globalized thought should not take the wrong meaning out of that. When there is pure hatred of each and every citizen towards these people then nobody will give them shelter and then you will not need police or army to kill or capture them. If this does not change one cannot blame only the terrorists for doing wrong because then everyone is equally responsible. And those who are killing they do not think they are killing the innocent. They think anyone who is non follower is criminal. Word of Jihad is not their invention at least. Almost everyone needs to change themselves from inside to make sure these things stop. So stop blaming outsiders only. A small child does that. Blaming another boy in school for doing the wrong thing. Without internal motivation how can external motivation effect so hard? Without demand how can continuous supply work? Examples of such thoughts need to change:

  1. Thinking my God is better than yours
  2. Thinking this is the best religion – all others are rubbish
  3. Thinking Israel is pure Jews – but still ISIS is not Muslim
  4. Having soft corner for them who provoke Jihadi thought
  5. Being happy when US Army convoy is hit by the Taliban
  6. Being again and again fooled in the name of brotherhood
  7. Not being able to accept science in modern education
  8. Saying Congrats of Eid on Facebook only to all Muslims
  9. Being happy that Zakir Naik “defeated” Sri Sri in debate
  10. Saying Shah Rukh is our’s but unaware of Selina Jethley

I can go on. The list will become more than 50 and not just 10, but next time. There is shortage of space and time now. But I hope I have been able to clarify my points. And those people, who will show extremist reaction to this post, they are actually the very good examples of what I am talking about, where lies the real problem, and what they must change in themselves and their children. Always remember that getting rid of the responsibility by saying they do not belong to us is not a solution to save oneself. Would you have accepted a same reaction and logic of terrorism if people of another faith carry on the same thing? So stop making up fake stories of which big country is behind this and start counting how many millions of your own people indirectly supports or at least in the heart enjoys any such thing that happens. Think. There is time. And surely Allah needs you. To be a part who will actually start to get into the root of all these things and bring the peace back. Or else – the Dajjal being born and grown inside will finish everybody.