But he and his fellow peace seekers must explain why they remain indifferent to the Palestinians’ basic human rights.
Filed under:
Middle East • peace process • Zionism
David Grossman, one of our finest writers, is angry. In a recent article he said he feels Israelis accept with indifference “our stuck-up lives, devoid of all hope…” He believes we “coddle ourselves… in anxieties, lassitude and self-righteousness,” give in to “self-abnegation” and seek escape in “the sweet stupor of nationalism, militarism and victimhood.” We deny, he avers, “the legitimate needs and just claims of the Palestinians.” We refuse to understand that reality “requires flexibility, daring and vision.” We, Grossman charges, refuse to take “any real step that will lead to a true change of consciousness,” and bring about peace.
One could expect that Grossman, a sensitive writer and bereaved father, would not take out his frustration over the absence of peace by a blanket condemnation of most of the Israeli public. One would expect insights on why we have lost “the ability to achieve peace,” as he claims, and what we must do to achieve his “true change of consciousness.”
What change does he expect? Is giving in to “the legitimate needs and just claims of the Palestinians,” no matter what danger this poses to our survival, what he has in mind? Please spell it out, dear distinguished writer. Please teach us how to deal with the dangers that may result from your “vision”—or do you think the possibility of a Hamas takeover in the West Bank is plain fantasy?
ONE COULD also expect that Grossman would not make do with complaining that Israelis and Palestinians “do not really understand, deeply, what peace means,” but would try to describe to the stiff-necked inhabitants of this land the “option of true peace” he envisions. Is there any chance his vision would be accepted by most Palestinians? Would it make them abandon the militant “vision” of Hamas which most of them voted for?
This could be tested if Grossman and his fellow peace seekers—such as Shulamit Aloni, Yossi Beilin, Yossi Sarid, Yuli Tamir, most of the Haaretz publicists and many other prominent literary figures—would formulate an up-to-date, improved version of the Geneva peace initiative. We could then find out what we would be forced to give up and what kind of peace we would get in return.
Would it be a cold peace like the one with Egypt, which never misses an opportunity to undermine the State of Israel? As importantly, we would find out how many Palestinian and Arab leaders are willing to endorse an offer of peace that would meet most, but not all of their “legitimate needs and just claims” (like the right of return and a Judenrein West Bank?) as Grossman recommends. Would it be more than the very few who were willing to endorse the Geneva Initiative? If not, will Grossman and his ilk stop charging that we are peace resisters because we refuse to share their well-intentioned illusions?
GROSSMAN COMPLAINS that we cannot transcend the conflict in the new peace spirit of US President Barack Obama. He might want to consider the possibility that this is because he and his fellow visionaries on the Left simply keep reiterating the mantra of “peace now,” while dismissing the harsh realities. They keep ignoring the failure of all the instant peace initiatives they have advocated, from the Oslo agreements through the Ami Ayalon-Sari Nusseibeh “understandings,” from the far-reaching concessions offered by Ehud Barak at Camp David and Taba to the Beilin Geneva Initiative. All these overtures were never accepted by the Palestinians, and therefore resulted only in greater bloodshed.
Grossman and his friends must also explain why, as zealous guardians of human rights, they seem so obsessed with Palestinian self-determination while remaining indifferent to the Palestinians’ basic human rights? Why are they working for the establishment of what will surely become an Iran-style state led by Hamas that will cause its citizens only increasing misery, both social and economic?
How can they call for the establishment of a regime that will oppress women and children, devoting all its energies to jingoism? How can they support the creation of a state whose leaders are committed to the destruction of Israel? Is the right of political self-determination so supreme that it trumps all else?
Only time will tell, of course, whether our “anxieties” are realistic or imaginary, whether Grossman grasps reality or whether he indulges in fantasies. The record seems to advise caution. If a Palestinian state is irredentist and warlike, it will be a great tragedy for both the Palestinians and for us.
Log in or Register
If you will it, David Grossman will bring peace
The Jerusalem Post
8 Jul ’09
David Grossman is one of our finest writers.
