The Choice Is Nationalism or Human Rights

More

A few points regarding Dr. Milton Masur’s critique of our article “The Blind Alley of J Street and Liberal American Zionism“:
* Masur attributes to us the assertion that “without the uprooting of the Palestinians a Jewish state would not have arisen here.” But that quote comes not from us but from our direct quotation of a 2004 statement by Benny Morris, the pioneering historian of Israel’s birth, who is currently a defender of the actions taken. The full quote presented in our article is:

“Ben-Gurion was right. If he had not done what he did, a state would not have come into being. That has to be clear. It is impossible to evade it. Without the uprooting of the Palestinians, a Jewish state would not have arisen here.”

* Masur presents two arguments: He disputes the intentionality of the driving away of non-Jews from now-erased villages in Israel. And he also contends the population transfer wasn’t that bad of an idea.
In our research, we found Louis Brandeis was reported in November 1939 by Isadore Breslau as objecting to a planned visit to the United States by Chaim Weizmann: “He believed the whole thing was a mistake. He was afraid Weizmann would press his plan for political action, based on a future re-shuffling of populations.”
In May 1941, Weizmann told American Jewish leaders that there must be Palestinian Arab resettlement, in order for the Zionist vision to be properly realized. (Rafael Medoff, Zionism and the Arabs: An American Jewish Dilemma, 1898-1948.)
* The American Jewish Committee was briefed by the Israeli consul-general in 1953 so the AJC could propound the claim within the United States that the creation of Israel had been “a feat of colonization unique in history, which was accomplished without displacing anyone.”
In his thoughtful critique, Masur does not make that claim. However, like other decent defenders of the State of Israel, he hopes for Jewish nationhood without consequences of continued subjugation and exile of non-Jews from the land of Israel — a sort of magical thinking.
*The choice is nationalism or human rights as the guiding principle. Otherwise one is left with a contorted defense, in effect: “We knew transfer had to happen for our goals to be met, and it happened — but we didn’t intend for it to happen,” letting the inhuman doctrines of ethnic nationalism determine our future as Jews.
*The reasons that others may focus on Israel’s faults and legitimacy may be questionable, we suppose, but there is no question why Americans and Jews should speak forcefully. We are intimate participants in this drama, while Israel claims to be the nation-state of the Jewish people, and America routinely claims Israel as its “most important strategic ally” in the Middle East.

3 thoughts on “The Choice Is Nationalism or Human Rights

  1. Well, Abba and Norman. If Hitler had won the war then there wouldn’t be an Israel and your life would be better I suppose. Better luck next time

  2. In the article “The Choice is Nationalism or Human Rights,” The Solomons indicate that I mis-attributed to them a quote by Benny Morris: “…without the uprooting of the Palestinians a Jewish state would not have risen here.” I stand corrected, especially when I consider the evasiveness attributed to Jeremy Ben Ami: ” …Asked whether relations with non-Jewish Palestinians would be better now if Jewish leaders who favored creation of a non-ethnically-based state had prevailed, Ben-Ami did not respond directly.” Clearly, the Solomons imply that a non-ethnically-based state could have been created, although I previously disputed that in my critique.
    The Solomons further indicate that I dispute the intentionality of driving out the Palestinian population and that I think that population transfer wasn’t that bad of an idea. Using Gorenberg’s analysis, I concluded that the leaders of the newly formed state had made provisions for incorporating Palestinians into the state, implying that there was no intention by these leaders of driving them out, but circumstances didn’t permit that. The Israeli Jews did not speak with one voice, and some of the intentional displacement of the Palestinians came from the Irgun and LeHi (Stern Gang) who perpetrated the Deir Yassin massacre, but were rebuffed when the IDF sank the “Altelena” in a dispute over military sway.
    As to whether I think population transfer wasn’t that bad an idea, I quoted Chaim Weitzman who thought this displacement was “the lesser of two evils” under the circumstances, and certainly made some sense considering the mixed Jewish-Palestinian populations on both sides of the UN partition borders.The fact is that 150,000 Palestinians remained within Israel’s borders–they were not forcibly removed.
    I will also speak to the comment by the Solomons that hope for Jewish nationhood without consequences of continued subjugation and exile of non-Jews from the land of israel is “…a sort of magical thinking.”
    I indicated in my critique that progress had been made in bringing about citizenship rights for Israeli Palestinians, although full equality has not yet occurred. Gorenberg considers Israel (as well as The United States, Pakistan et al) to be an “ethnocracy,” meaning that subgroups are treated unequally and unfairly, not because this is the ethical thing to do, but because fairness and equality have to evolve over time in ethnocracies.
    I think that trying to make a single functioning dual ethnic state out of the West Bank, Gaza and Israel proper would be folly, and I would apply the “magical thinking” I am accused of to that concept.
    Milton Masur MD

  3. Bill, you are incorrect, Hitler’s aim was to drive Jews out of Europe, which is why the Zionists (following Herzl’s teachings, see his diary, I believe it is page 19 where he says “Anti-Semites will be our greatest friends, and Anti-Semitic Nations our greatest allies.”) This is why the Zionists collaborated with the Nazis in WWII, as their goals were the same.
    The Zionists made sure that the traditional Rabbis were killed off by the Nazis, as they had long taught that any attempt to re-establish Zion by the hands of man was a sin against the Torah.
    It is because of Hitler that the Golden Calf was erected in Palestine, without Hitler, this colonial entity would never have existed.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *