Kirsten Powers is a thoughtful liberal who’s willing to challenge the party line. At times, though, her arguments strike me as misguided. Such is the case with her column in The Daily Beast titled, “What Evangelicals Get Wrong About Israel and the Palestinians.”
Ms. Powers quotes Todd Deatherage, co-founder of the Telos Group, an organization that “works with American evangelicals to help positively transform the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.” According to Mr. Deatherage, “What a lot of Christians don’t understand is the importance of realizing both people [the Israelis and the Palestinians] have legitimate connections to the land.” American evangelicals, we’re told, need to “understand the Palestinian perspective.”
“Palestinians have a need for dignity and respect, and a deep attachment to the land,” according to Deatherage. As for Powers, she criticizes American evangelicals for their “blind loyalty to Israel, with little to no regard for the plight of the Palestinian people.” She then asks, in the context of the Palestinians, “Since when is dehumanizing people—God’s creation—an acceptable Christian view?”
The answer, of course, is never. But it seems to me that both Powers and Deatherage are missing some important points.
Let’s start with some historical ones.
From 1948 through 1967 Jordan and Egypt controlled the West Bank and Gaza—and during that time neither nation lifted a finger to establish a Palestinian state. The Arab world seemed strangely indifferent to the Palestinians’ “deep attachment” and “legitimate connections” to the land. In fact, in 1970 King Hussein of Jordan slaughtered tens of thousands of Palestinians and eradicated the PLO from Jordan. And for those who maintain that the animosity against Israel is because of the occupied territories and settlements, there is this inconvenient fact: the PLO, whose declared purpose was the elimination of Israel, was founded in 1964—three years before the West Bank and Gaza fell under Israeli control. And what explains the 1948 and 1967 wars against Israel, before the occupied territories and settlements ever became an issue?
The land Israel did win in 1967—including the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, the Sinai desert and the Golan Heights—was the result of a war of aggression by Arab states against Israel. After its victory in the Six-Day War, Israel signaled to the Arab states its willingness to relinquish virtually all the territories it acquired in exchange for peace—but that hope was crushed in 1967 when Arab leaders met in Khartoum and adopted a formula that became known as the “three noes”: no peace with Israel, no negotiations with Israel, and no recognition of Israel.
The wave of anti-Israeli rage never subsided. Thirty-three years later, in 2000, then-Prime Minister Ehud Barak offered up an astonishing set of concessions to Yasir Arafat, including having Israel withdraw to virtually all of the 1949-1967 boundaries, so that a Palestinian state could be proclaimed with its capital in Jerusalem. Yet Arafat not only turned down the offer but responded with an intifada against Israel. And in 2005 then-Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and Israel did what no other nation—not the Jordanians, not the Egyptians, not the British, not anyone—has ever done before: provide the Palestinians with the opportunity for self-rule. In response, Israel was shelled by thousands of rockets and mortar attacks.
The record also shows that when Israel has an Arab interlocutor that is interested in authentic peace—such as Jordan and Egypt under Anwar Sadat and Hosni Mubarak—it is quite willing to make peace and return land for peace (see the Sinai Desert, which Israel returned to Egypt and which is three times the size of Israel and accounted for more than 90 percent of the land Israel won in the 1967 war).
I detail this history because it’s highly relevant to what is happening in the here and now. For while some “rejectionists” do exist among evangelical Christians in America and among some Jews in Israel, the reality is this: A two-state solution is the official policy of Israel. The obstacle to a Palestinian homeland doesn’t have to do with evangelical or Israeli rejectionists; it has to do with the inability of Hamas and the Palestinian leadership to make their own inner peace with the Jewish state of Israel. As long as that’s the case, it’s perfectly appropriate to distinguish between what Churchill called the fire brigade and the fire. And as the most recent conflict in Gaza has once again demonstrated, Hamas not only targets innocent Israeli civilians; it does everything it can to cause the deaths of innocent Palestinians (by using them as human shields) in order to score propaganda victories. Israel, on the other hand, takes extraordinary steps to try to prevent civilian deaths. Denying these realities—constructing a false narrative that fits a false hope—makes peace less, not more, likely.