But he and his fellow peace seekers must explain why they remain indifferent to the Palestinians’ basic human rights.
Filed under:
Middle East • peace process • Zionism
David Grossman, one of our finest writers, is angry. In a recent article he said he feels Israelis accept with indifference “our stuck-up lives, devoid of all hope…” He believes we “coddle ourselves… in anxieties, lassitude and self-righteousness,” give in to “self-abnegation” and seek escape in “the sweet stupor of nationalism, militarism and victimhood.” We deny, he avers, “the legitimate needs and just claims of the Palestinians.” We refuse to understand that reality “requires flexibility, daring and vision.” We, Grossman charges, refuse to take “any real step that will lead to a true change of consciousness,” and bring about peace.
One could expect that Grossman, a sensitive writer and bereaved father, would not take out his frustration over the absence of peace by a blanket condemnation of most of the Israeli public. One would expect insights on why we have lost “the ability to achieve peace,” as he claims, and what we must do to achieve his “true change of consciousness.”
What change does he expect? Is giving in to “the legitimate needs and just claims of the Palestinians,” no matter what danger this poses to our survival, what he has in mind? Please spell it out, dear distinguished writer. Please teach us how to deal with the dangers that may result from your “vision”—or do you think the possibility of a Hamas takeover in the West Bank is plain fantasy?
ONE COULD also expect that Grossman would not make do with complaining that Israelis and Palestinians “do not really understand, deeply, what peace means,” but would try to describe to the stiff-necked inhabitants of this land the “option of true peace” he envisions. Is there any chance his vision would be accepted by most Palestinians? Would it make them abandon the militant “vision” of Hamas which most of them voted for?
This could be tested if Grossman and his fellow peace seekers—such as Shulamit Aloni, Yossi Beilin, Yossi Sarid, Yuli Tamir, most of the Haaretz publicists and many other prominent literary figures—would formulate an up-to-date, improved version of the Geneva peace initiative. We could then find out what we would be forced to give up and what kind of peace we would get in return.
Would it be a cold peace like the one with Egypt, which never misses an opportunity to undermine the State of Israel? As importantly, we would find out how many Palestinian and Arab leaders are willing to endorse an offer of peace that would meet most, but not all of their “legitimate needs and just claims” (like the right of return and a Judenrein West Bank?) as Grossman recommends. Would it be more than the very few who were willing to endorse the Geneva Initiative? If not, will Grossman and his ilk stop charging that we are peace resisters because we refuse to share their well-intentioned illusions?
GROSSMAN COMPLAINS that we cannot transcend the conflict in the new peace spirit of US President Barack Obama. He might want to consider the possibility that this is because he and his fellow visionaries on the Left simply keep reiterating the mantra of “peace now,” while dismissing the harsh realities. They keep ignoring the failure of all the instant peace initiatives they have advocated, from the Oslo agreements through the Ami Ayalon-Sari Nusseibeh “understandings,” from the far-reaching concessions offered by Ehud Barak at Camp David and Taba to the Beilin Geneva Initiative. All these overtures were never accepted by the Palestinians, and therefore resulted only in greater bloodshed.
Grossman and his friends must also explain why, as zealous guardians of human rights, they seem so obsessed with Palestinian self-determination while remaining indifferent to the Palestinians’ basic human rights? Why are they working for the establishment of what will surely become an Iran-style state led by Hamas that will cause its citizens only increasing misery, both social and economic?
How can they call for the establishment of a regime that will oppress women and children, devoting all its energies to jingoism? How can they support the creation of a state whose leaders are committed to the destruction of Israel? Is the right of political self-determination so supreme that it trumps all else?
Only time will tell, of course, whether our “anxieties” are realistic or imaginary, whether Grossman grasps reality or whether he indulges in fantasies. The record seems to advise caution. If a Palestinian state is irredentist and warlike, it will be a great tragedy for both the Palestinians and for us.
More recent commentary
The New Republic
19 May ’11
Economic Miracle
A Middle East peace strategy that could actually work.
