Replacing old myths with new ones

I will let my few readers here on a little secret - "myth-busting" is one of the most cherished and sought-after prizes among would-be and actual historians. Alongside lifetime prizes and collegial respect, nothing makes our mouth water more than the prospect of making a conference presentation or writing an article - stating that everything historians believed up until now is baloney - and watch them squirm.

It goes without saying that I have nothing against "myth-busting" efforts per say. "Myth-busters", however, must be very knowledgeable people - they must know what they are talking about. Otherwise, instead of squirming, the prospective buster will be laughed out of the room as an ignoramus and never heard from again.

It is with some regret and much satisfaction that I must place the recent "Hannukah Myth-Buster" written in Slate, for the most part, in the latter category. Although a number of facts presented in this openly anti-Zionist piece are correct, the article overall contains factual holes large enough to drive a train through, or even an Hellenic army. The fact that I can say this even though my specialty is the Modern Period makes Ponet's effort even more laughable (The fact that he is the Jewish chaplain for Yale is disturbing). While I invite others more knowledgeable to punch more holes, I will point out some of the main problems:

• Ponet makes no mention of other sources such as Josephus, who is our only source for the period post-Shimon.
• Ponet neglects to mention that of all the ethnic groups that were in Hellensitic Palestine - only two have survived - the Jews, and a small sect of Samaritans. Everyone else, the Edomites, the yeturim and the Nabateans, all disappeared. This does not bode well for the "it's possible to survive and maintain one's identity under foreign rule" thesis.
• Ponet "conveniently" forgets that the decrees by Antiouchus Epiphanes - attested to in the Macabees books - may very well have been recommended by said Hellenic Jews (Bickerman's argument).
• The fact - attested to by archaeology - that almost all of Eretz Israel aside from Samaria became Jewish under the Hasmoneans is forgotten. Before that we were geographically confined to the Jerusalem-Lydda area and likely would have suffered the fate of the Edomites.
• The "civil war" between the Perushim and the Zedukim during the Hasmonean and Roman periods (as opposed to the hellenists) is well documented in Jewish sources.
• The claim that the "Maccabean dream" was the main reason for the Great revolt and the Bar Kokhba revolt (as opposed to, I don't know, say Roman oppression, ethnic conflict between Jews and non-Jews, social conflict between the elite and the dispossessed, the establishment of the destroyed Jerusalem as Aelia Capitolina etc) is a load of BS.
• As for whether an ethnic group needs a nation-state, in light of the ever-shrinking Jewish population in the diaspora, my answer would be an emphatic yes.

  So remember - "myth-busting" is only for those who have a command of history - AIWAC

Tidbits - Misc.

• Yeesh, what a grouch.
• I always though the Romans had something to do with it...

To Love the Nothing

I recently watched a movie called Closer, which details the rotten moral world inhabited by four characters - two male, and two female. The film can best be described as utterly heartless, even cheerfully so. The characters are blunt in their statements about their infidelities and feelings, and 'humanity' or morality is a currency that has no value.

Several years ago, I read Lord of the Flies as part of the required reading for the literature bagrut. That work, although it ultimately described the victory of animalistic and immoral tendencies over humanity, was meant more as a warning about the dangers of this happening to us if we are not careful. Closer, by contrast, is a celebration of its own moral vaccousness. It is but a symptom of a broader tendency in the Western world to celebrate the nothing, to praise the id. What was once called "criticism" is often not meant to help change things for the better but rather to bask in the putrid state it claims society is currently in. It makes me sick to my stomach that we've come to this. This is the civilization that brought democracy, human rights and mutual tolerance?

The same reasons that made me resist the message of Lord of the Flies make me feel disgusted by this movie. Humankind has shown itself capable not only of horrible things, but also great ones. Contrary to the director's narcissistic view, many of the people I've "bumped into" over the years have been quite decent folk. Not saints, to be sure, but certainly not the bastards described in this movie. We are taught in Judaism that we have a good inclination alongside the evil one. To look only at bad deeds and people, but to ignore the good ones, is no less of a deception than to do the opposite.

Some of you may very well want to walk down that road of self-negation. To those of you who decide to do so, I bid you farewell - I will have no part in it. AIWAC

The Definition of Progress

Seen in the Efrat Pharmacy:

"Doctor, I have an earache"

2000 BC: "Eat this root"

1000 AD: "Roots are for unbelievers. Pray for your health"

1850 AD: "Prayer is silly superstition. Take this pill"

1940 AD: "The pill's no good, drink this liquid"

1985 AD: "The liquid's no good, take this antibiotic"

2000 AD: "Antibiotics are artifical, eat this root"

Tidbits - Academic

• Prof. Sam Lehman-Wilzig, Head of the PoliSci department at Bar-Ilan, writes a .pdf-blog, where he discusses various issues regarding Israeli academia (in Hebrew). His latest post is a discussion of a sad fact - in the land of Hebrew, only publications in English are considered worthwhile.
• The new Azure is out, with an essay by David Hazony on the sad state of Israeli education today, including universities, and an interesting piece on the concept of borders and sovereignty in Zionist thought (free reg. required).
• Israel Affairs has also come out with an issue dedicated to Israel and Islam. (Sadly, Israel Affairs is a perfect example of what Wilzig laments - that is, an excellent, informative, scholarly journal about trends in Israel that is only available in English, which no-one here will willingly read).

An Israeli Shabbes

Israel is a hectic place. Political and economic problems are ever-present in print and visual media, as well as discussions between people here. Too often, the obsession with everyday problems spills into Shabbat, and the atmosphere of the day is punctured with heated debates about Sharon, the economy, the elections and what not.

For many years, I too would read the Friday newspapers for much of Shabbat. Then, slowly but surely, I came to the realization that it just wasn't worth it. The newspapers rarely had anything interesting, and the news was usually depressing and made me feel miserable. So, for the past few months, I have forced myself into a change of habit - I read the papers early on Friday, and either completely avoid or minimize my newspaper reading on Shabbat.

I can not begin to describe how much more pleasurable Shabbat has become for me since I made that change. For me, Shabbat is now more than just a day where I don't watch TV and talk on the phone. Suddenly, the Day of Rest really is a day unconnected to the world and its insanities, including the Israeli ones.

So I wish you all a Shabbat Shalom, and hope that we will all be able to truly appreciate Shabbat for what it is. The problems of the world and the Jewish people can surely stand to take a break for one day in the week.

History and Propaganda

Professor Yoav Gelber's indispensable history of the Israeli War of Independence (otherwise known as the 1948 War) is now available in paperback. I highly recommend reading the appendices, available online, which compare what actually happened at Deir Yassin and Tantura, with the version present in Palestinian propaganda.

Enjoy,

AIWAC

The Land Before Time

"...Nostalgia is the longing for what never was" - Sir Harold Evans, The American Century

Once upon a time, not too long ago, there was a state called Israel. It was a veritable paradise, with a booming economy, an egalitarian society and a unified nation. There were few terrorist casualties, and the border was rather quiet. Then came the stunning victories of the Six-Day War, and the country began going downhill. Capitalism, settlements, militarism, occupation, and religious fanaticism are but some of the results that came of this disasterous victory. The NRP dared to turn from a MAPAI lapdog to a party with a will of its own (albeit the wrong one, IMHO), the fascists took over (Likud) and the state became ostracized. Worse, the Jewish populace itself began to split into various factions, creating the chaos we see today.

If you believe the above description, then I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you, real cheap. I will leave it to others to punch holes in the historical innacuracies in the above narrative. Indeed, I would not have bothered mentioning it if this were not the position of many on the left, from the lunatic-fringe (scroll down to Oren's letter on Judt) to the old-guard Zionists.

