Image via Wikipedia

(This blog post was originally drafted in response to the piece “Next year in occupied East Jerusalem!”, which appeared in the Jewish Journal (Los Angeles) in March 2010. The draft was on a USB memory stick that disappeared at the time and has just reappeared. While it’s no longer a timely response, I think it’s still an appropriate one. I’m posting it with only minor edits.)

A few reactions to this passionate summation of our historic attachment to Jerusalem, and the apparently unstoppable need to build in East Jerusalem at this particular juncture in history:

Yes, it would have been nice if we could have had it all, right now. We made do without having sovereignty over Jerusalem for almost 2,000 years, however. Maybe

we could do without it for a little longer; say, until the Messiah arrives?

Zionism defied the rabbinic ban on attempting to restore the Jewish people to its ancestral homeland. It did this for sound reasons and at a critical moment in history (if only more had realised just how critical!). That mission and objective has now been achieved. Do we really need to go on tempting fate, pushing the envelope, for the sake of territory that can be considered part of Jerusalem only by a huge stretch of the imagination? It may be appropriate to be passionate about the Old City and the Kotel; less so for the sake of some obscure Palestinian villages that happened to be swept up in the 1967-era greater Jerusalem metropolitan region that supplanted the human-scale city of Jerusalem.

Does this further the historic mission of a minimal Zionism; to provide a home for a homeless people? If not, then maybe it should be considered negotiable, Holy City or not.

I have a huge question mark around why – more than 40 years following the liberation of Jerusalem – we are still trying to digest chunks of the reunited city. That we bit off more than we could chew is apparent, and perhaps it’s time to acknowledge that, if we haven’t digested it by now, perhaps we never will. Right now Israel resembles nothing so much as a python trying to digest an entire sheep. Unfortunately the villagers have happened upon the bloated python and, armed with sticks and stones, are forcing it to regurgitate its prey.

Israel believed it could do a far better job of managing the holy sites than its Jordanian predecessor, but is this in fact the case? Just looking purely at the Jewish holy sites, the Temple Mount was put forever out of bounds by an act of national self-abasement within days of the 6-Day War, when Dayan handed over the keys for the entire Noble Enclosure (rather than just the individual mosques) to the Muslim Waqf. As a result, Jews can now visit the Temple Mount only as individual tourists, and the Waqf has been allowed to Islamicize the entire site, including any archaeological evidence from the 1st and 2nd/3rd Temple periods that may have survived. There is no way to turn back the clock on this one, barring a process that would ignite the entire Muslim world.

When it comes to the Kotel and other Jewish holy sites, Israel’s record is no better. Instead of being open to all Jews, irrespective of how they practice their Judaism, the Kotel and other sites have steadily been transformed into what are effectively Haredi synagogues (and very shabby ones at that). Only the customs and rituals of this most extreme form of Judaism are respected or even tolerated, while expressions of other forms of Judaism are disallowed, or routinely lead to harassment, violence and even arrest.

Quite frankly, I believe I would have better, more equitable access to the Jewish holy sites in Jerusalem under a (Gentile) internationalised city than I enjoy under Israel’s regime!

Although still a youngster, I recall that, in the immediate aftermath of the Six Day War, Israel’s demands for adjustments to the armistice lines on geo-political, defensive and other rational grounds were clearly articulated and met with a sympathetic hearing from the international community. (The adjustments mooted included the Latrun salient, anchoring Israel’s wasp waist along the hills of Gilboa, annexation of the Old City, etc.) That has all now been swept away. Under the influence of the Greater-Israelites, Israel’s maximal demands have been presented as her “red lines”, while at the same time these red lines are somehow negotiable. Instead of rational border adjustments for defensive purposes, such concessions will now have to be wasted on incorporating the “settlement blocs” into Israel proper, an exercise that will do nothing to strengthen Israel’s geopolitical situation or facilitate defensive borders. The logic of defensible borders has been replaced with so much pseudo-Halachic drivel around the imperative to retain all of Judea and Samaria.

Legitimate demands for strategic adjustments have been submerged beneath irrational considerations, and all of them are now likely to be swept aside and rejected out of hand as simple greed.

Once again, Israel has held out for everything, and may well (deservedly) end up with nothing.

For all our supposed attachment to Jerusalem, Israel has quite simply made an unholy mess of integrating the nominally reunited city, and succeeded in putting her claim to Jerusalem as a whole (not just East Jerusalem) up for grabs.

East Jerusalem: Liberated or Occupied? was originally posted on Maskil

Remembrance Day – also known as Armistice Day, Poppy Day or Veterans Day in various countries – is observed throughout most of the Western World. It is not officially commemorated in Israel (although it is remembered by Jewish war veterans in accordance with their own their own countries’ customs throughout the Diaspora).

Yom Hazikaron, literally “Israeli Fallen Soldiers and Victims of Terrorism Remembrance Day” is Israel’s official Memorial Day. Yom Hazikaron is observed alongside Yom Ha’atzmaut, the national independence day of Israel. As its name implies, Yom Hazikaron specifically honours the memory of Israeli soldiers killed in the line of duty, as well as its civilian terror victims. (In an earlier post, I did propose that its scope be changed to also embrace the Jewish victims of radical Islamist terror worldwide.)

It is, of course, entirely appropriate that Israel honours its own war dead in this fashion, and at that particular time. Perhaps it’s time to ask, though, whether there’s room within the Israeli calendar and consciousness for a more general salute for those (both Jews and non-Jews) who served, fought and died to make our world (such as it is) the place it is today, with all its problems and potential.

I realise that Israel probably already has too many national and religious public holidays, so I’m not about to suggest another! My thought was that perhaps the most appropriate way to do this would be an official honour guard and wreath-laying at the most significant Allied (mainly Commonwealth) war graves in Israel, e.g. the Jerusalem War Cemetery. Those honoured should include:

• All who fought and died on the Allied side during both World Wars (but particularly in the fight against Hitler), and for freedom and democracy in subsequent conflicts
• Those who took part in the liberation of our homeland from the Ottoman Turks in WWI
• Jewish war veterans and war dead worldwide, from WWI through to the current day.

Perhaps more than anything else, this is a recognition that there is an underlying divide between those nations that commemorate Remembrance Day in some form, and those who don’t. Israel should stand firmly with those who do.

Postscript

The ever-vigilant Joel Katz pointed out that 9 May is already officially recognised as “Victory Day on Nazi Germany” in Israel, a “National remembrance day, business as usual”. 9 May was Stalin’s equivalent of V-E Day, and has little buy-in outside Soviet culture.  The fact that it is now celebrated in Israel appears to be a special concession to the +/- 1 million immigrants from the FSU who made Israel their home.  I envisaged the same kind of status for Remembrance Day;  perhaps in time the two remembrance days could be consolidated.

As an aside, Soviet Victory Day appears to be the only Israeli public holiday whose date in fixed in the Gregorian calendar, rather than the Hebrew calendar.

Links/Reading/Resources:

• Soviet Victory Day in Israel – Demotix.com
• Remembering the soldiers who built American Jewish life – Haaretz – Israel News

Related posts:

• Modest proposals for Yom HaShoah and Yom Hazikaron

Remembrance Day in Israel was originally posted on Maskil

Image via Wikipedia

In my previous blog post, I looked at the last days of Apartheid South Africa, and the eerie parallels between the attitudes of White South Africans at the time, and the apparent mindset of much of Israel today. In both cases, there was/is the widespread belief that (a) we can stand alone against the world, because of a whole range of strategic and other factors, and (b) we can hold out/carry on this way indefinitely, for generations or centuries to come in need.

Despite the bravado, South Africa was eventually forced into a negotiated settlement with the ANC. Similarly, I believe that unless Israel uses the current opportunity to grab the best deal she can, she will eventually be forced to accept something far less favourable than what can be had today. Writer Uzi Silber took issue with the concept of a negotiated settlement, due to the absence of a credible partner for peace on the Palestinian side. I have no argument with that; a Holocaust-denier turned “moderate” would not be my choice of negotiating partner either. If not negotiation, then what?

In broad brushstrokes, this is my analysis:

For now, Israel is still largely in charge of her own destiny, not Abbas or Obama. Israel can take the initiative to move the so-called peace process along, and the other players will follow.

Israel has a decade or so at the most before the world completely loses patience with the running sore that is the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, and imposes a solution that is unlikely to be in Israel’s best interests.

In the next few years, therefore, (e.g. by end of Obama’s 1st and hopefully only term), Israel should negotiate OR IMPOSE a settlement that the real key players can live with, if not actually like (the US would be seen as a key player, Saudi Arabia not).

Essentially what I’m suggesting is that Israel begin unilaterally implementing the best possible deal she could expect at the negotiating table, then wait for the other parties to catch up.

What are the outlines of a solution that Israel should be demanding, negotiating, unilaterally imposing, or all of the above?

• No “peace at any price”, “land for peace” or “a price for peace”. Instead, “peace for peace”, and reasonable concessions where this is in Israel’s interests.
• Not disengagement, but rather disentanglement. Any withdrawals would be of a civilian, not a military nature. This is about reducing points of friction, getting out of one another’s faces.
• Set definitive borders between Israel and the remainder of Palestine. Only the major settlement blocs contiguous with Israel should be retained, and a contiguous Palestinian entity on the West Bank must be enabled.
• Borders should be based more on Israel’s strategic needs than the present locations of settlements, which are in many ways a strategic liability.
• The remaining settlements and outposts should then be formally abandoned by the Israeli government, and security and other services eventually withdrawn, once the inhabitants have been given the opportunity to relocate.
• The security barrier must be rerouted to conform to Israel’s new international frontier.
• Formal annexation of any retained territories once precise borders have been delimited.
• The boundaries of East Jerusalem should be reduced considerably, to exclude as many predominantly Arab neighbourhoods and villages as possible, while still retaining the Old City and the central urban core.
• The IDF would not be withdrawn from any area, and must retain complete freedom of movement within Israel’s security envelope (essentially, Western Palestine plus the Golan).
• No power vacuum must be permitted to emerge in the West Bank. Power should only be devolved to a stable West Bank authority, or an Egyptian or Jordanian or combined authority. (Remember when we used to think that the worst possible thing for Israel was Egypt poking her in the ribs from Gaza, or the Arab Legion looking down from the heights of Latrun? How times have changed!)
• The West Bank authority would remain demilitarised for the foreseeable future, with security services only being permitted to have small-arms/side-arms.
• Any form of extra-territorial land bridge between the West Bank and Gaza should be ruled out.
• While I am opposed to an exchange of territories, i.e. to compensate the PA for land lost to the Settlement Blocs, this may be unavoidable. (The right-wing fantasy of Israel shedding territories heavily populated by Israeli Arabs is just not on, unless we’re keen to rack up another violation of international law.)
• Return to an emphasis on rights-based instead of a concessions-based diplomacy for Israel.

Israel should not anticipate a diplomatic round of applause, pat on back, greater understanding from the world, or any other rewards flowing from this process, as she did following the Gaza withdrawal. This is just something that needs to be done, in Israel’s own interests.

(Speaking of Gaza, in this scenario, the withdrawal would have been of civilians only. Settlements contiguous with Israel’s border would have been retained and formally annexed. The IDF would have retained control of the Philadelphia Corridor and a much greater degree of freedom of movement. Last but not least, the IDF could have prevented Hamas from seizing power.)

With this process completed, I am confident that Israel will have neutralised at least some of its current existential threats, reinforced its place in the family of nations, and starved the current efforts to delegitimize her.  With the Palestinian threat now at least externalised, she can at last begin confronting her massive internal challenges.

Links/Reading/Resources:

• Defining our own borders – Israel Opinion, Ynetnews

Related posts:

• Defining Israel’s borders through BATNA
• Last days of Apartheid South Africa – Lessons for Israel

The Last Days of Greater Israel – A Response to Uzi Silber was originally posted on Maskil

Image via Wikipedia

What does this have to do with a blog on Israel and Jewish affairs? Having lived through the fall of Apartheid and the all-too brief honeymoon period that followed, I find a number of eerie parallels between attitudes and beliefs held by White South Africans at the time, and Israel’s growing isolation and withdrawal today. (What I am not doing, though, is to compare the Apartheid system of Separate Development with the situation in Israel. Such a comparison is inaccurate and unjust and gives ammunition to those who simply wish to demonise Israel.)

In January 1978 – along with tens of thousands of other school-leavers, graduates of our Christian National Education system – I began my National Service with the SA Defence Force. I was not politically mature (or even aware), and believed that we were doing our part to save Southern Africa from what had befallen the rest of Africa: domination by the militant Black nationalism and Communism that had led to the ruination of the continent; the Total Onslaught.

