In his weekly Canadian Jewish News media analysis column “According to Reports,” Paul Michaels, CIC Director of Communications, finds some columnists ready to distinguish between fair criticism of Israel and deligitimization of the Jewish state.
Something surprising appeared recently in The Nation magazine, the oldest American weekly – founded in 1865 – and solidly on the left to far-left (Naomi Klein, a leader of the boycott, divestment and sanctions, is a columnist).
In the July 19/26 issue, in a letter to the editor, one of The Nation’s prominent columnists, Eric Alterman, who writes on the media, rebuked the magazine over its stridently anti-Israel editorial “Free Gaza” (June 21) which dealt with the flotilla saga.
While claiming up front that he “strongly oppose[d]” Israel’s blockade of Gaza, Alterman held nothing back about the magazine’s extreme one-sidedness: "There is no notion that any sane person in Israel or Egypt or the West Bank would ever have a problem with anything Hamas has ever done or have any reason for concern if it ruled the country on its borders and had the power to kill whomever it liked by whatever means it liked. You’d never know, either, that it is a regressive, totalitarian, anti-Semitic political movement opposed to liberalism in all its forms, particularly as it relates to women. This editorial, like most Nation editorials, assumes Israel is 100 percent at fault in this conflict and that whoever opposes it is 100 percent correct. It is the mirror image of the right-wing Zionist viewpoint it attacks. As such, it can have no relevance to the views of anyone who takes the complications of the conflict seriously in hopes of finding a solution that might one day be acceptable to the country The Nation consistently demonizes.”
Whether Alterman’s days with the magazine are numbered (as happened years ago when a more famous previous columnist, Chris Hitchens, quit in protest) remains to be seen. Unlike Hitchens, Alterman has not moved to the right. And it cannot be ignored that Alterman himself has indulged occasionally in unfair, one-sided censure of Israel. But it is significant that he has – finally- stood up against the increasingly widespread bankruptcy of the far left that, like the far right, seeks only to delegitimize Israel in cartoon-like fashion.
At least among some within the left, who care about intellectual honesty and fairness as an inherent part of their concern for social and political justice, there is a growing recognition that a line must be drawn between legitimate and illegitimate criticism of Israel.
Shira Herzog addressed this important subject in her July 14 Globe and Mail column, “What does pro-Israel mean?”
It’s unfortunate that Herzog drew an over-simplified contrast within the Jewish community between those who defended Israel’s stand in the flotilla incident and those who criticized it. She depicted a fundamental divide between traditional organizations and “liberal” ones. However, Herzog failed to note that there are numerous liberal-minded Jews within traditional organizations who, though far from jingoistic, maintain that much criticism, including that of the flotilla operation, is so extreme and rampant – to the point of dangerous – that it needs to be countered.
Herzog in fact went on to acknowledge this concern when she drew attention to a study done by the Tel Aviv-based Reut Institute about what it calls “the delegitimization network.” She explained that this network is a “disparate, largely viral coalition [that] links European and North American radical left NGOs and fundamentalist Islamic groups in rejecting Israel's legitimacy. In other words, they don't distinguish between Israel and its continued occupation of Palestinians and territory. They're focused not on resolving the Palestinian issue through a two-state deal that would respect Israel's territorial integrity and Jewish majority alongside a Palestinian state, but on branding Israel as a pariah internationally. (The loose network includes the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement.)”
She continued: “This heightened vulnerability leads many pro-Israel advocates to reject expressions of ‘critical support’ because insidious efforts to delegitimize Israel gain credibility when Jewish voices rally against its policies.”
Space does not allow for a more detailed examination of Herzog’s nuanced account of what distinguishes valid critics from “delegitimizers.” But the discussion is important, and her views should be considered when confronting those who cross this line.
/cijainfo
@CIJAinfo