Reflections from news and commentary of the day
Subscribe To
Posts
All Comments
Sunday, September 15, 2024
[Salon] An Intellectual Dead Zone: Congress | Capitol Hill Citizens - Guest Post by Bruce Fein
An Intellectual Dead Zone: Congress
By Bruce Fein*
Congress has become an intellectual dead zone confirmed, among other things, by the customary blather reported in the Congressional Record.
There is no cerebral activity or curiosity there with one exception. Scheming for re-election for the sake of re-election. Their intellectual universe extends no further.
Members struggle to know the three branches of the federal government. A Senator identified them as the House, Senate, and executive. A House Member also received a failing grade in blurting, "If we work our butts off to make sure that we take back all three chambers of Congress — Uh, rather all three chambers of government: the presidency, the Senate, and the House."
An incumbent Congressman informed me that discussing the Constitution with colleagues is like reading Shakespeare to cows. The late Bill Pascrell (D-N.J.) chronically fretted over congressional dumbness. Congress has defunded its own in-house think tank, the Office of Technology Assessment, three decades ago. I can’t think of a single Representative or Senator who could hold a candle to the likes of predecessors James Madison, John Qunicy Adams, Joseph Story, Henry Clay, or Daniel Webster.
Many would fail the citizenship test required for naturalization. Most have not read a serious book in years if not decades. None have a mastery of the Constitution they are sworn to preserve and defend. Their respective staffs are characteristically in their salad days unlearned in the ways of power.
Most legislation is drafted by lobbyists or the executive branch. A small minority of Members know the contents of the bills they are voting on. Hearings have dwindled into sideshows and occasionally carnivals. None were held to examine the stupendous folly of expending more than $300 million every day for twenty (20) successive years in Afghanistan to return a grislier and more misogynistic version of Taliban. All the lights were flashing on the dashboard year after year with no one paying attention. Instead, Congress is scrutinizing errors in the withdrawal of combat troops under President Joe Biden for partisan advantage. In the manner of flip-flopper in chief John Kerry on the Iraq war, former President Donald Trump boated on twitter of his forcing Biden’s hand on Afghanistan until he somersaulted
“I started the process, all the troops are coming home, they (Biden) couldn’t stop the process. 21 years is enough. They (Biden) couldn’t stop the process, they (Biden) wanted to but couldn’t stop the process.”
Members are generally clueless about their own constitutional prerogatives. I once asked a freshman Member about resorting to the inherent contempt powers of Congress, unanimously affirmed by the Supreme Court in McGrain v. Daugherty (1927), to compel compliance with congressional subpoenas or fact indefinite detention. The Member’s eyes glazed over as if I had asked him about quantum mechanics.
Congress has similarly surrendered the war power, the treaty power, legislative power, and the spending power to the White House ignorant of their constitutional authorities. They are mesmerized by the words in Article 2, section 2: “The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States.” Alexander Hamilton explained in Federalist 69 the de minimis power associated with that provision
“The President is to be commander-in-chief of the army and navy of the United States. In this respect his authority would be nominally the same with that of the king of Great Britain, but in substance much inferior to it. It would amount to nothing more than the supreme command and direction of the military and naval forces, as first General and admiral of the Confederacy; while that of the British king extends to the DECLARING of war and to the RAISING and REGULATING of fleets and armies, all which, by the Constitution under consideration, would appertain to the legislature.”
Notwithstanding Hamilton, who was present at the creation, Senator John McCain (R-AR) audaciously and mendaciously maintained centuries later that Congress has no "right to declare peace," and bugled: "[T]he fact is that the President of the United States is given the responsibility, the most grave responsibility of sending into harm's way our greatest national treasure, our young men and women." Those ill-conceived words conflict with the congressional decision to end the Vietnam War by prohibiting the expenditure of any funds of the United States to conduct combat operations in Indochina after August 15, 1973. P.L. 93-50, sections 304 and 307.
Communicating serious ideas to a Member and expecting a substantive response is a triumph of hope over experience. Silence is the norm. Even an AI generated answer is the exception.
Congress is responsible for its own intellectual death. It has neglected to create a Congressional University to instruct Members and staff in the Constitution and the history of the waning of congressional power. Congress has created and funded the National Defense University, the Army War College, the Navy War College, and the Air Force War College. Why not a university for itself.
Congress is too important to the Constitution’s separation of powers to be left to intellectual dunces.
*Bruce Fein was associate deputy attorney general under President Reagan, research director of the Joint Congressional Committee on Covert Arms Sales to Iran, and is author of Congressional Surrender and Presidential Overreach.
Saturday, September 14, 2024
Friday, September 13, 2024
Thursday, September 12, 2024
The Armageddon Agenda - TomDispatch.com
The Armageddon Agenda - TomDispatch.com
Michael Klare, Ensuring the Collapse of Civilization?
Posted on September 12, 2024
I was born on July 20, 1944, in the midst of the Second World War. Barely a year later, the U.S. ended that conflict in the Pacific by dropping atomic bombs on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and creating two all-too-literal hells on Earth.
To this day, fortunately, no other nuclear weapons have ever been used (if, that is, you don’t count all the ones tested, including in above-ground places like Nevada). But in some sense, as I wrote a few years ago, “You could say that we’ve been living in a science-fiction novel since August 6, 1945, when that first American nuclear bomb devastated Hiroshima. Until then, we humans could do many terrible things, but of one thing we were incapable: the destruction of this world. In the nearly eight decades that followed, we have, however, taken over a role once left to the gods: the ability to create Armageddon.”
And of course, in our own seemingly inimitable fashion, we’ve also stumbled across a second slow-motion way to do in ourselves and the planet: climate change. In other words, we’re giving classic science fiction and dystopian fiction writers a genuine run for their money (which, of course, will be burned to a crisp).
Worse yet, 80 years after those first atomic bombs were used in Japan, nine (yes, nine!) countries (including Israel and North Korea) now possess atomic weapons. The U.S., Russia, and China, with the three largest nuclear arsenals on the planet, as TomDispatch regular Michael Klare makes clear today, are all potentially preparing to expand them further. (The phrase in this country is “modernizing” and our government already plans to “invest” up to $1.5 trillion in “modernizing” this country’s nuclear arsenal in the decades to come.) And yet, as Klare also makes clear, it’s remarkable how little Americans think about such world-ending weaponry. The popular film Oppenheimer was an exception to that reality, though it paid sadly little attention to the devastation the bombs that Robert Oppenheimer played such a role in creating caused in the last days of World War II.