I can't shake the feeling that the cry "back to the " '67 lines" means a lot more than just a position on the state's final borders. It represents a desire to turn back the clock and reverse the events and trends in Israeli society that have taken place since the Six Day War. How else can one explain Elazar Stern's desire to create a Ben-Gurion style IDF, Sharon's desire to actually become the next Ben-Gurion and the obsession with the Galilee and the Negev? More to the point, are so many people so deluded that they think that even a return to the Green Line will instantly solve all problems, like some magic wand? Do they really think they can turn back time?

Comments would be greatly appreciated. AIWAC

On False Symmetry and non-Jewish Jews

Leon Weiseltier has a devastating critique of Speilberg's Munich, as well as it's writer Tony Kushner, in the New Republic (free registration required). The pathology of people like Kushner never ceases to amaze me.

Life in an Israeli University

• Your average classroom will contain 25% knowledgable, active participants, 65% stenographers, and 10% who don't show up.
• The most common questions in the classroom are: "Could you repeat that again?" and "What will/Will this be on the test?
• Everything - from grades to attendance requirements - is open to negotiation.
• Things you will never hear a student say in an Israeli University: "What? Only English and Hebrew? I want Latin, Ancient Greek, and Russian!", "Sir, I think the grade you gave me was too high", "Only 25 pages? That's only enough for my introduction!"
• Skills acquired in an Israeli classroom: knitting kippas, staring in space, and handwritten stenography.
• Tests are better than papers when you have to write papers. Papers are better than tests when you have to take tests.
• "Liberal Arts" does not exist here. Consequently, many university graduates are educated ignoramuses.
• Don't bother sucking up to the teacher - tests are graded blind.

Beneath Contempt

This article needs no introduction. I can only hope that Finkielkraut will make it through this. (Hat Tip: Azure)

Countdown to Eviction

I don't think there's anything left to say. Welcome to "Hitnatkut - the Sequel", with hundreds of thousands people being evicted instead of 8,000. I'm sure all our left wing folks will have a field day. Somehow I don't feel like writing anymore. AIWAC

Damn It, Not Again

Another mass murder has taken place in Netanya. I hope there's a nice place in hell set aside for the murderer. My prayers are with the families of those killed. Shelo Neyda Od Tza'ar.

Muslim Period Conference Report

[Disclaimer: Once again, I am reporting on a subject about which I know comparatively little. The opinions of the various scholars are their own. Please do not shoot the messenger. Thank you - AIWAC]

Well, I must say that the conference was not a total disaster. Most of the lecturers remained within their alloted time frame (more or less), and many of the presentations were quite enlightening. Some people even remembered to tell jokes and keep the audience (including yours truly) awake. Below are some some of the highlights:

As mentioned before, this subject of this conference was Israel during the First Muslim Period, from the Muslim conquests in the 7th century until the Crusades (late 11th century), although most of the lectures covered only the Muslim Conquests and the Ummayad Period. The subject of the reliability of the Muslim historiography of the conquests was a particularly contentious subject. Prof. Amiqam Elad and a master student of his (forgot his name) argued that it was possible to unearth historical facts and events from the Muslim sources through a critical reading thereof. They claimed that although the Muslim sources we now have were written a century or two after the fact, this does not prevent us from discerning the earlier sources and checking their credibility (ala Josephus, for instance). Prof. Moshe Sharon, on the other hand, dropped a bombshell by claiming that the Muslim histories were a bunch of bubba mayses with kernels of truth. He compared the Muslim historical project to an alternate reality in which no documents survived from WWI, and in which the history thereof was done by interviewing some old Germans. Needless to say, this caused much consternation and discussion. [Sharon has an article plugging this line that is due to come out soon in Studia Orientalia (I think this is it). Should be interesting.]

Archaeology of the Muslim period was another theme in the conference. Prof. Yossi Patrich discussed the transition of Ceasaria from the Byzantine to the Umayyad Period. Dr. Katya Zitrin discussed the subject of roads in Israel during the Umayyad period, where she showed that the Umayyad "road project" consisted mainly of maintenance of Roman and Byzantine roads and installations, rather than the construction of new roads or milestones. Dr. Gideon Avny of the Israeli Antiquities Authority shed new light on Ramle, the city that was erected from scratch during the Umayyad period. He showed that the number of excavations being done there has grown exponentially and has contributed a great deal to our knowledge of the city.

Another theme of the conference was the life of the Dhimmi communities under Early Muslim rule. The picture that emerged was mixed. Dr. Michael Erlich showed that the historical evidence points to a general tolerance of Dhimmi religious structures, with mosques and churches/synagogues exiting side by side rather than mosques replacing churches. Dr. Avni also showed this to be the case - in Jerusalem, for instance, Christian institutions (at least until the 9th century) grew during this period, and Dr. Shimon Gath showed that there were large, mainly unmolested Dhimmi communities in Ramle, a Muslim-built city. On the other hand, another lecturer (whose name escapes me for the moment) showed that the flight of much of the population of the cities along the coast during the Muslim conquests - due both to fear of war and a Muslim policy of expelling the Dhimmi inhabitants along the coastline - lead to a collapse of these cities and a break between the Middle East and the Mediterannian (which became called 'the Byzantine (hostile) Sea'). The Christian communities were now cut off from centers in Asia Minor, and had to adjust to life under Islam.

All in all, an interesting conference. I hope that there will be a discussion of later Muslim periods (Fatimid, Mamluk etc), to see whether the picture described above changed and why.

Here Goes Nothing...

So help me, I am going tomorrow to an all-day academic conference on the effects of the "First Muslim Period" (63~-1099) on Israel from a geographical and religious point of view. At least I can take comfort in the fact that some big guns will be there - such as Moshe Sharon and Ronnie Ellenblum.

"Gentlemen, Start Your Screaming!" - Penguin to Batman, Batman Returns

On Selective Outrage

Ben-Dror Yemini blasts the hypocrites who only seem to find 'corruption' on the opposite side of the political spectrum. Ken Yirbu.

Tidbits - Academic (and Jewish) Stuff

• Ronnie Ellenblum is known for his book on Frankish settlement in Israel during the Crusader period. In it, he questioned the perception of Crusaders as alien invaders who cowered in castles and cities for protection - he showed that there was quite a bit of settlement going on in some areas. Moreover, he demonstrated that many of the castles were built in relatively safe areas, and thus can not be explained as mere fortresses. He also attacked the notion that the local population (Eastern Christian and Muslim) was uniformly hostile to the Crusaders. Now, Ellenblum is coming out with a new book on Crusader Castles, also meant to undermine simplistic notions of 'Crusaders VS everyone else' in the Middle East. Let's hope Ellenblum's second work turns out to be as thought-provoking as the first.
• The latest issue of Israel Affairs is a veritable jem, loaded with informative and interesting articles, from a discussion of 'escapist' parties in Israel (Green Leaf, anyone?) to a long critique of Israel's radical academics. Well worth a trip to the nearest university library.
• Also worth a trip is an article in the latest issue of Middle East Journal. The article is a discussion of the Lydda/Ramle controversy by Alon Kadish and Avraham Sela, two professors who wrote a book on the subject (with Arnon Golan) which was published in Hebrew in 2001. The subject itself is too long for a blog post, but suffice it to say that Kadish and Sela dispute (convincingly, IMO), Benny Morris' claim of a massacre in one of the mosques during the 12th of July, and make a strong case against the idea that the expulsion of the inhabitants of Lydda and Ramle was premeditated. Well worth the read, whatever side you're on.
• ...and finally for something Jewish, as promised. Dr. Gur Alroey, author of an excellent study of Jewish immigrants to Israel during the second aliya (all the immigrants, not just the pioneers), has recently set up a database of names of Jews who contacted various agencies in an attempt to emigrate from the 'Pale of Settlement'. In their own words:

  ...The MJMD records are base on the applications of Jewish emigrants who applied to the JCA & ITO's information bureaux which were scattered all over the Pale of Settlement in the Russian Empire in the early twentieth century...In particular, the MJMD aims to understand the causes, characteristics and patterns of the Jewish Migration in the early twentieth century. In addition, the MJMD enables, via search engine, to look for relatives who possibly migrated through the two information bureaux...The MJMD invites the public to visit us at this site.