This doesn’t mean that every Israeli action and every Israeli government has acted wisely. Israel itself is constantly engaged in a lively discussion about its approach to everything from settlements to roadblocks. My point is simply that in the totality of its actions, facing organizations and nations dedicated to its destruction, Israel has acted in estimable ways. People demand of Israel what they demand of no other nation, and the moral double standard that is applied to it is repulsive.
I want to turn, finally, to what it means to be genuinely pro-Palestinian. The old paradigm argues that to help the Palestinian people means applying pressure on Israel to hand over new land. But in Gaza we have just tested the proposition that the Palestinians, if given self-rule, would govern responsibly. The result wasn’t just escalated violence against Israel; it was destitution and suffering for Palestinians who lived under the leadership of Fatah and then (after a brief and bloody intra-Palestinian civil war) Hamas. Which brings us to a larger truth: the Palestinian people, many of whom are bone weary of war, have suffered horribly at the hands of other Arab nations, who have used them as pawns; and at the hands of a corrupt and malevolent Palestinian leadership. The few responsible Palestinian leaders who have emerged in recent years have proven to be much too weak to shape the course of events.
Those who profess solidarity with the Palestinian people and want them to live lives of dignity and peace—which is an admirable and humane impulse—should focus their energy and efforts less on Israel and more on replacing the political elite and reforming the political culture of Palestinians who will not let their burning hatred for the Jewish state dim, even for a moment. Unless and until that happens, no amount of Israeli good will and no amount of territorial concessions will lead to peace. It will, in fact, only inflame the passions of Israel’s enemies and draw the Jewish and Palestinian people closer to days of violence, days of mourning, days of war. Surely that is something that those who long to be peacemakers and agents of reconciliation should understand.
Yes, Kirsten Powers is a generally open-minded liberal. Which makes her column all the more troubling. In a world where you cannot say "golf" or "Chicago" without someone raising the eyebrow of whistled racism, and in a World of 24/7 news cycles with analysis upon analysis of everything from the Benghazi matter to Charlie Sheen's sex life, it is still O.K. to reflexively bash Israel or anyone that supports Israel. This, despite all the historical evidence cited in the post that it is the Palestinians that need tough love, not Israelis or their supporters. It shows that the momentum of opinion is always against Israel. Efforts need to be made to push back against it. I used to look at the U.S. as a dam helping to hold back this force. But given the actions of our present administration, I think many leaks have formed which may be hard to fix.
So many people line up and say " we are criticizing Israel for Israel's sake, to make them change into a better version of themselves that will help them in the long run", tough love blah blah blah. n nHave any of these jokers had the balls to say the same to Hamas or the PA? n nHas Obama ever asked the Palestinians to engage in 'serious self reflection'? n n
Bravo, Peter, on your excellent post
"more on replacing the political elite and reforming the political culture of Palestinians who will not let their burning hatred for the Jewish state dim, even for a moment." n nRemove that, and there is no unique 'palestinian' identity as distinct form a generic arab identity. . n nNo ancient stories, coins, or kings. No traditional dances, foods, or ancient scripts. Zilch. Nada.
To a liberal, 'balance' means antisemitism. Plain and simple. They are paranoids and their so called balance means ;balance against their own perception that the whole world is controlled by the Jews and liberals alone offer the 'balance' of the opposing and therefore correct point of view.
Let's roll back the borders of Israel to historic locations – specifically the time of David. In other words, all of Judea and Samaria, etc. This is the land G-d gave the Israelis. Let the Palestinians migrate to a new homeland … in Egypt or Syria. n nCan't we all just get along?
“Palestinians have a need for dignity and respect, and a deep attachment to the land,” n nAnd if they feel they don;t get it, they are justified in blowing up pizza parlors and slitting the throats of sleeping children and shooting pregnant women point blank in the belly. n nAs if Israel has not given them more dignity and respect that any arab nation has ever given any arab people – and, in this case, never has such dignity and respect been given to a less deserving 'people'. n nAnd we all know if you have 'a deep attachment to the land' (doesn't that sound 'authentic'?) , even if it is only as deep or goes back only as far as the return of the Jews to their land, well, you are justified in doing just about anything . . . n nWho is this tool Deatherage? n nWhy does he or she expect the Jews to be more 'Christian' than 'Christians'? n nAt what point does a people forfeit its right to 'dignity and respect'?How many buses do they need to blow up, how many children do they need to spill the brains of? How many celebratory candies do they have to pass out when civilians are brutalized? n nWhat about the Sudanese, and Syrians? Don't they deserve at least 5% of the dignity and respect and support the 'Palestinians' get?