So, today, let Klare fill you in on humanity’s race to oblivion and just what we should indeed be paying far, far more attention to. Tom
Wednesday, September 11, 2024
Tuesday, September 10, 2024
[Salon] KREMLIN LETTER - Guest post from Michael Brenner: Kremlin Letter
[From: Michael Brenner]
KREMLIN LETTER
I’ve been in touch with my old friend Anna Chapman after a considerable interval. She called out-of-the-blue to offer commiseration for the plight of the American polity – or so she said, and to inquire sympathetically how I was faring in the draconian crackdown on all those ‘subversive’ elements who have expressed any regard for Russia. I told her that I hadn’t been targeted except for one telephone call from the FBI alerting me, in a roundabout way, that a commentary of mine from 2015 had been published on a remote website of dubious leanings. Said site allegedly was underwritten by an anonymous foundation which, in turn, was suspected of receiving funds from the Russian government. Anna intimated, with exquisite delicacy, that were I seriously inconvenienced, there was refuge available at the luxurious condo complex on Lake Baikal (Decembrist Mansions) where she is a founding investor. It quickly became evident, though, that her actual purpose was to convey the thinking in the Kremlin about relations with the U.S. – in the hope that I might diffuse them among the distinguished and influential persons who receive these commentaries. Evidently, Anna took this initiative on instruction from her superiors in the Russian Bureau for U.S. Affairs (BUSA) where she has held a shadowy position as a freelance consultant since her extrication from the States.
For those unfamiliar with her background, Anna Chapman is the nom de guerre of А́нна Васи́льевна Ча́пман who for many years was a deep sleeper agent in England and then in the New York area. Her main beat was Manhattan South – referred to by FSB colleagues as Bloomingdale Station. It was in Bloomingdale’s that she was exposed by an undercover FBI agent while trying on the latest Ivanka line of leggings.
Here is a summary transcript of what Anna had to say.
· The Russian leadership is pretty laid back about the Presidential election; they are resigned to deal with whomever/whatever emerges from the malestream. They have become accustomed to the peculiarities and antic features of politics in the U.S. The Kremlin has concluded that there is nothing that Russia could do to inflect the discourse about international affairs in general or attitudes toward Russia in particular. Most certainly, any notion of its ability to affect the outcome is outlandish.
· What of the related claim that Russia is running a disinformation campaign aimed at discrediting American democracy? Why even consider sowing discord (itself a threat of unwelcome instability) when the natives are doing such a thorough job of discrediting their political system all on their own. The United States’ complicity in the Palestinian genocide has put the final nail in the coffin on the American claim to being the cynosure of humanistic values. While that performance surely redounds to the diplomatic advantage of Russia, China et al, it is at the same time a worrying sign that the world’s still strongest power has gone completely off the rails.
· Putin, along with his senior colleagues, are amused by headlines declaring that “Russia’s Strategy Is to Shape the American Mind.” For one thing, they have no idea where that elusive mind is to be found
· Their preference is for predictability – not persons. It follows that they see Kamala as more tolerable than Trump. With her, they get continuity with the Biden administration – however noxious it has been. At least it gave them something to plan against. There is a small hope that she could be more inclined to opening diplomatic communications with Moscow given that she is a novice who may see an interest in finding out firsthand who Washington is dealing with – and, a certain relaxation of the current high tensions would provide her some space to establish herself in the Presidency.
· Donald Trump, by contrast, is impetuous and quixotic. His mercurial temperament keeps the Kremlin on edge. Moreover, his own earlier administration showed no particular respect for Russian national interests. After all, he set in motion the escalation of economic sanctions and gave his full backing to the armament and anti-Russian program of Kiev. Hence, Kremlin leaders place little stock in the proposition that Trump might be a less implacably hostile foe than Biden or Harris. That idea, which has gained favor among some opponents to America’s current belligerent policies, is based on two suppositions: Trump is a pragmatic dealmaker; and he is less devoted to the neo-con scripture that rules thinking among the Democrats. Both are seen as dubious in Moscow’s eyes in the light of his consistently bombastic rhetoric, his practice of seeing all encounters in zero-sum terms, his lack of any conception of an alternative world order, and the strength those forces in Washington who would undercut any conciliatory moves (witness the tentative opening toward North Korea in 2017). Trump cast as the ‘prince of peace’ is taken to be a wistful hope of those searching for a deus ex machina to save them from the present self-destructive course America has taken,
· Kremlin leaders are increasingly concerned by the Trump movement’s turn toward outright autocracy and hyper-nationalism. An election that was understood to be a referendum is now taking on the appearance of a referendum on neo-Fascism – or some close facsimile thereof. The readiness of half the voting populace to put at risk their time-honored democratic principles and institutions is seen as reflecting a worrisome degradation in the American body politic – a prelude to disorder and erratic, dangerous actions abroad
· Moscow fear that those around the White House who are driving America’s aggressive policies might do something extremely risky vis a vis Russia. Their fear is that they recklessly cross Russia’s ultimate red lines – thereby, forcing the Kremlin to respond in ways that could bring the two powers to a direct confrontation. They see signs that some of the extreme hardliners are pressing for such radical measures in the waning days of an administration that offers the best/last occasion to execute their drastic strategy of winning a game of ‘chicken’ with the Kremlin. Be alert for such an October surprise is the watchword.
· The talk from Moscow about the dangers of nuclear war is meant to sober decision-makers in Washington by spelling out exactly what the apocalyptic outcome might be. Kremlin leaders are distressed that a large slice of the American foreign policy elite seems to have unlearned all the wisdom about nuclear matters acquired over the past 75 years. However, there has been no remarkable change in Russian nuclear doctrine. Its version of the SIOP (Strategic Integrated Operational Plan) always has encompassed a wide range of scenarios. Kremlin leaders are trying to strengthen deterrence through messaging – advertising and dramatizing symbolic measures. They are fully conscious of the inherent logical dilemma in nuclear strategy.
