Lighten Up, Folks

Robin Shepherd demonstrates that the BBC isn't just biased against Israel: they've got to actually work at it.

Yet, truth be told, perhaps it not a good idea to spend as much time as this blog does being all serious about stuff. Especially at Sukkot, the only Jewish holiday where we're explicitly told to be happy. So for starters, Jeffrey Goldberg insists Fidel - for all his blemishes - is actually pro-Israel.

Judeosphere likes the political cartoons of Shlomo Cohen, as anyone ought. Personally, I think this one is simple genius:

If you're a Facebook user (most people are, I'm not) you'll probably need to see this film

If you're a Twitter user (I'm guilty), this film

And if you user You-Tube (me? never), this film

Interpreting Israel from America

Laura Rozen in Washington speculates why the Israeli delegation didn't show up to listen to Obama's UN speech today. True, she says, it's Sukkot, and the Israelis told the White House in advance that they'd not be there, but that can't be serious. There's got to be another reason- so she goes speculating.

Perhaps. It might however be worth noting that no Israeli politician who wishes to be re-elected can be seen to disregard the Jewish holidays. Offhand, I cannot think of a single case of diplomacy on Jewish holidays for decades. (Perhaps prior to the election of Menachem Begin in 1977, but I wouldn't vouch even for that). I realize this seems parochial: observing an ancient holiday rather than listening to a speech by the President of theUnited States of America, but there it is.

Human Rights Violations Quiz

In a world of balanced reporting, these would be easy questions to answer. Test yourself:

In what part of the world has a perceived occupier shot more than 80 civilians this summer?

More significantly, in what part of the world have some 200,000 (two hundred thousand!) civilians been forced out of their homes, with thousands of casualties?

Two States for [??] People

Salam Fayyad broke off a meeting yesterday in New York with Danny Ayalon when Ayalon insisted their joint communique mention "Two states for two people". Jonathan Tobin comments:

The point here is more than mere sophistry. If the peace talks do not result in recognition of Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state, then the conflict will not be over. While some groups are putting pressure on Israel to concede its right to build in disputed territories prior to even the start of negotiations (such as the left-wing lobby J Street, which published a full page ad in the New York Times today demanding that Israel freeze settlements without mentioning any corresponding concessions from the Palestinians), the PA won’t even admit that a two-state solution will allow for one of the two to be Jewish. One needn’t be a peace-process cynic to understand that what is going on now is a charade, not a genuine negotiation.

I'll offer a different take: If Israel will not be recognized by the Palestinians as the Jewish State, then there's no need for the Temple Mount/Haram elShariff to be in Palestine. On the contrary. Since Palestine will be Judenrein, but Israel (defined as Jewish or not) will have a significant Palestinian minority, the holiest place for both sides should obviously be in the country which is home to citizens of both nations.

Come to think of it: This should be true of the entire city of Jerusalem. Rammallah, with Palestinians only, should be in Palestine. Haifa, Jaffa and Jerusalem, with mixed populations, should be in the country with the mixed population, the country that can't acceptably be defined as Jewish.

Diversity in Jerusalem (and Beyond)

Here's an interesting item about three public markets in Jerusalem: the gigantic mall at Malha, the upscale-touristy open-air promenade at Mamila, and the oldest of the three, the tourist market in the Old City (about a three minute walk from Mamila). In all three there are Israeli and Palestinian shoppers together; in the Old City the stores are all operated by Arabs and in Malha most or all of the stores are operated by Jews; in Mamila there are Jews and Arabs on both sides of the counters.

In the past I've toyed with the thesis whereby the more direct the Israeli control of Palestinians, the better for them in many ways. Where would any reasonable person prefer to live: in a Palestinian refugee camp in Lebanon, In Syria, in Hamas Gaza, or in Israeli Haifa? Over the past year or two Salaam Fayad and his people may finally be getting their act together in some parts of the West Bank, and hopefully this will continue. In the meantime, however, for all the many blemishes, Jerusalem seems not to be so bad.