We believed that the struggle would continue for decades, perhaps even centuries to come. Our children and grandchildren would be called on do their duty to save “Volk en Vaderland” (we used those words) from the savagery of raw Africa. Little more than a decade later, Mandela had been released from prison, the CODESA talks had begun and democratic elections were on the horizon.

That bears repeating: little more than a decade later.

How was this possible? We firmly believed that with South Africa’s mineral and other natural resources, her control over the Cape sea route (the Suez Canal had been closed since 1967), her military might, etc., The West could simply not allow this prize, this bastion of civilisation, to fall to Communism. Voortrekker terminology about drawing the wagons into a defensive circle or Lager (the “Lager mentality”) was common on both sides of the argument. Vesting Suid Afrika (Fortress South Africa) would hold out until such time as The World (not us) was brought to its senses.

Behind the scenes, however, senior SADF figures were warning their political masters that the most they could do was give the politicians breathing room to make a deal. Boycotts, disinvestment and sanctions had begun to cut deep into the SA economy, as had black labour unrest and events such as the Soweto Riots of 1976 (fomented mainly by school-goers). The National Party eventually cut a deal with its chosen successor – the African National Congress (ANC) – and then retired to seaside homes, cattle farms and inflation-linked pensions. The New South Africa experienced its brief Rainbow Nation phase before the slow slide into the current phase of reverse discrimination, corruption, rampant crime and ineffectiveness. The heroism, the mental and physical scarring, and the loss of many of our finest sons had become somehow irrelevant.

Today, Israel (like White South Africa in the 80s) appears to be living under the illusion that she has all the time in the world. The illusion that with her economy, the IDF, support from the US and Diaspora communities, she has no need to set her borders, find- rather than just seek – peace, and come to an accommodation with the other inhabitants of Palestine. There are far too many dangerous illusions at work here. The illusion of brave little Israel, alone against the world. The illusion that we don’t need peace; that we can survive in a state of low-intensity conflict forever. The illusion that we only need one ally, and that we are free to thumb our noses at her views when they don’t suit us. The illusion that the only outpost of democracy in the region would never be abandoned. The illusion that we can’t be replaced as America’s most dependable ally in the region. The illusion that we contribute too much to the world to be cast aside. The illusion that we are right and the rest of the world is wrong. The illusion that we are protected by the lessons and guilt of the Holocaust. And, perhaps most dangerous of all, the illusion that the God of Israel would not allow her be destroyed again.

Israel has perhaps another decade to restore its status as a Rechtsstaat (domestically, internationally and in the territories) and integrate itself back into the family of nations. Another decade before the same forces that ended 40 years of National Party rule in South Africa also put an end to the 40-year illusion of Greater Israel, and the hopes and dreams of Little Israel along with it.

In the immortal words of Hollywood enforcers and crime-fighters, “we can do this the hard way or the easy way”. For now, the choice is still ours.

Last days of Apartheid South Africa – Lessons for Israel was originally posted on Maskil

According to the concluding paragraph of an article entitled “Only aliyah can save Israel” by Uzi Silber:

So what then is the solution [to Israel’s demographic problem]? Barring unforeseen miracles, mass Jewish immigration to Israel by the hundreds of thousands remains the only viable way of ensuring that the Jewish state’s future does in-fact remain ours.

My first reaction was “in that case, why didn’t the immigration of as many as 1 million Jews from the FSU (mostly during the 90s) “save” Israel?” Why not indeed? My second reaction was “if we’re relying on immigration on that scale, then we’re in deep trouble!”

Unfortunately, though, formulas such as this have been repeated so often and so blindly that they have taken on the halo of truth. As a result, very little clear, hard thinking has been done to define whether Israel does indeed have a demographic

problem, the nature and extent of the problem, what can be done to address it, and whether those measures include mass immigration. Also, of course, whether mass Jewish immigration from anywhere in the world is a realistic option.

This clear, hard thinking needs to be a group exercise, but I can offer a few observations and suggestions.

Is this Zionism?

A call for “mass Jewish immigration to Israel by the hundreds of thousands” may sound like Zionism. Zionism, however, was intended to address the Jewish condition – Jewish powerlessness and minority status everywhere – by creating a Jewish commonwealth in Palestine. With that objective now largely achieved, the Zionist equation has seemingly been inverted, with Jews everywhere being called on to plug this particular leak with their bodies. I for one am uncomfortable with this inversion of Zionism; almost the antithesis of Zionism.

Sources of Aliya

I’ve detailed my views regarding Aliya in the 21st Century elsewhere (see Related posts: below). Simply put, though, the pools of potential immigrants have largely ceased to exist.

The Holocaust and 60 years of intensive Zionist efforts (as well as Israel’s conflict with its Arab neighbours) have basically drained all the pools of potential immigrants to Israel. Leaving aside what I refer to as personal fulfilment Aliya, I think it’s true to say that (barring unforeseen calamities) pretty much everyone who needs or wants to make Aliya has already done so. This might seem like a shocking notion, but it might be one we need to get used to.

Defining the problem

Defining the problem is not something I’m going to try to do here; it’s an essential part of the exercise I mentioned above. First, though, we need to understand that defining Israel’s Arab minority as “Israel’s demographic problem” will be deeply offensive to Israel’s Arabs, many Jews (both in Israel and elsewhere), and people who care about Israel as a democratic and just society, and as a place founded as a refuge from the Holocaust. (It’s also just possible that by defining a situation as a problem, we are in effect creating a self-fulfilling prophecy.)

Be that as it may, we need a clear grasp of Israel’s demographics before we can start bandying Aliya about as the solution. We need to understand the position both within the Green Line and in Western Palestine as a whole. We also need to recognise the implications of Israel’s formal but unrecognised annexation of East Jerusalem (without clearly defined boundaries) and the transplanting of over half a million Israeli Jews into East Jerusalem and Judea and Samaria (the West Bank), without any formal annexation.

Lastly, we need to understand the perceptions on both sides and arrive at a view of how Israel’s Arabs define themselves. As a peaceful minority, such as the Jews were in Europe? As a demographic time bomb? As searching for justice and their rightful place in Israeli society, or the spearhead of Arab, Islamic or Palestinian irredentism? Are these perceptions and realities shifting, and if so in what direction?

Only once we’ve understood Israel’s demographics can we decide whether Israel has a problem or not; bearing in mind that the tipping point is not 50%. As we’ve seen with Israel’s other (far more insidious) demographic issue, at only 20% of the population, the Haredi (ultra-Orthodox) minority have used their coalition partnership “bargaining chip” to subvert Israel’s democracy and fund their institutions, lifestyle and growth at the taxpayers’ expense, while imposing their worldview on the rest of society.

We also need a working definition of the Jewish State, even if this is just stating the obvious: a Jewish state cannot exist without a Jewish majority.

Solutions

The final step in our mooted brainstorming process is the search for practical measures to retain or increase Israel’s Jewish majority, without harming the rights, property and persons of its non-Jewish inhabitants, and without damaging Israel’s image and standing in the family of nations. Here are a few starter suggestions:

Define where Israel starts and ends, either through a negotiated settlement or through BATNA. Israel needs to set its borders, either bilaterally or unilaterally. This is essential to both understanding and addressing the situation, and the window to achieve it is closing rapidly. We can’t continue trying to carry water in a sieve.

Bring the settlers home. Settlement blocs contiguous with pre-1967 Israel should be formally incorporated into Israel, and the remainder abandoned. The Settlement Enterprise has dragged Israel into an unwinnable demographic war in the West Bank, while at the same time diverting population growth out of Israel proper. For Israel’s sake, it has to end.

Seal Israel’s borders. Almost as soon as Zionist settlement in Palestine began, it was accompanied by (and sometimes even outstripped by) immigration from the surrounding Arab countries. The trend has continued to this day, with the attempt to erase the Green Line only recently having been abandoned. Israel must have absolute control over her frontiers and over who and how people and goods enter and leave them. The Border Police and related services must be dramatically boosted in order to achieve this.

Don’t permit erosion of Israel’s sovereignty. (One of my hobby-horses.) Israel’s writ must extend to every inch of her territory (or security envelope, where these are not conterminous) and over every inhabitant of the country. So-called no-go areas simply cannot be permitted.

Stop subsidising the birth-rate in any way. Attempts to increase Israel’s birth-rate began in the first years of its existence and – in one form or another – have continued to this day. This is despite their having been a miserable failure; instead of changing the behaviour of Middle Israel, they rewarded the behaviour of those who would have had large families anyway – the Arab and ultra-Orthodox sectors. They have quite simply backfired, and should be scrapped immediately and replaced with a system that penalises large families reliant on welfare.

Stop treating sociological Jews as 2nd-class citizens. This applies mainly to the 350,000-odd Jews from the FSU who immigrated to Israel under the Law of Return, but fail the stringent tests of “Jewishness” set by Israel’s Haredi-dominated rabbinate. This sort of treatment will in no way encourage other “undocumented” or sociological Jews to make Aliya; just the opposite. Israel should instead provide a soft landing for these immigrants, including the option of recognised non-Orthodox conversions. (It’s ironic that the very people who whine about the lack of Aliya tend to support this hard-line attitude towards those caught between the Law of Return and a cold, pitiless rabbinate.)

Family reunification and mail-order brides. Israel currently permits immigration from countries with which she is formally in a state of war or armed conflict (including the Palestinian Territories). This is done in terms of family reunification and “mail-order brides” for Arab/Muslim citizens (some 50,000 between 2000 and 2005, according to one report). No country in a state of conflict can permit this organised insanity, even in the name of political correctness.

Define an immigration policy. Israel’s addiction to foreign labour needs to be tackled by means of a formal immigration policy. This policy should define the skills and sectors where guest workers are needed (e.g. frail care for the aged), and regulations and conditions for their stay. The periodic knee-jerk reactions to the presence of guest workers (followed by mass expulsions) contribute to the perception and substance of Israel as an unwelcoming destination. This in turn subtly influences decisions regarding Aliya.

Create an attractive society. Apart from a very small minority, appealing for Aliya on the basis of a demographic struggle is not likely to be an attractive proposition. Simply put, Israel needs to compete in an open immigration market. The surest way of becoming more competitive is a shift away from the semi-theocratic model of society and closer to the Western, democratic and secular model, including a clear separation between religion and state. Israel needs to stop believing and acting as if it has a “captive market” for its desired immigration demographic, and become competitive instead.

Strengthen or plunder the Diaspora?

More than 60 years after Israel’s miraculous creation, we need to start asking how long Israel’s insatiable appetite for Aliya will continue. Israel is already the home to a plurality of Jews in the world today. What percentage of the world’s Jewish population will eventually satisfy her need?

With the Diaspora in something of a disarray, perhaps it’s time to call a halt to the Aliya industry, focusing instead on Aliya by choice (personal, fulfilment Aliya) and the Aliya of need (e.g. where a threatened community needs to be evacuated).

Instead of plundering the Diaspora of its best and brightest, perhaps its time for Israel to put a lot more emphasis on strengthening Jewish life and communities wherever they exist, and strengthening the ties between Israel and the Diaspora.

If Israel, the World Zionist Organisation (WZO) and the Jewish Agency (JAFI) are not the right bodies to achieve this, perhaps they should move aside and make way for a democratic, representative global Jewish convention ready to meet the challenges of 21st Century Jewish life.

Links/Reading/Resources:

• Only aliyah can save Israel – The Jewish Chronicle
• 50,000 Palestinians Immigrated to Israel Since 2000 (Itim/Ha’aretz, 30Nov05)

Related posts:

• The real demographic threat to Israel – the Haredi (ultra-Orthodox) sector
• Immigration to Israel from the FSU – a bungled Aliyah
• The Jewish Agency and aliya in the 21st century
• The easiest demographic problem we’ve ever had
• JAFI, NBN and North American Aliyah – When is enough enough?
• Secure and recognized borders for Israel through “best alternative to a negotiated agreement” (BATNA)

Only Aliya can save Israel. Oh really? was originally posted on Maskil

I think there needs to be a Palestinian state (or a Palestinian entity that’s something less than a state). Not because the Palestinians desire or deserve it; they don’t (there has never been a less deserving people). Rather, because Israel deserves it. What do I mean by this? Palestinian autonomy (or independence in all but military affairs) is probably Israel’s last chance to become something resembling a normal, respectable country, with normal (if somewhat constricted) borders, normal (if somewhat homicidal) neighbours, normal diplomatic and foreign relations and a normal (kind of) internal agenda and concerns.

