Altneuland

How about a Jerk of the Week Award?

2008-09-14T16:30:00.000+02:00

Awarded to whom, and for what?

Sometimes it seems as if hardly a week goes by without Israeli politicians crossing another red line, conceding some position or territory once considered non-negotiable, as if in a race to out-concede one another.

I’d therefore like to suggest a weekly (or monthly) award for the Israeli politician or public figure who makes the largest, most outrageous territorial concession (in principle) on behalf of Israel, in advance of any actual negotiations, and even in advance of any demands from the other side.

(I wasn’t particularly happy with the term “Jerk”, but most of the alternatives I came up with were expletives; suggestions would be welcomed.)

In this case, “Parts of eastern Jerusalem could be the capital of a future Palestinian state, Ehud Barak told Al-Jazeera.” (This is just an example. I’m not picking on Barak, whose record in the IDF I admire greatly; his record as PM less so. Barak may be a “serial donor” when it comes to Israel’s strategic assets, but no more so than many other Israeli politicians. Why is he even talking to Al-Jazeera, BTW?)

Here’s a few reasons why I think this kind of approach is a bad, very bad idea. I’m sure you could add a few of your own:

There should one official government position on an issue such as this, and all politicians associated with the current governing coalition should be required to adhere to it. No country can negotiate (or even conduct normal diplomatic relations) if each member of the government is singing from a different hymn-sheet. Credibility becomes non-existent. This is not the way to hold a debate, if that’s the objective. Some form of coalition discipline is needed.

Four decades ago, when Israel firmly held all the windfall territories from the Six-Day War, this may have looked like Israeli magnanimity, speaking from a position of strength. Forty years down the road, making these huge concessions has become a habit, almost a knee-jerk reaction, and comes across more like the victim saying “here, take my wallet” to the mugger.

Israel’s official position going into any negotiations should be that Jerusalem is Israel’s eternal, undivided capital, and that no concessions can be made here. Whether it comes out the other side with that position still intact is another matter.

I’m not one to fight to the last drop of Israeli blood on an issue, but surely no self-respecting nation offers up its capital city (or parts thereof) as part of a negotiating process or package. Being forced to make those concessions is somewhat different, but we should not be sitting down with that concession already made.

If we enter into or resume negotiations with concessions such as this already stipulated, what other cards do we hold? What do we offer if our “peace partners” demand still more, and we honestly believe that one more concession will clinch the deal? The Knesset building?

Many of these offers or concessions are made as “one-time” deals, but who remembers that particular detail when the next round begins? All that is remembered is that Israel has already conceded Place A or B. Too late to cry the diplomatic equivalent of “all bets are off” or “terms and conditions applied”.

What are we receiving in return? In our eagerness for peace, we tend to forget that negotiations should be a two-way street. We’ve already pretty much agreed to give back basically everything in return for something we can convince ourselves is peace. We know it, they know it, and yet we’re no closer. If it’s not working, let’s stop doing it.

It really is way past time to move on from concession-based diplomacy to rights-based diplomacy!

Judy Montagu, in a recent Jerusalem Post column, also highlighted the issue of pride (or the apparent lack thereof) among the current crop of Israeli leaders.

In its prime, Zionism was very much a values-driven movement. Some of these values derived from Judaism, others from the analysis of the Jewish situation vis-à-vis nation-states, anti-Semitism, etc., others from socialism. Perhaps one of the tasks of 21st Century Zionism is to reclaim those values – from across the Zionist ideological spectrum – that are still relevant for Israel and the Jewish world today.

In the case of Israel’s leadership, perhaps the value that we should insist they exemplify is the Betar value of Hadar, for example “Every word of yours must be a "word of honor", and the latter is mightier than steel.” (Yes, I realize that Betar and what it once stood for is now considered passé, but hopefully values never really go out of fashion.)

So, until this mindset starts to change, “the envelope please…”

Altneuland: Israel needs a new school of negotiating skills

Technorati Tags: Betar, Eastern Jerusalem, Hadar, Israeli politician, Negotiation, Six-Day War, Territorial concession

North American Aliya: When is enough enough?

2008-09-09T16:00:00.000+02:00

The recent revolutionary changes in the roles of the Jewish Agency for Israel (JAFI) and Nefesh B'Nefesh (NBN) regarding Aliya from North America provide (perhaps unnecessary) lessons in what happens to institutions that fail to adapt to changed circumstances.

Rather than organisational roles, however, what I’d like to address here is Aliya in general, North American Aliya in particular, whether Israel still “needs” Aliya, and how to make Israel a destination of choice for immigrants rather than refugees.