In a different universe, meanwhile, there are currents in the Haredi community, in Jerusalem and elsewhere, which may lead them, too, into a natural participation in the broader society. Perhaps.

Bill Clinton, by the way, thinks he understands how these sort of issues play out in the negotiations for peace. I'm not convinced, but it's interesting how closely he follows the matter.

On a different - but not totally unrelated - subject, TNR offers a description of the occupation of West Sahara, and the difference in the way that occupation is treated compared to Israel's. A whiff of hypocrisy, if you read closely. Which raises the question: where would it be better to live, in West Sahara or in Kalkilya, say, on the West Bank? (h/t Silke).

Things in the Intertubes

Michael Oren gave a speech (three times) on Yom Kippur, and lots of folks are trying to decode it. You can, too: here it is. (Me, I'm not decoding).

Jeffrey White has a new study about what will happen if Israel and Hezbullah have another war. Save, and check his accuracy after it happens, I fear.

The Muqata has dug up an old one about the season we're in. It's worth your time.

Scholars on Shlomo Sand

I've finished reading Shlomo Sand's The Invention of the Jewish People. Who knows, perhaps I'll find the time to write a review of it (it's an astonishingly poorly researched book that will be lapped up enthusiastically by all the usual suspects). In the meantime, here's a quick round-up of some serious reviews by real scholars.

Israel Bartal published his review in Haaretz, where it's no longer accessible - but The Zionist Conspiracy blog (true to its name) saved it online for us here.

Anita Shapira published her review in The Journal of Israeli History; you can find it online here.

Hillel Halkin lacks the academic stature of Bartal and Shapira, but he's a knowledgeable fellow and writes well; here's his TNR review.

Not Everyone Likes the Jews

A new book, The Secret History of MI6, tells that British hostility to Zionism was so intense after WWII that its secret agency went so far as to blow up ships that were to take Holocaust survivors to Mandatory Palestine. According to this review of the book, it seems no-one was hurt, as the ships were attacked when in port, empty.

Some latter day Brits still intensely dislike Israel, and they're busy passing anti-Israeli resolutions. Across the pond some folks don't like Israel much either. They pretend they're merely upholding fine moral principles, but sadly, a fellow named Dr. Fred Gottheil unveiled their dishonesty when he asked hundreds of signatories of an anti-Israel petition to sign one about human rights in Muslim societies: most refused to sign.

If you enjoy reading about such nastiness you'll be gratified to learn there's a new blog all about antisemitism, titled JHate - a blog about anti-Semitism. (Remind me to write about the different spellings of the term someday).

Finally, on a related but upbeat note. Remember when after the earthquake in Haiti an Israeli medical team did such a fine job that the usual suspects united in condemning Israel for pulling out its field hospital after a mere month? Well, it appears the story is more complex. Once there were larger hospitals in operation there wasn't much need for an emergency field hospital there, but it seems various Israeli organizations are still in Haiti, till this very day and not packing up to leave.

Update: Juergen sends in this nice article about Ireland: the author thinks the post of Israeli ambassador in Ireland must be the worst job an Israeli diplomat can have. (Worse than Turkey?)

View through Obfuscation

Shmuel Rosner ponders whether the NIF has learned anything from the public pressure on it these past months, and is not convinced. Yet he expects the pressure to continue, and recommends the NIF-folks take this into account.

View from the West

Prof. Fouad Agami, always a contrarian, has numbers that tell a surprising - and optimistic -story:

The truth is that the trajectory of Islam in America (and Europe for that matter) is at variance with the play of things in Islam's main habitat. A survey by Elaph, the most respected electronic daily in the Arab world, gave a decided edge to those who objected to the building of this mosque—58% saw it as a project of folly.