  I highly recommend that you do so.

That's all for now, folks. AIWAC

A Victory for Decency

The mythological Captain R., who was accused of having committed "kill verification" on a 13-year old girl who was killed when she came too near an army installation, was acquitted of all charges today. Thus ends a horrifying saga in which R. was mercilessly attacked as a cold-blooded monster.

It would be nice to say that this was a one-time incident. Unfortunately, this is not the case. Put bluntly, in the court of public opinion in Israel, you are presumed guilty until proven innocent, if then. You are not entitled to any kind of presumption of innocence. Moreover, the papers will never give the kind of attention to your acquittal (buried on the back pages), that they dedicated to spreading every rumor, however unfounded, "proving" your guilt. I still remember the "Strashnov affair" which burst onto the Israeli media scene for a week during Netanyahu's reign, only to fizzle out a year later. Such behavior is a blot on the Israeli media.

I have nothing but contempt for those who jettisoned all semblence of human decency in the case of Captain R. and others. May they live to suffer but a fraction of the humiliation and disgrace caused to Captain R by their irresponsible reporting.

The Coming Historical Firestorm (and it's not about the Arabs or the Israelis)

[Disclaimer: This post is meant as a discussion of the Armenian genocide/massacres question solely as a "news" item in the historical area. I make no pretensions as to authoritative facts on the issue, as I know little on the subject of the Armenian Genocide/Massacres aside from some second-hand info. I apologize beforehand if I make any stupid mistakes - AIWAC]

Gunter Lewy, a well-respected political scientist, is no stranger to controversy. He is the author of a book on the Nazi persecution of the gypsies, where he argued that though they suffered terribly and were often massacred en masse, their suffering was not "genocide" as there was no overall intention to wipe them all out, as opposed to the Jews. Recently, he also disputed the claim that the American Indians suffered a "genocide" at the hands of European colonists, again due to the lack of intent to exterminate them.

Both works aroused heated debate. However, none are as likely to cause the "earthquake" that will likely arise from his next work - on the Armenian genocide/massacres - that will come out at the end of the month under the University of Utah Press imprint. An article of Lewy's, perhaps meant as precurser to his book, has already received an indignant and long reply from Vahakn Dadrian, one of the leading authorities on the subject (It is probably his letter that is part of the "Armenian Genocide" Correspondence in the current issue of MEQ.)

If I understand correctly, and again I'm not an expert, no one (at least no reputable historian) denies that at least hundreds of thousands of Armenians died through forced famine, thirst (both due to deportations), and massacre during the First World War. Neither does anyone deny that the Ottoman Empire ordered virtually the entire Armenian population deported from areas near Russia, the enemy of the Empire. Rather, the debate revolves around the question of whether the Turkish authorities intended to physically exterminate, rather than 'simply' deport through hardship and attending death, all or at least a large part of the Armenians living in the Ottoman Empire.

To say that this is a controversial subject is the understatement of the year. To this day, the Turkish Government refuses to acknowledge any wrongdoing whatsoever with regard to the sufferings of the Armenians during WWI, and has taken action against those who try to say otherwise. Indeed, the state of Israel has been reluctant to adress the issue because of the danger of severance of ties with Turkey, an important ally in the region. On the other side of the spectrum are contries such as France, which not only recognizes the Armenian Genocide, but where Bernard Lewis was famously found guilty of tortious damage to the Armenian community in 1995 for denying that what happenned constituted genocide.

It then follows that Lewy's book is akin to pouring gasoline on an already raging fire. Will it force a thorough debate and discussion of the facts, so we can finally know who was historically right, as much as can be done? Or will politics prevail in this horrible, unending controversy, where actual debate of the facts will take a back seat to polemics and mud-slinging? Only time will tell.

Peretz, Post-Modernism and Populism

Caroline Glick has a long, erudite piece on the darker side of the "strike-king". I hope she's wrong. In any event, I hope that Peretz will never come to power. If that happens, God help us all.

Tidbits - Appetizers

1. A new and promising-looking issue of Middle East Quarterly is starting to come online. The first available article is a compilation and rebuttal of some of Juan Cole's rantings.
2. The new Hebrew Azure is (mostly) online (free subscription required). The article on the 'strike plague' in Israel, and how to fight it, is especially relevant.

That's all for now, folks. AIWAC

The Other Side of the Coin

Ten Years. It seems like only yesterday we heard that Rabin had been shot. It is hard to describe how I felt, an intense disbelief, as though something other-worldly had just happened. I can only compare it, perhaps, to the stunned feeling I had on 9/11. A suicide bombing would have at least felt like it belonged, in some perverse way, to the natural order of things. But this? To this day, I do not understand why Amir was not executed, or shot on the spot.

Yet, as the columnists and pundits waste ink and precious time arguing pointlessly "did we learn our lesson?", and ynet waxes nostalgia over the "candle youth", I can not forget the flip side to the reaction on the part of many to Rabin's murder.

Because I remember it - it is seared in my mind no less than that day. I remember how everyone who objected to Oslo was labeled an "inciter", or at least somehow an accomplice to the murder. I remember when "We will never forgive or forget" was a slogan of the left. I remember the calls to shut down Bar Ilan, as though the entire University was somehow to blame, for being religious, or for just being a convenient target.

At my first year at BIU, I remember the dorm manager telling us in oblique language that our dorm, where Amir stayed at, may still be bugged by the GSS. I remember my father telling me about the Bar Ilan professor who answered the question "did you cry?" with "No. I was in shock", only to have the latter sentence edited out. I remember my mother, going to light a candle, telling me of a reporter who was disappointed that she did not jump with glee at the news but was saddened.

I remember, too, the widespread historical revisionism that took place. I remember the obsession with Rabin's "legacy", the near-paganic rituals that took place in his name year after year. I remember how all of a sudden, Israel under Rabin was a picture-perfect time. No suicide bombers, no "victims of peace". People remembered only the peace demonstration where Rabin was murdered, but somehow all the anti-Oslo demonstrations were forgotten, except of course those where fanatics were present, shouting "Rabin is a Traitor" and the like.

I have stated before that history must be learned in its entirety, not just what we want to know. This period is no exception.

UPDATE: Sarah Honig also touches on this issue. Amotz Asa-El challenges Rabin's legacy.

A Little Learning Is a Dangerous Thing...

George Santayana is famous for saying that those who do not learn from hstory are condemned to repeat it. To this must be added that those who have only a minimal, or superficial, knowledge of history are condemned to misunderstand, or worse, to distort it.

A sad example of this can be found on Damian Penny's excellent blog, where he brings Noam Chomsky's false claim that the worst casualty rate of a pogrom was 49. There are more examples of this belief in the Comments section of the post. The reason for this is not malice, but rather ignorance. Most people have heard of the infamous Kishinev pogrom, which indeed had a "relatively" low body count, but which made waves throughout the world. Fewer have heard of the Ukranian pogroms against the Jews in the 17th century (known as Gezerot Tach Ve'Tat among Jews), or the mass slaughter of Jews during the Russian Civil War. The death toll in both was in the tens of thousands at minimum. A good summary of the pogroms can be found here and here. (BTW, Noam Chomsky's pal, Israel Shahak, considers the Ukranian pogroms to be a progressive event. It would be nice to know Chomsky's opinion on the matter.)

Let this be a lesson - to truly know history, one must know it in its entirety, not just snippets and slogans.