The Jerusalem Post
15 Mar ’11
The government-tycoons-media triangle
Israel needs to slash its state budget by as much as possible if it wants a chance at fighting waste and corruption.
The Jerusalem Post
9 Mar ’11
Welfare and rebellion: The economic factor in the Arab uprisings
Too little attention has been paid to how Egypt’s socialist past and welfare-state present shaped the current rebellion.
The Jerusalem Post
7 Feb ’11
Is all quiet on the economic front?
The Herzliya Conference has become an important international event, but one central issue is absent: Israel’s debilitating economic concentration.
The Jerusalem Post
22 Jan ’11
Teaching an elephant to dance
It’s highly unlikely that government can ever learn to make long-term plans and execute them efficiently.
The Jerusalem Post
23 Dec ’10
Hellenization and Enlightenment: Post-Hanukka ruminations
How can one dare compare narrow-minded religion with the all-embracing faith of universality and equality that is socialism?
The Jerusalem Post
1 Dec ’10
Would Milton Friedman have approved?
Many of the social and economic troubles we are experiencing are due to the public’s lack of understanding of the need for economic literacy.
The Jerusalem Post
17 Oct ’10
Perverting public discourse
The PM’s courageous decision to tackle economic concentration was misrepresented by several of our media publications—owned of course by tycoons.
The Wall Street Journal
8 Oct ’10
Breaking Israel’s monopolies
Economic concentration hurts the country’s viability and the chances for peace.
The Jerusalem Post
4 Oct ’10
Israel’s progress undermined
A damaging ethos of ‘welfarism’ and distributive politics has come to dominate not only academia but our cultural, military and even our business elites.
The Jerusalem Post
19 Aug ’10
Unable to decide
The reformers must know the importance of the reform’s success both for Israel and for their careers, and what damage they will incur if it fails.
The Jerusalem Post
13 Jul ’10
Elana Kagan, terrorism and the law
Kagan’s admiration for Justice Aharon Barak’s philosophy may have revealed her own predilection for radical judicial activism.
The Jerusalem Post
30 May ’10
Yes, break them up
We must dismantle the oligarch-owned monopolies that impoverish the Israeli consumer and choke our economy.
The Wall Street Journal
18 May ’10
Land of silicon and money
The OECD’s invitation to Israel is a “seal of approval” but the country still needs more reforms.
The Jerusalem Post
10 Feb ’10
The surprise of it all
The world’s astonishment at Israel’s response to the Haiti disaster is insulting. What we saw there was Israel’s true face.
The Jerusalem Post
10 Jan ’10
Hi-tech prospects and pitfalls
Individual initiative and freedom are essential for creativity—in hi-tech as in all other spheres.
The Jerusalem Post
14 Oct ’09
A woman who knew her worth
As far as Rose Friedman was concerned, public kudos did not matter that much. She persisted in being a rose, no matter what.
The Jerusalem Post
22 Sep ’09
Movies in Nablus, dramas in Bethlehem
Lasting peace must grow from the bottom up, from an “economic peace process” that proves what advantages peace has to offer on a daily basis. It cannot come from signing peace agreements with radical and corrupt entities propped up by corrupting Western handouts.
The Jerusalem Post
15 Aug ’09
Israel’s ‘scrambled’ economic system
A courageous recent film has exposes the strong connection between Israeli oligarchs and bureaucrats. Unfortunately however the film’s simplistic pseudo-Marxist treatment is more misleading than revealing.
The Jerusalem Post
24 May ’09
The economy: look to the future
Netanyahu paid heavily to pass a budget in time; his “partners”’ bargaining tactics, bordering on blackmail, reflect poorly on our politics.
The Jerusalem Post
4 May ’09
Reform: prospects and pitfalls
Binyamin Netanyahu’s recent economic plan has great promise but faces obstacles—such as the media and the Histadrut—that may undermine its success.
The Jerusalem Post
11 Apr ’09
Big government? Yes, but there’s a reason
Is Binyamin Netanyahu’s government too big? Yes. So why would Netanyahu create such an unwieldy beast?