I’m not suggesting (as most of Israel’s enemies and many of her friends do) that The Occupation is the greatest single obstacle to peace in the region. It’s not. What I am affirming, however, is that even if all other obstacles were to be removed, peace would still not be possible without real Palestinian autonomy. Even if and when Israel manages to make peace with all neighbouring Arab states, she will not have peace until the Palestinian Civil War (the real one) between Arab and Jew has ended. (If one needs evidence of this, Israel has peace treaties with both Egypt and Jordan, and has not fought a conventional war with another state since 1982. And yet, peace appears further away than ever.)

Ending the occupation of the West Bank does not mean the withdrawal of Israel’s military from the territories. While I’m not in favour of The Settlements (actually I think they’re a monkey on Israel’s back), there are sound defensive, geopolitical and strategic reasons why Israel needs to maintain a military presence in Judea and Samaria indefinitely; perhaps for generations. The mistake of a total withdrawal as per the Gaza model should not be repeated; the IDF needs complete freedom of movement within Israel’s security envelope.

(For their part, the settlements – and the refusal of successive Israeli governments to curb their expansion – gives the lie to the glib assertion that Israel is ready to evacuate the territories at the drop of a shtreimel in return for peace. Nobody is fooled by this any longer, except perhaps the blindest of Israel’s friends.)

Unfortunately, the pseudo-Halachic claptrap around the concept of the Land of Israel has clouded the issues and undermined Israel’s strategic and geopolitical case for adjusting her borders with rump Palestine (something that will be further complicated by the need to retain the Settlement Blocs contiguous with Israel) and maintaining a presence elsewhere, e.g. overlooking the Jordan valley along its entire length. Even in the era of apparent post-conventional warfare, defensible borders should still be seen as a requirement. In addition, as both the victim and the victor in the war in which the territories were captured, I see no moral reason why Israel should offer or be obliged to offer an exchange for any areas annexed.

I’m all in favour of “peace for peace” rather than “land for peace”, nor do I believe that there should be a “price for peace” that Israel needs to pay. In this case, however, the “land for peace” is inhabited. Unless we want to carry on with our unwinnable demographic war against Palestine, and end up with a Jewish majority nowhere in the world, we need to give up the land. We need to take our responsibilities as the Occupying Power seriously and hold the territories in trust for its inhabitants, until such time as they’re ready for the responsibility. Not for their sake, but for our own. For the sake of generations to come, and for the sake of the entire Jewish people, who are harmed the most by the phenomena of “The Occupation” and “The Settlements”.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Israel and the Arabs: Dangerous real estate (guardian.co.uk)
• West Bank Settlements Become Havens Of Israeli Surburbanites (huffingtonpost.com)

Israel Needs a Palestinian Entity was originally posted on Maskil

I’m pleased to announce that Maskil just reached another auspicious milestone – the first anti-Semitic “hate-mail” comment – from someone calling himself Adam979 (in Hampshire?). The comment appeared on “Google Knol: The Next Big Thing for anti-Semitism 2.0?”, which I posted more than a year ago.

Below are the text and user details of the comment; I’ve deleted the comment itself from the blog post:

New comment on your post #399 “Google Knol: The Next Big Thing for anti-Semitism 2.0?”

Author : Adam979 (IP: 81.98.97.208 , cpc3-nfds8-0-0-cust463.lei3.cable.ntl.com)

E-mail :

URL :

Whois : http://ws.arin.net/cgi-bin/whois.pl?queryinput=81.98.97.208

Comment:

Wow what are you whining about now. Come on it’s distasteful how you guys cry and cry about the world being so tough. It’s pathetic considering that you yids have been at it for longer and become more adept at the very things you are bleating about a long time ago.

Stop your whining, or is that simply another endearing trait of your big nosed race.

You can see all comments on this post here:

http://blog.maskil.info/2008/08/google-knol-the-next-big-thing-for-anti-semitism-2-0/#comments

I could be wrong, but I don’t think I was whining. I was trying to be analytical, factual and reasoned (although I’ll be the first to admit that we do whine a bit. We even have Yiddish words like “kvetch” to describe it). I’m also reluctant to cry wolf when it comes to anti-Semitism. As I said in an earlier post:

I have to admit that – because I’m reluctant to see every bruising encounter between Gentile and Jew as anti-Semitism – I’ve never been a big fan of the ADL. If someone dislikes some or all the Jews he or she has personally encountered, that is not anti-Semitism. As soon as he or she forms or adopts and promotes theories to explain this dislike, and applies it to all the Jews who have ever lived, that’s anti-Semitism.

What I call “Social Anti-Semitism” – plain old-fashioned dislike of Jews you’ve met in person – is best ignored (as a people, nobody ever accused us of being “likeable” anyway). Once that spills over into hate speech, Holocaust denial, demonization of Israel and racial theories, then it’s a different matter.

This comment, I’m afraid, crossed the line into that murky territory and starts to generalise and build theories around why we (as a “race”) are supposedly the way we are.

So, to Adam979 and everyone who thinks and acts like him: Drop Dead.

Update

Apparently our “hero” Adam979 (who could be from Leicester rather than Hampshire) was searching on the term “will adsense allow my anti-israel blog?” Google gave him just one result; my blog post on Google Knol.

To answer your question, I’m sure they will, Adam.  Unless you believe Google is also run by the “big nosed race”. Which I’m sure is the explanation you’ll use if they turn you down for any reason.

Links/Reading/Resources:

• Lijit | Detail on searches for will adsense allow my anti-israel blog?
• Lijit | Search – will adsense allow my anti-israel blog?

Related posts:

• Is CAMERA trying to warp Wikipedia?
• Anti-Semitism 2.0: Just hit Enter
• Google Knol: The Next Big Thing for anti-Semitism 2.0?
• Will Britannica 2.0 Provide a Platform for Anti-Semitism 2.0?

Another Milestone for Maskil – My First Anti-Semitic Hate Comment was originally posted on Maskil

Image via Wikipedia

The latest BBC Earth Report (entitled Down to Earth) gave a fascinating glimpse into local efforts to re-green the West African portion of the Sahel.  It described three of the techniques being used to achieve this (diguettes, so-called half-moons and zai).  From the transcript of the documentary:

The techniques used are simple but effective. One such practice is the “diguettes” – low dry stonewalls to retain water and stop rainfall runoff.

Ouedraogo Boureima: Working with stone lines is helpful because if the land is bare, the rain water runs off and carries away the good soil and seeds we’ve planted. By planting new trees, when they grow, it helps stabilise the soil.

Mathieu Ouedraogo: This is a traditional method we’ve adapted and it consists of measuring the levels. The technique of piling stones to make stone barriers has existed for millennia. But this adapted technique is primarily from Burkina Faso.

The farmers have refined the old technique by charting a level line across the face of the slope then placing the stones to make a barrier at an even height along the length of the field.

Once the fields have been stabilised by the “diguettes” the farmers use a different technique to protect the growth of their crop seedlings. They’ll make a “half moon.” It’s cut from the hard soil and filled with manure and vegetation, allowing water to be retained long enough to encourage new growth. It helps to protect the crops and soil from being blown away in the dry season. Again it’s a simple, effective technique, but in 50 degree heat only two “half moons” can be dug a day. “Zai” – another ancient technique Mathieu likes – is easier. Small holes are dug and filled with dung and seeds. The microorganisms within the dung create the best environment for the seeds in this harsh dry soil until the rains come.

These techniques – traditional, but updated for modern conditions and given a scientific underpinning – resemble in some ways the techniques adopted by the JNF in its efforts to green (or re-green?) the Negev Desert in Israel – limans and savannization.  (For those who are interested, please see the descriptions of these techniques below, drawn from different sources.)

While the KKL-JNF no doubt still has much to teach Africa regarding desert reclamation, perhaps some of these age-old African techniques can be modified and applied to the Negev, particularly if ways can be found to mechanise them, or at least make them somewhat less labour-intensive.  (Labour is far more plentiful in Africa, and much less of a social issue than in Israel, unless we can find ways to reignite enthusiasm for a Kibbutz Volunteer culture.)

The writing is on the wall for the settlements in Judea and Samaria (the West Bank).  The settlement impulse will need to be diverted back into Little Israel (mainly the Galilee and Negev), and the KKL-JNF will need all the resources it can muster (including intellectual and technical) in order for the Negev to support a far higher density of both biomass and human population.

Limans

Liman is a Greek word meaning “port”. But in Environmental preservation work, limans are group of trees planted at low lying points in various locations in the Negev. These small groves are surrounded by earthen embankments that create a kind of mini-watershed within them. Winter rainfall flows from the basin into the liman, providing all the water the trees need without further irrigation. Since Negev summers are rainless, the soil of the liman must be sufficiently deep to soak up the water needed to nourish the trees from one winter to the next. Nevertheless the trees selected for planting in the liman are suitable for arid land life.

Savannization

Israel has developed new afforestation practices for semi-arid and arid regions, the most famous of which is called savannization. This technique is based on harvesting of surface run-off through contour furrows [on?] hillsides afforested with trees. Savannization has proven to prevent desertification and increase productivity and biodiversity without external resource enrichment. It was demonstrated that savannization reduces flash floods and their consequent soil erosion, and increases the overall productivity of semiarid soils.

Links/Reading/Resources:

• TVE’s Earth Report: Down to Earth

I found the following documents and resources useful in understanding the approach of Israel and the KKL-JNF to combating desertification and greening arid zones (such as the Negev).

• Greening the Negev
• JNF Education
• Combating Desertification- The Israeli Experience
• DESERTIFICATION
• Newman Information Center for Desert Research and Development

Greening the Negev – Lessons from the Sahel was originally posted on Maskil

Image via Wikipedia

According to an item on the Haaretz Israeli news Website (Should IDF shoot terrorists holding soldier captive? ), we should expect to see a change in the official IDF rules of engagement regarding attempts to kidnap soldiers.

In future, IDF units and members will be required to resist any kidnap attempt by means of force, even if opening fire puts the kidnapped soldier at risk of injury or loss of life. On the ground, some Israeli units (especially those stationed near Gaza) have already introduced their own standard operating procedures to that effect.

I waited for the other shoe to drop, but thus far it hasn’t. What was missing here is a formal policy that, in the event of the successful kidnapping of an IDF member (and once his (or her – may it never occur) whereabouts have been established, a rescue mission should be undertaken (or at least considered). Such a rescue should be attempted as soon as possible, and even if it could lead to injury or death for the kidnapped soldier. (There is, of course, also the risk that the unit undertaking the rescue could suffer casualties.)

While we all place the highest possible value on the life of each soldier, the national interest, our history in the 20th Century and our duty to the kidnapped soldier demand that such a rescue attempt be made, and that it be one of the first options to be considered. A rescue mission – even an unsuccessful one – must surely be preferable to three years of living hell for the victim and his kin, and three years of national humiliation and anguish for the country.

There was a time when it would almost have been taken for granted that the kidnapping of an Israeli (whether a soldier or not) was likely to result in an Israeli commando raid (and perhaps a little corrective bombing for good measure). In a sense, Israel wrote the early playbook when it comes to dealing with Arab and Islamist terrorism. The West now appears to be working from that playbook (e.g. the rescue of journalist Stephen Farrell from Afghan terrorists), while Israel appears to have abandoned it in favour of public pleading and the release of hundreds of blood- drenched murderers for little more than body parts.

Each episode of this nature sets the stage for the next incident. Each time, the price becomes steeper, the humiliation greater and the likelihood of a repetition greater. It’s time for Israel to up the stakes and change the rules once again. It’s not just about the rescue of a particular hostage; it’s about setting the price for the next one.

Kidnapping of IDF Soldiers – Not Just Resistance, but Rescue was originally posted on Maskil

For the better part of a century, Zionism in its various forms managed to engage and embrace some of the finest minds and spirits amongst the Jewish people. It also enjoyed widespread support amongst non-Jews, mainly in the West.

Zionism – Mission Accomplished?

With the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, the largest part of the mission of Zionism was accomplished. For decades thereafter, though, Zionism continued to play a role in encouraging immigration to Israel (Aliyah) and in building up the fledgling state, confronted by dangers and shortages on every front.

In many ways, however, Zionism had simply become a synonym or shorthand for “supporting Israel”. (I, for instance, think of myself as a “Lover of Zion” rather than a fully-fledged Zionist.)

Threats And Challenges To The Zionist Ideology

Especially since the Six-Day War, Zionism as an ideology has had to confront a variety of internal and external threats and challenges, including:

• The infamous UN GA resolution equating Zionism with Racism, which singled out only the Jewish people’s national liberation movement as racist!
• Likud’s election victory in the late 70s. Labour Zionist icons such as the Histadrut and the Kibbutzim fell out of favour, although Israel had nothing to replace them with apart from naked capitalism.
• Changed attitudes towards Zionism within Israel, even amongst those who remained staunchly patriotic.
• The liberation/occupation of areas such as Judea and Samaria. This began with so much promise (whether one envisaged the return of the territories or not). In subsequent decades, though, it has exhausted Israel’s moral capital in the eyes of the world (and in those of many long-suffering supporters), eroded the morals and morale of the IDF, severely degraded the rule of law throughout Israel and the territories and caused Israel to hugely and wastefully invest in infrastructure that will eventually fall outside her control. It has also dragged Israel into an unwinnable demographic war with the existing inhabitants of those territories. Enough said.

Some Suggestions For A New Zionist Agenda

Given all these negatives, it is fair to ask whether Zionism still has a mission in the 21st Century, and if so, what should form part of its agenda. Here’s my first attempt at defining a mission and vision for 21st Century Zionism; a consensus Zionism that might once again enjoy widespread support within both Israel and the Diaspora.

Resettling Little Israel

Settlement and population distribution inside the Green Line have been almost completely abandoned during the last 4 decades, in favour of the doomed Settlement Enterprise in Judea and Samaria (the West Bank). Israel now needs to turn inward and take back its country, applying the wasted resources from YESHA to Israel proper instead.

Restoring The Rule Of Law

Israel is well on the road to becoming an outlaw state, both in its relationships with the rest of the world and internally. Zionism needs to demand from its adherents and from the state that they respect the rule of law, internationally and domestically. It also needs to call for a formal constitution to be put in place, and insist on absolute equality before the law.

Universality, Separation, Equality

Israeli society has been deformed and distorted by the various exemptions, subsidies, inequalities and other forms of “affirmative action” that have benefited mainly the anti-Zionist ultra-Orthodox (Haredi) sector. Zionism must demand an immediate end to all such self-destructive inequalities in the name of party politics (or Torah). The playing fields must be levelled.

Social Justice

The abandonment of Israel’s early social and socialist ideals in favour of (semi) free-market capitalism has led to huge socio-economic gaps arising, almost invariably along ethnic, religious, gender and geographical lines. The work of Zionism cannot be considered complete until we have at least begun to address these and other glaring social justice issues.

The Environment

The Land of Israel suffered from almost 2,000 years of abandonment, neglect and exploitation. This was followed – in the 60 years since Israel’s birth – by the effects of her urban explosion, industrial revolution and large-scale pollution of natural resources. Zionism needs to have an item on its agenda that deals with making Israel physically a fit country to live in.

A New Work Ethic

Sadly, labour Zionism – the Zionism of the left that gave Israel almost everything it has of value – is effectively no more. Israel needs a new work ethic, one that – at the very minimum – does not recognise the right of the voluntarily indigent to draw on the state’s welfare infrastructure.

Strengthening Jewish Communities

Lastly, although it may not seem like something that should form part of a Zionist agenda, Zionism needs to commit to strengthen Jewish life wherever it exists. The rapacious demand for ever more Aliyah to meet Israel’s perceived needs must end. Instead, a smaller, tighter Israel that no longer engages in unwinnable demographic conflicts must support and engage with Jewish communities worldwide.

This is my own first pass at attempting to realign Zionism with the needs of Israel and the wider Jewish world. Has anything fallen through the cracks? I’d be interested to hear from readers what other broad headings they believe should be included in the platform of Zionism.

Or is there simply no longer a need for Zionism, Zionist ideology and Zionist organisations? Can we instead rely on pro-Israel movements and the Israeli political scene to provide the vision that Zionism once gave us?

Zionism – A Mission for the 21st Century was originally posted on Maskil

Cover of Forged in fury

Quentin Tarantino’s Inglourious Basterds was released just in time for the 70th anniversary of the start of the 2nd World War on 1 September 2009.

Most of us will understand that this is pure fiction; that this is simply not how it was. Some, though, will believe that there must be some basis in fact here (the principle of “where there’s smoke there’s fire”). Some may even see it as a form of Jewish cinematic revenge fantasy regarding WW2. From that point of view, it could be considered a dangerous piece of escapist fiction, likely to be misused by those who want to blur the distinction between aggressors and victims.

(This is not to say that Jewish retribution or revenge did not take place at all. Michael Elkins’ searing Forged in Fury gives an insight into one clandestine unit that did exactly that.)

Having said all that, there would be no point in my suggesting you don’t watch Inglourious Basterds. What I would suggest, however, is that once you’ve indulged in the orgy of bloodletting, counterbalance it by making the effort to attend a screening of Broken Promise (or even the 2008 Daniel Craig movie Defiance). (Broken Promise is based on the true story of Jewish partisan Martin Friedman/Petrasek.) Better yet, arrange a screening of the movie at your synagogue or JCC. Introduce material from the Jewish Partisan Educational Foundation to gain a real understanding of Jewish resistance in Hitler’s Europe.

Jewish victimhood during WWII was both fact and (understandable) mindset. The Zionist leader Vladimir Jabotinsky attempted to “reframe” this mindset and give the Jewish people as a whole the status of a combatant or participant in the conflict, rather than just a powerless victim of it, e.g. through his books The Jewish War Front and The war and the Jew. Had his life not tragically ended in 1940, he may well have changed that perception.

Thus, while Jewish servicemen and women from many nations took part in the struggle against Hitler’s Europe as part of their countries’ armed forces (in numbers far exceeding their proportion of the population), the Allies did not permit a specifically Jewish contribution to the war effort. (Hitler, for his part, had no such misgivings and saw WWII to a large extent as a war of Aryan against Jew.)

While various conquered European nations were permitted governments in exile and armies or legions in exile, the Jews alone were denied this privilege. (The Jewish Brigade Group, when eventually established, was part of the British Army, and was formed too late to play its intended role in the conflict.)

It is one of the supreme ironies of history that the Jewish people’s hour of greatest weakness – during the Holocaust – was also its hour of greatest strength. While the genocide was taking place, there were almost certainly more Jewish servicemen and women in uniform than at any other time in our history (estimated at around 1.5 million).

Rewriting history

With the notable exception of statesmen such as Jabotinsky, the response of Jewish leadership to the conflict and the Holocaust can best be described as a failure of imagination. Even Ben-Gurion (with his call for the Yishuv to “fight the war as if there was no White Paper and fight the White Paper as if there was no war”) effectively narrowed and limited the range of possible responses to Hitler. With the benefit of (some) hindsight, it’s possible to say that this approach didn’t meet the need for a comprehensive (“big picture”) strategy to save the Jews of Europe, which should have included calls for the following:

• Establishment of a government in exile for the disenfranchised Jews of occupied Europe
• Establishment of a Jewish Legion along the lines of the Free French Forces and Free Polish Army (for Jewish refugees and others unable to serve in their own countries’ armed forces)
• A far greater effort to call attention to the genocide taking place in Europe
• Military and other action to prevent the mass murder wherever possible
• Action to rescue or facilitate the rescue of Jewish refugees from Europe
• Pressure on Allied governments to grant visas to Jewish refugees and otherwise provide destinations for those who managed to escape
• Repeated calls for retribution against those taking part in genocide
• Unrestricted immigration of Jews to Palestine (the intended Jewish National Home) for the duration of the conflict
• Establishment of a provisional Jewish State in at least part of Western Palestine well before the end of the conflict

What is shocking is not that none of these objectives was achieved, but rather that there was no widespread, consistent call for any of them to happen (neither on the part of Jewish leadership nor that of the Allies).

One of the unacknowledged “Big Lies” of WWII was that the way to save the Jews of Europe was to defeat Hitler. While they ultimately could not have been saved without Germany’s defeat, that defeat alone could not save them. By the time Hitler’s bunker had been overrun, it was too late for the vast majority of those caught in the jaws of history. In little more than 5 years, 2,000 years of Jewish existence and civilisation in Europe had simply ceased to exist.

Inglourious Basterds has nothing to say about that monumental evil and those few who tried to prevent it.

Fighting the 2nd World War All Over Again was originally posted on Maskil

In a sane world, we would not have to oppose the appointment of a self-avowed book-burner as Director-General of The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (lest we forget what the acronym UNESCO stands for).

We live in an age of inverted values, however, and at times we need good people everywhere to take a stand against something bad. In this case, something that could do immeasurable harm to one of the organisations that actually brings credit to the UN: UNESCO. I’m referring to Farouk Hosni having put himself forward as a candidate for appointment as Director-General of UNESCO. And in this case, “taking a stand” shouldn’t involve much more than joining a Facebook group or signing an online petition.

Who is Farouk Hosni, and why should we oppose his appointment as UNESCO DG? You can read all about his spotty record in the resources below. His threat to burn Israeli books – a statement that he only attempted to retract when it became a campaign issue – immediately disqualifies him from heading up an organisation founded to protect the world’s cultural treasures.

Here’s how the ADL puts it:

Who could imagine that someone who advocates burning books might lead the international organization that protects the heritage of global civilization? Yet that’s what could happen if Farouk Hosni, the man Egypt wants selected to head UNESCO, is chosen.

His outrageous statement, “I’d burn Israeli books myself if I found any in libraries in Egypt,” is one of many similar comments he has made over the years. UNESCO was created to uplift, ennoble and unite mankind. Clearly, a man who calls for one of the most shocking crimes against culture and civilization should never be its leader.

Does the world really need an avowed book-burner (and anti-Semite to boot) to fill a key role for which far better qualified candidates exist?

Have a look at the material referenced below, and add your voice to those opposing his candidacy via Facebook, Twitter or the ADL e-petition.

NB – This campaign is time sensitive, as the election will take place in Paris from Sept. 3rd to Sept. 22nd 2009.

Please let me know of other resources by means of comments below.

• Election of the UNESCO Director General
• Save UNESCO! Sauvons l’UNESCO!
• Why I worry about Farouk Hosny as Candidate for UNESCO Director General
• Facebook – Against Farouk Hosny as Head of UNESCO
• Causes on Facebook – Oppose Farouk Hosni
• Americans for UNESCO (AmUNESCO) on Twitter
• Jean Delaporte (SaveUNESCO) on Twitter (A committee to say NO to Farouk Hosni as UNESCO possible next DG)
• Oppose Farouk Hosni as UNESCO’s Director-General Now!

Oppose Farouk Hosni as UNESCO’s Director-General was originally posted on Maskil

JNF Achievements And Challenges

The Jewish National Fund (JNF) was founded in 1901 – a little over a century ago – and began planting trees seriously in 1908 (in Hulda, in memory of Theodor Herzl). It has since planted an incredible 250 million trees, mostly in the second half of its existence (according to this JVL article).

In its second century of existence, however, the JNF faces more than its fair share of challenges. Some are external (e.g. Netanyahu’s land grab in the guise of land reform), while others are internal (e.g. its inability to present a single face to the outside world, particularly with regard to its Israeli and US arms). It has also been a victim of the “Zionism is Racism” mindset, with various ideological and legal challenges directed at its policy of reserving land purchased with Jewish donations for the benefit of the Jewish people.

JNF Program Of Work

According to the JNF website, its work in Israel is divided into the following seven action areas:

Forestry & Ecology, Water, Community Development, Security, Education, Research & Development, and Tourism & Recreation.

Its Blueprint Negev initiative (“a 10-year, $600 million campaign to revitalize the Negev Desert and make it home for future generations.”) encompasses all these action areas.

This appears to be a sound, comprehensive plan, keeping the JNF relevant to Israel’s needs for living infrastructure. Is it enough of a vision, though, to inspire the JNF’s traditional donors (large and small), supporters, volunteers and the public at large (within both Israel and the Diaspora)? Is there another over-arching vision that could serve as the flagship for the JNF’s efforts over the century ahead?

Israel’s Low Forest Cover (LFC)

Despite having planted a quarter of a billion trees over the last century (and despite Israel being the only country to have ended the 20th Century with more trees than it began with), Israel is still classified as having Low Forest Cover (LFC), however that is defined.

A Billion Trees In Israel By 2100!?

Given these factors, perhaps that “over-arching vision” for the JNF (and conservation in Israel as a whole) should be the JNF equivalent of UNEP’s Billion Tree Campaign: to have planted one billion trees in Israel by the end of the century. (The 250 million-odd already planted (plus natural or legacy forests) would be deducted from the total, leaving a target of perhaps 6-700 million trees.)

Such a JNF Billion Tree Campaign would support and complement the action areas referred to above, as well as helping Israel to become a net negative contributor to man-made Climate Change. It would complete the transformation of Israel’s landscape and climate (which began with Zionist colonisation 150-odd years ago), and could quite conceivably mitigate much of the local impact of Global Warming and desertification.

Is It Achievable?

