In yet another “why young American Jews don’t support Israel” piece, this one in Time magazine, Dana Goldstein describes her ’emotional’ conflict with her mother:
I understand the frustrations of the Palestinians who are dealing with ongoing Israeli settlement construction and sympathize with their decision to approach the U.N., but my mom supports President Obama’s promise to wield the U.S. veto, sharing his view that a two-state solution can be achieved only through negotiations with Israel.
She doesn’t talk much about why her mother would like to see Obama veto the Palestinian resolution, but like most young people she probably doesn’t listen carefully to her parents.
I would think that her mother, who is said to have a degree in Jewish History, understands that Israel is looking for an agreement that will end the conflict. It is not interested in giving Fatah and Hamas a better diplomatic and military platform to fight from. So it insists on recognition of Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people and security arrangements, and will never agree to the absurd demand to resettle ‘refugees’ in Israel.
Maybe she also understands the Palestinian strategy, which is simple:
- Demand the platform that they want from the UN.
- Then President Obama, caught between a rock and a hard place, will pressure Israel to make concessions in order to ‘restart negotiations’ and obviate the need for a UN Security Council vote.
They can’t lose. They can repeat the cycle, with slight variations, over and over. Each time, Israel gives a little. Ultimately, they get the platform they want without the recognition and security arrangements Israel needs.
Dana Goldstein doesn’t even give lip service to Israeli concerns. She refers to the “security” fence — the quotes suggesting that is not for security — and says that it “tamped down terrorist attacks but also separated Palestinian villagers from their land and water supply.” Even given that in some places it was a real problem for Palestinians, isn’t tamping down terrorism important? Does she have any idea of what terrorism means for Israelis?
She says that she “understand[s] the frustrations” of the Palestinians, but she never seems to empathize with the real concern of the Israelis, that if the Palestinian program is carried out it will be the end of the Jewish state.
Goldstein focuses only on the Palestinians. She doesn’t mention the missile threat from Hizballah, the nuclear one from Iran, or the emerging one of Turkey and Egypt becoming confrontation states. None of these are a result of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and in fact they are arguments that this is a very bad time for concessions that would weaken Israel’s strategic position.
How did she come to feel this way?
It was only after I went to college, met Muslim friends and enrolled in a Middle Eastern history and politics course that I was challenged to reconcile my liberal, humanist worldview with the fact that the Jewish state of which I was so proud was occupying the land of 4.4 million stateless Palestinians, many of them refugees displaced by Israel’s creation.
In other words, she rejected her mother’s point of view in favor of a laughably ignorant and entirely one-sided one that she heard from the mouths of anti-Israel Muslims and left-wing academics. Surely her mother could have explained to her from a historical and legal point of view whose land it is, and whose fault it is that there are 4.4 million stateless Arabs on the permanent international dole.
She admits that Orthodox Jews are an exception to the generation gap that she describes, but she doesn’t quote any of them or seem to have an interest in why they support Israel. She does quote an 18-year old who proudly remarked that heckling Israeli PM Netanyahu helped her “reclaim her own Judaism.”
I want to avoid pop psychology here, but one wants to say: listen to your mother, girl!
***
The entire piece is facile, a collection of sophomoric anti-Israel clichés. Why did Time publish it?
The answer lies in the quotation at the beginning of this post. I’ll quote it again, with emphasis:
I understand the frustrations of the Palestinians who are dealing with ongoing Israeli settlement construction and sympathize with their decision to approach the U.N., but my mom supports President Obama’s promise to wield the U.S. veto, sharing his view that a two-state solution can be achieved only through negotiations with Israel.
So that’s the false dilemma they present: support the Palestinians, or support Obama’s efforts to pressure Israel. Make up your mind — just don’t support Israel.
‘Time’ has been anti- Israel for so long as I can remember. This particular useful idiot is unimportant, though who knows this may be her first step toward a stellar media career. I think the right word for both ‘Time’ and this ‘girl’ is used by you in this piece, i.e. Superficiality.