The Jerusalem Post
30 Mar ’09
To bail or not to bail
Should the government bail out those of our tycoons who cannot redeem NIS 100 billion worth of bonds?
The Wall Street Journal
12 Mar ’09
Mideast peace can start with economic growth
Billions of dollars in foreign aid to the Palestinians has resulted in war not peace. There’s a better way.
The Jerusalem Post
22 Feb ’09
Warning cries from Herzliya
The government is dysfunctional. The question is why—and how to mend it.
The Jerusalem Post
2 Feb ’09
A lesser economic evil
All government deficit spending is bad. But sometimes deficits are unavoidable. And some deficits are better then others.
The Jerusalem Post
22 Dec ’08
Spinners and cheaters
Why not exploit the crisis to destroy what little freedom Netanyahu’s reforms brought to the economy? Why care if the country will lose its only hope of deliverance from the economic retardation caused by our statist heritage?
The Jerusalem Post
3 Dec ’08
Precipitating the next collapse
Focusing on a putative pension crisis distracts our attention from the real serious crisis that a worldwide recession is bound to create here.
The Jerusalem Post
22 Oct ’08
The panic-mongers’ one-note chorus
The country, the pundits conclude, must return to the good old days of “social democracy.”
The Jerusalem Post
15 Jul ’08
The banks are bamboozling us again
In the name of stability the comptroller has ignored many of the banks’ offenses.
The Jerusalem Post
29 Apr ’08
An Irish-style banana republic
It must be either naiveté or cynicism that allows “Israel 2028” to recommend a reform that will make government a larger and a more efficient instrument for economic growth.
The New York Sun
29 Apr ’08
Israel still doesn’t get economy
Israel’s elites—especially the chattering classes in the press and the academy—are hostile to capitalism because our universities’ social sciences and liberal arts departments are dominated by post-modernist and neo-Marxist professors.
Ideas matter. Hostility to capitalism exacts a great price from the Israeli economy and from its hapless workers.
inFocus
2 Apr ’08
US charity to Israel reconsidered
Jewish institutional efforts must now undergo a period of reform and greater accountability. Some charitable efforts should be privatized. Individuals or groups of donors must take personal responsibility for specific projects, to ensure that funds are dispensed in a responsible and cost effective manner.
The Wall Street Journal
8 Mar ’08
Israel’s no-win strategy
Israeli politicians are preoccupied with political machinations designed to buy support from powerful interest groups by distributing government largesse. This causes not only the factionalization of politics and growing corruption, but consumes time and energy that leadership should use to address life and death issues.
The Jerusalem Post
20 Feb ’08
Dangerous infatuation
Government can no more control powerful economic forces than it can the rise and fall of tides. To effectively fulfill its nightwatchman role—to protect us from internal and external violence and to enforce contracts—government must be kept limited.
The Jerusalem Post
22 Jan ’08
What’s ‘public’ about their broadcasting?
Our “public channel,” funded by a compulsive tax, does not need to be pluralistic or even-handed.
Like other public institutions that lack well-defined ownership, Channel 1 has consequently been taken over by bureaucrats and by undemocratic workers’ unions.
The Jerusalem Post
21 Nov ’07
A year without Milton Friedman
This man did more good for humanity than any other.
The Jerusalem Post
17 Oct ’07
Getting beyond the teachers’ strike
As long as education remains a government monopoly, it is bound to function like all other government monopolies, where union bosses fill the vacuum that lack of defined ownership creates, and monopoly power allows them to blackmail the public.
The Jerusalem Post
19 Sep ’07
A healthy dose of skepticism
In the wake of the Second Lebanon War, there is hope that the phenomenal performance of the economy will finally make Israelis realize the crucial role it plays in their lives.
The Jerusalem Post
14 Aug ’07
How to grow Israeli hi-tech
At the recent Merage Foundation conference to help Israel’s hi-tech sector grow, calls were heard for more government “direction”. This despite sixty years of massive government intervention and “development efforts” that have led mostly to massive failures and waste.