The Company They Keep

Israel Shahak, recently deceased, is a name not likely to ring any bells in this country. A former professor of chemistry [!] at Hebrew U, Shahak was an off-the-wall nut who was not just a run-of-the-mill anti-Zionist, but also an anti-semite. Yes, you read correctly. Shahak, who incidentally survived Bergen-Belsen, was a Jew-hater who openly espoused anti-semitic hate propaganda, as documented by Werner Cohn.

Shahak is a nut, a fringe lunatic. Unfortunately, as Cohn has shown, Shahak has received the endorsement of a number of far-left intellectuals, names that may sound familiar - Noam Chomsky, Gore Vidal and Edward Said, thus giving his "scholarship" an undeserved legitamacy. Sadly, it seems that this list must now apparently be broadened to include that of Norman Finkelstein, who "has no doubt that what [Shahak] wrote [on Judaism] is accurate". Next time you see someone espouse these gentlemen, you might want to bring this to their attention.

Anyone who knows of others who endorse or support Shahak's "history of Judaism" are welcome to do so in the comments section. Sunlight is the best disinfectant to this kind of poison.

The Old Jewish Death Wish

Anti-Chomsky has an enlightening post slamming Eric Hobsbawm's subtly anti-Jewish (pro-assimilation) screed. Read it all, for this view has been gaining in strength in the last couple of years.

Tidbits - Good Stuff

1. The new Azure is available online (free registration required), with a host of enjoyable articles to choose from.
2. A seal from the First Temple period (not comletely dechiphered yet) was recently found in the sifting of the Har Habayit dump. Ken Yirbu.
3. BTW, if you're interested, you might want to volunteer in the sifting (contact Zahi Zweig), or at least help them continue their work with donations. Trust me, it's a memorable experience.
4. On a lighter note, I highly recommended the very entertaining, and oh so true, stories in Israelity about weather, Starbucks, and...the DREADED PETEL!!! AAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHH!!!

Shanah Tovah to every one of my readers and to Am Yisrael. She'Nikatev Ve'Nechatem Le'Chaim Tovim Ve'Shalom. AIWAC

Beneath Contempt

1. My attitude towards the "anti-disengagement" movement, as opposed to the actual settlers, has now hit an all-time low, with the following disgusting display. Something needs to be done about this extreme and vocal minority, which constantly smears our name in the eyes of the Israeli public.
2. Ha'Aretz continues to reach new depths as the "newspaper for anything not Jewish" with the following display of anti-Zionist, anti-anything book reviews. Even moderate left-wingers are starting to realize as much (see the attached letter at link).

As if we didn't have enough problems...

Our good friends at Bagatz will hand down a principled ruling on the legality of the seperation barrier tomorrow. The infamous ruling of the Hague will be taken into consideration. Forgive me if I don't expect anything but total disaster.

Enlightened Bigotry

I would find it hard to believe that any Jew can read this laundry list of acts of bigotry, especially the Magen David Adom part, without feeling both humiliation and outrage. Are we the only ones who actually have to make sacrifices in the name of "multiculturalism" or false "tolerance"?

No More Excuses

Over the past few years, extremist Israeli academics have gotten away with murder, constantly spewing outrageous anti-Israel statements and even calling for the boycott of their own institutions. Though these people represented only a small minority in their profession, they created the opposite impression, largely as a result of the failure of the vast majority of scholars to rebut their arguments, or at least make it clear that they are not representative of Israeli academia as a whole.

To be sure, things are changing now, especially with the enlistment of various Israeli academics to SPME. However, there is still much too much work to do to repair the damage done over the past five years. One way would be to "Go West" and join Dr. Ron Zweig as an Israel Studies teacher in a major university, either permanently or as part of a sabbatical. In doing so, you can give voice to the variegated, vibrant society that is Israel, instead of the "Nazi state" loksh that's being sold nowadays.

Now is not a time for excuses. Now is a time for action. AIWAC

UPDATE: Here's your chance - Yale's looking for new talent.

...and Raise it Again With Pride

David Hazony has an an excellent article on the 10th century structure -'David's Palace' - recently uncovered by Eilat Mazar (free registration required). Enjoy.

I Hang My Head in Shame

According to the following report, Israeli teachers are the least insistent on hard work. (Hat Tip: Azure)

This needs to change. Now. Any suggestions as to how to do it?

Frenchmen of the Mosaic Faith?

A while back David Pryce-Jones wrote an article in Commentary exposing the pro-Arab and often bigoted outlook of the French Foreign Ministry and government. It should therefore come as something of a surprise that the most vehement and indignant letters in the current issue of Commentary were both written by French Jews.

These letters, pathetic and laughable paeans to France, make me wonder about the anomaly that is French Jewry. It would seem that there are some members of this community that are more "French than the Frenchmen", to the degree that they would prefer France over Israel in a debate, and even agree at one point in the past that "Zionism is a dangerous utopian project". It is difficult to otherwise understand the behaviour of Charles Enderlin, also a French Jew. Efraim Kishon Z"L once said that Jews hate themselves even more than Arab terrorists. These letters would seem to prove that statement.

Tidbits

1. Commentary has a nice summary on L'Affaire Al-Doura.
2. MEQ has a pretty damning, though somewhat overstated, indictment of the CFR's Middle East Recommendations. (interestingly, there is no response by Benny Morris to Efraim Karsh's article in the Spring 2005 issue)...
3. Last but not least, My Obiter Dicta has a post on the tomb of the Rambam that is a prime demonstration of the saying "kol hamosif gore'a".

Tidbits - Well Said

1. Martin Peretz has an excellent collection of post-disengagement musings online (free registration required).
2. Ben-Dror Yemini once again plays the part of the sane one (hebrew).
3. Meyrav Wurmser hits the nail on the head.

The End of the Beginning

It's over. The disengagement has been successfully carried out, with little violence, and without the civil war predicted by some, endorsed by others. The precedent has been set.

The question is: Now what? Where do we go from here? Will we follow Condoleesa Rice and the Europeans and make a bee-line for the green line? Will we try to hold on to something? Is there even the slightest chance that this will lead to a quiet modus vivendi (forget peace)? Perhaps more importantly, where are we going as a nation, if we can be called that? Will the post-Zionist train derail, or drive us off the cliff at full speed?

My Obiter Dicta has pointed out that the most pressing issue at the moment is the care for the thousands who have been evicted. It will take time to absorb them and help them fit in. But no-one has the right any longer to duck the pressing issues at hand. We are a badly divided society, with several forces, most on the far-left, and some on the right, trying to pull us into the abyss. The fundamental issues we took for granted - Jewish identity, our right to self-determination, have been called into question.

Moreover, we can no longer delude ourselves that we can hold the entire West Bank indefinitely. We can no longer indulge in fantasies that "it won't happen" or "millions of Jews will come" or "Jordan is Palestine". We must now cut our losses and save what we can. Most importantly, we must reconnect to Israeli society. The tendency to segregate ourselves in "religious only communities", both within and beyond the Green Line must stop. Now.

I am sure that many will disagree, even vehemently, with what I have stated here. But if the disengagement has proven anything, they can no longer afford to ignore it.

Yehi Ratzon She'Yichleh Charon Apo VeNizkeh Le'Geulah Bimhera Beyamenu. AIWAC

God, Not Again

There's been another Jewish terrorist attack on Arabs, this time by the driver of workers at an industrial site. No words exist which can contain the outrage and shame I feel at hearing this incident, the second of its kind within weeks. May his memory forever be erased, as should all those who defile the land with innocent blood, and who desecrate God and use his name in vain.

My condolences to the families of those killed.

Are We Next?