· Russian strategists have long recognized that the operational doctrine and disposition of forces that makes for the most credible deterrence is the one you'd least want to have in place in the event of actual hostilities - whether by accident, miscalculation or escalation dynamic. Tripwires, launch on warning, etc. The logical way to reconcile the two is to broadcast the idea that one has put in place some mutual suicide arrangement - but don't actually do it. The Kremlin is pretty much following that path. Medvedev especially - and Putin in more muted tones - talks about the extreme risks of the West doing anything that threatens Russia's integrity. Cataclysmic nuclear war might well result. Yet, there is no evidence, or reason to believe, that there has been any consequential change in Russian doctrine, operational plans or force structure.
· Putin, and his advisers, have the impression of an America whose collective psyche has become fragile – and whose polity is in a precarious state. That makes it unstable, unpredictable and liable to extreme reaction to external events and internal strains. Hence, he feels an imperative need to do whatever is in his power to prevent a total breakdown – with carries catastrophic consequences for everyone. This is quite the opposite of alleged plans to sow discord among American political elites, to severely weaken the country, and thereby to enhance Russian influence in some postulated power political contest. That is the exact opposite of how he views a desired state of relations between the two countries. Russia, he believes, has an interest in a stable United States – one that plays a positive role in maintaining international order, to the degree circumstances permit. That requires, though, Washington’s abandonment of its hegemonic ambitions, a recognition of multiple nodes of global intercourse, and the sophisticated diplomacy need to establish and maintain such arrangements as that conception implies. The one clear path for constructive engagement grounded on these principles is dialogue. Unfortunately, Washington refuses to engage in even the most basic forms of communication. So, Putin patiently waits for Godot.
· All indications, as seen from Moscow, are that the U.S. is moving in the diametrically opposite direction. So, in partnership with China, Russia is accelerating their project of constructing an alternative set of international institutions and collaborative venture under the BRIC’s umbrella.
· These perceptions and concerns about America are shared by President XI. The two have exchanged thoughts on how to manage this delicate balance between resisting Washington’s bellicose demands and avoiding raising tensions to a combustible level.
· American society is viewed as in parlous condition – indeed, its governmental institutions are corrupted, its civic culture degraded, its leadership erratic and increasingly disengaged from reality. Yet, the American political class is oblivious to what the rest of the world is aghast at.
[Salon] Iraq’s water crisis - Arab Digest.org. guest post
Iraq’s water crisis
Summary: a country with one of the most severe shortages of potable water in the world is saddled with a corrupt and incompetent governance structure that has failed abysmally to provide its citizens with a clean and sustainable flow of that which is essential for life itself.
We thank Winthrop Rodgers for today’s newsletter. A journalist and analyst who spent several years in Iraq’s Kurdistan Region, he focusses on politics, human rights, and economics. He tweets @wrodgers2.
Iraq is facing a water disaster. Years of drought and the effects of climate change are compounded by the country’s rapid population growth and sprawling urban development. Upstreaming dam construction by Türkiye and Iran is restricting water flows, depriving Iraqi farms, businesses and residents of the water they need. The Kurdish areas of the country are relatively insulated from the more extreme effects by their position further upstream and higher levels of local precipitation. Yet even there, governance inadequacies in the Kurdistan Region are exacerbating an already severe water shortage situation.
Erbil is a growing urban center, attracting workers from across the Kurdistan Region and central Iraq. Many of them have abandoned rural life because of the growing impact of climate change on agriculture. As the city has grown both in terms of its physical footprint and population, Erbil’s water supply and infrastructure have struggled to keep pace. Some water comes from the Ifraz pumping facility on the Great Zab River 30 kilometers northwest of the city, but its capacity is limited. Plans to expand the plant have not progressed. Over the past 20 years, the city has made up the difference by pumping water from underground but this has become an increasingly unsustainable practice. Wells are now dug 700 meters into the ground and some that are at 500 meters are already drying up, according to local officials.
As a result there are chronic water shortages across the city, although the poorest neighbourhoods are disproportionately affected. Residents go for weeks without proper supplies and must resort to buying water from trucks to fill their roof-top tanks. Understandably, this is a situation that breeds resentment among the population. Small protests are a common occurrence in Erbil, with residents blocking traffic on major roads to draw attention to the issue.
By 2035 Iraq will only be able to meet 15 percent of its water needs, the United Nations has warned [photo credit: Jassim Al Asadi]
The local government, which is controlled by the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP), is intolerant of public displays of criticism. The residents are cognisant of this and limit the duration of their demonstrations to avoid arrest and retaliation by the security forces. The water shortages have become a widely discussed topic in Erbil and fodder for opposition parties looking to embarrass the ruling KDP. Yet it is critical to note that this public pressure has not yet resulted in any new investment aimed at improving or diversifying Erbil’s water supply. Thirsty residents will likely face the same or worse conditions next year.
Residents of the Kurdistan Region’s second largest city typically have enough water, thanks to the nearby Dukan reservoir. However they face a different challenge in the form of water-borne illnesses. On August 24 the local authorities announced that eight people had tested positive for cholera. Pollution from the city also flows downstream, rendering the Tanjaro River one of the most polluted waterways in Iraq. Last year residents of the town of Darbandikhan held a month-long sit-in protest demanding better quality-drinking water only to be met with promises that turned out to be empty.
The problems in Erbil and Sulaymaniyah highlight the fact that there are no major water recycling plants in the Kurdistan Region to take greywater and sewage and turn it into useable water. This technology is widely used in many countries, including in the developing world, and would help to alleviate shortages and combat pollution and disease. On several occasions, the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) signed agreements with foreign development agencies to build water processing plants but the plans ultimately were not implemented. Given the obvious need, the availability of foreign assistance and the relative simplicity of the technology involved, it is baffling that the government seems unable to make progress.