My initial response to these changes was something along these lines: Israel is already home to almost half the world’s Jews. If there’s any problem it hasn’t been able to solve with (say) 40% of the world’s Jews, is it any more likely to be solved with 45 or 50%?

Why do we still see this apparently crying need for more Aliya? My sense it that – more than any other factor - it has to do with the (unwinnable) demographic war we’re engaged in with the Arab population west of the Jordan. If this is the case, then let’s rather find ways to disentangle ourselves from that situation (the word disengage would have been more suitable, but it’s now discredited). I can’t say yet how that disentanglement should happen, but I do know we need to apply our minds to finding solutions.

In my reading of history, Aliya was never intended to be about the needs of the Jewish Commonwealth, but rather about addressing the “Jewish Problem” (or situation; problem implies a solution) and the physical safety of individual Jews and communities. The equation has now been turned on its head, with Israel needing Aliya to address … what need again?

Historically, this need for Aliya arose because the huge pools of potential Eastern European Olim were annihilated in the Holocaust, leaving only a remnant to fulfil the dream. In one of our history’s saddest ironies, the Jews for whom Zionism was created all but ceased to exist, and immigration instead came mainly from Middle-Eastern Jewry, who until then had had no pressing need for such a safe haven.

In one of my previous posts on the subject, I said that the best hope for Western (particularly North American) Aliya is a strong and connected Diaspora. That is where we should focus our efforts, rather than on ceaselessly scouring the planet for Jewish DNA.

In my opinion, we need to aim for a normal migration pattern between the Diaspora and Israel, and vice-versa, but with the balance in favour of Israel. This is a far more realistic scenario than banking on waves of immigrants to somehow “complete” Israel.

So, while I believe that JAFI and NBN should be there for those who wish to make personal fulfilment Aliya (as well as to evacuate threatened communities in need), I remain unconvinced as to whether Aliya is the real solution to Israel’s current problems.

Leaving that aside, what kind of campaign or initiative would help bring those waves of Olim to Israel’s shores? I believe that what’s needed is not a marketing campaign, but rather an effort to make Israel a far more immigrant-friendly country. I don’t think it’s ever been tried before, but I do think it’s worth a shot.

What is the work that would need to be done in order to make Israel an attractive destination for immigrants? To what extent is this a case of having to just change images and perceptions, or are there underlying realities to be dealt with? We know that, even among our friends and among Jews themselves, Israel’s image is often that of an oppressive, fundamentalist garrison state. This initiative to make Israel Olim-friendly involves addressing not only perceptions, but also the unpleasant realities that sometimes underpin them.

The poisonous cocktail of unpleasant realities and half-baked perceptions is steadily alienating an increasing segment of (especially young) Diaspora Jews. The sad part is that many of these people are rejecting Israel (or at least uncritical support of Israel) exactly because they see it as violating so many of the Jewish values they were taught to uphold. In the eyes of many, the ugly Israel they see is an affront and an embarrassment to Judaism and its ethical teachings.

(Speaking of perceptions, why is it that I can get to watch Al-Jazeera on satellite TV, but not something along the lines of Infolive.tv? We’ve been hearing about the need for a pro-Israel satellite TV channel for years. When are the heavy hitters going to step up and make this a reality?)

Here’s where I believe we need to start:

A constitution. Israel needs a constitution. Not a phony IDI “constitution by coercion” that hands over power to exactly those people and institutions it should be protecting the public from. A real constitution that protects the man in the street from princes, merchants and cardinals alike; from MKs, oligarchs and the rabbinate alike.

Equality before the law. Legislation and dirty little “shmoechel” coalition deals that transfer public funds to one specific sector of the population, or that exempt that sector from the obligations and rights of citizenship need to be struck down. There needs to be one education system, one system of national service/conscription and one welfare system, at least for the entire Jewish population.

The rule of law. Israeli law needs to be imposed over every person and every inch of Israel’s territory - whether disputed or undisputed – by force, if necessary. If I relied on satellite TV as my only source for Israeli news, I would see Israel as a place where Haredi gay-bashers and olive-tree uprooting settlers reign supreme, while the law stands idly by. No state can allow itself to be eroded in fact and reputation this way; particularly not a state facing as many threats as does Israel. Crack some heads. When you’re dealing with cowards and bullies, one or two demonstrations of resolve usually suffice.

Separation between religion and state. This needs to happen irrespective of whether a constitution comes about or not. The Israeli religious-bureaucratic complex must be dismantled, and all the major streams of Judaism must have equal standing with Orthodoxy. No more garbage about a status-quo and authentic/Torah/Halachic Judaism. This has gone on long enough. Just fix it.