Planting something in the order of 8 million trees per annum over the next 90 years is an extremely ambitious (but not impossible) target. (Abu Dhabi for instance, planted some 130 million trees in a matter of decades. Although Israel does not have Abu Dhabi’s deep pockets, it does demonstrate that such afforestation schemes can be “ramped up”. The Dust Bowl Shelterbelt Project and China’s Green Wall are other examples.)

Gearing Up For The JNF Billion Tree Campaign

The JNF Billion Tree Campaign would, however, require streamlining, automating and gearing up the entire process of afforestation or reforestation, including:

• A comprehensive review of its previous policy of favouring pine monocultures as nurse crops, to determine whether this has achieved the desired results.
• A massive expansion of Israel’s tree seedling nursery capability.
• The use of satellite mapping and GPS technology to inventory Israel’s existing forest assets, and identify and accurately plot the areas to be planted, with access roads and firebreaks present from day one.
• Inventing or perfecting automated tree planting all-terrain vehicles, capable of handling the entire process of planting seedlings, including digging the hole, composting, placing the seedling, filling the hole and compacting the soil and watering the seedling. The vehicles should ideally navigate by means of GPS linked to a forestry management system that would implement the correct mix, spacing and proportion of tree species to achieve the region’s climax vegetation within a single generation.

Supporting Activities

• Renewed planting in urban areas, including sidewalk trees and parks.
• The requirement that owners of private land over a certain size also prepare and carry out tree planting plans.

Regional Politics

Palestine west of the Jordan forms a single geographical entity, and is also (to a lesser extent than in the past) almost entirely under Israel’s control. The plans should therefore be drawn up to include the so-called Palestinian Territories, but implementation may have to wait for more peaceful times.

A Zionist Renewal?

Zionism and the venerable bodies associated with it (including the JNF) have for the past 40 years been drawn into the mire of the Settlement Enterprise – the graveyard for decent Zionist hopes and dreams. Bold mega-projects such as a JNF Billion Tree Campaign (and my Med-Kinneret Canal proposal) could serve to revitalise and renew Zionism and give Zionists and Lovers of Israel a vision for the 21st Century.

Related posts:

• The JNF’s pine forests: Pine deserts or nurse crops?
• Building the wrong canal: An alternative to the Red-Dead Canal
• The Valley of Peace: Why a Med-Kinneret Aqueduct makes more sense
• Jordan To Go Ahead With Red-Dead Canal Project

New Vision For The JNF: A Billion Trees By 2100 was originally posted on Maskil

Along with the rest of the world (or a sizeable part of it), I see daily images of Israel such as those on this euronews insert. There is bias, propaganda, a lack of objectivity, half-truths, untruths and misunderstanding of Israel’s case. Perhaps even anti-Israel sentiment degenerating into anti-Semitism.

Beyond that, however, there is an almost palpable sense that a huge injustice is being committed in the name of Israel, Judaism and the Jewish people as a whole. To me, there’s also a glimpse of the seeds of Israel’s destruction, a nightmarish vision as to how the third (and almost certainly final) Jewish commonwealth in Palestine might end.

It’s started to become almost commonplace to speculate about and predict the demise of Israel. Israel’s enemies do so gleefully, her friends sadly, but perhaps with more conviction. How has it come to this, a mere 60-odd years after Israel’s traumatic birth; seemingly the logical outcome of almost a century of Zionist and proto-Zionist thought and activity?

The external threats facing Israel are considerable, but in a sense no more than those she has faced in previous critical junctures in her history. So what’s different this time? This time, the external threats are compounded and aggravated by internal stresses, forces that threaten to rupture the fabric of her society, transform that society into something never envisaged by her founders. Something far, far less capable of addressing those external threats.

One of the ironies is that both of these existential threats – because that’s what they are – come from within Judaism itself, the force credited with keeping the Jewish people intact through two millennia of exile and dispersion.

On the one hand, the Haredi or ultra-Orthodox strain of Judaism (anti-Zionist from the beginning) has become increasingly divorced from mainstream Israeli society, while at the same time its massively subsidised demographic growth continues at the expense of the host population. The Haredi sector is distinguished by its lack of participation in the workforce, its refusal to perform military service, its separate, mind-numbingly backward educational networks, disproportionately small contribution to the tax base and excessive draws on the welfare system. This massive shift of the private burden onto the public system, coupled with an ideological emphasis on large family sizes will eventually transform Israel. Perhaps into a state based on Halacha, but more likely one based on Halukah. In the interim, Israeli society will be crippled internally and far less able to resist the external forces arrayed against her. It has in effect hijacked Israel’s domestic policy.

On the other hand, the national-religious ideology in its Settler form has already succeeded in damaging (and threatens to further undermine) Israel’s relationships with her neighbours, Israeli and Palestinian Arabs, her friends and allies (mainly in the West), and uncommitted and well-meaning people everywhere. The Settlement Enterprise is also increasingly starting to drive a wedge between Israel and previously supportive Diaspora Jewish communities worldwide. The diversion of population across the Green Line is upsetting the delicate demographic balance within Israel and transferring wealth and assets away from Israel’s control. It has in effect hijacked Israel’s defence and foreign policies.

As a result of these two trends, Israel is fast becoming an outlaw state. Within Israel and the territories for which it is responsible, Haredim, Settlers and their respective allies play games and make a mockery of Israeli law. In the world arena, an Israel in the thrall of the same elements dances around its obligations and standing under international law.

Israeli events and Israeli politics are both unpredictable, but should both of these trends – the demographic growth of the Haredim and the onward march of the Settler Enterprise – continue to their logical conclusion, it is difficult to imagine a positive outcome for Israel, hard even to imagine one in which Israel continues to exist in anything like its present form.

Perhaps Israel will yet pull the proverbial rabbit out of the hat. As Lewis Mumford liked to remind us, “trend is not destiny“. The current trends, however, give little reason for hope, unless you’re of the belief that the Almighty micro-manages the day-to-day affairs of Israel. (Provided, of course, that the ritual minutiae of mitzvot are observed.)

(As an aside, some elements of Zionist thought looked forward to a renewal or revival of Judaism once the Jewish people became established in its ancestral homeland. Instead, ultra-Orthodoxy offers the same congealed cholent (now labelled “authentic Judaism”) from which generations still alive fled without a backward glance. Settler Judaism for its part has degenerated into a blood and soil cult, with all the external trappings of Jewish ritual (in an exaggerated form, e.g. oversized kippot and exaggerated payot) but little evidence of a redeeming spiritual message.)

For the first time in my adult life, I fear for Israel’s very existence. I hope I’m wrong, but I fear I may be right.

A Premonition Of Israel’s Demise was originally posted on Maskil

Those who’ve been following any of my legacy Blogger blogs (Altneuland, Cafe Birkenreis, J-Blogosphere or Plant More Trees) via RSS feed or e-mail may not be aware that I’ve consolidated most of my blogging activities on a new site, Maskil.

The new blog runs on the superb WordPress.org CMS software and utilises a premium template for readability and (hopefully) a better user experience. Please stop by and take a look sometime.

If you’re not already a subscriber, you can stay up to date with the latest blog posts on Maskil by means of an RSS feed or e-mail updates, or through Twitter or FriendFeed.

Maskil Has a New Home on the Web was originally posted on Maskil

There, I’ve said it.

Until now, I’ve avoided any in-depth discussion regarding “The Settlements” in Judea and Samaria (the “West Bank”; the widest river bank in the world!), because it’s taken me until recently to firm up my position regarding the whole Settlement Enterprise.  This recent Israel National News (Arutz Sheva) article (Jews to Reclaim Land in Jordan?) kind of tipped me over the edge, although strictly speaking it’s entirely unrelated.

So let me start with my conclusion.  The settlements are a bad idea; bad morally, bad for Israel and the Jewish people. Just plain bad.  (Not so good for the other inhabitants of the West Bank either.)

I’m saying this as someone who has always believed that the Jewish people has an unquestionable claim to Palestine (west of the Jordan).  That the Mandate and related documents give us the right to settle anywhere in that territory.  And finally, that winning those same territories in a defensive war entitled Israel to annex or hold any part or all of them.

Why do I think the settlements are bad for Israel then?  I want to focus on just two or three aspects; covering the entire argument would require a much longer piece (or a book).

Israel’s Case Based on Justice

Before anyone began to (or needed to) talk about our right to a national home in Palestine, there was a sentiment that emerged from time to time to the effect that allowing the Jews to “have” Palestine would reverse an historic 2,000 year-old injustice;  the almost total destruction of Jewish life in Palestine by the Romans.

I believe that this sentiment, this thread, this idea of righting an historic injustice is what carried the Zionist idea through to the rise of Hitler.  Nations, classes, leaders, prominent individuals – certainly not all, or always – supported Zionism because justice was on its side.  This sense of fair play was replaced by other (mostly) less noble emotions after the destruction of European Jewry during the Holocaust.

Justice was what allowed a significant part of at least the Western World to support Zionism and Israel.  It was also what allowed the majority of Jews worldwide to similarly support an idea not all were comfortable with;  the negation of the Diaspora.  This belief in the justice of Israel’s cause lasted until after the Six Day War (after which it became almost unnecessary), and has been eroding steadily since then.

Whether this erosion is justified or not is debatable; the erosion itself is not.  And a large part of that erosion is attributable to the settlement enterprise, and the manner in which it has been conducted.

Due almost entirely to the settlements, Israel’s cause is increasingly being seen as one of greed rather than need.

The perception that justice is no longer on Israel’s side has, of course, been exploited by Israel’s enemies, but all the Hasbara in the world can only correct the misperceptions, not the underlying realities.

Israel as a Child of International Law

Israel – perhaps more than any other nation-state in history – is a child of international agreement, diplomacy and law; a truly fascinating story of the then civilised world agreeing to the creation of an eventual Jewish commonwealth in an Ottoman backwater.  (The fact that this trust was systematically betrayed by the Mandatory Power, culminating in the doors of the Jewish National Home being barred to the doomed Jews of Europe is something that will live forever in infamy.)

History lesson aside.  Even though a child of international law, international law alone was not and is not sufficient.  Equal credit must go to the pioneers, and all the generations before us, who laid the foundations for what Israel is today.  Often with their bare hands, and often at great cost, a cost which sometimes included their lives.  At the end of the day, however, all that effort and sacrifice would have been in vain without what Herzl referred to as a “Charter”.  (As with so many other things, Herzl was right on this one.)

Israel has several of these charters, one the most significant of which is the 1947 United Nations General Assembly partition resolution (a non-binding resolution, as we often prefer to forget).  By accepting that resolution, we in effect gave up our charter to Judea and Samaria.  Until that charter is renewed, the settlement enterprise needs to be given notice and put on hold.

As a child of international law, Israel needs to be a model citizen of the international community, not a rogue state or an international pariah or outlaw state.  It can never be that while the settlers are allowed to define its standing in the world, or hold its defence and foreign policies hostage.  (One of the consequences of being a child of international law is that the haters have now begun referring to the historic mistake of Israel’s creation.  That hateful notion should not get in the way of Israel returning to law abiding status.)

The Country Is Shrinking

Greater Israel is effectively smaller than Little Israel before the Six Day War.  How so?

• From 1967 until very recently, efforts to settle the rest of the country (particularly the Galilee and Negev) were abandoned in favour of settling YESHA (Judea and Samaria and Gaza).
• With perhaps 500,000 Israeli Jews now living over the Green Line, Israel’s Jewish majority within Little Israel has been eroded to the same extent.
• With the boundary between Israel and the territories having been effectively erased for more than 40 years, both legal (e.g. family reunification) and illegal Arab immigration into Israel has taken place steadily, further aggravating the demographic problem.  (We may have thought Israel was colonising Palestine, but in effect Palestine was colonising Israel.)
• The growing threat of settler lawlessness and violence has been feeding and in turn been fed by similar trends in the Haredi and Israeli/Palestinian Arab sectors.  As successive governments shrink from the necessary confrontation, Israel’s sovereignty no longer extends to every inhabitant and dunam of Israel, even within the Green Line (still less within the cease-fire lines).

Instead of causing it to grow, the Settlement Enterprise has caused Israel to shrink.

The Land Of Israel:  A Slippery Concept

Underlying the historic and legal claim to a Greater Israel is the notion of Eretz Israel or the Land of Israel, AKA the Promised Land.

The problem with the theological concept of Eretz Israel is that it a very fluid, almost slippery notion.  It’s easy to define the core, less so the periphery.  It ends up being a matter of “Every place that the sole of your foot shall tread upon” being regarded as part of Eretz Israel, which can eventually lead to the just short of clinically insane notion of somehow recovering “Jewish lands” in Jordan (Trans-Jordan), an area where Jewish settlement ended before it could even begin (in the 1920s).

This theoretical, Talmudic notion of the Land of Israel has been allowed to intrude into the real world of international diplomacy, law and politics.  And borders.  (Recall the almost rational debates about whether Gaza is or isn’t part of Eretz Israel at the time of the 2005 withdrawal.)  In the hands of the settlement enterprise it puts Israel in the company of Islamist fundamentalists and China in Tibet.

The Dog and His Reflection

Its fragile control over Greater Israel has led Israel to become like the dog and his reflection in Aesop’s fable.  We are in danger of dropping the bone of Little Israel while snapping at the reflection in the water – Judea, Samaria and the settlement enterprise.

With regret then, the settlement enterprise is a disaster for Israel.

The Settlement Enterprise Is a Disaster for Israel was originally posted on Maskil

JPost’s BlogCentral recently featured an excellent article by Prof. Gil Troy. In a nutshell, Prof. Troy called on the Modern Orthodox in the Diaspora and religious Zionists within Israel to cut off financial support for the Haredi communities and institutions (e.g. yeshivot) at the centre of this lawbreaking. He also called on them to confront and “out” those instigating and applauding the violence. I can’t put it any better than this:

UNFORTUNATELY, TOO many Orthodox Jews and religious Zionists are not just bystanders to Haredi and rabbinic extremism but enablers. Too many fear the extremists. This cowardice comes from a brand of religious one-upsmanship extremists the world over have mastered. People from the center, no matter how passionate or pure, end up having their credentials questioned by the ayatollahs in religion and the commissars in politics. Too many modern Orthodox Jews and religious Zionists act insecure when amid their more radical brethren.

Violent ultra-Orthodox criminality is really only the tip of a much larger iceberg in Israel. Perhaps by addressing the violence, however we can better understand and get to grips with the bigger issues.

The Haredi Strategy: A More “Exclusive” Judaism

Haredi (ultra-Orthodox) violence (and Haredi behaviour in general) has both a pull and push effect. It has a pull effect on those who currently define themselves as Orthodox, forcing them to take more and more extreme positions to excuse, justify and explain their inaction.

In the case of those who already have questions about Judaism and Jewish identity, there’s often a push effect, especially where those unfamiliar with the Jewish landscape identify extreme ultra-Orthodoxy as speaking on behalf of Judaism as a whole. The predictable reaction is “if this is Judaism, I want nothing to do with it”.

The combined pull/push effect leads to a steady shrinking of Judaism’s sphere of influence, and in the numbers of those who choose to identify as Jews; a quiet drift away. This tendency towards a smaller, more “exclusive” (in the true sense) Judaism is presumably one of the desired outcomes of the Haredi campaign against moderation.

For this reason, we should not leave tackling the problem of Haredi violence to the Modern Orthodox and National Religious. Not just because they’re shrinking from the challenge, but because this is an issue that affects the entire Jewish people, and the credibility of Judaism as a faith. So, here are a few things the rest of us can do:

NGOs

NGOs with an interest in the rule of law, separation between church and state and just plain good government could draw up a list of organisations and bodies (formal or informal) that are seen to be responsible for the violence. The list should be published or otherwise made available to potential donors, to ensure that funds are not inadvertently channelled to them.

Donors

Insist on an audit of all organisations and initiatives receiving financial support through your federation (or other chosen channel for Tzedakah) to ensure that none of them in any way instigate, participate in or even sympathise with those responsible for the violence. There are enough worthy causes out there.

Israeli Politicians

Refuse to participate in any coalition deal that includes the non or anti-Zionist Haredi parties. OK, I can dream, can’t I? The point is that no Israeli governing coalition that includes the Haredi parties can properly address this issue. (My suspicion is that the Haredi parties utilise the unspoken threat of violence and disorder to further their political aims.)

JAFI/MASA

Ensure that no official funding flows to those associated with the violence. Even more importantly, ensure that MASA participants from abroad are steered away from these suspect institutions and programs, e.g. yeshivot. While we’re on the subject, ensure that programs that are not part of the broad Zionist consensus are included in the schedule of approved study and volunteer options.

Law Enforcement

A democratic country such as Israel must permit its citizens to demonstrate peacefully. These incidents were never intended to be any such thing, however; they were always intended to be violent confrontations. For that reason, the forces of law and order in Israel should crack down harshly on the rioters (using every available method and tactic for riot control) to bring the outbreaks under control quickly. I suspect that 2 or 3 incidents at the most should be sufficient to make everyone see the light. Anyone responsible for inciting or instigating the violence should also face the wrath of the law.

(I’m guessing that, because the thugs choose to cloak themselves in the wholly inappropriate garb of the ghetto when rioting, they are accorded some measure of protection or leniency in these incidents. This needs to be replaced by a “don’t do the crime if you can’t do the time” attitude by law enforcement.)

An Existential Threat

Violent ultra-Orthodox criminality is already responsible for helping to contract the reach and weight of Israel’s very sovereignty as a nation-state. If the current trends within the Haredi world continue, this sector has the potential to become another existential threat to Israel. The use of the phrase “existential threat” has blunted its impact over time. So, just to be clear, I’m saying that they are potentially a threat to the very existence of Israel. I will justify that position in another blog post.

Related posts:

The real demographic threat?
Cowardice and bullying
Exorcising the Haredi Golem

Lance the Boil of Haredi Lawbreaking was originally posted on Maskil

In May 2008, I posted an item regarding the Holy Land sites (Israel and surrounding areas) that had been nominated for inclusion in the New 7 Wonders of Nature list.  I was therefore appalled to read in Haaretz that the Palestinian Authority (PA) has decided to boycott efforts to have the Dead Sea included in the list, due to the participation of the Megilot Dead Sea Regional Council.

I responded with the following comment on the article.

Dead Sea or Settlements?

As usual, the “Palestinians” are cutting off their noses to spite their faces, by not being able to separate out the issue of recognising (and perhaps even saving) the Dead Sea from the issue of settlements in the “West Bank” (the widest river bank in the world).

I believe that the Jewish people has a better claim to Judea and Samaria than any other people on the planet (apart from the people now living there).  Despite that, however, I do have a problem with the manner in which the settlement enterprise operates, and the way it has hijacked and damaged Israel’s defence, domestic and foreign policies and generally hurt Israel’s image and support for her.

I would not, however, want the Dead Sea to “suffer” because of principled objections to the way in which settlement in Judea and Samaria has been carried out, and the way in which it has diverted attention from settling Israel inside the Green Line.

Surely this initiative should be considered above politics?  Even if a true natural wonder such as this was entirely outside of Israel, I would still support efforts to save or rehabilitate it.

To my mind, this demonstrates once again that the PA – far from being a “state in the making” is simply another failed state in the making.

One would also think that – in terms of international law – the PA should not even be considered a country for purposes of this exercise;  certainly it is not YET a country.  While we have to bear some of blame for that particular situation, I guess the special status accorded to things “Palestinian” goes back to chairman of the PLO being allowed to address the UN GA with a holster on his belt (long before the PA came into existence).  If I was a conspiracy theorist I would see a trend developing here!

Links/Reading/Resources:

The Haaretz article is here, with my comment as #43. Dead Sea or Settlements?

• Palestinian boycott keeps Dead Sea off ’7 wonders’ list
• coComment – Dead Sea or Settlements?

My original post appeared here:

• Holy Land sites nominated for New 7 Wonders of Nature

I’ve since migrated it (and my other blog content) to this blog.

Related posts:

• Holy Land sites nominated for New 7 Wonders of Nature

Dead Sea, 7 Wonders of Nature and Settlements was originally posted on Maskil

There’s a tradition that anyone who visits Israel gets to offer their opinion (usually unsolicited) regarding what’s right with it, what’s wrong with it, and what should be done by Israelis to fix it.  I see no reason why I should be the exception to that rule, although I won’t be that ambitious.

I visited Israel for about ten days in the 2nd half of March this year, attending The World Union for Progressive Judaism’s CONNECTIONS 2009 convention.  That’s already almost three months ago, so I thought I should put these notes in order before my observations lose their freshness altogether.

Ten days (and most of that time spent within the confines of conference centres) is not really enough time to claim expertise on any aspect of Israel or Israeli society.  It’s enough time to form some impressions regarding the face that Israel presents to the visitor, however; whether on business, vacation or a religious pilgrimage.  I’m therefore confining my remarks to those impressions and (surprise, surprise) how Israel’s impact on its tourists can be improved.

An English-Language TV Channel

As a conference delegate, I didn’t get to spend a whole lot of time watching TV, but I did notice the apparent lack of a local English-language TV station (still).  English is the language of international commerce, tourism/hospitality, and just about everything else (including most of the Diaspora).  I shouldn’t even have to try to motivate this; it’s just something Israel needs to have.  Just a 24/7 “loop” of news, weather, sport, traffic, financial information, etc.  All the usual stuff a business traveller might expect, presented from a local perspective (preferably by gorgeous Israeli women).  Just do it!  (This is entirely separate from the externally orientated “Al Israela” I’ve discussed elsewhere.)

English In The Hospitality Industry

Yes, we in the Diaspora need to do a better job of learning Hebrew too, but more of those involved in the Israeli hospitality and tourism industries (and even just service industries and public servants in general) need to be at least competent in English.  Trust me, this will be one of the best investments Israeli tourism (and the individuals themselves) can make.  English is the “lingua franca” of the connected modern world, and Israel cannot afford to be left behind.

More Information For Tourists

Have more tourist information stands at strategic locations.  Make sure that hotels, hostels and B&B’s keep a stock of tourist information brochures and pamphlets.  Due to flight availability, we ended up with two days free time in Jaffa.  We spent most of the time walking around, without ever encountering a visitor friendly information stall, sign or brochure (apart from a map we obtained from the hostel).

Business Hours

Shops appear to keep very strange hours, and only the largest post their business hours on the storefront.  There’s plenty of room here to make it easier for visitors, by sticking with more conventional business hours and posting these hours in the storefront window.

More Bureaux De Change

We found it easy to change US Dollars at the “Change” cubicles in Jerusalem’s Old City, but something of a mission everywhere else.  Banks appear to have abdicated their role as BDC’s (apart from being very expensive).  The Israel Post Office branches turned out to be the best bet for exchanging currency, but I’m not sure that many visitors would know this.  The bottom line is that more BDC’s are needed, particularly in areas frequented by visitors from abroad.

Pre-Paid Mobile Phone Cards

At home in South Africa, I am used to being able to buy a pre-paid mobile (cellular) phone SIM card and the airtime to go with it practically anywhere (including ATM’s and just about any retail outlet).  While in Israel, however, I only came across one shop selling pre-paid SIM cards and airtime, and it was closed at the time.  I’m guessing that, like me, many visitors would like to have a local number for the duration of their visit, without having to take out a contract.

Buses

The bus service was still as good as I remembered it from the early 80s, albeit less used by the man in the street.  Having a standard fare irrespective of how many stops you travel is a great idea for both drivers and passengers.  Just one suggestion:  place more bus route maps at bus stops, e.g. at all bus shelters.  We found these to be quite useful where available.

Sherut Taxis

These shared taxis were once second only to Dan and Egged buses in importance as far as public transport is concerned.  They now appear to have been displaced by normal metered taxis.  I would suggest that there is still a role for Sherut taxis (particularly for routes such as those to and from the airport), sitting between buses on the one hand and private taxis on the other.

Israel’s Water Crisis

In a previous blog post, I suggested that the hospitality and tourism industries in Israel could play a far greater role in making visitors aware of Israel’s water crisis, and helping to mitigate the impact of the traveller on Israel’s scarce water resources.

Urban Trees

Given the proud achievements of the KKL-JNF over the last century, I was surprised to find urban (sidewalk) trees and local parks to be a scarcer resource in Tel-Aviv than I would have expected.  Once again, my observation is from the traveller’s perspective, but putting more emphasis on greening Israel’s urban centres would benefit both residents and visitors, and even the planet itself in a small way.

Hijacking Of Sites Of Historical Interest

There’s a growing trend for sites of archaeological, historical or religious interest to be hijacked by the Haredi (ultra-Orthodox) minority in Israel.  These sites are then transformed from sites open to all into what are effectively ultra-Orthodox synagogues, with partitions and extreme dress codes being imposed on all visitors.  This trend needs to be resisted.  Israel needs to take back these sites and hold them in trust as the common heritage of all, not just the exclusive domain of an extreme minority.

An Urban Facelift

Israel’s classic 3-4 story square cement apartment blocks could also do with a facelift.  Addressing just these three aspects could completely transform much of Israel’s older urban landscape, making then more visually appealing for both residents and visitors:

• Paint or coat the exteriors in either white or off-white
• Conceal all external surface wiring and pipes by means of conduit or some form of trellis
• Find ways to conceal or otherwise make external air-conditioning units less of an eyesore

Urban Blight

The urban blight in the very heart of the sidewalk café heart of Tel Aviv is shocking and incongruous, and completely out of key with Israel’s current economic status and the image she should be trying to convey.  There needs to be an urban renewal partnership between central and local government, private enterprise and conservation bodies to inventory these buildings and take a restore/renovate/demolish decision for each building.  (Such an initiative is obviously way beyond the mandate of the Israeli tourism authorities, but they should certainly be taking an active interest in it.)

The Famous Sabra Abrasiveness

Finally, Israelis should be complimented on the huge gains in all round civility that has taken place in the last few decades.  There’s still a lot of room for improvement, however.  While the Israeli Sabra myth still held sway, that famous Israeli abrasiveness and directness was an acceptable part of the whole package.  Given the erosion of Israel’s image over the last four decades, however, perhaps it’s time to reintroduce a lot more good old fashioned courtesy.

A Visitor’s Observations On Israel was originally posted on Maskil

We’ve come to understand that the way in which Israel’s military conflicts are portrayed in the media constitute another front in the war against her;  one which she is losing ground on.

Over the past few decades, each time that Israel is obliged to defend itself, its citizens or its interests (or trample over the Middle East in hob-nailed boots, depending on who you listen to) the call has gone out for a global TV news/current affairs channel that reflects the Israeli case and perspective on events.

The need for such a channel became blindingly obvious during the 1st Hezbollah War (2006) and again during the 1st Hamas War (2009), but on each occasion the awareness appears to have faded before any concrete steps were taken.

I was therefore please to come across this reference (on Twitter) to a proposed “Israel World TV” service. According to the Twitter bio:

Israel World News will be a global cable news network based out of Jerusalem. Click on the URL to view the demo [File Size: 95.34 MB]. Investment info. available.

Additional information regarding Israel World News Television is contained in this Press Release.

So, will this be Israel’s answer – not just to Al Arabiya and Al Jazeera and the like – but also to BBC World News, CNN, FOXNews and Sky News (my personal favourite), all of whose coverage of Israel tends to be tilted against her to a greater or lesser extent? Let’s hope so. If not, then perhaps other initiatives to establish what I’ve come to refer to as the “Al Israela” cable/satellite TV channel will eventually bear fruit.

As always, I have a few thoughts regarding the outlines of such a service:

• It should be available worldwide
• It should be free-to-air
• It should broadcast 24 hours a day, 7 days a week
• It should eventually broadcast in all the major world languages (starting with English and other European languages)
• It should be available as a conventional TV broadcast in Israel and the Middle East, and as a cable/satellite TV channel worldwide (without subscription)
• Anyone with a suitable satellite dish should be able to tune in to the station, but strenuous efforts should also be made to have it included in as many cable/satellite TV bouquets as possible worldwide

Some observers have pointed out that a wealth of video material with a Hasbara orientation is available from various Israeli and Jewish video websites. This is not the answer, or at least not yet. This material is only available to those with a computer (or with easy access to one) and a broadband Internet connection. A TV set (with or without a satellite dish) on the other hand, is almost ubiquitous, at least in the Western world. In addition, these services rely on the user “pulling” the material to him/her; the desirable model is for the material to be “pushed” out on the airwaves. (This is not to say that these clips and inserts (in some cases fully-fledged programs) should not be made available for re-broadcast on Al Israela; that would be the best of both worlds.)

In the meantime, the answer to my question “Will @IsraelWorldNews finally give us an “Al Israela” cable/satellite TV channel?” was “Soon!”. Let’s hope so!

Al Arabiya, Al Jazeera … but where’s Al Israela? was originally posted on Maskil

In Part 1 of this blog post I took issue with some of the viewpoints expressed by Hirsh Goodman in his talk at the Beyachad JCC on 30 April 2009.

In this part, I will look at his views on the key issue of Iran, and also take a brief look at areas where I had no argument with Hirsh’s views.

Iran. He suggested that Israel’s risk in the event of a nuclear war was much lower than that of Iran, inter alia because Israel presents a smaller target. That may well be, but the phrase “all it takes is one” springs to mind. Exactly because of its size and concentrated population centres, Israel would probably not survive even a single nuclear strike, while Iran could probably absorb dozens and still function (after a fashion).

Sanctions. Hirsh believes that targeted sanctions by the West are the best way to bring Iran to its senses. I’m sorry, but what sanctions? By all accounts, the West’s (and especially Europe’s) trade and other dealings with Iran are growing by leaps and bounds. So long as Iran can keep the West talking, sanctions will remain little but a vague threat on the horizon.

Whose problem? Hirsh also suggested that we should see Iran as the West’s problem, rather than Israel’s. For once we should not place ourselves in the path of the juggernaut. I’d like to be able to agree with this, but sadly I can’t. Hitler’s Germany should have been the world’s problem rather than a Jewish problem. By the time the world finally tackled the problem, however, it was too late for the Jews of Europe. Those who said that the best way to save Europe’s Jews was to defeat Hitler were deceived and in turn deceived . In the same way that Hitler’s Germany was and remained a Jewish problem long after it became a world problem, Iran is and will remain an Israeli problem long after it becomes the West’s problem.  Iran is not threatening the West with genocide.

Ahmadenijad. Hirsh stated that if Ahmadenijad didn’t exist, Israel would have to invent him; in the sense that he highlights the irrationality, even insanity, of the Iranian regime. Perhaps so. What is of grave concern, however, is the welcome Ahmadenijad receives in the corridors of power. Instead of being given the treatment appropriate to a homicidal, axe-wielding maniac, he is instead treated like a slightly eccentric relative who occasionally makes rude gestures at the neighbours (the ones nobody really likes anyway).

Goodman spoke for close to two hours, and there was much in his sweeping survey of Israel’s situation and prospects that was new to me, or that I was comfortable with. As often happens, however, what stuck in my mind were the issues I disagreed with, rather than those that did not snag. Here’s a few of the things I did agree with him on:

Kibbutzim.  The Kibbutzim have (ironically) become the biggest property developers in Israel. My take, however, is that if they’re not using the land for its original purpose, it should be handed back to the ILA or the JNF.

Railways. The expansion of Israel’s railway network has been phenomenal. Kol Hakavod! Israel does not have space for both people and the voracious appetite for land and resources that private cars have. Let’s get the emphasis back on public transport.

Democrats. Democratic presidencies tend to be better for Israel in the long run. Agreed, but BHO is not your father’s Democrat.

Geography. In one of the ironies of history, the geography of Israel and (Arab) Palestine have been reversed; territorially and historically each is where the other should be, e.g. through most of its early history Israel’s heartland was in Judea and Samaria. Agreed.

The Two-State Solution. This is dead in the water. Agreed. The Arabs have been rejecting their half of the two-state solution (then called “Partition”) since at least the late 30s. What’s not clear, however, is what workable formula can take the place of the Two-State Solution.

Israel’s Case. Israel needs to be present, to show up and state her case wherever possible, even if the outcome is a foregone conclusion. Agreed.

1st Hamas War. It was interesting to hear Hirsh say that not embedding journalists with the IDF was a major blunder during the Gaza operations, as was opening the floodgates to journalists afterwards, without a comprehensive briefing. Both of these approaches were of great concern to me while I was busy with my Twitter “coverage” of the operation.

I understand that Hirsh Goodman has cut down considerably on his speaking engagements, so if you do have the opportunity to hear him speak, it will be time well spent.

Here is Hirsh’s biography as per the invitation to the event:

Hirsh Goodman is the author of “Let Me Create a Paradise, A Journey of conscience from Johannesburg to Jerusalem” published to critical acclaim by PublicAffairs and HarperCollins. Sir Martin Gilbert wrote of the book: “I was much moved by many episodes in it. It really is a superb book… “And that “it is history with a human face.”

Hirsh is currently a Senior Research Associate at the Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies at Tel Aviv University where he directs the Andrea and Charles Bronfman Program on Information Strategy, designed to make policy makers factor media into their planning process rather than correcting bad policies after the fact.

In the mid-1980s, after covering all of Israel’s major wars, the peace process with Egypt and other events, he became the Strategic Fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy where, among others, he wrote together with W. Seth Carus “The Future Conflict and the Arab Israeli Conflict”.

In 1990 Goodman founded The Jerusalem Report, the highly regarded international bi-weekly magazine on international Jewish affairs published out of Jerusalem. In 1998 he was named Vice-Chairman of the Jerusalem Post, a position he held for three years.

Related posts:

Taking issue with Hirsh Goodman (Part 1)

Taking issue with Hirsh Goodman (Part 2) was originally posted on Maskil

Some weeks ago, I attended a briefing by Media Strategist Hirsh Goodman at the Beyachad JCC in Johannesburg. Hirsh (a former South African) was on a visit here to take part in the local Jewish community’s Yom Ha’atzmaut celebrations.

I didn’t take notes during his broad-ranging talk, so it was only when I jotted down a few points later that I realised how many issues I thoroughly disagreed with him on. While Hirsh is far better qualified (in terms of both his academic record and life course) than I to take positions on many of these issues, nevertheless I’m backing my own judgement. Of course, he may well have taken some of these positions just to be contrarian. Let’s look at a few.

(I realise I may be putting words in his mouth, and I’m open to correction on any of the points. I’m also not quoting chapter and verse to support either stance.)

Turkey. Hirsh still sees Turkey as an ally of Israel and the West (and saw the Davos incident as trivial). This may well be the case, but it’s less true than it was in the past, and is becoming less and less true, with the Islamist agenda of Erdoğan and the AKP biting deeper. Israel should not be making strategic plans that assume Turkey’s friendship. Turkey will not be the first or the last secular Muslim majority country to abandon secularism in favour of Islamism.

Water. Hirsh underplayed Israel’s water crisis, suggesting that it was a bureaucratic blip and that Israeli ingenuity and the Israeli “Boer maak ‘n plan” (a Boer makes a plan) attitude would be sufficient to overcome the problem. Other commentators, however, suggest that Israel is poorly positioned to drive a national strategy to tackle the water crisis because of the paralysis induced by Israel’s electoral and political system.

Missiles. Hirsh’s view is that Israel is better able to cope with more advanced missiles than with the less advanced, e.g. the Qassam, with the higher level of technology playing into Israel’s hands. Israel may still have something of a technological edge, but as we saw with various incidents in the 1st Hezbollah War (e.g. interception of Israeli communications), following orders can trump cockiness. A further example: despite Israel being a leader in the field of computer security, whose Internet Websites end up getting compromised during times of conflict? An army of script-kiddies can do considerable damage to a technologically superior opponent.

Settlements. His belief is that pretty much nothing can be done about the Settlements in Judea and Samaria. Once again, I disagree. While there is a hard core of Settlers who will not be dislodged without severely harming the fabric of Israeli society, I believe the majority can be persuaded to leave once permanent consensus boundaries have been delineated, and once services are withdrawn from those Settlements that do not form part of the blocs, and that are not destined to remain part of Israel.

IDF. Hirsh was relaxed about the increasing proportion of National Religious (dati’im) in IDF combat units and the officer corps, referring to them as the salt of the earth (which they undoubtedly are). Shouldn’t we be a little concerned, however, about which chain of command will receive their loyalty in a time of internal conflict; the official IDF chain of command, or chain of command that reaches up to the Almighty through their Rabbis? In an earlier phase of our history, Ben-Gurion disbanded the Palmach for exactly the same kind of reason (and despite their elite status).

Israel’s Arabs. Hirsh is justifiably proud of the fact that Israel’s Arab citizens admit they would prefer to remain a part of Israel. The writing is on the wall, however. This attitude is being eroded by Palestinian nationalism and militant Islamism, and the smell of blood is in the water. They may want to remain in Israel, but the Israel many now envisage is not one that most of us would be comfortable with; it is one stripped of its Jewish and Zionist fundamentals.

Gaza. Hirsh made light of the Jewish narrative in Gaza. While Gaza may be on the periphery rather than the core of the Jewish heartland – and while we may have all but relinquished our claim to her – we should not attempt to rewrite history and erase the Jewish narrative there. There are others all too willing to take this up and extend it to other parts of Israel.

Golan. I didn’t agree with his assessment of the importance of the Syrian track. I believe that only regime change in Syria will pry her loose from the Iranian orbit. Even in the age of remote control warfare, defensible borders and strategic depth still have meaning. I’m also a believer in Peace for Peace rather than Land for Peace when it comes to the Golan Heights and anywhere else.