Indeed, this is an excellent example of a pervasive conundrum regarding development across Iraq, both in federal areas and in the Kurdistan Region. Ordinary citizens daily face quality-of-life issues that may (or may not) require technically complex solutions but ones that can be understood and addressed with funding, expertise and political will. Policy papers are drawn up, conferences are held, think tanks think and politicians promise but in the end no progress is made. Several years later another attempt is organised with the same result. The problems are known, as are the solutions, but ordinary residents are left without resolution.
In the case of Iraq’s water infrastructure, there are certainly things that are out of the control of policymakers. The country is extremely vulnerable to the effects of climate change, including prolonged droughts, desertification and increasing heat. This is a global problem that affects Iraq in a disproportionate way.
It is nevertheless disheartening to see Iraqi and Kurdish leaders exhibit so little ambition to confront water issues. With the country’s vast oil wealth, one might assume that funding could be allocated for improved water infrastructure, including water recycling. However, poor public policy, corruption and a lack of attention divert resources. The cost of continued delay will only increase and while wealthy elites can secure reliable access to clean water, electricity and other services it is ordinary Iraqis who will suffer the most as these services become less and less available. And while most people can muddle through most service delivery failures, water is not one of them.
Iraqi and Kurdish leaders should make serious efforts to address water shortages and climate change. They need to invest, as a matter of utmost urgency, in water recycling facilities and water conservation measures. Working with global specialists and Iraq’s homegrown experts, policymakers can and should update and implement the water management plans that have already been developed. Specific funding should be set aside in the budget and protected from the political fights and the corruption that undermine country-wide public policy. These are straightforward recommendations but given the greed and incompetence embedded in the country’s governance structures they are likely to prove difficult to put into practice. This is unfortunate; the alternative is a future of ever-increasing shortages and pollution with all that that entails: further outbreaks of water-borne diseases like cholera, rapid agricultural decline, economic insecurity and increasing instability as Iraq’s burgeoning population struggles to secure life-essential water.
[Salon] CONFRONTING THE CONTRADICTION BETWEEN ZIONISM AND JEWISH MORAL AND ETHICAL VALUES -
This article will appear in the Fall 2024 ISSUES, the quarterly journal of the American Council for Judaism.
CONFRONTING THE CONTRADICTION BETWEEN ZIONISM AND
JEWISH MORAL AND ETHICAL VALUES
BY
ALLAN C. BROWNFELD
——————————————————————————————————————————-
Recent events in Gaza and in the West Bank have caused an increasing number of Jewish Americans to see a dramatic contradiction between the conduct of the Israeli government and traditional Jewish moral and ethical values. Students of history note that this contradiction existed from the creation of the state of Israel in 1948, but that recent developments have made this obvious to an increasing number of people of all religious backgrounds. Equally clear is the manner in which many American Jewish organizations and religious bodies have defended whatever the Israeli government did, whether it was morally right or wrong.
Israel suffered a grievous terrorist assault on Oct. 7, 2023. Its response has been massive and is still in process at this writing. More than 40,000 Palestinians have been killed in Israel’s campaign in the Gaza Strip , the local Health Ministry said on August 15. According to the Health Ministry, the majority of the dead are women and children. At least 92,401 have also been injured.
According to the Washington Post (Aug. 16, 2024), “Palestinian journalists, first responders, international aid workers and war-casualty watchdogs, all say the official death toll in Gaza is probably an undercount…After months of bombardment and siege, thousands of bodies are still believed to be buried under the rubble, according to Gaza’s civil defense force.”
Criticism Within Israel Is Widespread
Israel’s conduct of the war has been sharply criticized within Israel itself.. The newspaper Haaretz (Aug. 15, 2024) published an editorial with the headline, “Israel’s use of Human Shields on the Battle Field Is a War Crime.” It declared: “The practice that Haaretz exposed of military units forcing civilian residents of Gaza to serve as human shields—-searching tunnels and buildings before the forces enter, while wearing army uniforms and sometimes also protective vests to give them the appearance of IDF soldiers—is a war crime….Many of the prohibitions specified in the laws of war are the consequence of atrocities experienced in wars, especially World War 11. The prohibition against using enemy civilians as human shields is one of them.”
The International Criminal Court is currently considering a request by the Court’s chief prosecutor, Karim Khan, for arrest warrants for Israel’s Prime Minister and Defense Minister. One of the conditions for the ICC’s jurisdiction is that the Israeli justice system is unable or unwilling to investigate and prosecute war criminals.
In August, the Israeli human rights organization B’Tselem issued a report entitled “Welcome to Hell,” highlighting a variety of human rights abuses in Israel. This report was largely ignored by the Israeli media. Torture of Palestinians in Israeli prisons, it found, is widespread. Physicians for Human Rights Israel (PHRI) in August reported about one Palestinian inmate who died with a ruptured spleen and broken ribs after being beaten by Israeli prison guards. Another met an excruciating end because a chronic condition went untreated. A third screamed for help for hours before dying. According to PHRI, at least 13 Palestinians in the West Bank and Israel have died in Israeli jails since Oct. 7. An unknown number of prisoners on the Gaza Strip have also died.
Serious Abuse Of A Sexual Nature
Inside Sde Teiman, a facility on a military base in the Negev desert that holds Palestinian detainees captured in Gaza, nine reservists were detained after “serious abuse” of a sexual nature of a detainee. Newly released detainees say that torture, sexual abuse and deprivation of food are widespread. A CNN investigation found that newly released Palestinian detainees describe being beaten, denied medical care and made to kneel handcuffed and blindfolded for days.
The Tel Aviv-based Association for Civil Rights In Israel (ACRI) declared that, “The conditions at Sde Teiman gravely violate both Israeli and international law. Its continued operation is not just illegal—-it’s a potential war crime.”
When it comes to the West Bank, which Israel has occupied in violation of international law for more than 50 years, its current government no longer supports the two-state solution which the U.S., under both Republicans and Democrats, has advocated. Indeed, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu rejects the creation of a Palestinian state and members of his Cabinet call for annexing this territory and expelling its indigenous Palestinian population.
Largest Seizure Of Land In Three Decades
Recently, Israel has approved the largest seizure of land in the West Bank in over three decades, reported the Associated Press ((July 3, 2024): “Israel’s aggressive expansion…reflects the settler community’s strong influence in the government…Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, a settler himself, has turbocharged the policy of expansion…saying he aims to solidify Israel’s hold on the territory and prevent the creation of a Palestinian state.”
