 |
Moshe Dann , a former asst. professor of History (CUNY), is a writer and journalist living in Jerusalem.
|
|
|
|
By Moshe Dann
September 12, 2004
That Israeli "occupation," "settlement," in Yesha (the West Bank and Gaza) is "immoral" is the hallmark of the Left in Israel. Many of them believe that all of Israel's problems stem from this "evil." In their view, nothing is worse that oppressing another people and depriving them of their national/political rights.
These sentiments resonate in every Jewish heart because we are a people with a long history of suffering and oppression. More than anyone else perhaps, it is our responsibility to examine carefully our behavior. We cannot do to others what was done to us.
In presenting their case, however, advocates for unilateral withdrawal from all or most of Yesha -- and the creation of a terrorist-led Palestinian state -- use "morality" to obscure something much deeper: unconsciously, their sense of shame and guilt.
Ever since Israel entered Yesha in 1967, the Left has been apologizing for that miraculous victory, even though Israel's very existence was at stake. They are even more incensed that Israelis had the 'audacity' to move into areas that were formerly forbidden to Jews, where Jews had lived before 1948 and which hold deep historical and strategic significance for the Jewish people.
Despite the fact that no Arab-owned land was taken (or "stolen") by Jews who built their homes in Yesha, the Left considers this "occupation." After the Oslo Agreements in 1993, however, nearly all Palestinians came under the control of the Palestinian Authority. And until Arafat and his terrorists openly declared a renewed war against Jews it was a period of enormous growth and prosperity.
If there is "occupation," it cannot be over people, except when Israel exercises its right of self-defense by going into Arab towns to destroy terrorists and their network, or when Arabs are restricted at checkpoints. These actions save lives.
"Occupying" land that belongs to someone else is another matter - and a legal one. But who owns "State Land" - land that is unclaimed and uninhabited - but the State? And who is to decide? Should Israeli sovereignty be decided by the UN, the EU or Swiss bureaucrats at the International Committee of the Red Cross who call Jewish presence in Yesha "illegal?"
"Moralists" of the Left draw the line in 1967, but from the Arab perspective the "Nakba" (catastrophe) was not in 1967; it was in 1948. The so-called Arab refugees come from that failed attempt at genocide. Using that criterion of "occupation," the establishment of the State of Israel itself was "immoral."
What frightens the Left is the possibility that Jews did "steal Arab lands," that Israel does discriminate against Arabs, that Israel is responsible for Palestinian terrorism, that Zionism is racism. So they blame "the settlers;" it's convenient and diverts attention from their 'original sin.'
In order to justify Israeli "occupation of Arab land" in 1948, the Left would sacrifice Jews who "occupied Arab land" since 1967.
This explains why the Left clings so desperately and tenaciously to a "peace process" whether one is possible, or not. Any agreement or move which leads to a Palestinian state vindicates what happened in Israel's War of Independence, legitimizes our existence and frees us from the burden of responsibility for Arab refugees.
Giving up Yesha means no longer having to say "I'm sorry." No need to defend the Jews' moral, legal and historical rights to live in Yesha, or anywhere else. If Palestinians can be convinced or forced to accept a state in Yesha, we're off the hook. For the Left, a Palestinian state is doing tshuvah.
Then, they hope, Israel will be accepted by the world, even by its enemies!
When I have asked Leftist friends and colleagues to accompany me to Yesha to see for themselves what is going on - for good and bad, they refuse on principle. They consider it immoral to visit these areas - except to demonstrate with Peace Now and Palestinians against Jews -- because it implies support for Israeli "occupation."
Yet, these same people visit other countries that endorse anti-Semitism, that oppress minorities and women, that "occupy," persecute and murder anyone they don't like. Moreover, they seem unconcerned about the corruption and terrorism rampant under the Palestinian Authority. "Not my problem," they say. But it is; Israel created and sustains the PA.
By using "morality" selectively to justify their antagonism toward Jews who live across the border of 1949 -- most of whom are religious -- the Left ignores the humanitarian issues of Jews whose homes will be destroyed. Oblivious to the consequences of unilateral withdrawal -- primarily Israel's security in the face of ongoing terrorism -- the Left claims a moral "high ground."
If Israel has no right to rule in Yesha, it has no right to rule over Israeli Arabs, or land and property claimed by Arab "refugees." In fact, the Left undermines the integrity of the State itself. If the Left is correct, than Zionism is wrong.
To make common cause with the weaker, the underdog can be an admirable quality. But to assist directly and indirectly those who would create murder and mayhem has no moral justification.
The Left's most dangerous message is that -- despite success in our on-going war with Palestinian terrorism -- we not only cannot win, but we should not win. That is moral depravity.
Views expressed by the author do not
necessarily reflect those of israelinsider.
 
|
|
|
|
Click on the blue headline to read a Talkback comment and respond to it. Click on the  icon to send a private email to the talkback writer. The icon appears only if the writer has decided to be contacted. If no popup window appears, please make sure your popup blocker allows israelinsider.com.
|
|
| |
|
|
