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

HELP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Is there a blogger expert in the house? Despite all my efforts, many of my posts come out screwy - even though I press enter, it bunches all the paragraphs together, it screws up the lines etc. HELP! AIWAC

Research Suggestions

I often come across subjects that I would love to research (or see someone else research), but simply don't have the time or sufficient interest (though someone else might be interested). Therefore, in the interest of science, I will, on ocassion, present subjects in my chosen field that have not been researched, or have only been researched minimally.

This post's subject: Jaffa During the Mandate

Yes, ladies and gentelman, shocking as this may sound, next to no research exists on the city of Jaffa, especially Arab Jaffa, during the period of British mandatory rule - with the sole exception of Hannah Ram's study of the Jewish community in Jaffa up until 1939. This in spite of the fact that Jaffa was the city with the largest population of Arabs, served as the center of Arab print media (newspapers), and was often the scene of political violence such as during the Arab Rebellion of 1936-9.

I arrived at this fact after having searched a number of academic databases, all of which turned up studies of Jaffa that stop at 1917. Even the database of the Institute of Palestine Studies, a pro-Palestinian outfit with academic pretensions, contains nothing. The closest thing to a study - Mark LeVine's doctorate which will come out in book form in two months - is problematic both due to its too broad scope (from the Ottoman period to the Mandate), and its use of "post-colonial" theory.

So I encourage whoever is reading this to take up the gauntlet, and fill the void that currently exists. Research questions could include: relations between Jews and Arabs in Jaffa, political activity in Jaffa, attempts to bring about the establishment of a deep water port at Jaffa, urban development, the municipality etc.

Good Luck,

AIWAC