Authorities approved the appropriation of 12.7 square kilometers (nearly 5 square miles of land) in the Jordan Valley . It was the largest single appropriation approved since the 1993 Oslo Accords . Settlement monitors said the land grab connects Israeli settlements along a key corridor bordering Jordan, a move which undermines the prospect of a contiguous Palestinian state.
U.N. spokesperson Stephane Dujarric called it “a step in the wrong direction,” adding that “the direction we want to be heading is to find a negotiated two-state solution. According to the U.N., more than 700,000 Israeli settlers live in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. Much of the international community condemns these settlements as a violation of international law.
Netanyahu More Interested In Political Survival Than Israel’s Future
The former head of Shin Bet, the Israeli intelligence agency, Ami Ayalon, told Christine Aminpour on CNN (June 24, 2024)that Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu “is more interested in his own political survival than in Israel’s future. He does not want to end the war or the occupation of the West Bank. On this path, we won’t have democracy and, in the end, we won’t have sovereignty. There needs to be a day-after plan, which we do not now have.” Ayalon declared that, “Netanyahu’s toxic leadership will lead to the end of Zionism.”
In recent days, settlers have become increasingly violent toward Palestinians. Nader Weiman, a former Israeli Special Forces soldier, is now director of Breaking the Silence, an organization of former Israeli Army veterans that advocates an end to Israel’s occupation. He said settlers have stepped up attacks on Palestinian communities while the world’s attention was focused on Gaza. The U.N. Humanitarian Affairs office has recorded more than 650 attacks against Palestinians since Oct. 7. Settlers have killed at least 9 Palestinians and Israeli security forces have killed more than 400.
Asked why settlers destroyed schools, Weiman responds: “Because you want families to feel they are not safe here. With no school here, the kids cannot return. And if you do not have kids, you don’t have life. It’s not just about stealing livestock, it’s about destroying the sense of being at home.”
Assault On West Bank Has No Reason Or Justification
Writing in Haaretz (Sept. 1, 2024), Gideon Levy notes that, “Over the 11 months of war, Israel has ripped up the West Bank…The current assault has no reason or justification. Israel has exploited the war on Gaza to cause turmoil on the West Bank…The Army, Shin Bet, Border Police …and violent settler militias blend into each other…There has not been a pogrom in which soldiers weren’t present and did nothing to stop it…Tens of thousands of acres were expropriated and robbed over these months. Roadblocks have also returned in full force. You cannot move from one place to another in the West Bank without encountering them.”
On July 19, the International Court of Justice, the top judicial arm of the U.N., said Israel should “bring an end to its illegal occupation of Palestinian territory, cease new settlements and pay reparations to Palestinians who have lost land and property.” The Court said Israel is responsible for “systematic discrimination” against Palestinians based on race or ethnicity “and breached their right to self-determination. In advance of Prime Minister Netanyahu’s visit to Washington in July, the Knesset passed legislation opposing the establishment of a Palestinian state.
In an editorial entitled “Israel’s Continued Denial of the Reality of the Occupation,” Haaretz (July 21, 2024) declared: “The opinion by the International Court of Justice revealed nothing to Israelis that they do not already know. The opinion shatters the lie that the occupation is only temporary and intended only for security purposes. This is the lie Israelis told themselves during decades of occupation while they seized more and more Palestinian land and built settlements on it. The opinion bursts this bubble of lies and views various acts of the Israeli government as annexation of the territory….Israel’s working assumption that the world will continue to ignore the occupation has been shattered…Israel…may wake up to a reality in which it is boycotted and ostracized like apartheid-era South Africa.”
“War On The Palestinian People”
On Aug. 28, hundreds of Israeli troops launched raids in several areas of the West Bank,carrying out mass arrests, and killing at least 10 Palestinians. Nabil Abu Rudeina, a spokesman for Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, described the operation as “a continuation of the comprehensive war on the Palestinian people, our land and our holy sites.” He called on the U.S. to intervene. “The world must take immediate and urgent action to curb this extremist government,” he said.
Few Americans of any religious background understand the harsh bigotry which motivates leaders of the settler movement. Rabbi Meir Kahane was expelled from the Knesset for racism and terrorism in an earlier era. He proposed legislation that was very much like the Nazi Nuremburg Laws, making marriage between Jews and non-Jews illegal. Now, he is a hero to the settler movement. Beyond Meir Kahane, heroes of this movement include the former Sephardic chief rabbi of Israel, Ovadiah Yosef. In a weekly sermon to the nation, he declared that the “only reason for the existence of non-Jews is to serve Jews.” His funeral in 2013 was considered the largest ever in Israel with crowd estimates reaching 800,000. He is a hero in Israeli society, with his picture on postage stamps and many streets carrying his name.
Another rabbi widely admired by the settler movement is Rabbi Kook the Elder, who said: “The difference between a Jewish soul and the soul of non-Jews—-all of them in all different levels —-is greater and deeper than the difference between a human soul and the souls of cattle.”
Bigotry In The Settler Movement
Few Jewish Americans are aware of the bigotry which characterizes the Israeli settler movement and is to be found in much of ancient Jewish literature. Consider this statement from Menachem Mendel Schneerson, who headed the Chabad movement: “The difference between a Jewish and a non-Jewish person …We have a case between totally different species. The body of a Jewish person is of a totally different quality than the bodies of (members) of all nations of the world…A non-Jew’s entire reality is only vanity…The entire creation of a non-Jew is only for the sake of the Jews.”
Mordechai Nisan, a lecturer at the Hebrew University, wrote in an official publication of the World Zionist Organization, that a non-Jew permitted to reside in the land of Israel “must accept paying a tax and suffering the humiliation of servitude…Non-Jews must not be appointed to any office or position of power over Jews.”
Reform Judaism, at its beginning, abandoned the bigotry to be found in the Talmud and other Orthodox religious writing. It looked to the God of the Prophets , who was not a God for Jews alone, but the Lord of all creation. Second Isaiah proclaims God the God of all people. In chapter 56 of the Book of Isaiah we find the passage epitomizing universalism: “My house will be called a house of prayer for all peoples.”