I suppose this is a good a time as any to reveal the fact that I live the Gush Etzion area. That's right, I am a settler, an evil war criminal who derives pleasure from beating and killing Palestinians and uprooting olive trees (If you believe this description, there's a bridge in Brooklyn I'd like to sell you, real cheap). The reason I reveal this is because I believe that I should be expecting an eviction notice soon as well.

With the disengagement going into full swing, I can not shake the feeling that we are going to retreat all the way to the Green Line, no exceptions, just as the Europeans desire. This includes, for the uninitiated - the entire Old City, Ramat Eshkol, the Mt. Scopus part of Hebrew University, part of road no. 1 and so forth. This also means that "concensus" settlments such as Gush Etzion, Ma'aleh Edumim, will be on the chopping block as well. This Jewish population living across the Green Line is circa 400,000. Kicking them out will create a human disaster that will make the disengagement look like a cake walk.

I recently expressed this fear with an acquaintance, who told me that Gush Etzion was part of the "concensus" and thus won't be removed. To this I replied that it used to be a concensus that Jerusalem should be undivided - now it's up for grabs. Apparently, the "demographic demon" means that we must forfeit even unpopulated areas like Latrun, or areas that contain archaeological remains of supreme national importance, like Silwan/City of David.

To be sure, I lay some of the blame at our own feet - i.e. the settler community and leadership. There were many territorial compromise plans that would have allowed us to hold on to at least some of the territory gained in the Six-Day War. Then, of course the Green Line did not have the sacred value it has today, nor were people so obsessed with the Nakba narrative of the poor Palestinians. We rejected every one, insisting on holding every inch permanently, ignoring the demographics and fantasising about "millions of Jews" who will come.

Sharon may not really intend to hold the "concensus" Blocs, but we never considerd this to be an option. Recently Dan Diker has tried to argue for a return to the "defensible borders" concept in Azure (free registration required). To this I reply - too little, too late.

Nevertheless, the fact that so much of the intelligentsia and the public probably equates eveything across the Green Line as equally illegitamite - even when this is not so, as I have tried to explain - depresses me to no end. It would seem that even Jerusalem has ceased to be of much importance, and so the "Israeli" has beaten the "Jew". Ben-Gurion must be rolling around in his grave, although I'm sure many are now dancing on our grave.

Was this why we fought, was this why over 20,000 people died in the various wars? So that we could assimilate differently, if as "Israeli" or "Jew-Arab" or "Yiddisher"? Was this why we stayed alive for 2,000 years in exile, so that we could do to ourselves what even the worst of our enemies couldn't do - i.e. make the Jews de fatco disappear?

Deeply depreesed, but still hoping,

AIWAC

Interesting Reading

The first online article from the Fall issue of MEQ is a real eye-opener, making clear the intense antipathy of Europe to the Jewish state, their hatred for Ariel Sharon, and their sympathy for the Palestinians. If this article and the Table of Contents is any indication, the issue promises to be very interesting. Stay tuned.

Invitation to Fisking

Prof. Charles D. Smith, author of what is often hailed as an 'objective' history of the Israel-Palestine conflict, has recently thrown his facade to the winds with this very uninformed screed. As others are probably more informed on the subject of Islam, and its relationship to the Jews, I leave it to them to dissemble this 'expert'.

Update - 'David's Palace'

It is interesting to compare this even-handed article in the JPost on the subject with the NY Times' hatchet job (BTW, I think it is a black mark on Israeli academia that Mazar is considered a 'black sheep' for having objected to the destruction of artifacts on the Temple Mount).

I think it is important to be careful with the subject nonetheless. Prof. Reich is right - it will take much more time, including a full excavation of the building and its surroundings, as well as examination of the artifacts, before we can argue whether or not this is really the fabled palace of David.

Nevertheless, the discovery is very important. For years archaeologists have argued whether or not Jerusalem really was a capital city during the tenth century (David and Solomon's time) or simply a 'small village'. The dearth of published pottery from this period seemed to support the nay-sayers. Recently, it was proved that there WAS pottery from this period in various later houses.

The discovery of a building this extensive from the 10th century - even if it is 'only' an administrative building - gives us not only evidence of the importance of the city at the time but also an idea of where the 'nerve center' of Jerusalem was located. So champagne is called for in any event.

I Couldn't Have Said It Better Myself

Prof. Barry Rubin rips apart the NYT's disgusting attempt to pooh-pooh Dr. Eilat Mazar's important archaeological findings. It seems they haven't improved since the good old days of WWII, when the Holocaust was constantly downplayed. Well worth the read.

Finding Your Way in Israel

"...and now for something completely different" - Monty Python

Do you have trouble finding places in this country or getting proper directions? You might want to make use of the E-Map Israel service, now available in English. A real time-saver.

The Next Blood Libel

Just in time for the nine days, the PA would seem to have officialy accepted the "Arafat was poisoned" theory (Hebrew link), which is spreading across its media as we speak.

Welcome to the Twilight Zone.

Tidbits - Good News

1. The largest desalination plant in the world is now operational in Ashkelon. Now we can rest a little easier about our water supply.
2. Yad Ben Zvi has come out with an English-language album-style history of the Land of Israel, written by top scholars. Perfect as a gift or a souvenier.
3. Shai has gathered together all his "Weekend Miscellaneous Pop Culture Entry" posts in honor of its "50th anniversary". Highly recommended.
4. My Obiter Dicta's back, with some interesting insights.
5. ...and you can check out the official website of the Tell Es-Safi excavation project, where I recently spent a week as part of my degree requirements.
6. ...or check out the possible discovery of King David's palace (notice the NY Times' efforts to bend over backwards and poo-poo the whole thing).
7. ...or enjoy some of Martin Kramer's choice lectures.
8. ...and finally, a hilarious blog on Syria.

"Always look on the bright side of life" - Monty Python

Thou Shall Not Kill

I am ashamed beyond words at hearing this, and even more so at the equivocating and glorifying of his friends (How dare they call this killer one of the Aseret Harugei Malchut?). Murder is murder is murder. Period. No ifs, and or buts about it. My condolences to the families of those killed.

The Great Demography Debate

Many of you familiar with the various debates over Zionism, and "Palestine" during the late 19th and early 20th century, have probably come across the "empty land" agument. To make a long story short (and it's a VERY long, complicated issue), pro-Zionists and pro-Palestinians argue whether or not the area was sparsely or densely populated from the advent of Zionist settlement onward. By extension, they also debate what caused the great increase in the Arab population, especially during the Mandate, when it more than doubled itself in 30 years. Some of the pro-Zionists will argue that there was substantial immigration into the country during the 19th and 20th century, while pro-Palestinians will insist that the country was densely populated almost solely by locals, and grew only by natural increase.

The current consensus by top Israeli scholars is that while the country was not empty, it WAS sparsely populated during the '70s and '80s of the 19th century[1]. Moreover, this population was not evenly distributed - the main concentrations of settlement were in the hill country and nearby ports, while many of the valleys and lower areas (such as the Sharon) were relatively spare in people[2]. Moreover, while it is generally agreed that immigration played only a small part in the overall increase in the Arab population in the country, at least since the 1870s onward, there are now studies that show that immigration constituted as much as 20-25% in the population increase in areas along the coastline, i.e. the main areas of Zionist settlement.

Until now, only Prof. Moshe Brawer's study[3] (and to some extent Prof. Arnon Soffer's presentation in a 1986 conference on demography) could serve as evidence for this phenomenon. Now, in the most recent issue of Cathedra, the leading Land of Israel Studies journal, we have another study on the Arab population growth in the Sharon area, which also argues for such a proportion of immigrants in that area. It will be interesting to see further study done on this issue.

That's all for now, folks. AIWAC

[1] See for instance, Yehoshua Ben-Aryeh's articles in various issues in Cathedra on the subject.

