AMI POPPER AND EQUALITY

Last week, the convicted terrorist Ami Popper was involved in a fatal car crash resulting in the deaths of his wife and child. In 1990,Popper was convicted for massacring a group of Arab workers at a roadside junction near Rishon-LeZion. Prior to murdering his victims he made sure that none of them were Jewish by checking their i.d. cards and then proceeded to gun them down in cold blood. He received a couple of life sentences for his crimes. Since being imprisoned Popper has been allowed out on short leaves from prison on countless occasions. The reaction to the tragic accident centred on whether prisoners (particularly long term ones) should be allowed to drive whilst out of prison - the contention being that their driving skills would naturally have become very rusty from being incarcerated for so long. Not surprisingly,few questioned the right of such a murderer to be allowed out on leave. Even fewer questioned the inequality between Jewish and Palestinian convicted murderers. It is impossible to imagine a Palestinian convicted murderer being released on short leave as Popper was. So what if he is a model prisoner - it is just as conceivable that Palestinian murderers are also model prisoners - does this justify them being given furloughs? For Israel to live up to its principles of equality either all prisoners should be allowed the chance of receiving leave or none at all.

GAY RIGHTS PARADE AND ARAB-JEWISH COEXISTENCE

Opposition to the proposed Gay Rights Parade in Jerusalem has put to-gether strange bed-fellows. The Ultra-Orhodox Jewish Community in Jerusalem and its Palestinian Muslim counterpart fiercely oppose the Parade taking place in Jerusalem. Both groups view the parade as an abomination of Jerusalem as a city holy to both Jew and Muslim. What is interesting is this joint co-operation in opposing the parade. It would seem that in the face of a righty or wrongly perceived "external threat" to their way of life Palestinian Muslim and Israeli Jew cannot only co-exist but can actually cooperate - and that in a city which exemplifies more than any other the bitter Israeli-Palestinian divide.

A few years back I vacationed in London during Succot and sat on a bench in Regent's Park. I happened to see two fairly large family groups strolling near each other - one group consisted of Ultra Orhodox Jews and the other of religious Muslims - both enjoying the late autumn air and playing with children and grandchildren. What struck me observing these two groups was how similar they really were - and how an ignorant stranger looking at them would probably lump them together as probably belonging to the same religious group. I would even venture to suggest that the Ultra Orthodox Jews would, at least from a dietary and dress code point of view, have felt more at home with the Muslims than they would have with me a Secular Jew.

And as for me? Well, sitting as a lawyer in a Tel Aviv Court to-day, I looked over at an Israeli Jewish lawyer having a friendly conversation with an Israeli-Arab (Palestinian) lawyer. They chatted amiacably in Hebrew for several minutes. What struck me was how much the Arab lawyer was Israeli and how the two lawyers were part of the same people (at least in the eyes of my ignorant stranger looking in). From a cultural social point of view the two lawyers have more in common with each other than they might have with many co-religionists or fellow nationals from abroad - for example with a non-hebrew speaking Jew from Alaska or with a Magreb Arab or non-Arabic speaking English Muslim respectively.

The bottom line is that it is all a bit confusing - this overly strict division of ethnic groups just does not always stand up to the reality test - and perhaps we would be better off if we sometimes let reality take its course.

ITALIAN FASHION AND ISRAELI REALITY

Last night (4.11.06), Israel's Channel Two screened a fun-type documentary entitled - let's see you instead of me. This apparently light hearted programme takes an Israeli with a specific profession and gets him to change places with a counterpart from abroad.

In last night's showing, an Italian fashion from Milan photographer exchanged places with a news photographer from Tel Aviv. The Israeli photographer went off to the glamorous world of fashion photography in Milan. He was given the envious task of photographing an exquisite young model in the arms of a less exquisite aging ex-basketball star. The photographer was given instructions by an uppity Italian magazine editor who poured scorn on the Israeli's lack of ability (in his opinion) to carry out his given task. After suffering several insults (delivered in a passive-agressive manner) the Israeli photographer decided, in despair, to show the Italian editor some of his work from back home in Israel. He proceeded to show lab top pictures of death Israeli style - grisly photographs from suicide attacks carried out by Palestinian terrorists in Israel. This ever so cultured magazine editor was suddenly confronted with another reality far removed from his beautiful insulated Milanese existence. As the Israeli photographer showed him a picture of a blood drenched corpse of a little Israeli baby , the editor clammed up and decided to break up the meeting - this despite the Israeli's tongue in cheek protest that this was only the beginning of what he had to show!.

The Italian photographer who came to Tel Aviv was a far more sympathetic character than the Editor back in Milan. He too could not come to terms with Israeli reality particularly when he went to photograph the bereaved family and friends of a fallen Israeli soldier. Brought to tears he could not bring himself to photograph the mourners. Unlike the snotty magazine editor who could not even bring himself to say something about what he saw, the Italian photographer was refreshingly honest in his admission of how hard the Israeli reality was to confront.

Last week there was debate in Israel about marketing Israel's image abroad. The term in vogue these days is "nation branding". One view has it that Israeli should focus on an Israel not related to religion or to the conflict with the Palestinians. Others feel that Israel should show the world some hard truths about the reality of life in this country - just as the Israeli photographer did in Milan and just as the Italian photographer experienced in Israel.

What was interesting about the television programme was the reaction of a European audience (albeit a specific audience of two) to a glimpse of Israeli reality. One reaction (the photographer's) was of sympathy, sadness and understanding the other was (the editor's) of distaste and revulsion. One could say that the editor was revolted because reality suddenly confronted him, knocking him down a much needed peg or two or perhaps his reaction was one of refusal to deal with the fact that Israelis (not only Palestinians) suffer and bleed. Did he clam up because his mould of stereo-type thinking regarding Israel suddenly cracked? Or perhaps simply pictures of death and suffering were just too much to deal with for a person involved with the narrow world of photographing fashion nymphs? We will never know what the editor was really feeling on being exposed to Israeli reality - what is important that the pictures caused a reaction - and causing a reaction is a start if Israel is going to put forward its position to the world in a more telling manner.

ISRAELI ARABS - SOME SUGGESTIONS

It is difficult to deny that Israeli Arabs suffer unofficial discrimination in Israel. Such discrimination requires attention and even affirmative action. For example, the number of Israeli Arabs employed in the public sector (languishing at around 6%) should be more or less relative to their proportion of the general population. However the need to counter and amend such discrimination does not diminish the need for Israeli Arabs to take a serious look at themselves in the mirror and decide where their loyalties lie: as Israeli citizens loyal to the State or to its enemies.

It is totally unacceptable when Israeli Arab members of Knesset engage in activities or make political utterances which show a fundamental disloyalty to Israel. Praising the Hizballah in the recent Lebanese Conflict,visiting Syria and expressing support for President Assad,advocating the kidnapping of Israeli soldiers by Palestinian terrorists andcomparing the Israeli Army and Police to Nazis exemplifies how Arab Knesset members exploit their democratic rights (including the freedom of expression) in order to undermine (and ultimately) topple the Jewish State.

Living in a democratic state implicitly means that a citizen has rights and obligations and not rights alone. A citizen's basic obligation is his loyalty to the state whose citizenship he holds. Imagine how Americans would view Congressmen who dared to side with America's enemies or how Englishmen would view Parliamentarians who advocated the killing of British soldiers. Such people would quite rightly be tried for treason.

Israeli Arabs need to be fully integrated into Israeli Society. I would advocate them even being obliged to do national service. Their footballers would be obliged to sing the Israeli anthem when playing for the national team. In short they should (like all citizens) be obligated to be and to act loyally to Israel and not to its enemies.


Parallel to a firm commitment by Israeli Arabs to fully integrate into Israeli society, Israel as a state should respond by positively dealing with the very real discrimination suffered by Israel's Arab citizens.

DEMOGRAPHICS - ANOTHER OPTION

Israel's demographic predicament vis-a-vis the Palestinians has come to the fore in recent years. Between the River Jordan and the Mediterranean Sea there are approximately nine million people - five million Jews and four million Palestinians. Whilst some dispute the accuracy of the above figures (for example Caroline Glick of the Jerusalem Post) my premise is that they are more or less accurate. Were Israel to retain all of the above-mentioned territory it would in time cease de-facto to be a Jewish State. The problem would be compounded if the Palestinians were to call Israel's bluff by demanding that Israel annex Judea, Samaria and Gaza to Israel and then insisting on their right to vote for the Knesset. Israel as a democracy would be unable to resist such a demand by the Palestinians for universal suffrage and the way for the demise of Israel as a Jewish State would be paved.

So what then are the alternatives?

1. Extreme right wingers (such as the Moledet Party, Michael Kleiner and lately Effi Eitam) have long advocated some form of expulsion of Palestinians from all of the Land of Israel.Such a solution would obviously be both undemocratic and immoral apart from the fact that Israel would become a pariah state in the world. Therefore expulsion is quite evidently not a feasible solution to the demographic problem.

2. In the last election campaign, Avigdor Lieberman's Israel Beitanu Party advocated a land swap whereby parts of pre 1967 Israel (such as the Wadi Ara area) containing a large number of Israeli Arabs would be given over to the Palestinian Authority in return for large settlement blocks in Judea and Samaria being annexed to Israel.This idea does not entail expelling Palestinians from the land but rather an attempt to repartition the land of Israel according to where large Jewish and Arab population centres are respectively situated (wherever practical). Unfortunately the plan suffers two main faults: (1) If Arabs living on land slated to be given over to the Palestinian Authority decided to move to another part of Israel then the result would be that territory without an Arab population would needlessly be given to the Palestinians and the demographic problem would remain. (2) In light of the recent Lebanon War and the shelling of Israeli towns giving up land would further put Israeli towns under missile threat - this time from land given to the Palestinians.



3. A different solution to the demographic dilemma was proposed by the Kadima Party's election mandate which called for the setting of Israel's permanent borders in a way that would ensure a stable Jewish majority. Failing a negotiated settlement with the Palestinians, Kadima proposed a unilateral withdrawal (or realignment) from parts of Judea and Samaria leaving the large settlement blocks in place. Since the Lebanon War the realignment plan has been shelved - thus putting the demographic issue on the back-burner.


4. Another solution to the demographic problem is increased immigration. Whilst many vainly wait for a mass immigration of Jews from the West (particularly from the United States), the fact is that such a mass immigration is unlikely to occur. There is however as yet a large untapped source for immigration to Israel. I am referring to hundreds of thousands of people particularity from the former USSR who have a link (even a distant one) to Judaism and the Jewish people. These are people that are not Jewish by Jewish Law but do have a grandparent or even great grandparent who was Jewish. Their main reason for immigrating to Israel would be for economic self-betterment. Once such people arrived here their children and grand children would gradually be absorbed by the dominant Israeli-Jewish culture paving their way for an ultimate total absorption as Israeli Jews. Jewish Orthodoxy would then face a challenge of either having to provide relatively simple conversion procedures enmasse for such people or to accept the fact that Israel will ultimately have two Jewish populations - one in the strict Jewish Law sense of the word and the other in the National - Cultural secular sense of the word (something akin to what it has to-day). In any event the end result would be the possibility of a huge immigration of people with a link (albeit flimsy but nevertheless still a link) to the Jewish people. I would even propose going as far as to search the elsewhere (such as in Latin America, Spain and Portugal) for thousands of people who may have such a remote link to their Jewish past. If such people could be encouraged to immigrate (in search of a better economic future) to Israel this would change the demographic tables distinctly in favor of Israel's Jewish Population and would go a substantial way to solving the demographic threat to a Jewish majority between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea.

HIZABALLAH THREAT TO ISRAEL'S POWER OF DETERRENCE: 27.9.06

1. One of the reasons that Israel launched its military campaign against the Hizballah in July was to restore its power of deterrence in face of Hizballah's bellicose and aggressive actions including the flagrant violation of Israeli sovereign territory and the unprovoked use of violence against its soldiers and civilians. After the ceasefire with the Hizballah it seemed that this power of deterrence had to a degree been restored particularly in light of the fact that Hizballah positions were no longer being manned a few meters from Israel's border and that Hassan Nasrallah was in hiding for fear of his life.

2. Two related events however occurred last week which may be the portent of worse to come and a signal that Israel's restored power of deterrence will be put to the test soon.

In one incident a large group of Hizballah supporters (some of whom were said to be armed) stoned an Israeli military vehicle situated on the Israeli side of the border. The complete lack of an Israeli response - immediate or otherwise- to this taunting of its soldiers is what is worrying.Neither tear gas, water cannon or shots in the air were even fired in order to transmit a message of deterrence to the Hizballah. Whilst restraint is an admirable trait (at least in the West) in this particular case it will be seen by the Hizballah as being an act of weakness - it is almost a given cetainty that soon a similar but more brazen act against Israeli troops will be undertaken because the Hizballah logic will be that if Israel did not react to this provocation it may not act to the next one and so on.

The second portentous event was the giant Hizballah "victory" rally in Beirut where some 800,000 people saw and heard Hassan Nasrallah speak. There had been speculation that Israel may target him for assassination at the rally but even less forceful actions were not undertaken such as for example breaking the sound barrier over Beirut whilst Nasrallah was proclaiming victory. In his speech, Nasrallah mocked the tears of the Lebanese Prime Minister, Siniora during the war. Such derision of sensitivity only demonstrates how what is sometimes perceived as being admirable in the West is viewed as a weakness in the Middle East. Nasrallah's appearance showed his supporters that here he was appearing in public for all to see and not hiding in some bunker.

3. The upshot of the border fence stone throwing incident and of Nasrallah's unhindered public appearance in Beirut are both a blow to Israel's power of deterrence. Had Israel used a measure of force to deal with these two provocations then a clear message - do not try us - would have been sent out to the Hizballah and its followers. Alas, the message that has been transmitted to the Hizballah is to continue to provoke Israel and failing any Israeli action the pre-war status quo will slowly but surely be restored - something which is obviously to Israel's detriment.

ANSWERING THE IRELAND-PALESTINE SOLIDARITY CAMPAIGN

Professor James Bowen of the National University of Ireland and chairman of the Ireland-Palestine Solidarity Campaign recently wrote an article entitled "Making Israel take responsibility"(published in Haaretz on 15.9.06). Professor Bowen criticizes Israel for using anti-Semitism to "excuse its expulsion of Palestinians in 1948, its discrimination against Palestinians who managed to remain inside the Green Line, and its territorial expansionism after 1967". Anti-Semitism was a major reason behind the burning need to re-establish the Jewish National Home in the Land of Israel, if this homeland had been reestablished prior to the rize of the Nazis, half the then World Jewish population would have been saved from extermination. Anti-Semitism was and is an integral part of the Jewish-Israeli psyche.But it has little to do with Professor Bowen's allegations. Rather, Professor Bowen's criticism of Israel reflects the Palestinian victim narrative which resolutely refuses to accept any blame for the situation of the Palestinian people to-day. Interestingly, Professor Bowenwhilst lauding Irish Jewish relations forgets to mention IRA support for Nazi Germany.

1. If the Palestinians were as Bowen puts it "expelled" (most fled in a cowardly fashion unlike the Jewish Population who stood to fight for their homeland), then this was after they (and not the Jews who accepted the UN Plan) rejected the UN Partition Plan for dividing the land between a large Arab State and a smaller Jewish one. Five Arab armies invaded the newly born Jewish State with the intention of throwing the Jews into the sea. Which ever way one looks at the 1948 War the fact is that the Arab nations declared war on Israel and lost - this fact cannot be disputed by Professor Bowen. The Palestinian flight or expulsion or whatever you term it was a result of the War which was not started by Israel but was won by it (after losing 1% of its population during that War). Bitter a pill as it may be to swallow the Palestinians have only themselves to blame for not accepting the UN Partition Plan and for taking up arms against Israel.

2. In referring tp Israel's "territorial expansion after 1967", Professor Bowen is probably alluding to Israel gaining control of Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) in the 1967 Six Day War.This "expansion" was a result of Jordan's decision to attack Israel in 1967 - once again a case of an Arab defeat brought about by a belligerent decision to go to war against Israel.

3. One view I share to a degree with Professor Bowen is in his allegation of discrimination against Palestinians living within Israel's 1967 borders (the Green Line). Although these Palestinians have the right to vote and enjoy full civil rights they do suffer from un-official discrimination which is inexcusable even if their political leaders (Palestinian members of the Israel's Parliament) openly side with Israel's enemies (for example by professing open support for suicide bombers and for the Hezbollah). Such discrimination however pales into insignificance when compared to the apartheid like conditions under which Palestinians in Lebanon live.

Professor Bowen claims that Jews who "migrated to Palestine since 1882" should not have more entitlement to the land than the Palestinians. If Professor Bowen wants to play the historical date justification game I have no objections. In the 1880s Jews started their return to the land of Israel from which they were expelled in 70AD by the Romans some 560 years before the Arab Armies conquered the land at the Battle of Yarmuk in 638 AD. And what of other countries?By Professor Bowen's view Protestants would have less of claim to Northern Ireland than Catholics just because they gained political power there following the Battle of the Boyne in 1688 when the Catholics had been in Ireland since early Gaelic and Celtic days.

What matters is the present. The fact is that because Palestinians have always chosen violence as their best option ( witness Yasser Arafat's decision to prefer launching the second intifada instead of accepting Israel's offer of a Palestinian state in 95% of Judea and Samaria) they have very little to show for themselves.

Professor Bowen advocates sanctions being imposed on Israel something which only reinforces the view that the Palestinians and their supporters seek Israel's destruction as a Jewish State instead of realizing that unlike those Palestinians who ran away in 1948 the Jewish people have no other national home and will not relinquish their hold on their homeland. When the Palestinians realize this fact and demonstrate a genuine recognition of Israel they will surely find themselves in a far better position than they have been for the last hundred years. Professor Bowen and his colleagues in the Ireland-Palestine Solidarity Campaign would serve the Palestinians far more by advocating such recognition and moving away from victim mode.