Monday, February 17, 2014
From Ian:
Gerald M. Steinberg: Oxfam’s Middle East blinders
Gerald M. Steinberg: Oxfam’s Middle East blinders
Oxfam also distorts economic analyses of the West Bank and Gaza, repeatedly arguing that that the sole impediment to Palestinian development is Israeli policy, ignoring intra-Palestinian limitations and factors, as well as immoral mass-terror attacks. Similarly, Oxfam uses its power and access to lobby the European Union to sanction Israel. In 2009, four years after the last Israelis left Gaza, Oxfam International’s director, Jeremy Hobbs, demonized the Jewish state for creating “the world’s largest prison” and erasing geography (Gaza shares a border with Egypt), and blamed it for Hamas’ policy of diverting humanitarian resources to fund terrorism.Responding to the J Street Challenge
For all of these reasons, the criticism of Oxfam’s role in the anti-Israel boycott industry is clearly justified. An organization based on promoting moral principles cannot support and enable one-sided boycotts and double standards that demonize and single out Israel. To go beyond the rhetoric of “reducing poverty and addressing injustice,” and put these words into action, Oxfam must end its involvement in all forms of demonization, and win back Scarlett Johansson’s heart.
This reality is implicitly acknowledged in “The J Street Challenge,” a critical documentary film about the organization that has just been released by Americans for Peace and Tolerance, a Boston-based group run by the well-known anti-slavery activist Charles Jacobs. And it is a reality that, Jacobs and his co-producers insist, needs to be grappled with through honest debate and discussion.Orthodox Jew? Hate Israel? The New York Times Wants To Interview You
The key question raised by the film is what it means to be “pro-Israel” not on a personal level, but within the context of the political lobbying and advocacy that swirls around American policy towards the Israeli-Palestinian conflict (or, as Harvard Professor Ruth Wisse more accurately terms it in her interview in the film, “the Arab conflict with Israel”). And when you examine J Street’s record, it becomes very hard to dispute Professor Alan Dershowitz’s assertion that the organization—despite its much-vaunted tagline—is “neither pro-Israel nor pro-peace.” Trailer
In “A Conflict of Faith: Devoted to Jewish Observance, but at Odds With Israel,” the New York Times wants to disabuse readers of the minority-antiZionist-380x252notion that observant Jews are all pro-Israel. So they highlight four who oppose not only Israel’s policies, but even favor the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) campaign.Why Anti-Zionist Jews Are a Minority
Of course, the article does reference the fact that their views are at odds with family and friends. But it begs the question: Why would the New York Times publish a feature piece — in the “beliefs” section no less — about people whose views are in an extreme minority?
What the overwhelming majority of Jews know that these five people and their adoring audience at the Times don’t is that opposition to Israel’s existence—as opposed to criticism of it—is taking a stand against the right of the Jewish people to life. While there is a portion of the ultra-Orthodox community that also holds to anti-Zionism because of their own bizarre interpretation of Judaism (which strangely goes unmentioned in the article), non-Haredim who do so are fighting common sense, history, and the basic principles of fairness. If those who adopt such positions are a minority, it is not due to any resistance on the part of the majority to ethics or concern for others but because of the implausibility of their beliefs. (h/t NormanF)