[2] David Grossman, Ha-Uchlusiyah Ha-Aravit Ve-haMa'aHaz Hayehudi (The Arab population and the Jewish Foothold) (Hebrew), Jerusalem: Magness Press 20o4.

[3] Moshe Brawer, Immigration as a factor in the increase of the Arab village in Palestine (Hebrew), Merhavim 2 (1975), p. 72-81.

A wake up call

Out of Step Jew hits the nail on the head with this post on the necessity to revive Zionism. Let's hope someone's listening.

A Bleak Future Ahead

Here are some more reasons to be miserable during "bein hametzarim" (besides the obvious, that is):

1. The disengagement will happen. The question of how violent it will be is irrelevant. The religious community will continue to be further ostracized, while voices such as Ben-Dror Yemini, who actually believes in a JEWISH and democratic state, will continue to be drowned out by the pro-assimilatinist ("post-Zionist") crowd.
2. Norman Finkelstein's book, after having received tons of undeserved publicity no thanks to Alan Dershowitz's campaign against it, will come out next month. In all likelihood, it will receive rave reviews by the usual suspects, while those capable of debunking him will hide in their little cubbyholes.
3. Tom Segev's book on 1967, already a bestseller here, and receiving positive reviews almost across the boards, will likely come out in English soon. Only Michael Oren's book will serve as something of a counterbalance.

I could list more, but I don't have the heart for it. My only consolation is that the Jewish people have survived worse. I just wish we didn't have to want to self-destruct so much.

AIWAC

The Revival of Hebrew

One of my favorite blogs, Rishon Rishon, has a very illuminating post about the revival of the Hebrew language. He is, of course, correct that the revival itself is not just due to Eliezer Ben Yehuda, but more importantly, the successful spread of the language itself among a highly diversified group of Jews.

However, I don't think he managed to cover the whole story. While it is true that the beginning of this spread of Hebrew began with small, highly ideological units - it did not just spread because of their rise to power. Rather, two more widespread forces were at work: the Zionist movement and the Jewish educational system in "Palestine" and later the state of Israel.

The Zionist movement, and more importantly, the leadership in the Yishuv, were fiercely zealous when it came to teaching and speaking Hebrew. After the "language wars" during the 'Second Aliya' period, Hebrew became the increasingly dominant teaching language in an increasingly Zionist-dominated education network. Almost all Zionist leaders (including "Cultural Zionists") spoke Hebrew or at least advocated its teaching - at the newly-founded Hebrew university, for instance. During the Mandate, when large groups of Jews speaking diverse languages arrived here, the educational system available to Jews was almost exclusively Zionist and Hebrew-oriented. It goes without saying that Hebrew became THE language in the state of Israel, learned by generations of Olim thereafter. Thus, the adults may or may not have been successful in learning Hebrew, but their children most certainly would.

Moreover, Zionist leaders and activists worked very hard at making Hebrew the sole language used in the Yishuv, as aginst Yiddish and German. Sometimes this even went so far as to try to legally ban certain German-spoken activities within Tel Aviv, for instance. A book recently came out on the "underground" use of Yiddish in the Yishuv, though I haven't read it (I have suspicions that it's another "post-Zionist" initiative - describing a genuine reality solely to undermine Zionism).

All of this, of course, would not have been successful, if it weren't for the willingness of the Jewish Olim to have their children learn Hebrew. The Zionist movement provided the means and the ideological incentive, the Olim gave their consent. These forces, and not just the identity of the leadership, were responsible for the amazing success of the Hebrew language.

Tidbits - Archaeology, Real and Fake

1. Across the Bay, one of my favorite blogs, has a devastating critique of one of the (if not THE) main pillars of Palestinian pseudo-scientific propaganda - the equation 'Palestinians=Canaanites', as well as the 'academics' who support such statements (Khalidi, Massad, Cole etc). I've said it before and I'll say it again - if you're looking for propagandists and 'party-line' historians, look no further than folks like this.
2. Efraim Karsh comments on this sad phenomenon from a different angle in Commentary.
3. An article on a project of paramount importance - the sifting through the Temple Mount remains dumped by the Waqf. (Yours truly participated for two days) A book on the findings up until now (the project will continue next year) is planned in the coming months.
4. ...and a discussion of Lachish in honor of the publication of the full report of the most recent digs there (1973-1994).

That's it for now. AIWAC

On Narratives, Part I

An unabashedly pro-Palestinian piece of propaganda published in Ha'Aretz (Hat Tip: Israellycool), gives me the opportunity to discuss a few of the many problems which "post-modernism" has inflicted on historical study, especially of the Arab-Israel conflict. Due to length, this posting will be split up into a number of parts, each dealing with a specific problem:

The first problem has to do with the prominence "narratives" are currently given in the study of history. A legitamite method in literature and anthropology, the idea that history itself is simply a group of "narratives", none better than the next, and that there are no bona fide "facts" (or at least very few "facts"), has been festering in this field for some time. So much so, that "collective memory" and "cultural images" are now more discussed and studied than what actually happenned, when and why. Perhaps the prime example of such warped thinking is Mark LeVine's study of Jaffa, which if the promo is any indication, is more concerned with how people perceived their cities than with how things actually were.

This is not to say that perceptions of events do not have a place in the study of history. History, after all, is the study of human actions and thoughts, and these can't be understood without knowledge of the cultural background, and, yes, the "narratives" or ideas that run through various socities. We are not simply a collection of fact-collecting robots, always working according to some non-human rules regardless of where we come from. We are creatures of our surroundings, whether we reject or embrace them.

As imortant as "narratives" might be, however, their value stops at the door of the establishment of the factual record. The essential, critical part of history which examines what happenned, when and why, has no place for "narratives" or "multiple truths" or "rashomons". The fact that Israelis and Palestinians perceive the actions of Officer Hinks differently does not mean both, or even either, perception is correct. Officer Hinks may be a murderer (for killing a family in cold blood) or a hero (for killing rioters) or neither, but he can not be both. As Yoav Gelber points out in his important essay on history - either 80 or 250 people were killed at Tantura - both numbers can not be correct. History only happenned one way, and as much as Prof. Bar-On and Dr. Masalha would like to have Israelis and Palestinians listen to "each other's narrative", in many cases one, or both of the narratives will be false.

If history, especially charged history like the Arab-Israel conflict, is to remain a legitamite discipline and not a laughing stock where charlatans and story-tellers can claim equal standing with actual historians, the border seperating fact from perception or "narrative" must be clearly maintained.

Tidbits

1. The JPost has a new section called Cafe Oleh, with all sorts of interesting stuff by and for new immigrants.
2. Shai has a long, excellent post on one of the greatest Israeli bands (and my personal favorite) - Kaveret.
3. The Head Heeb recently posted a thoughtful sketch of the behavior of "post-genocidal states", including Israel, of course.
4. Avi Shlaim's The Iron Wall has come out in Hebrew. IMHO, while it might have been a "contoversial" book had it come out (in Hebrew) in the '90s, I doubt anyone will take it seriously now (except for the usual Israel-hating folk, that is).
5. Speaking of "New Historians" (an overused and out-of-date term if there ever was one), I have yet to hear of a response by Benny Morris to Efraim Karsh's review of his book. Perhaps someone reading this knows of one?

Train Disaster

A horrible accident has occured in the south - part of a pasenger train derailed after crashing into a truck. The death toll now stands at 7 and rising. Let us hope and pray for the wounded in this disaster, and our condolences to the families of those who died. She'Lo Neida Od Tza'ar.

Research Suggestions

This post's subject:

The Haredi Community in Jerusalem During the War of Independence

Very little work scholarly work has been done on the Jewish civilian population's trials during this period, and even less on the Haredi community. With the exception of an article by Yuval Frankel in Ha'Tzionut, almost all discussion of the Haredi community in Jerusalem during 1948 tends to be superficial and biased.

Part of the problem is that documentation is hard to come by - if there are organized archives of the community and its institutions, they are hard to track down. Sub-questions could include: How many military-age Haredi Jews joined the Hagnah/Palmach/Etzel/Lehi? What was the attitude of the various parties and Rabannim to the problems that came up during the war? Is there responsa on the subject? What kind of relationship existed between the population and the military (Haganah, later IDF) and the civil (Va'ad HaKehilah, later Dov Yosef) authorities?

Good Luck.

AIWAC

A Reminder

For those of you who still believe the boycott is only about the '67 "occupation", I give you the following quote of Hilary Rose, one of the founders of the boycott initiative, from an interview given in the Jerusalem Report:

"As a young woman I shared the general sentiment that Israel was a wonderful thing," Rose says in a telephone interview, in clipped English tones. "Now I believe that in a terrible sense Israel was Europe's last act of anti-Semitism. Europe's failure to deal with anti-Semitism after World War II meant they colluded with the Zionist dream to build a state on somebody else's land." (Emphasis mine)

BTW, British Jewish anti-Zionism is deep-rooted. Already in 1917, Edwin Montagu, an assimilated Jewish politician, watered down the Balfour Declaration and tried to have it rescinded. A book by Rory Miller covers the anti-Zionist movement among British Jewry in the years 1945-48 - Divided Against Zion. Although most Jews made their peace with the state after its establishment, it would seem that Jewish anti-Zionism is back in style. God help us all.

Tidbits - Historiography

1. Professor Yoav Gelber's (Haifa U) important article on the development of Israeli historiography is now online. You might want to check out his analysis of the current state of history teaching in the universities.
2. David Greenberg has an interesting 2-part article on the pitfalls of popular history.

That's all folks. AIWAC

Research Suggestions

This time round: Tell En-Nasbeh Pottery

The site of Tell En-Nasbeh is perhaps the best candidate for the title of site of Biblical Mizpah, where Shmuel Hanavi visited, and which lay on the border between the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah. Extensively excavated in the 30s, the analysis of the site was nevertheless restricted by the level of research back then, which has since improved by leaps and bounds.

Recently, Jeffrey Zorn has re-analyzed the strati (levels) of the site, showing that there were five "stages" in the development of Tell En-Nasbeh (Zorn has an impressive site dedicated to Tell En-Nasbeh, with a wide selection of sources). In effect, Zorn wrote what my teacher here called the Perush Rashi for the architectural report on the site, allowing researchers to better understand the site.

The time has long past for someone to take up the mantle and do the same for the extensive amount of pottery found at the site, which was only roughly catalogued. The documentary material exists, now someone has to take the descriptions and catalogue them accurately according to type, period, style (burnished/unburnished, painted etc) and so on.

Good Luck.

Tidbits

1. We now have our very own high school teacher-students sex scandal. Hurray.
2. Asaf Sagiv has a good, albeit long, critique of Slovaj Zizek in the most recent Techelet (Hebrew).
3. Efraim Karsh has fired the first round against Benny Morris, hitting him at his weakest point - his "transfer" thesis.

That's all for now. AIWAC

Why can't we just disappear in peace?

In other news this week, Amos Shocken has finally shown his true colors. Anyone who deluded themselves that Gideon Levy and Amira Hass were merely exceptions to a generally Zionist newspaper can now hang their heads in shame. Schoken is just as anti-Zionist, and anti-Jewish, as the rest of them.

At least one can take solace in the fact that the Maariv op-ed page, edited by Ben-Dror Yemini, dedicated its section to five op-eds rebutting Schoken's stupidity.

For Shame (Rav 'Amar and the JPost)

I'm sure you've heard by now that Rav Shlomo 'Amar, Sepharadic Chief Rabbi, will be questioned by the police on his knowledge of the beating of a young man who wooed his daughter. I can not think of anything more humiliating or degrading for Torah and Judaism.

The JPost, however, has gone too far in calling for the abolition of the rabbinate - drawing a straight line between Rav Kuk and Rav Metzger, to show how the mighty institution has fallen. In my opinion, the analogy is false - what about Rav Goren or Rav Ovadia Yosef (pre-politics)? Besides, do two poor candidates make the entire system rotten? Why is it that instead of thinking in terms of reform, people are so eager to destroy the whole building? I also suspect that the JPost's call is neither isolated nor sudden. Although their political line has veered rightwards, and is now somewhat centrist, their line on religion has always been akin to that of their sister publication, the Jerusalem Report. Put simply: anything goes. Any form of Judaism - even "Messianic Judaism ", i.e. missionaries, get the puff-piece treatment from these guys. It feels as though they have now joined up with Shinui on their secualr crusade to remove religon from public life.

Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe this post is an intemperate reaction to an intemperate op-ed written by someone who is genuinely shocked by the depths to which the Rabbinate has sunk. I doubt it, though.

Tidbits - Perfidy

• The May 2005 issue of Commentary has an excellent online article about the French, Jews, Zionism and the Arabs. The more things change...
• In the same issue is a review of a book on the New York Times' deliberate downplaying of the Holocaust.
• You might want to check out the major study of French policy towards Zionism and the State of Israel during the years 1945-49 (Hebrew).

That's All for now, folks. AIWAC

Book Recommendation

I'm currently reading a beautiful, touching book entitled "Letters to Talya". The "book" contains the full correspondence between Dov Indig, a Hesdernick from Cerem DeYavneh, and Talya, a secular teenager living on a kibbutz up north, between the years 1971-1973. For those of you who read Rav Haim Sabato's "Adjusting Sights", the character Dov, who is killed on the Golan in the Yom Kippur War, is the aforementioned Dov Indig. The extended correspondence opens up the world of both of the writers, and includes subjects both deep (religion, the Holocaust) and trivial (Bagruyot).

I have not been so touched by a book in a long time - it made me feel optimism at a time when everything seems to be reeking with cynicism. I cannot recommend it enough.

Benny Morris

It turns out I was wrong about Benny Morris' book. Those of you who read my review will know that I was curious about the fact that the book had received few reviews. Well, things are heating up now. The Journal of Palestine Studies, always on the hunt for any book which might undermine the Palestinian National Narrative, has published two articles on the subject in their latest issue, one an apparent rehash of Joel Beinin's rant in MERIP, and another a reprint of a 1959 article written by Walid Khalidi (is he a relation of Rashid?), who might be known as the father of the National Narrative (with Edward Said as is its most successful promoter).

The article by Khalidi has been reprinted because the editors think that Morris revived the claim that Arab leaders called on the Palestinians to leave. Had the editors actually read the book, they would have known that Morris makes no such claim - he merely argues that leaders DID allow for limited evacuation in a number of cases, which contributed to the general chaos. The cases he documents are clearly backed up by evidence, and I don't see how a 1959 article, can rebut that (I am also sceptical of his use of Arab sources, since most of this type of material is off-limits to most historians and thus difficult to verify). For all the hay about the Israeli Establishment VS. the "New Historians", the real unmoving establishment exists on the other side, embodied by this selfsame journal.

In any event, the real fireworks will start after Efraim Karsh's article on the book comes online in MEQ. Karsh, you will recall, wrote the most direct assault on the "New Historians", and has fought Benny Morris tooth and nail ever since. I highly doubt that Morris will take it lying down, so things should be interesting. Stay tuned.