(Why is this such a crucial issue? Unless you’re planning to attract only those comfortable wearing basic black, a major part of the target market will be Conservative/Masorti, Reconstructionist and Reform Jews, all of whose legitimacy (institutions, rabbis, conversions) is disparaged and denied by official Judaism in Israel. Israel cannot afford another bungled Aliya such as the one from Russia during the 90s, where as many as 1 out of every 3 immigrants was disenfranchised by being considered non-Jewish according to Halacha.)

Stable government. Another long-recognised need. MKs need to be accountable to their voters, and Israel needs to be able to form stable, viable governments that can serve out their terms, and are not reliant on coalition deals with Haredi and other anti-Zionist parties.

Bureaucracy. Less of it. Israel Inc. still needs to become a lot leaner, meaner and more business-friendly (while not allowing the individual’s rights to be trampled). The concept of Proteksia just isn’t cute anymore (if it ever was), and shouldn’t be a requirement for getting anything done when dealing with government.

Corruption. Corruption on the part of holders of public office (including the rabbinate) needs to be stamped out. Dealing with this blight on the nation may require setting up a dedicated unit with the function to vigorously investigate and prosecute corruption on the part of public officials, from the highest to the lowest.

(I don’t presume to try to teach the Israeli voter Civics 101, but Israelis have been living with these affronts to democratic dignity for so long that many appear to have become resigned to them.)

I have a “second-tier” list as well, but I’ll save that for a future post, apart from this one:

Acts of insanity. Avoid them. Remind me again how many years of net positive Aliya is required to offset just one act of political insanity or demographic suicide, in allowing “just” 20,000 “Palestinian refugees” the “right of return”.

What do these have to do with Aliya? On the face of it, nothing, but in reality, everything.

Aliya by choice, and particularly Aliya from North America and the rest of the Western world is a whole new ballgame for Israel and most of the bodies responsible for it (NBN excluded).

Attracting large-scale immigration from modern, democratic, secular Western societies, with a high living standard, religious freedom, little overt anti-Semitism or discrimination, and respect for human rights is simply not one of Israel’s core competencies.

Could Israel achieve it? Almost certainly, but it will require some profound changes to both venerated and despised Israeli institutions alike.

What’s the advantage of doing all this work? Not only will it create a very favourable climate for attracting immigrants, but all Israelis, old and new, existing and potential will benefit from it. It will also decide the tenor of the state for generations to come, making it truly a state for all Jews, not just the self-anointed “Real Jews”.

There is little doubt that a substantial Anglo Aliya is capable of making a huge contribution towards Israeli society in many respects. I believe this can only happen, however, if the right conditions are created to facilitate it.

To repeat a (misquoted) phrase, "If you build it, they will come." Get this right and all else will pretty much follow.

Related posts:

Altneuland: A bungled Aliya

Altneuland: Cowardice and bullying

Altneuland: The Israel Democracy Institute (IDI): Constitution by Coercion

Altneuland: The Jewish Agency and aliya in the 21st century

Technorati Tags: Demographic suicide, Demographic war, Disengagement, Equality before the law, IDI constitution by coercion, Jewish Agency for Israel (JAFI), Jewish Commonwealth, Jewish Problem, Nefesh B'Nefesh (NBN), North American Aliya, Palestinian refugees, Right of return, Rule of law, Separation between religion and state

Young Israeli art student scam in South Africa?

2008-09-02T18:00:00.001+02:00

OK, I admit it. I got ripped off.

Last week a couple of young Israelis (Lior and Noa) talked their way into our home, claiming to be part of a syndicate of ten young art students selling their original oil paintings door to door.

(You’re smirking already? If I’d just read this, I would have probably done the same, but in my defence they were pretty convincing.)

They were friendly, presentable, apparently genuine and sincere, and unmistakably Israeli. They were in no hurry, and spent more than an hour chatting, discussing the work, with plenty of anecdotes about life in Israel as struggling young art students thrown in. Why were they selling door to door? They wanted to get their work on as many walls as quickly as possible, and couldn’t afford gallery overheads etc.

Eventually I handed over a cheque, and they left minus two canvasses, having phoned their supervisor (Dror) to pick them up.

So where’s the scam?

I was staring at my newly-acquired oils from someone who might be famous one day. (What do you mean you’ve never heard of Chagit Penn?) What was bothering me? The scenes looked just a little too generic. They were supposedly of Haifa and Jerusalem in the rain, but they could have been any seaside town, and any city in the rain respectively.

