-
Recent posts by the Israel Policy Forum are great examples of how when they are right, they are a valuable source of information, but how when they are wrong, they can really detract from productive discourse.
In a recent post about home demolitions, Stopping Home Demolitions, Securing Jerusalem's Future (Sadie Goldman, March 25, 2009), they show how they can tell stories that people need to hear. While I wish they had also spoken about how East Jerusalem has never been considered part of the "territories" and as such needs to be discussed in a different context, they still tell an important story about how more conservative politicos in Israel are still caught in the past and making dialogue between the two sides more difficult than they need to be.
And the fact that I am including this link and commending the story is a clear indication of my desire to be balanced on this issue. Many in the "pro-Israel" community would disagree with highlighting this problem. But it is a problem, it is all "legal" but it may not all be the best thing for working toward our final two-state solution.
https://israelpolicyforum.ngphost.com/analysis/stopping-home-demolitions-securing-jerusalems-future
But Michael Rosenberg's campaign against those who did not support Chas Freeman's appointment to the NIC chair is more of a problem. No commending this one.
http://israelpolicyforum.ngphost.com/blog/firestorm-freeman-withdrawal-explodes-msm
In this and previous posts, Rosenberg goes too far and plays right into the hands of those who like to believe the conspiracy of the "Jewish Lobby" exists. The age old myth that a cabal of Jews plots to control world governments, banks, and media. Now Rosenberg - along with Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer - will say that is not what they mean. They will say that their "Israel Lobby" is not the same as the "Jewish Lobby" of days gone past. What I once asked Walt in person was this ... "Because you know how others will process your work, and because you do not specify that so many Jewish organizational lobby groups do NOT agree with those you attack, aren't you leaving them open to connect the dots - especially since you go on to say that this "lobby" operates to the detriment of America, just like the old myth?"
His answer to me was simply that he did not see it like that and that he took that responsibility seriously - and specifically stated in the front of the book that he was not anti-Semitic. Well for both Rosenberg and the Walt/Mearsheimer team, I say to you again, you cannot assume that people will not believe what they have known all their lives if you are not more careful.
I have read the works of all three and in both tone and content, they are NOT careful enough and do not qualify their work. Rosenberg most recently rails with language that would make any novice or expert believe that there is a clandestine group who pressures Washington politicos for Israel - right or wrong. Well, Mr. Rosenberg, we know that organization is AIPAC and they make no bones about that. As for everyone else, well maybe they have other reasons for condemning Chas Freeman and maybe you have not represented them well and in so doing, allow others less informed to be convinced - yet one more time - of those dastardly Jews who are controlling the US government and STIFLING debate once again.
Well Mr. Rosenberg, there was plenty of debate. And if you actually look at statements made by Mr. Freeman, he wasn't just critical of Israel policies, but he didn't even seem to be at all sympathetic to them on the issue or balanced in his statements. And if he can't be diplomatic before he takes office, what is he going to be like once he gets in there. The bottom line is there was just cause for many who care about Israel to dislike the appointment - even with all of his qualifications. They simply felt someone more even handed could be found. And I know they would accept criticism of Israeli policies, but just like with every other issue in this country, you want someone who is closer to what you believe. Criticism of Israel was not in this case - and is rarely ever the issue. It is about how far that criticism goes. But to have people like you continually spout that ANY criticism of Israel is what gets you in trouble, perpetuates the very myths and stereotypes that keep our dialogue on this issue going backward instead of forward.
No comments:
Post a Comment