Tidbits

• Couldn't make it to Israel this Pesach? Enjoy the next best thing, with beautiful aerial photos of choice sites throughout the country, as well as a "bird's eye" map ("Hover" section) of the Old City of Jerusalem.
• Shai, as usual, has a nice obit for Ezer Weizmann. His description of the Hametz obsession is, unfortunately, not that far off the mark even in "sane" circles.
• Quite a bit has been said about the AUT's decision to boycott my university as well as Haifa U. A correspondent of mine from Haifa says there's nothing to worry about, while others are, justifiably, up in arms. Personally, I think we should see if this "decision" has real teeth, as opposed to just blowing off hot air. Besides, as others have pointed out on the academia mail list - the less publicity given Ilan Pappe, who compensates for his mediocrity by screaming "boycott", the better.

The Blurring of Terms

Recently I came across the following paragraph coined by the AUT, which will decide on whether or not to boycott select Israeli academics and institutions tomorrow (via Jonathan Debyshire):

In addition, the AUT deplores the witch-hunting of colleagues, including AUT members, who are participating in the academic boycott of Israel. We recognise that anti-Zionism is not anti-semitism, and resolve to give all possible support to members of AUT who are unjustly accused of anti-semitism because of their political opposition to Israeli government policy. (Emphasis Mine)

For some time now, left-wingers, especially those on the lunatic fringe, have created a mental equation according to which criticism of Israel policy is anti-Zionism, and is falsely claimed to be anti-semitism. Conversely, anti-Zionism is no different from criticism of Israeli policy, and just as legitamite. Of course, many have abandoned this strange balancing act, and have simply reverted to a simple criticism=anti-zionism=anti-semitism equation (Michael Rivero, for instance). This formula has allowed "critics" of Israel to push the envelope in their "critiques", all the while claiming that there are simply "critics of Israeli policy". This equation is almost completely false, a self-deception meant to legitimize that which is reprehensible.

Let's start with the first part of the equation, namely that criticism of Israeli policy=anti-Zionism and vice versa. There are many critics of Israeli policy both here and abroad. They come in all shapes and sizes, from both the left and the right. The difference, however, between them and anti-Zionists is this: they do not deny the legitimacy of the state of Israel as a state for the Jewish nation, an expression of their self-determination. They may hate the occupation all they want - but they do not argue that Israel, at least behind the Green Line, should cease to be a Jewish state, or at least a "state of the Jews".

Anti-Zionism is exactly that - the denial from the Jewish people of the right to self-determination. The question of the borders of that state are irrelevant to that fundamental principle. Critics of "Israeli policy" criticize something that can change, that is transient, and not essential to its being. Anti-Zionists are not "critics of policy", since no policy save self-annihilation would reduce their antipathy. But what about "antizionism=antisemitism"? In my opinion, the answer is the same, allow me to explain why:

First of all, as Manfred Gerstenfeld has ably shown, pure "anti-Zionists" often use cliches and imagery (neocon cabal) that are openly antisemitic. Second, and more important, anti-Zionism is an act of political violence against the Jewish people. But, the critics will say, there were and are Jews who object to Zionism, not just Hardeim but enlightened folk. Judith Butler has resuscitated the spirit of Judah Magnes, who supported binationalism and tried, up to the very last minute, to prevent the establishment of the Jewish state.

As MS Arnouni, author of an interesting and out-of-print defense of Israel once put it - it is one thing to try and prevent the birth, once the baby is out, to kill it is murder. The same goes for the Jewish state. Before it was erected, one could, and many do, bring arguments against it. However, the Jewish state is now established, and an attempt to kill it, or dissolve it, would be to destroy the only state in the world for the Jewish nation. The fact that there are Jews that object to the state does not make it any less legitamite than any other state, some of whose citizens or fellow nationals would like to see their country disappear or vanish into some larger being. To claim then, that anti-Zionism is not anti-semitism simply because it does not threaten individual Jews, but "only" removs their right to self-determination is egregious and sophistic.

Keep this in mind the next time someone says they're "only criticizing Israeli policy".

AIWAC

Tidbits

• HNN has a nice article online about bloggers and the 1st ammendment.
• Shabtai Teveth has won the Israel Prize for his monumental multi-volume biography of Ben-Gurion (up to 1946).
• Rabbi Israel Meir Lau, also winner of the Israel Prize, has recently come out with an autobiography.
• Video Conferences Online: The SPME conference on Columbia U at Columbia U, and a major conference on the Battle of the Chinese Farm during the Yom Kippur War - specifically the one involving the Tzanhanim (paratroopers).

That's all for now, folks.

A Tour Through the Israeli Academic Bookstore. Part One: Radical Chic

I confess, I am a book-worm. Make that a book-whale. I love to read, and read about books. I check stores, and online stores, obsessively to check out if there's anything new and interesting. The following is an attempt to share some of that obsession:

One can not walk into an Israeli bookstore, certainly not an academic bookstore, and not notice the huge array of far-left and lunatic-fringe left literature on the shelves. Every week, at least one new radical booklet comes out. A series of small, radical publishers, Resling publishers foremost among them, has in the past three years or so, published scores of works meant for the true believer to reinforce his faith, and for the uninitiated to join the flock. Translations of everyone from Andrea Dworkin (RIP) to Jacques Derrida to Joseph Stalin (yes, THAT Joseph Stalin), as well as home-grown works by local radicals such as Uri Ram are readily available on the shelves. Add to this the radical works published under the auspices of the "Red Line" Series of HaKibbutz HaMeuhad, as well as Am Oved, and you have a virtual library of source material for the aspiring moonbat or idiotarian.

I'm not quite sure how to swallow this development. Does this flood have an effect on the mainstream of Israeli readers, or even academics? Or is it simply a desperate cry for attention that is ignored? Maybe someone could fill me in on this.

Baruch Dayan Emet

Naomi Shemer, Efraim Kishon, Uzi Hitman, and now Ehud Manor have all passed away. This is truly the end of a generation, one that will be sorely missed. Shai has a nice tribute to Manor on his blog.

Tidbits

1. Bill Clinton's memoir has come out in Hebrew.
2. A conference on civil society during the 1948 war, a sorely neglected subject, will take place at the Yad Ben-Zvi institute.
3. A conference on a number of books on the Levi Eshkol period will take place tomorrow - a transcript should be available online in a few months.
4. The latest issue of Middle East Quarterly has an interesting pair of articles on China and the middle east. (Personally, I'm waiting for the critiques of Wurmser and Karsh to come online).
5. Ariel Beery has posted his senior thesis online. It's definitely worth a look-see.

That's all for now, AIWAC

Speaking of Demonization...

My Obiter Dicta has an excellent post on the subject of anti-Judaism rhetoric. I couldn't have said it better myself.

Reasons for Pessimism

People close to me are beggining to despair. It feels that the 'Jewish State' is losing what is left of its Jewish character. The recent Bagatz ruling only reinforces that feeling.

Indeed, it is hard not to become depressed nowadays:

1) The fight over disengagement has turned into a bloody kulturkampf, with a blanket demonization of everyone who lives over the 'Green Line' in full swing.

2) Judaism is under fierce assault - Shinui (an anti-Jewish, not just ant-cleric, party) is leading the charge with language that had a non-Jew used it, would be accused of anti-semitism.

3) The state of my chosen field is deteriorating, with constant emphasis on 'cultural images' and glorified literary criticism (an entire issue of Israel [hebrew], a once repectable journal of history, is dedicating an entire issue to a discussion of a book by Amos Oz). Post-modernism, and all the other 'posts' are in fashion - actual historical inquiry (and, of course, god forbid it should say anything nice about Zionism) is in retreat.

4) The first signs of the 'fight over 1967' which Michael Oren predicted 5 years ago are starting to appear. The reviewer in Ha'Aretz of a book on the tense relations between the government and the army in the years leading up to the Six-Day War, came within an inch of openly saying that Israel wanted, and was responsible for, the war. I have no doubt that someone will make this argument (with footnotes, of course) openly soon. I am deeply pessimistic about the outcome of this debate.

Trying not to completely lose hope,

AIWAC