Now seriously concerned, I started Googling search terms such as “young Israeli art student scam”. Judging by the search engine results page, the phenomenon of young Israeli “art students” selling artworks of questionable quality or origin is well known in countries such as Australia, Canada and the US. (There’s also a whole conspiracy theory around them, but that’s something else entirely.) So, I guess they’ve now established themselves in the Northern suburbs of Johannesburg.

If there was ever any doubt, I found my rainy day in Jerusalem during the search, except that the version on the Internet included the Eiffel Tower!

What’s behind this?

Israeli youngsters probably have more reason than most for taking a gap year after military service and before (or in some cases after) tertiary study. I was under the impression, though, that this usually involved a search for spirituality and recreational pharmaceuticals in places such as India, not art-related scams.

South Africa also has a robust tradition of gap year backpacking. In “my day”, this was to escape the claustrophobia of Apartheid and the Total Onslaught. In the 2000s, it’s to escape the claustrophobia of affirmative action and violent crime. Young travellers would do just about anything legal to pay their way, but this was almost invariably an honest day’s work for a day’s (minimum wage or below) pay.

What saddens me about this episode (apart from the financial loss) is that these youngsters are poisoning the well for future waves of young Israeli backpackers and travellers.

The Jewish peddler or “smous” (and later the commercial traveller or “rep”) was once a fixture of the South African landscape, but was almost universally a highly regarded “member” of whatever community he happened to be in, remembered with fondness even decades after his demise. Sadly, however, these “art students” are simply mining the fragile Israeli/Jewish connection to sell their dubious wares and move on. That’s something you can only ever once, whether at the level of the person or the community.

To Lior, Noa (and Dror), you spent enough time with us to see that ours is not an affluent home. The real harm you did was not to me and my family, however, but to your own selves, and to the reputation of the young Israeli traveller, now and in the future.

Technorati Tags: Commercial traveller, Israeli backpacker, Israeli traveller, Jewish peddler, Rep, Smous, Young Israeli art student scam

New JTA site planned for Rosh Hashanah: Hold that thought

2008-09-01T18:00:00.001+02:00

In a post last week, I commented on what a frustrating experience leaving a comment on the JTA website had become. (The JTA (or Jewish Telegraphic Agency) positions itself as “The Global News Service of the Jewish People”, a claim I don’t take exception to.)

Judging by the response (online, and particularly offline), the post seems to have touched a nerve with J-Bloggers and other “serial commenters” on the Judeosphere.

It appears there is light at the end of the tunnel, however, at least according to the response posted by Daniel Sieradski, the Director of Digital Media at the JTA:

We've been having ongoing trouble with our current website -- particularly with the comments -- and I do apologize for the inconvenience it has caused you and other readers. (As you've noted, the problem does not exist on our blogs, which are using a different content management system all together.) You'll be pleased to know that we'll be launching a brand new site around Rosh Hashanah at which time the issue with our comments feature will be entirely resolved.

Again, sorry for the inconvenience.

Thanks to Daniel for taking the trouble to stop by, and for providing this update on behalf of the JTA. I look forward to seeing the new JTA site in the Rosh Hashanah timeframe.

Judging by the feedback to the original post, there will be many other readers and J-Bloggers who will also welcome the change!

And if you do have the overwhelming urge to write on the JTA’s wall in the meantime, the Flock browser appears to give the best results. If you do decide to install Flock, please choose the Eco-Edition!

Technorati Tags: Digital Media, Flock Browser Eco-Edition, J-Bloggers, Jewish Telegraphic Agency, JTA, Judeosphere, Serial commenters

Jerusalem, D.C.?

2008-08-31T16:00:00.001+02:00

In a post last Sunday, I suggested that – in view of the likely outcome of Jerusalem’s municipal election - the Israeli central government may eventually be obliged to take over some or all aspects of Jerusalem’s administration.

My reasons for suggesting this somewhat drastic step had to do with the deterioration of the city’s composition, standing and infrastructure under the relatively benign rule of Haredi (ultra-Orthodox) Mayor Uri Lupolianski, and the expected further deterioration under the most likely mayoral candidate, MK Meir Porush. Porush is widely expected to end all pretence of running an administration for the benefit of all Jerusalem’s inhabitants, and simply focus on the narrow sectional interests of the Haredim.