One God For All People
The idea of one God for a particular people was not the unique contribution of the Jews. There had been other peoples who promoted such ideas. Judaism’s unique contribution was the idea of one God for all peoples, representing a single standard of morality with one set of moral values applying universally. This was the revolution in religious thinking the Hebrew Prophets brought about.
The Prophet Amos helped to move Judaism away from being a narrow tribal religion to that of a universal faith open to all believers. The Prophet Hosea called for justice tempered with love. In Hosea’s view, God was always ready to pardon his people as soon as they repented. In his book “Meet The Prophets,” published by the American Council for Judaism, Rabbi David Goldberg writes, “…the transition from the clerical to the prophetic—which finally crystallized Judaism into a religion centered on ethical monotheism.”
As Zionism emerged in the late 19th century, it was rejected by the leading religious figures of the day. For Reform Jews, Zionism contradicted their belief in a universal prophetic Judaism. The first Reform prayerbook eliminated all references to Jews being in exile and to a Messiah who would restore Jews throughout the world to the historic Land of Israel. The distinguished rabbi and author Abraham Geiger declared that the essence of Judaism was ethical monotheism. The Jewish people were a religious community destined to carry on a mission “to serve as a light to the nations , to bear witness to God and His moral law.” The dispersion of the Jews was not a punishment for their sins, but part of God’s plan whereby they were to disseminate the universal message of ethical monotheism.”
Rejecting Nationalism “Of Any Variety”
In November 1885, Reform rabbis meeting in Pittsburgh wrote an eight point platform which emphasized that Reform Judaism “rejected nationalism in any variety.”
In the wake of growing antisemitism in Russia and Eastern European at the end of the 19th century and the rise of Nazism in Germany in the 1930s, many Jews began to look positively upon the idea of creating a Jewish state in Palestine as a refuge for those being persecuted. Jewish groups in the U.S. that had always opposed Zionism, slowly began to view it more favorably. They ignored the fact that Palestine was already populated.
The early Zionists not only turned away from the Jewish religious tradition, but Jewish moral and ethical values as well. They launched a campaign of terrorism in Palestine to remove as many of the indigenous population as possible. In April 1948 the Zionist Irgun and Lehi forces launched an attack on the Palestinian village of Deir Yassin. Inhabitants of the peaceful village were lined up against the wall and shot. More than 100 victims, mostly women, children and older people, were killed. As the Zionists had planned, news of the massacre spread rapidly and helped prompt the flight of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians from their homes. Irgun leader Menachem Begin, a future Israeli prime minister, issued this message to his troops after the attack: “Accept my congratulations on this splendid act of conquest…As in Deir Yassin, so everywhere, we will attack and smite the enemy. God, God Thou hast chosen us for conquest.”
The Goal Of Removing Palestine’s Indigenous Population
The Zionists admit that removing the indigenous Palestinian population was their goal. As early as 1937, Israel’s future prime minister, David Ben-Gurion, told the Zionist Assembly: “In many parts of the country it will not be possible to settle without transferring the Arab fellahin (peasants)…With compulsory transfer we would have a vast area for settlement..I support compulsory transfer.” What the Zionists committed, declares Israeli historian Ilan Pappe, was “ethnic cleansing.”
Since Israel’s creation, much of the organized American Jewish community has transformed itself into a defender of whatever that state pursues. Israeli flags fly in many synagogues and Israel and “the Jewish people” often appear to be the object of worship, not God. This becomes a form of idolatry, much like the Golden Calf in the Bible.
Now, as Israel’s war in Gaza has cost the lives of more than 40,000 Palestinians and as settlers in the West Bank continue their assault upon its Palestinian residents and the Israeli government rejects the creation of a Palestinian state, more and more Jewish Americans are expressing dismay with Israel and the American Jewish institutions which support and defend it.
Jewish Demonstrators Arrested In U.S. Capitol
In July, U.S. Capitol Police arrested Jewish demonstrators protesting U.S. weapons sales to Israel inside the rotunda of the Cannon House Office Building, a day before Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addressed the Congress. The protest, organized by Jewish Voice for Peace, included rabbis, students, and descendants of Holocaust survivors. The group is “horrified and dismayed “ that elected officials would meet with Netanyahu, said Sonya Meyerson-Knox, a group spokeswoman.
The Washington Post (July 24,2024) reported that, “…hundreds of protestors sang ‘Let Gaza. Live’ and ‘stop genocide’ and sat in a circle around a banner which read ‘NO ONE IS FREE UNTIL EVERYONE IS FREE.’ They wore red shirts that read ‘JEWS SAY STOP ARMING ISRAEL’ and clapped as they sang ‘Not In Our Name.’ Protestors unfurled banners, including one that said: ‘TIKKUN OLAM=FREE PALESTINE,’ referring to the Hebrew phrase that means to repair the world. Several protesters wore hand-made prayer shawls…and the words ‘NEVER AGAIN FOR ANYONE.’”
Rabbi Linda Holtzman, leader of the social Justice community Tikkun Olam Chavurah in Philadelphia said there is a “mass murder” happening in Gaza and believes the path to a cease-fire includes an end to U.S. military aid to Israel. Holtzman said that there needs to be a political decision about the future of Israel and she hopes to see a future that Palestinians and Israelis can decide together.
Sanctity Of Life At The Heart Of Jewish Tradition
Rabbi Holtzman said that, “It’s incredibly important for me to be here as a rabbi and as a Jew because at the heart of Jewish tradition is the sanctity of life. We can’t sit back and watch people being killed and not stand up. That feels, to me, like a serious anti-Jewish thing to do.”
An American Jewish military intelligence officer has resigned to protest U.S. support for Israel, saying that what is happening to the Palestinians there reminds him of the Holocaust. According to the Jewish Telegraphic Agency (June 6, 2024) ”Major Harrison Mann submitted his resignation to the military and to the Defense Intelligence Agency…He said, ‘As the descendant of European Jews, I was raised in a particularly unforgiving moral environment when it came to the topic of bearing responsibility for ethnic cleansing…My grandfather refused to ever purchase produce manufactured in Germany—-where the paramount importance of ‘never again’ and the inadequacy of ‘just following orders’ were oft repeated,’ Mann wrote in the letter.”