Elaph was at it again in the aftermath of Pastor Terry Jones's threat to burn copies of the Quran: It queried its readers as to whether America was a "tolerant" or a "bigoted" society. The split was 63% to 37% in favor of those who accepted the good faith and pluralism of this country.

This is remarkable. The ground burned in the Arab-Islamic world over the last three decades. Sly preachers and their foot soldiers "weaponized" the faith and all but devoured what modernists had tried to build in the face of difficult odds. The fury has not burned out. Self-styled imams continue to issue fatwas that have made it all but impossible for Arabs and Muslims to partake of the modern world. But from this ruinous history, there has settled upon countless Muslims and Arabs the recognition that the wells are poisoned in their midst, that the faith has to be reined in or that the faith will kill, and that the economic and cultural prospects of modern Islam hang in the balance.

To this kind of sobriety, Muslim activists and preachers in the diaspora—in Patterson, N.J., and Minneapolis, in Copenhagen and Amsterdam—appear to be largely indifferent. They are forever on the look-out for the smallest slight.

View from the East

I spent the morning in East Jerusalem. Not long ago I met a fellow there - a Palestinian, of course - who seems a potential partner for a discussion I've been wanting to have for a number of years already, about the town we both live in.

I'm not going to name him yet, because although we've had a few meetings already, he and I have yet to define what it is we're doing, beyond telling each other stuff. (And showing). Give us a few weeks (each of us is busy with other things), and perhaps we'll reach an agreement about what we're up to.

I will however note a few quick impressions.

We visited a girls school, at which apparently all the girls and the staff were dressed in traditional clothing, the adults with their heads covered. Except for the principal, who was dressed in Western garb, spoke fluent Hebrew, and seems to have a shelf-full of academic degrees and qualifications from all sorts of institutions of higher learning on all sides of our conflict.

Set aside the strategic aspects of two nations clashing; there seems no dearth of things Israel does which can be interpreted, from the East Jerusalem perspective, as either malicious, or very idiotic. Of course, there are other explanations for the same things, too: it's a complicated story.

There's a UNRWA school over there. The story of UNRWA is quite odd, and I wrote a section about it in Right to Exist. The thing about UNRWA is that it exists to support Palestinian refugees: but the area I was in doesn't have any Palestinian refugees. On the contrary, it's an area populated by a number of clans who've been precisely there, where they are now, for something like 250 years. Apparently, back in the 1950s the Jordanians (or someone) convinced UNRWA to support the locals in the village they'd been living in for centuries, because it abutted on the border with Israel. Assuming my friend's story was correct - and the UNRWA school is certainly there - then the UNRWA story is even more bizarre than I thought.

At one point we drove past an elderly man with some bags. His job, I was told, is to collect bread. When the locals throw out their garbage, they separate the old bread from it, because bread cannot be treated as garbage. (This is true in some Jewish families, too, mostly ones from Arab societies). This elderly man has appointed himself, and is recognized by all, as the remover of cast-aside bread. He comes by regularly, collects the bread which is placed separately near the garbage bins, and makes use of it (to feed animals, apparently).

Root Cause: America Fights Back

The Guardian has a long and not very coherent article about Faisal Shazad and how he came to be a (failed) terrorist. The cause? America is killing Muslims.

Of course, other people are killing Muslims too, included mostly other Muslims, but also - at least quite recently - Russians, Serbs, Indians, Chinese and so on. Unlike America, moreover, some of them have been at it for rather a while, and even at times were the aggressors. Not that you'd learn any of this from the Guardian.

Shahzad's reasoning, shared by suicide bombers in Gaza, Sri Lanka and elsewhere, was that his act was a war tactic. Aerial bombing by states cannot avoid killing children. Hence terror bombings by militants that kill children are a logical response. The anti-terror police have a programme (so far successful) to prevent another 9/11, but it cannot address root causes – American foreign policy...

Nothing new here, move on...