It seems I’m not alone in this view. In an article in Haaretz (Yeruham in Jerusalem) published a couple of days later, Anshel Pfeffer appears to have independently arrived at the same conclusion. Judging by the relatively few comments on the article, the article seems to have largely flown under the radar. The conclusion read as follows:

The only long-term solution for Jerusalem's ills is legislation that would expropriate substantial portions of the municipality's authority and transfer it to a special ministry or government department established for this purpose. Various detailed proposals along these lines already exist, such as one to establish a super-municipality that would manage the capital's entire urban expanse, including the satellite cities of Mevasseret Zion, Tzur Hadassah and Ma'aleh Adumim, while splitting Jerusalem into several quarters that would run their own municipal affairs autonomously.

Opponents of such a move will charge that it is anti-democratic. Yet far older democracies treat their capitals in similar ways. The American constitution gives Washington, D.C., special status, and some of its affairs are managed by the federal government. In 1985, the British parliament voted to abolish the Greater London Council, on the grounds that it had become wasteful and inefficient.

Israel's government has every justification for assuming responsibility for its capital city.

This may or may not be the answer, but it is becoming increasingly apparent that radical steps do need to be taken to address the urban decay, demographic imbalance and the flight of capital and jobs from the city.

Jerusalem, D.C. or Haredistan? As with most other things in life, not choosing also ends up being a choice.

(Hat tip to Joel Katz (Religion and State in Israel) for bringing the Haaretz article to my notice.)

Links/Reading/Resources:

Yeruham in Jerusalem - Haaretz - Israel News

Altneuland: Exorcising the Haredi Golem

Altneuland: Jerusalem of Gold or Jerusalem of Black?

Technorati Tags: Anshel Pfeffer, Haredi, Jerusalem, Ultra-Orthodox

Is commenting on JTA worth the frustration?

2008-08-27T18:00:00.001+02:00

Is anyone else out there finding commenting on items on the JTA website to be almost more hassle that it’s worth?

This morning I attempted to submit a comment, only to have the “Post rejected” message displayed, with no further explanation given. I then switched from the Firefox 3.x browser to IE7. This time, after clicking on Submit Post, the article was simply refreshed and the comment vanished, without any rejection or confirmation message. I tried again using Flock (Eco-Edition), and the comment was finally accepted.

I don’t have the coComment extension installed on Flock though, so I had to go back to Firefox in order to manually paste the text into coComment.

It’s just as well I always compose my comments using a word processor, then copy and paste to the web, or the exercise would have been even more frustrating.

The JTA website’s support for coComment (or vice-versa) is at best a little uneven. coComment works fine on JTA blogs such as The Telegraph, but tends to be unreliable when used along with the main JTA website.

You can access my coComment comments here.

By the way, although the comments footer for an article usually displays the message “Hyperlinks will be created for URLs automatically”, if you do enter a URL in your comment, it will almost certainly be rejected. How about some consistency here?

One more thing: Why is the count of comments on JTA items always out by one? An article with 1 comment shows 0, while an article with 2 comments shows as 1, etc.

With the exception of the coComment issue (which is not really the JTA’s problem), I have reported all these irritating bugs to the JTA - most on more than one occasion - without any response or resolution.

coComment, Flock (Eco-Edition), JTA

Jerusalem of Gold or Jerusalem of Black?

2008-08-24T18:00:00.002+02:00

The traditional distinction between the earthly and the heavenly Jerusalem is reflected in the gap between the Ideal Jerusalem - the eternal, undivided capital of Israel and the Jewish people - and the Real Jerusalem as it is today.

Unlike the Ideal Jerusalem, the Real Jerusalem (or at least its unity) looks more and more up for grabs in any deal with the PA. Also unlike the Ideal Jerusalem, the Real Jerusalem is becoming ever more unwelcoming and divorced from the rest of Israel in its demographic composition and political make-up.

What are the likely scenarios for the future of Jerusalem within the internal Israeli context (i.e. leaving aside the conflict with the PA)? Can it still be saved for Israel and remain connected to the (non-Haredi) Jewish people, or do we need to start nominating “candidate cities” for a new capital? There are only really two scenarios, with everything else being something somewhere in between. They are:

Jerusalem of Gold. Some form of non-Haredi coalition manages to take back the city on behalf of its inhabitants (as well as the rest of the country and the Jewish people at large). Industry and a more diverse population balance are gradually restored. This is the option that should be favoured by any one who cares about both the Ideal and the Real Jerusalem.

Jerusalem of Black. More of the same. The ultra-Orthodox hegemony over the city continues and deepens. The secular, traditional and Modern Orthodox continue to flee, along with initiative, enterprise and jobs. The city becomes poorer, more corrupt, disheveled, nepotistic, and more of a burden on the Israeli taxpayer. This looks to be the most likely scenario.

