Netanyahu's Latest Propaganda Offensive

Progressive Jews Reject Netanyahu's Latest Propaganda Offensive

Editor of Tikkun, the largest circulation liberal/progressive Jewish Magazine in the world, calls Netanyahu's speech "a self-contradictory ruse which will not advance the peace process."

San Francisco, June 15, 2009

While welcoming Israel Prime Minister Netanyahu's speech at Bar Ilan University on June 14 for its willingness to re-embrace the Two State Solution that previous Israeli governments had already accepted, Rabbi Michael Lerner, editor of Tikkun magazine, the world's largest circulation liberal/progressive Jewish magazine, sharply critiqued the subtance of the speech as a "self-contradictory ruse that will not advance the peace process."

Rabbi Lerner issued the following statement:

"Prime Minister Netanyahu sounds reasonable when he says, 'I appeal to you, our Palestinian neighbors, and to the leadership of the Palestinian Authority. Let us begin peace negotiations immediately without prior conditions.' Yet a few minutes later he tells his audience that he will not meet with a Palestinian delegation that includes representatives of Hamas, though they in fact represent a significant section of the Palestinian people. What is that if not a prior condition? We at Tikkun have no sympathy for Hamas or for its acts of terror. But we also recognize that countries seeking peace must negotiate with their enemies, and to do so they cannot dictate to their enemies who can be in the enemies' negotiating team. When the US negotiated an end to the war in Vietnam it had to sit with representatives of those who were continuing at that very moment to engage in acts of terror and in killing American troops. Had we refused to do so, the U.S. would still be fighting the war in Vietnam today. So Netanyahu's speech, while appearing to be a reasonable statement of a search for peace, when read more carefully is actually a self-contradictory ruse that will not advance the peace process."

"Moreover," Rabbi Lerner continues, "once you recall that Netanyahu is an expert at endless negotiations (his mentor, former Prime Minister Shamir of the Likud party, commenting on why he agreed to negotiations with the Palestinians in Madrid in 1991, pointed out that he would be willing to sit in these negotiations for the next twenty years, and never agree to anything that would end the settlements) the apparent reasonableness of his talk decreases. Netanyahu himself was part of negotiations pressed on him by President Obama at Wye River, made commitments and agreements, and then failed to implement them. There was nothing in Netanyahu's talk on June 14, 2009, that would lead anyone familiar with this history to believe that Netanyahu has something different in mind this time.

"Meanwhile, the Occupation continues and with it the rising anger of Palestinians that pushes them to despair and hence to the embrace of Hamas' fundamentalism and its fantasy of destroying Israel. The likely outcome: there will be more terror attacks, and these attacks will be used as the excuse for abandoning or postponing the negotiations even after they've started, and nothing much will change in the daily life situation of Palestinians.

"Rejecting the U.S. insistence that 'natural growth' of West Bank settlements be ceased, ignoring the fact that the world community including the U.S. has never recognized the legitimacy of any West Bank settlements or Israel's annexation of the Arab sections of Jerusalem, Netanyahu made it clear that that his notion of security requires continued presence of the 400,000 Israeli settlers in the West Bank (and one suspects that his call for a demilitarized Palestinian state is a code for continued presence of the Israeli army in the West Bank and continued presence of roads exclusively for use of settlers on which Arabs are prohibited). His insistence that a Palestinian state not be allowed to make treaty agreements with Iran is of this same nature. What exactly does it mean to have a Palestinian state if Israel is determining its policies? Not very much.

"The Obama Administration, faced with Netanyahu's refusal to stop natural growth, should articulate a fuller picture of steps that Israel should take immediately to create a positive climate for negotiations. Those steps should include: 1. Removal of all road blocks and check points inside the West Bank. Israel has a perfect right to these road blocks at its 1967 borders, and perhaps even just before the entrance to Israeli settlements, but not on West Bank roads linking Palestinian cities and villages 2. Removal of all parts of the Israeli Wall that have been built beyond the Green line (the 1967 boundaries of the State of Israel). 3. Ending Israel's blockade of Gaza and allowing free entrance to Gaza of food, water, medical supplies, fuel and consumer goods. 4. Opening of free unrestricted travel between the West Bank and Gaza such as was promised by Israel in the Oslo Accords 5. Ending the blockade by Israeli gunboats of Gaza's access to the sea and reestablishing the right of Gazan fishing boats to fish. 6. Freeing of Palestinian prisoners who have not been granted a public trial and hence have never been convicted of any crime. Far more than stopping "natural growth" of the settlements, implementation of these steps would actually make quite a significant difference in the daily lives of Palestinians. Of course, articulating these ideas is useless unless they are backed by strong action to make it clear that U.S. military and political support depends on immediate and dramatic action on the part of Netanyahu's government, and that doesn't simply mean engaging in negotiations, but actual changes on the ground in the West Bank and Gaza.

"In turn, and without preconditions, the Palestinian Authority ought to respond to Netanyahu's demand for positive reassurances by publicly and unequivocally stating that the Palestinian people " have had enough of this conflict. We recognize the right of the Jewish People to a state its own in this Land. We will live side by side in true peace. The State of Israel is the national homeland of the Jewish People and will remain so." Many Palestinians claim that they've already agreed to this and it never seems to be heard Well, if so, it will cost Palestinians nothing to say it over and over again. Netanyahu reminded his listeners that 'The tragedies that arose from the Jewish People's helplessness show very sharply that we need a protective state'."

" Palestinians," Rabbi Lerner went on to say, "must recognize that even though Israel has immensely greater power, that the Jewish people are still suffering from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, and that we need to hear reassurances over and over again that we will not be forced to re-experience that sense of helplessness again. Conversely, the Palestinian people are also suffering from PTSD, and it is is Israel's responsibility to recognize that and speak in terms that reassure Palestinians that their needs for a homeland and for reparations for what they have suffered is taken seriously by Israel. And if not by Israel, than at least by President Obama and the U.S. Privately, Palestinians should signal that they would be willing to accept demilitarization as a condition of the creation of a Palestinian state, as long as that did not involve the presence of Israeli troops or Israeli settlers in the West Bank (directly counter to Netanyahu's claim in the June 14 speech that Israeli safety requires the continued presence there of the 400,000 settlers, plus "natural growth" of the sort he insists will continue). Demilitarization could be enforced by a U.S., Nato or some other international force. Palestinians should signal wiliness to accept this if the Palestinian state that is offered is economically and politically viable and not a set of isolated cantons.

"And this is what the U.S. can do: it can talk over the heads of the Israeli and Palestinian leadership and over the heads of the pro-right-wing Israel Lobby in the U.S. and present a full vision of what a peaceful resolution of this conflict should be. And President Obama should insist that both sides of this struggle hear the legitimacy of the other side's version of history, and both sides should approach each other in a spirit of repentance and open-hearted forgiveness. In the final analysis, it is only that which can heal the PTSD on both sides and make it possible for each side to embrace the peace that majorities on both sides deeply desire and deeply believe is impossible."

ENDS

© Scoop Media