Aznar's Friends of Israel

Since I spend far too much time following all sorts of folks who don't much like Israel, it's only fair to point out that some people actually do (like Israel). Jose Maria Aznar, for example, who was once the prime minister of Spain until he sided with Tony Blair and George Bush on some matter, and was booted out by his electorate for his efforts. Anyway, deep into retirement he is now trotting the globe touting his new organization, Friends of Israel. He seems to think there's a connection between Israel's legitimacy and well-being, and that of other places. How odd.

He even explained this at some length to the Haaretz person in Washington. More elbow power to him, I say.

Boycott Now!

Yet another good reason to boycott Israeli universities, the sooner the better.

Calling the United Nations

Imagine a hypothetical world in which everyone had decided to revoke the use of violence and refrain from war, preferring instead to live by universally accepted rules. Even in such a world there might sometimes be rogue elements who cheated, but in the rare cases of potentially violent mischief making, any side which felt itself put-upon would send a complaint to the world referees, who would call out the culprits, admonish them, and everything would go back to normal. Obviously, in such a world it would not be legitimate for anyone to retaliate with force, even when they felt attacked, since the world body would resolve the matter for them like an efficient nursery school teacher.

If, in exceedingly rare cases, some group insisted upon being unreasonable and aggressive, the world body could, at least conceivably, take action itself. This would be highly regrettable, but at least it would be clearly moral.

The odd thing is that there are people who sincerely believe this mumbo-jumbo, or at least pretend to. The Archbishop of Canterbury, for example, and others, too. For their benefit, here's a letter sent recently by a representative of the Israeli government.

Unetanneh Tokef

I've written in the past about Unetanneh Tokef, perhaps the single most powerful prayer of the High Holidays (but not for any lack of competition). The prayer was probably written in the Galilee in the Byzantine era; it's earliest copy comes from the Cairo Geniza.

A 13th century story tells how R. Amnon of Magenza (=Mainz) was tortured to death for refusing to convert to Christianity, and died as he was reciting Netanneh Tokef; whether the story is true or not I can't say, but it's old, it reflects real conditions in medieval Europe, and if one had the strength to die reciting a prayer this would be as good as any.

The Hebrew text, an English translation and analysis can all be found here.

At 1:50 pm on Yom Kippur of 1973 Egypt and Syria attacked Israel, and the Yom Kippur War began. Like 9/11, or Kennedy's assassination, it was a moment in time no-one ever forgets; the war was the second most bloody of our many chapters of conflict, exceeded in bloodiness only by the war of 1947-49.

Kibbutz Beit Hashita in the Jezereel Valley, a community of a few hundred families, lost 11 of its men, the highest proportion of casualties in any Israeli town in that war. In spite of being a very secular, left-leaning kibbutz, when the kibbutzniks commissioned Yair Rosenblum to write them a commemorative text he simply put Unetanneh Tokef to music, combining various styles of Israeli music. The most famous recording is by Hanoch Albalek, a member of the kibbutz. It has long since become a nationally recognized version.

By way of closing the circle, one might add that Beit Hashita is near Beit Alfa, the site of a magnificent Byzantine-era synagogue, so perhaps the anonymous author of the original prayer lived close nearby; in any case he couldn't have been very far away, given the size of the Galilee.

The Will to Power

Here's a fine review of what sounds as a tel-it-as-it-is book, Power: Why Some People Have It and Others Don't. According to the review

Mr Pfeffer starts by rubbishing the notion that the world is just—that the best way to win power is to be good at your job. The relationship between rewards and competence is loose at best. Bob Nardelli was a disastrous CEO of Home Depot. But he was paid nearly a quarter of a billion dollars to leave and quickly moved to the top slot at Chrysler, which then went bankrupt. Mr Pfeffer points out that CEOs who presided over three years of poor earnings and led their firms into bankruptcy only faced a 50% chance of losing their jobs (and perfectly successful senior managers are routinely cleaned out when new CEOs take over). There are plenty of things that matter more than competence, such as...

Silke would like this book.

Explaining Halachot is Problematic (or Not?)

As I mentioned earlier, I'm reading Shlomo Sand's The Invention of the Jewish People and finding it remarkably unconvincing. Perhaps the single weirdest thing about it is that Sand is offering a revolutionary new reading of Jewish history, yet he never - not once - cites the relevant Jewish sources. If there's one thing Jews did throughout their history it's read and write books; some of the more important of them relate directly to his subject matter: say, the Talmud, for example. He seems never to have glanced at them, nor even to have any idea what's in them via the ample modern academic literature about them. I cannot stress enough how truly bizarre this is.

Admittedly, learning history from the Talmud requires some careful scholarship, since its creators were in no way recording the annals of their times, nor were they interested in what modern historians do. So what? Lots of historians spend lots of time and effort deciphering past issues from oblique sources.

An example of a matter the Talmud never actually tells us, though it would have been of major significance, is the relationship between their scholarly efforts and the broad, non-scholarly Jewish public. The rabbis haggled endlessly over the tiniest minutiae of countless matters; how did this relate to the daily life of the general public?

Today I passed an interesting hint. The topic is a convoluted discussion about which cheeses produced by pagans can be eaten by Jews, if at all, and what are the Biblical sources for the different positions. Back in Mishnaic times there had been an early discussion between Rabbi Yehoshua and Rabbi Ishmael (2nd century); it was cited by Rav Dimi when he moved from Eretz Israel to Babylonia (4th century). At one point in the original discussion Rabbi Yehoshua had admonished Rabbi Yishmael not to explain: "Yishmael my brother! Keep your lips sealed!"

The Gemara asks why Rabbi Yishmael wasn't allowed to explain his position, and answers that it was a new, recent rule. The Gemara interrupts itself and insists: so what was the reason for the proscription, and gives a technical explanation about the method of cheese production. Having clarified that, the Gemara goes back to ask what was special about new rules that it was forbidden to explain them, and cites a report from Ulla (a 3rd century rabbi who lived in the Galilee but traveled frequently to Babylonia): the rabbis in the west (=Eretz Israel) never explained their halachic rulings for 12 months, fearing that if they did the people might decide they weren't convinced and not act as instructed; after 12 months people would have gotten used to the new instruction and there would no longer be any harm in explaining it.

Avoda Zara 35a. This thread starts and is explained here.

Jews are Palestinians are Jews

There's been quite a bit of ridicule of this article in the Guardian which refers to the people who lived in the Holy Land in the days of Jesus as "early Palestinians". CiFWatch was on the story here and here, Daled Amos was on it here, Mellanie Phillips here. Some of them talk about how this is no coincidence, rather the result of the concentrated efforts of Replacement Theology Christian thinkers and Palestinian ideologues. Fair enough.

These days, however, I'm in the middle of Shlomo Sand's The Invention of the Jewish People, which I hope to review in depth sometime. Sand isn't a Christian theologian, nor a Palestinian ideologue. He's a Jewish professor at Tel Aviv University. Yet his book, profoundly wrong as it is, is part of a clear effort to re-write history so that the Jews were not here 2000 years ago, and certainly not 3000. That slip-of-tongue in the Guardian probably wasn't, which is why it slipped past the editor. There are ever more people out there who actually do think Jesus' compatriots were early Palestinians, whatever that might mean.

Begin's Memoiries - and Rabin's, and Even Kissinger's

Lee Smith has read Yehuda Avner's new book The Prime Ministers: An Intimate Narrative of Israeli Leadership, and describes it at length. Avner worked closely with Levy Eshkol, Golda Meir, Ytzchak Rabin, and Menachem Begin, and kept piles of notes upon which he based this book. Lee says that it's all fascinating, but that Begin towers above all the others.

Yet another book we've got to read, I guess.