How should Israel – Everyman’s Israel – respond if the 2nd scenario – Jerusalem of Black - prevails? Simply accepting it as a fait accompli is an option, but it pretty much amounts to calling the whole Zionist enterprise a failure. I would suggest instead a more radical response, one that tackles the issue head-on instead of allowing it to fester:

Option 1. Unilaterally declare Jerusalem to now be the capital and territory of a separate state, to be known as Haredistan. In this way, Israel will rid itself of its most insidious demographic problem, while the Haredim will achieve their cherished ambition of a theocracy. The inhabitants of Bnei Brak could be given the option of migrating to Haredistan, in exchange for any remaining secular inhabitants of Jerusalem.

Option 2. Declare Greater Jerusalem to be Israel’s Capital District, administered by a Governor and some form of council appointed by and responsible to central government. The mayor (or Ayatollah in this case) would have only ceremonial functions. This is the option I favour.

The Capital District Governor and his or her council would be responsible for putting in place a regime with the following mandate:

Redefine and tighten up the boundaries of Jerusalem to exclude those areas that should rather be considered territory designated for the PA.
Draw up plans to attract commerce, industry and a more diverse and representative population back to Jerusalem.
Dissolve and reconstitute the administration of Jerusalem to eliminate corruption, nepotism, inefficiency and bias towards any particular sector of the population.
Put in place spatial planning that will protect what remains of the natural environment and built heritage, identify and backfill development in the core areas of the city (rather than expanding ever outwards) and create diverse and mixed usage neighbourhoods.
With the assistance of the appropriate central government bodies, restore the rule of law. This would include preventing illegal construction by all parties, eliminating no-go areas (by force, if necessary) and breaking up the activities of Sabbath enforcers, modesty patrols and other sundry Taliban tendencies.
Attract tourism that does not misguidedly see run-down ultra-Orthodox neighbourhoods and their natives as “quaint” or “picturesque”.
Prepare the city and its population and institutions for an eventual return to democracy at the local level.
Simply put, transform Jerusalem into an appropriate capital city for the revived Jewish people, a capital we can all be proud of.

Is this proposal undemocratic? Perhaps. Remember, though, that the Haredi sector has no commitment to democracy, but simply see it as a vehicle to take them to their particular destination. They have thoroughly abused democracy in order to promote their own narrow sectional interests, at the expense of the city and the rest of its bewildered inhabitants. Democratic local government can be restored once there is a culture and an understanding that the city does not belong exclusively to a fraction (however large) of those who live there.

None of the above will be possible under the present government (or any government we can envisage right now). I realize this all also sounds a little unrealistic (even to me), but that simply highlights how far from normal or acceptable the situation in Jerusalem (in truth, Israel as a whole) has become.

If we – not just the Israelis, but the Jewish people as a whole – are prepared to live with the intolerable then we may as well all pack up and go “home”, wherever home may turn out to be. We certainly don’t deserve the privilege of being able to call Jerusalem of Gold our eternal, undivided capital.

If we can’t achieve this, then we need to admit our failure, go back to the original UN partition plan and allow Jerusalem to become an “International City”.

Links/Reading/Resources:

Technorati Tags: Earthly and Heavenly Jerusalem, Greater Jerusalem, Haredim, Haredistan, Ideal and Real Jerusalem, International City, Town and country planning, Ultra-Orthodox, Urban and regional planning

Last Post for South Africa's Machal 800?

2008-08-20T18:00:00.000+02:00

This post will probably be of interest mainly to my readers in South Africa (or those with a South African connection), less so to my readers in other countries.

The South African Zionist Federation in Israel published the item below on its Telfed Online website under the heading “South Africa's 800”. I haven’t seen it published in the SA Jewish press (I may have overlooked it), so I’ve reproduced it here on the off-chance that a visitor to this site may be able to assist.

Approximately 800 Southern Africans (see exact numbers below) took part in Israel’s War of Independence as members of Machal (Mitnadvei Chutz L'Aretz). According to the item on Telfed Online (posted on Thu 2008/07/03):

The book, South Africa's 800 by Henry Katzew, (the story of South African volunteers in Israel’s war of birth), shows that 836 South Africans had participated. The editing team has successfully classified 799 of them, concerning their activities at the time, military units or Kibbutzim.