Mann continued, “I am haunted by the knowledge that I failed those principles. But I also hope that my grandfather would afford me some grace, that he would still be proud of me for stepping away from this war, however belatedly.” Mann told the JTA that he was not saying that the war in Gaza was the same as the Holocaust: “I think there’s no benefit in weighing tragedies against each other, and it’s not what I’m trying to do. Obviously, the Holocaust was much bigger, but that doesn’t mean that smaller massacres of innocent people (also) shouldn’t happen.”
Recalling Jewish Prayer At Buchenwald
Mann also said his thinking was inspired in part by his experience visiting Yad Vashem, Israel’s Holocaust memorial, while participating in training for U.S. intelligence officers. He recalled seeing the photograph of Jewish U.S. soldiers leading a prayer service for liberated prisoners at Buchenwald. He recalled, “That was the most proud I ever felt to be in the same Army as these men. It’s hard not to think back to that when we are seeing —-again—-photos of starved, emaciated children and burned corpses. I am now contributing to that instead of being the ones who liberated them.”
Mann’s resignation came thirteen years into his military career, which began after he graduated from the College of William and Mary. The first Jewish government staff member to publicly resign was Lilly Greenberg Call, a special assistant to the chief of staff of the Department of the Interior. She said, “there are so many others who feel this way.”
Professor Emeritus Yakov Rabkin of the University of Montreal, author of the book “What Is Modern Israel?,” provides this assessment: “The new state of Israel placed Palestinian Arabs under military rule, which lasted nearly two decades. Refugees and exiles who tried to return to their homes were killed, expelled or arrested…the murderous attack of Oct. 7, 2023 obviously enraged most Israelis. But instead of taking pause, military and political leaders immediately subjected Gaza to massive bombardment followed by a ground invasion. This caused a humanitarian crisis.”
Demonization Of Palestinians Is Common
In Rabkin’s view. “vengeful demonization of the Palestinians has become common. Even the soft-spoken president of Israel claimed that there were no ‘innocent civilians’. In Gaza. Meirev Ben-Ari…said in reference to thousands of Palestinian children killed by Israeli bombardment , ‘The children of Gaza have brought this upon themselves! We are a peace-seeking , a life-loving nation’…Many Jews…have been trying to come to terms with the contradictions between the Judaism they profess to adhere to and the Zionist ideology that has taken hold of them. A new variety of Judaism has taken root in Israel: National Judaism…Among its most fervent followers one finds the assassin of Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, who had attempted to find an accommodation with the Palestinians, and prominent members of today’s Israeli government.”
A letter signed by more than 1200 alumni and current members of the Union for Reform Judaism addressed to the organization on Dec. 16, 2023, declares, “We grieve for the 1,200 killed during Hamas’s Oct. 7th attack and the more than 18,000 Palestinians killed by the Israeli military—-almost half of whom have been children—-since then. Israel has cut off water, electricity, fuel and supplies to Gaza. We are deeply concerned that tax dollars have been so easily provided to support Israel’s military assault on Gaza, while we struggle for the basic needs of our communities.”
At the same time, a letter was released from descendants of progressive rabbis and leaders to express “our horror at the URJ’s failure to call for a cease-fire in Gaza. We are alarmed that the leadership of our community has not demanded an end to Israel’s devastating violence against Palestinians in addition to the safe and immediate return of the hostages…A decades-long campaign to dehumanize Palestinians has hardened the American Jewish community’s hearts. Atrocities are being committed in our name . We do not consider the killing of thousands of innocent civilians to be a justifiable consequence of ensuring our community’s protection.”
“Uncompromising Zionist Rhetoric”
The letter concludes: “The URJ continues to actively alienate alumni with its uncompromising Zionist rhetoric…We will reconsider our and the next generation’s membership and support of the URJ unless there is a public, dramatic shift in the way the movement addresses Israel. It is not too late to listen, to open your heart, and to make your children proud.”
Among the original signatories of this letter are Zippy Janas, a descendant of Rabbi Julius Rappaport, Chana Powell, daughter of a current URJ rabbi, Talia Yudkin Toffany, daughter of Rabbi Marjorie Yudkin, Zachariah Sippy, son of Rabbi David Wirtschaffer and Hafanyah Perluss, daughter of Rabbi Emily Feigenson.
Oren Kroc-Zeldin, whose grandfather Rabbi Isaiah Zeldin headed Los Angeles’ Stephen M. Wise Temple and whose mother Rabbi Leah Kroll was one of the first women rabbis ordained by the Reform movement, is director of the program of Jewish Studies and Social Justice at the University of San Francisco. He went to Jewish Day School and on Birthright trips to Israel. Now, he says that, “Jewish liberation in Israel was predicated on the oppression and ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.” He said he rejects “a monolithic pro-Israel identity.”
Reform Jews For Justice
An organization called Reform Jews For Justice(https://reformjewsforjustice.com) has also been established . It declares that, “As Reform Jews we stand together for Justice, in solidarity with Palestine. We unite in our values to call for a ceasefire, the release of hostages and an end to U.S. military aid to Israel…We have come together to call on our movement to engage in Solidarity with Palestine. We envision a Reform Jewish movement that…rejects a conflation of anti-Zionism with antisemitism…The URJ’s leaders have unabashedly demonstrated shameful tactics of ethno-nationalism and tribal political priorities over simple ethics and the illegitimate and dangerous conflation of Zionism and Judaism. We have been alienated from the movement that raised us to ask, ‘If I am only for myself, what am I?’—-through binary language suggesting that our affiliation is conditional on Zionism. WE will not stand idly by.”
It has been pointed out by many scholars and others that the Palestinians are, in fact, the final victims of the Holocaust, in which they played no role. Deena Dallasheh, a historian of Israel and Palestine who has taught at Columbia University and N.Y.U. notes that, “The Holocaust was a horrible massacre committed by Europeans. But I don’t think the Palestinians figure that they will have to pay for it. Yet the world sees this as an acceptable equation. Orientalist and colonialist ideology were very much at the heart of thinking , that while we Europeans and the U.S. were part of this massive human tragedy, we are going to fix it at the expense of someone else. And the someone else is not important because they are Arabs. They’re Palestinians and thus constructed as not important.”
