In an impassioned piece by Amitai Etzioni posted on the TPM Cafe, Etzioni gives an emotionally powerful statement and says he is
stunned at the blind hatred Israel evokes, not only by the same dark forces that mean to do in all of Western civilization, the United States first, but by the numerous Europeans, and those on the American left, including some Jews who draw on their academic credentials (e.g., in linguistics) to write tirades about their own in such extreme terms it makes the paper blush' and their ancestors turn in their graves like cement mixers.
Etzioni's indictment of the left requires a reply and I would like to try and provide one after the fold.
One might start a response to Etzioni by questioning his assumption that there is a blind hatred of Israel by those on the left. But it would be better to first acknowledge Etzioni's deep connection to Israel. How many of us have given as much of ourselves as Etzioni in the service of a deeply held ideal? Many of the fundamental values embodied in Israel are core values for liberals of every nation in every time. So, let me start by acknowledging Etzioni's committment to Israel and assure him that I and many others on the left stand shoulder to shoulder with him in support of the fundamental principles of social justice, democracy and human rights.
But now I must also say that Etzioni's indictment of leftists and Jews "who write tirades about their own" is deeply disturbing. I believe that at the core of any idea of social justice is the axiom that one's allegience isn't "to one's own" but rather to the principles of equality, justice, democracy and human rights. I would ask Etzioni to grant that many of those who criticize Israel do so from the starting point of principle and not from either allegience or antipathy towards Jews. I am disturbed that Etzioni associates those who argue against Israel's strategy on principle with those whose only principle is anti-semitism.
Etzioni also argues that most Israelis would
give their right arm and then some to have a real peace with their neighboring countries, to play a key role in promoting mutually beneficial economic ties by sharing the technical knowledge and higher education that make for high-tech economics and expected trade, and to work with progressive groups to advance democratic and human rights in the region and elsewhere. Sadly, these opportunities are missed, even by the nations that have a peace treaty with Israel.
Israel has sent literally hundreds of delegations of physicians, nurses, scientists, educators, agricultural experts, and members of many other professions and occupations to Egypt to try to build bridges and mutually beneficial arrangements. Practically all of these gestures of goodwill have been spurned by the Egyptians and they almost never reciprocate by sending their people to visit Israel. Similarly, tourism has been almost completely monodirectional, with Israelis streaming to Egypt and very few traveling the other way. This is a very cold and sad peace.
As one without Etzioni's close emotional attachment to Israel I find it natural to ask what might explain the asymmetrical approach to peace that Etzioni describes so accurately. Why aren't the Egyptians, for example, grateful to Israel for all it has done for them, for all it could offer them? I think the answer is that the "cold peace" that has been negotiated is one that rests not on mutual interests but rather on a gross disparity of power. As such it is necessarily a peace that is resented by the powerless and it is an arrangement that is unstable in the face of technological changes that alter the balance. At root, my explantion for the resentment is that the Arabs simply do not feel that the "peace" is just.
Finally, Etzioni concludes his plea with a lament about fundamentalist Muslims. He claims it is impossible to make peace with such people because, evidently, they wish only to oppress women, severely punish minor transgressions, deal with all non-believers as if they were dog-meat etc. This final paragraph produces great anquish for me. If one were to change the target of the paragraph to fundamentalist christians, or Jews, or liberals or any other group nobody would have a second's hesitation but to call this the worst kind of stereotyping. I can no more accept such a characterization of Arabs than I could accept a similar characterization Jews, Christians, Germans, Chinese etc. I think liberals of all stripes have an obligation to call out Etzioni on this and ask him to reconsider his characterization, to ask him if it is not more the product of emotional anguish than rational assessment.
All of us, critic and friend of Israel, must start with a respect for the underlying emotional attachment Etzioni has for Israel. We must understand that Israel is not some abstraction but a place, a home to millions who, like Etzioni, have friends, family, history and tradition. When Etzioni writes that undermining Israel will not appease terrorists and will only "add untold anguish to people whose history of suffering is already quite overextended, and to my personal suffering" any of us who would criticize Israel should pause before carrying on. What, really, do our abstract principles of justice, human rights and democracy have to do with the reality of one's family, friends and identity seemingly facing mortal peril?
But at the end of the day, for me and, I suspect for many of us on the left, the only way to diminish the mortal peril that terrorism and extremism present to everyone is to stand firmly with the principles of justice, equality, democracy and human rights. We must stand with our conviction that those principles must be applied not only for our friends and family, for our group and nation, but for all people and all nations. If I am critical of Israel it is only because I believe the Israeli government is in violation of these basic principles. To ask for an Israel that is constituted on the basis of equal treatment and equal rights for all it's citizens and for just treatment of all in the region is not to ask for Israel's destruction. Rather it is the only path that I can see that does not lead to utter destruction for the entire region including Israel.