The following 37 names, with their 1948 home town or 1968 place of residence are still unclassified. Anyone who might have information concerning these person's activities in 1948 are invited to contact of these emails:

doreen (at) sw.co.il, or lanesman (at) 013.net

Aftergood, Fred - Sderot Wingate, Haifa
Benatar, Samuel - Elizabethville, Congo
Bernstein, Elana - Berea, Johannesburg
Braudo, Muriel - Gwelo, Rhodesia
Brener, Lily - Riviera, Johannesburg
Burman, Philip - Wynberg, Cape
Capelluto, Yacov - Elizabethville, Congo
Dawson, Edwin - Wakefield, Rhodesia
Durner, Alfred - Lancashire, UK
Herman, Robert Albert - Kroonstad, OFS
Herzfeld, Lazlo - Nairobi, Kenya
Hershowitz, Thelma - Berea, Johannesburg
Horwitch, Lydia - c/o Pioneer Press, Cape Town
Israel, Albert - Chilonga, Rhodesia
Israel, Itzhak - Wakefield, Rhodesia
Jackson, Joe - Doornfontein, Johannesburg
Jacobson, Monty - Yeoville, Johannesburg
Karanowitch, Baruch - Wandel Street, Cape Town
Katz, Joseph - Salisbury, Rhodesia
Kerbel, George - Sokolow Street, Tel Aviv
Kimmel, Joe,- Bloemfontein OFS
Lawrence,Rina- Birmingham, UK
Lipman, Robert -Wolmarans Street, Johannesburg
Matheson, Isaac - Berea, Johannesburg
Miller, Leslie - Hillbrow, Johannesburg
Potel, Joseph - Salisbury, Rhodesia
Rabinowitch, Percy Mark - Wakefield, Rhodesia
Sacks, Zvi - Obervatory Ext. Johannesburg
Shelley, George Thomas - Que Que, Rhodesia
Sher, Percy - Vredehoek Cape Town
Stark, Gerald - Glenwood, Durban
Stern Maurice - P.O.Box 203, Tel Aviv
Van Harn, Ferdinand - HaCarmel, Haifa
Wallace, David - Sunnyside, Pretoria
Weigert, Hans - Melbourne, Australia
Weinberg, Arthur - P.O.Box 3924, Johannesburg
Wilkes, Bernard - Salisbury, Rhodesia

The book “South Africa's 800” referred to above was (perhaps unfortunately) self-published by Col. (Res.) David (Migdal) Teperson on behalf of the Machal Museum, and is therefore not available through the usual sources. I would be happy to publish details should there be any interest.

(On a personal note, my late Uncle Ron, late Aunt Sylvie and Aunt Doreen all served in Machal.)

South Africa's 800 | Telfed Online

Machal

Machal - Volunteers In The War Of Independence

Technorati Tags: David (Migdal) Teperson, Israel’s War of Independence, Machal, Mitnadvei Chutz L'Aretz, South African Zionist Federation, South Africa's 800, Telfed Online

Google Knol: The Next Big Thing for anti-Semitism 2.0?

2008-08-11T12:00:00.001+02:00

In a couple of earlier posts, I added my voice to the concerns at the abuse of the Wikipedia project to disseminate anti-Israel and anti-Semitic bias in the guise of objective, consensus scholarship, and at the use of the electronic self-publishing media in general to propagate anti-Semitic slurs, stereotypes and falsehoods.

The launch of Google’s Knol (“unit of knowledge”) project potentially provides another channel for the haters to exploit. I thought it would be useful to look at reasons why this may or may not happen, and what measures those working to counter this “Electronic Intifada” (in the generic sense) could take to prevent a worst-case scenario.

Factors that may promote abuse

As with its other user content services (e.g. Blogger, YouTube), Google has already announced that it will not play a role in editing or vetting content on Knol.

While procedures will no doubt be put in place to remove content flagged as inappropriate, our experience with YouTube tells us that the process may lengthy, ineffective, or both.

Given Google’s aim to provide user-friendly content creation and editing tools, it would be relatively simple to create new hate content as quickly as the old article is taken down. This may be as simple as copying and pasting the deleted material into a new Knol, perhaps with a few cosmetic changes.

Factors that may discourage abuse

Knols are attributed to named authors or contributors, unlike the anonymous model used for Wikipedia. Each contributor has an author profile (apparently linked to a Gmail address), and unverified profiles can immediately be considered suspect.

Knol provides for comments, ratings and reviews for each article, as well as the “Flag inappropriate content” indicator. (I’m not sure whether any of these can be turned off by the contributor, but it seems unlikely.)

Unlike Wikipedia, there is no one single authoritative article for a particular subject, e.g. a biased Knol with the subject of Intifada or Nakba would have to fight for readership with more scholarly or objective contributions.

Without the difficult to penetrate Wikipedia editing model, Knol provides a far more level playing field.

The credentials of authors or joint contributors can be examined and potential users of the content alerted in need, e.g. by means of commenting and rating.

(The fact that the Google executive responsible for Knol (Udi Manber) is an Israeli expatriate is unlikely to influence matters either way.)

Conclusions

So, will Google’s Knol prove to be the Next Big Thing for promoting anti-Semitism 2.0? In my opinion, not, unless we allow it to happen. It provides far less fertile ground for promoting hatred of Israel and Zionism and anti-Semitism in general. It will need to be closely monitored, however, and the various players in the Hasbara space will need to gear up to identify and counter bias.

Knol appears to provide a far more democratic and transparent medium for subject matter experts to self-publish. To my mind, that immediately favours those fighting against anti-Semitism, bias and hate.

Knol cannot be allowed to degenerate into the same murky state as Wikipedia in the anti-Israel space. Gearing up at an early stage may be the best way to prevent this from happening.

Where to from here?

Media monitoring and Hasbara groups such as CAMERA, GIYUS.ORG, HonestReporting, Israel Hasbara Committee, Israel News Agency, Jewish Virtual Library (Myths & Facts) and The Israel Project (apologies to those I haven’t mentioned) as well as the J-Blogosphere as a whole should begin taking an interest in Knol, including the following activities:

Conduct regular searches of Knol content for articles of concern.

Encourage volunteers to register on the site and begin becoming familiar with the functionality provided to comment, flag, rate or review articles.

Become familiar with the profiles of those submitting articles of Jewish interest and identify any with a consistent bias against Israel.

Encourage the subject matter experts in our midst to begin contributing Knols in their field/s of expertise. An article concerning refugees (both Jewish and Arab) from Israel’s War of Independence, for instance, may be a good place to start. The Knol model does allow for articles to be monetized through Google AdSense, so there may even be a financial incentive for this (this cuts both ways, of course).

Knol and Wikipedia

Whether intentional or not, there is little doubt that Knol will eventually compete head-on with Wikipedia for mind-share and mouse clicks. Given Google’s financial and technical muscle and Knol’s more open and transparent editing model, there is little doubt who will win in the long run.

We cannot simply write off Wikipedia, however. It remains the repository for some 10 million (!) articles (about a quarter of those in English) of varying trustworthiness, and users will continue to rely on it until such time as a tipping point has been reached. My own blog posts (including this one) are peppered with references to Wikipedia articles, and to date I’ve found nothing to take its place as an online research tool.

While those dealing with Hasbara cannot afford to abandon Wikipedia to the “Electronic Intifada”, I believe Knol can and should become the preferred address for new and updated content in the “Internet Haganah” space (once again in the generic sense, rather than that specific website).

Links/Reading/Resources:

The Valley of Peace: Why a Med-Kinneret Aqueduct makes more sense

2008-07-30T18:00:00.002+02:00

A cousin in Australia forwarded me this link to an absolutely superb piece of PR for the Valley of Peace project; a 3D visualization of how such a project could impact the region.

While there’s no way a lone blogger can compete with the heavyweights backing the Valley of Peace project, I would like to set out eight good reasons why I believe my Med-Kinneret Aqueduct proposal makes more sense for Israel than the Valley of Peace project.

With a canal/tunnel length of only +/-45km (from the Mediterranean Sea in the vicinity of Haifa to Lake Kinneret or one of its tributary streams), it seems far more practical as an engineering project.
The scope of the project is far less ambitious, and could be achieved within timeframes that are helpful for the current drought situation, as well as Israel’s overall water shortage and the impact of global climate change.
Due to its more limited scope, it is likely to be a more viable project financially.
Ecologically, it is likely to be far less damaging than the Valley of Peace project, as it envisages an underground aqueduct constructed using tunnel boring machine (TBM) technology. It also envisages the desalination of sea water before its injection into the Kinneret.
It addresses the plight of the entire lower reaches of the Jordan, including Lake Kinneret, the Jordan itself and the Dead Sea.
It is an unashamedly Zionist project, and considers the interests of Israel and its people first, although there may be benefits for Israel’s neighbors.
It does not put the development cart before the peace horse, and is not dependant on relationships between Israel and any of its neighbors. Israel can “go it alone” in need, and all infrastructure would be sited within sovereign Israeli territory.
Apart from the Med-Kinneret Aqueduct itself and the desalination facilities, it envisages leveraging the use of existing Mekorot and National Water Carrier infrastructure.

So, while the Med-Kinneret Aqueduct proposal may not be as glamorous (or glamorized) as the Valley of Peace proposal, it looks to be far more achievable and could deliver benefits in a much shorter timeframe.

(Hat tip to Bev.)

Links/Reading/Resources: