Given the circumstances of Israel's creation, those who will not concede its right to exist are, as far as I can see, anti- semites, not merely anti- Zionist.
Just in case you think I am arguing against that point, I am absolutely not. Certainly it was anti-Semitism that triggered the creation of Israel--the Holocaust, the refusal of Jewish displaced persons back then by countries like the US, and the refusal of Palestinian refugees by Jordan and others forcing the issue to crisis. I can also see that anti-Semitism was a factor in Arafat's passing on that sweet deal a while back. I understand those who claim his action signaled that his and other Arab constituencies in the ME want nothing short of the destruction of Israel.
What we were talking about, though, was anti-Semitism as a basis for bias in the US and European press and citizenry. Unwillingness to endorse Sharon's settlements and incursions in the West Bank have been called anti-Semitic. Portraying the Palestinians sympathetically has been called anti-Semitic. Perhaps for some that's the case, but there are other explanations. Perhaps some of those critics are just pacifists, for example. I know you don't like pacifists, but if one wants to fault them, it should be for being pacifists, not anti-Semites.
The factor that I can't ignore is that the Palestinians were displaced from their homes. Regardless of whether what Israel did was legal, regardless of Israel having done what it did in good faith with international sanction, regardless of whether other Arab states should have taken the refugees in, regardless of how inept the Palestinain leadership and counsel have been, displaced people are still displaced and it's impossible not to feel something for them, especially since they live such miserable lives, and wonder about others who don't feel anything for them.
Imagine if the UN had decided that we needed to give back our country to the Indians. Imagine if the black secessionist movement had prevailed and we had to give up Maryland, say, for a black nation. How would you feel being uprooted for something for which you personally bore no fault? I imagine that you would be angry about that. At the very least, you'd ask, why Maryland. Why not Mississippi? Or why not Liberia? Or Pagatonia?
Israel could have been located in Uganda. Since the Germans caused the problem and lost the war, it would make sense for them to give up half their country for a Jewish homeland. Or we could have given them Maryland. Or simply invited all of them to emigrate here and become Americans. It's just not possible for me not to feel for the displaced Palestinians. That's not anti-Semitism, IMO. If it would settle things in the ME, I'd be happy for all the Israelis to come here and be Americans. It is, rather, a question of Zionism--specifically the creation of a refugee population as a byproduct of the creation of Israel in that particular place.
I'm not trying to debate policy here. I'm only questioning the correct labeling of those who do not toe the party line. |