In Part 2, I will look at the key issue of Iran, and also take a very brief look at the aspects of Hirsh Goodman’s presentation that I was in agreement with.

Related posts:

• Taking issue with Hirsh Goodman (Part 2)

Taking issue with Hirsh Goodman (Part 1) was originally posted on Maskil

According to a handful of (somewhat conflicting) news reports, Jordan appears to have decided to go its own way, by proceeding with the controversial Red-Dead Canal Project without involvement from Israel (or the PA).

The unilateral launch of the Red-Dead Canal Project took place as part of the regional meeting of the World Economic Forum, and was announced along with a slew of mega-projects to be undertaken by Jordan.

How does this affect Israel, and what should her reaction be? I believe she should react by wishing Jordan all the best in her endeavours, while at the same time initiating a project to address her own water needs and rehabilitate the Jordan River Valley. The cornerstone of this project should be a Med-Kinneret Canal, taking desalinated water from the Mediterranean Sea +/-40km east and 200m down to the Sea of Galilee (Lake Kinneret).

Why abandon the Red-Dead Canal Project without a fight? I have detailed my reservations regarding the project elsewhere. These include:

• The size of the project (distances, budget and timescales) weighs the odds heavily against success
• Grave doubts as to whether the introduction of water from the Red Sea (Gulf of Eilat) will indeed save the Dead Sea, or simply hasten its demise
• Concerns regarding all the environmental impacts of the project have yet to be addressed
• The need for close international cooperation between enemies and former enemies (Israel, Jordan and the PA) brings further complications to an already risky enterprise
• Infrastructure will be situated almost entirely in Jordan’s sovereign territory, presenting a risk in the event of continued or renewed conflict in the region

What does the Med-Kinneret Canal proposal offer that the Red-Dead Canal Project does not, at least insofar as Israel is concerned? While these have been detailed elsewhere, some of the key advantages include:

• It would be located entirely within Israel’s sovereign territory
• The scale, complexity and cost would be limited, as it would follow the shortest possible route between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River Valley, due east from Acco/Haifa to the Sea of Galilee
• It would not rely on close international cooperation between Israel and its current or former adversaries
• It would be the cornerstone of a comprehensive project to address Israel’s water crisis holistically
• It would utilise Israel’s existing water distribution infrastructure, e.g. the Mekorot network
• It would help to rehabilitate the entire length of the Jordan River Valley, including both the Sea of Galilee and the Dead Sea
• Environmental impact would be reduced by introducing only partially or completely desalinated seawater into the upper reaches of the Jordan River system

I am, quite frankly, envious that it’s Jordan initiating this whole raft of mega-projects rather than Israel. Many of them are of a type and scale that would have traditionally been associated with Israel rather than its neighbours. Let’s hope that this will serve as something of a wake-up call to Israel that she is steadily losing her peacetime qualitative edge when compared to the region.

Hat tip to Joel Katz (Editor, Religion and State in Israel blog) for bringing the breaking news story to my attention.

Links/Reading/Resources:

1. Business in Brief – Haaretz – Israel News
2. Two studies to examine environmental impact
3. Jordan plans $10b seawater desalination plant – BostonHerald.com
4. Dead Sea Development Zone launched
5. Two sovereign loan agreements to be signed tomorrow
6. Uranium provides Jordan with spark for much-needed economic bonanza – Times Online

Related posts:

• Red-Dead Canal or Med-Dead Canal?
• Building the wrong canal: An alternative to the Red-Dead Canal
• The Valley of Peace: Why a Med-Kinneret Aqueduct makes more sense
• The Sea of Galilee and the Dead Sea: Charismatic Megafauna in Israel’s Water Crisis

Jordan To Go Ahead With Red-Dead Canal Project was originally posted on Maskil

Sky News recently featured an insert regarding the state of the Sea of Galilee (AKA Kinneret or Tiberias). (I tend to stick with Sky;  nothing at all to do with Sky having the hottest women presenters of all the networks.)

First the Dead Sea and now the Sea of Galilee have become Israel’s “charismatic megafauna” when it comes to the water crisis it faces. Israel is extremely fortunate to have not one, but two such unique “species”. We shouldn’t make the mistake, however, of believing that these two alluring bodies of water can be saved in isolation, any more than the Giant Panda can be saved without sparing its habitat.

Elsewhere I’ve outlined a comprehensive layman’s agenda for addressing Israel’s water crisis, but I have no problem restating it here. For this piece, I’ve broken it down into Maintenance and Development activities:

Maintenance

Who could have predicted a sustained drought? The Israeli Water Authority needs to urgently update its projections and plans to factor in the impact of Climate Change (Global Scorching) and prolonged drought.

“Such a drought of five successive years – that’s something we never met,” Dr Doron Merkel told Sky News Online.

Perhaps, but surely after just 2 or 3 years something of a rethink would have been in order?

The demand side. Make strenuous efforts to reduce consumption. The current advertising campaign is a good start, but the strategy to reduce consumption needs to be both comprehensive and sustained and include elements such as pricing.

Reduce waste. This is somewhat different to the efforts to reduce consumption, and mainly involves getting all levels of society (national, municipal, household, etc.) to maintain and repair infrastructure, in order to limit water wastage to the absolute minimum. Mekorot’s pipelines must be in good order, and leaking tap washers must be replaced.

(On a recent trip to Israel (I love saying that; I don’t get out much) to attend CONNECTIONS 2009, the hostels we stayed at showed little evidence of the water crisis. Dual-flush toilets were there, but no water-saving shower heads or other consumer devices or appeals to use water sparingly. Even bath/basin plugs were a scarce commodity! The tourism/hospitality industry could play a key role in educating both visitors and the public about the need to save water.)

Reduce pollution. Both more and less significant water sources (from small streams through to the aquifers on which Israel rests (in many senses)) have been or are being lost to pollution. Drastic steps need to be taken to halt this trend and restore these sources to the supply side of this unequal equation.

Realign agriculture. The water crisis should not require that Israeli agriculture – Zionism’s first born – be treated as a sacrificial lamb. All stakeholders should commit themselves to transforming Israeli agriculture over the next 3 to 5 years at the latest, to wean it off its dangerous addiction to scarce, subsidised water. Much has already been done in this regard, but much still remains to be done.

Development

Climate Change. While Israel’s “contribution” to Climate Change is insignificant, there’s no reason why she should not strive to become a net “negative contributor” when it comes to greenhouse gasses. Israel should also continue and expand activities that mitigate the effects of Climate Change, e.g. large-scale afforestation.

Eat your own dog food. Israel is acknowledged as being in the forefront of water technology. Instead of simply exporting this knowhow, Israel itself needs to become the field trial or proving ground for its own R and D; the pilot site for technologies than can help her use less water, more efficiently and effectively. Israel needs to eat its own dog food as far as water-tech is concerned; a win-win situation for both vendors and society.

Desalination. Israel’s population and mainly Western lifestyle mean that water consumption is far in excess of the carrying capacity of the country. Even were all the items above to be checked, there would still be a deficit. The only way to address this deficit is through desalination of seawater. Everyone in Israel knows this, but activity is lagging far behind awareness. Government needs to become the facilitator, and not an obstacle when it comes to large scale efforts to desalinate seawater.

The Med-Kinneret Aqueduct. The much vaunted Red-Dead Canal may or may not save the Dead Sea from total extinction. It won’t do much for Israel’s water situation, however. Only my Med-Kinneret Aqueduct proposal has the potential to rehabilitate the entire Jordan (from the Kinneret to the Dead Sea), as well as topping up Israel’s overall water supply “pool”. This is the final piece in the puzzle and needs to be given a serious hearing before Israel commits to a different (potentially disastrous) canal project.

Links/Reading/Resources:

1. Sea Of Galilee In Israel Is Facing Disaster Says Friends Of The Earth Prompting Government Campaign | World News | Sky News
2. CONNECTIONS 2009
3. Sea of Galilee – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
4. Charismatic megafauna – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
5. Nostalgia Sunday – Mekorot’s water portfolio | ISRAELITY

Related posts:

• Red-Dead Canal or Med-Dead Canal?
• Building the wrong canal: An alternative to the Red-Dead Canal
• The Valley of Peace: Why a Med-Kinneret Aqueduct makes more sense
• Jordan To Go Ahead With Red-Dead Canal Project
• Winemaking as an appropriate agricultural export for Israel
• Water: What price should Israeli agriculture pay?
• Boutique wineries: a model for the survival of Israeli agriculture?

The Sea of Galilee and the Dead Sea: Charismatic Megafauna in Israel’s Water Crisis was originally posted on Maskil

I get very nervous when I hear of plans to modify Israel’s Law of Return, such as the latest initiative on the part of Interior Minister Meir Sheetrit, involving a special committee headed by Professor Yaakov Ne’eman.

In its present form, the Law of Return includes – let’s call them – the Hitler provisions, allowing those with even just one Jewish grandparent to seek sanctuary in the State of Israel and receive citizenship with all its benefits and responsibilities. This is Israel’s ex post facto response to the Holocaust, during which the most observant, Halachically correct Jew shared the same horrific fate as the most bewildered, assimilated person with the misfortune to have had a Jewish grandparent.

This noble piece of legislation – one of Israel’s defining laws – sets Israel apart from every other state in the world, making it the one place on the entire planet that will automatically provide a home to anyone persecuted for being a Jew (or being considered one).

So why am I nervous? And why is this law – which some would see as the very essence of Zionism – under scrutiny, if not attack?

I’m nervous because of the way in which Israeli officialdom has bent to the will of the most backward, anti-Zionist elements within Israeli society – the ultra-Orthodox or Haredi sector – and I therefore find it difficult to believe that it will be any different in this case.

And why is the law under attack? Apparently because it “has been abused, allowing ‘people that have nothing to do with Judaism’ to receive automatic Israeli citizenship.” And just for good measure, because “1 million illegal immigrants [are] living in Israel”.

Scary stuff, but is that really the case? And if so, is the Law of Return to blame?

I believe that the problem is not with ‘people that have nothing to do with Judaism’, but the fact that Haredi domination of vital roles in the whole absorption process. This has meant that far too many were denied a soft landing, a clear and unobstructed path back to Judaism and to integration into Jewish and Israeli society. They were given no way of becoming Jewish that did not involve adopting the complete Haredi lifestyle, a path that most of the Jews by birth alive today reject!

It is very ironic indeed that for decades we praised Soviet Jewry for maintaining a tenuous connection to their Judaism, Jewishness and Zionism, despite all the odds against it. Now that they’ve finally come home, they are scorned for not being Jewish enough, for not being Halachically pure enough, for not being observant enough, or for having non-Jewish ancestors, partners or children. In the name of all that is holy, just what did you expect?!

As for the laughable figure of “1 million illegal immigrants” supposedly living in Israel, dragging this issue in here simply muddies the water, as issues around foreign workers and Palestinian family reunification clearly have nothing to do with the Law of Return.

No doubt the law has been abused by those who are not genuine in a desire to make Aliya as part of a return to their roots. The blame for that, however, must be laid at the door of those responsible for the whole Aliya process, not the law itself.

Judging by the tone of the report in Ynetnews, however, my impression is that this review will be used to disenfranchise the “sociological Jews”, such as those who made up almost a third of the total Russian Aliya of the 90s and later.

If they insist on tampering with it, what could or should be amended? I think that all except the ill-intentioned would agree that the safe refuge provided by the “Hitler provisions” must remain. To undo those provisions would literally set us on the path of unwinding the entire Zionist enterprise. Having been granted that potentially life-saving residence however, few would object to the idea of so-called sociological Jews following a normal rather than a fast-track path to citizenship. That normal track might include a 5-year residence requirement, a civics exam, fluency in Hebrew and an oath of loyalty.

Finally, the provisions and impact of the Law of Return cannot be separated from what has been termed the “Conversion Crisis” in Israel. Changes to the law must go hand in hand with changes that will give all the major streams of Judaism absolute parity when it comes to recognition of conversions; performed both within and outside of Israel. The time for Israelis (or potential Israelis) to enjoy freedom of religion (along with the rest of the civilised world) is long overdue.

Links/Reading/Resources:

• Law of Return – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
• Law of Return to be revised – Israel Jewish Scene, Ynetnews
• Committee to look at revising Law of Return | JTA – Jewish & Israel News

Related posts:

• Altneuland: A bungled Aliya
• Altneuland: The Jewish Agency and aliya in the 21st century
• Altneuland: The easiest demographic problem we’ve ever had
• Altneuland: North American Aliya: When is enough enough?

Hands Off The Law of Return! was originally posted on Maskil