As American Jewish groups which previously opposed Zionism changed their position in the wake of World War II, the American Council for Judaism was established in 1942 to maintain the traditional philosophy of a universal Judaism free of nationalism and politicization. In his keynote address to the June 1942 meeting of the Council in Atlantic City, Rabbi David Philipson declared that Reform Judaism and Zionism were incompatible: “Reform Judaism is spiritual, Zionism is political. The outlook of Reform Judaism is the world. The outlook of Zionism is a corner of Eastern Asia.” The first pledge of major financial backing was made by Aaron Strauss, a nephew and heir of Levi Strauss of blue jeans fame. Attending this meeting were six former presidents of the Central Conference of American Rabbis, the president of Hebrew Union College and a former president of B’nai B’rith.
Jewish Nationalism Is Secular, Not Religious
Judah Magnes, chancellor of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, wrote a letter endorsing the Council’s statement of principles saying, “It is true that Jewish nationalism tends to confuse people not because it is secular and not religious, but because this nationalism is unhappily chauvinistic and narrow and terroristic in the best style of Eastern European nationalism.”
On Dec. 4, 1945, hours after the first meeting with Zionist leader Chaim Weizmann, President Harry S. Truman received Lessing J. Rosenwald, the first president of the Council, in the Oval Office. He called for the admission of both Jewish and non-Jewish displaced persons to Palestine, and urged that Palestine shall not be a Muslim, Christian or Jewish state but a country in which people of all faiths can play their full part,” and that the U.S. take the lead in coordinating with the U.N., “ a cooperative policy of many nations in absorbing Jewish refugees.”
Rosenwald testified before the Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry on Jan. 10, 1946 and urged that large numbers of Jews be admitted into Palestine on the condition that “the claim that Jews possess unlimited national rights to the land, and that the country shall take the form of a racial or theocratic state, were denounced once and for all.”
“Emphasis On Blood, Race And Descent”
One of the speakers at the Council’s 1945 conference was Hans Kohn, a one-time German Zionist associated with the University in Exile in New York. He declared, “The Jewish nationalist philosophy has developed entirely under German influence, the German romantic nationalism with the emphasis on blood , race and descent as the most determining factor in human life, it’s historicizing attempt to connect to a legendary past 2,000 or so years ago, its emphasis on folk as a mythical body, the source of civilization.”
In the face of the 1947 partition of Palestine, the Council wished the new state well and declared its determination to resist Zionist efforts to dominate Jewish life in America. Rabbi Elmer Berger, the Council’s executive director, outlined the challenge presented by Zionist plans to foster an “Israel-centered’ Jewish life in the U.S. He wrote, “The creation of a sovereign state embodying the principles of Zionism, far from relieving American Jews of the urgency of making that choice, makes it more compelling.”
After Israel’s creation, much of the American Jewish community focused its attention upon Israel. Israeli flags appeared in many synagogues, Jewish day schools promoted the idea that Israel was the real “homeland” of all Jews. Israel, rather than the worship of God and the advancement of Jewish moral and ethical values, seemed to dominate Jewish life. As Israel engaged in repressive treatment of Palestine’s indigenous population, Jewish institutions rose to its defense. More recently, with the assault upon civilians in Gaza and the growth of settlements in the West Bank, defending Israel’s behavior, not advancing the moral and ethical insights of Judaism, have dominated much of the established Jewish community. But it has also produced a growing reaction,particularly among younger people, who see a contradiction between Judaism’s moral worldview and narrow nationalism of any kind.
The Council Was Prophetic
In his history of the early years of the American Council for Judaism, “Jews Against Zionism,” Prof. Thomas Kolsky concluded that the Council was prophetic in its warning about where Zionism would lead: “…many of its predictions about the establishment of a Jewish state did come true…For example, Israel became highly dependent on support from American Jews. ..the creation of the state directly contributed to undermining Jewish communities in Arab countries and to precipitating protracted conflict between Israel and the Arabs. Indeed, as the Council had often warned…Israel did not become a normal state. Nor did it become a light to the nations…The ominous predictions of the ACJ are still haunting the Zionists.”
Jonathan Sarna, a Brandeis University historian and author of the book “American Judaism,” says that, “Everything they (the ACJ) prophesied—-dual loyalty, nationalism being evil—-has come to pass.” In his “On Religion” column in The New York Times (June 26, 2010), Samuel Freedman noted that, “The arguments that the Council has levied against Zionism…have shot back into prominence. ..The rejection of Zionism …goes back to the Torah itself. Until Theodor Herzl created the modern Zionist movement…the biblical injunction to return to Israel was widely understood as a theological construct rather than a pragmatic instruction…The Reform movement maintained that Judaism is a religion, not a nationality.”
Since that was written, and in light of recent Israeli government actions in Gaza and the West Bank, it seems that Israel, and those in the American Jewish community who defend whatever policy Israel sees fit to pursue, have turned away from traditional Jewish moral and ethical values. Beyond this, while Jewish Americans believe in religious freedom and separation of church and state, Israel is a theocracy with a state-supported ultra-Orthodox religious establishment. Non-Orthodox rabbis cannot perform weddings, conduct funerals or have their conversions recognized.
Zionism Represents A Major Wrong Turn
For those who have never abandoned the vision of a universal faith of moral and ethical values for men and women of every race and nation, which the Prophets preached and in which generations of Jews believed, Zionism represents a major wrong turn. We are now entering a new era in which that wrong turn can be reversed. The humane Jewish tradition can finally be restored. Those who kept it alive during the years in which nationalism seemed to replace the unique Jewish contribution to world civilization, which also influenced the development of Christianity and Islam, can be viewed as having been indeed prophetic. A new and more hopeful era lies before us.
(6143 words)
—————————————————————-
Allan C. Brownfeld is a nationally syndicated columnist and serves as editor of ISSUES. The author of five books, he has served on the staff of the U.S. Senate, House of Representatives and the Office of the Vice President.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)