Ruminating further about this 'deep attachment to the land' remark. n nIt speaks to an atavistic view of the Palestinians on the part of the writer. n nThe Palestinians are such primitive brutes (is the subtext), that they are 'deeply attached to the land' such as we never are, and can therefore be excused and pardoned some very nasty behaviors that arise because of 'that deep attachment to the land'. n nThey are not 21st century adults as 'we are', implies the writer, but something else. Child-like, lashing out when 'their land' is threatened. n nAnd that is before we even get to the discussion of whose land it is or isn't. And if you are attached to the land, does that mean you need your own country, and army, and airforce? And if you say that yes, you do, what about the hundreds of thousands of other groups 'deeply attached to the land' (and for far longer than the 'Palestinians')? Do they get an army and air force too? If not, why not? n nSick. Hard racism of zero expectations. n nThe issue only comes up for two reasons: n nArabs have oil, and their enemies are Jews. Period. That is all a Martian landing on earth and spending 5 minutes on mid eastern history would conclude.
regarding: n n What about the Sudanese, and Syrians? Don't they deserve at least 5% of the dignity and respect and support the 'Palestinians' get? n nand n nArabs have oil, and their enemies are Jews. Period. That is all a Martian landing on earth and spending 5 minutes on mid eastern history would conclude. n nyou forget the elephant in the room n nthe first conflict concerns regular peoples, the second conflict includes JEWS nand the western world obsession with and lust for the blood of Jews n nNothing to get Europeans excited like the idea of shedding more Jew blood nthey like dead Jews.. n nmeh…..
Beinart also writes for the Daily Beast. nContagion…
For better or worse, the only way 'dignity' seems to be achievable (for the PA, anyway) is through the birth of an independent nation. The only way to achieve that is to eschew the Right of Return. Take a check, whatever. So long as the insistence on the right of return remains, all other negotiations are a joke and MUST FAIL. nFailure to get rid of this is LITERALLY choosing enmity forever. nThis has been the case so far. nI see nothing in REALITY to indicate this is changing, especially what happened after Abbas made a remark indicating he personally had given this up.
For better or worse, the only way 'dignity' seems to be achievable (for the PA, anyway) is through the birth of an independent nation. n nrepulsive culture with a thin veneer of gracious hospitable behavior that can turn to murderous rage on a dime-or lull someone into security before being decapitated n narabs achieve dignity by slaughtering their women at the hint of any independent behaviors n nthey maintain their dignity by murdering any opposition and severely punishing anyone misguided enough to question or criticize n nthese people are all about appearance and bravado n nas long as these people, adhere to islam, there can never be peace AS WE UNDERSTAND IT with Israel n nMuslims use words like peace and justice but the meaning of these words is different to the muslim mind n nPEACE n n9:29 Fight against such of those who have been given the Scripture as believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, and forbid not that which Allah hath forbidden by His messenger, and follow not the Religion of Truth, until they pay the tribute readily, being brought low. n n nFreedom of religion to a muslim means freedom for islam—-ONLY nwake up
Reasonable article from someone that looks and speaks for the outside looking in, BUT! As a born American from South Louisiana I lived in Damascus, Syria for many years before, during and after the Desert Storm War, there are a approx. 2 main things that no one ever talks about there will never be PEACE in the middle east between two family members until Forgiveness toward one another takes place individually, I will not go into details but I had been asked many times during delegate meetings what do they need to do to accomplish peace among their fellow countries/with one another, 1. I stated the nature was very unforgiving, 2. Was also very unmerciful, then I stated I had never encountered so much strife, and hatred in my life toward humanity are a people, then I asked the question were does this nature of strife, and hatred come from are the root cause, there was never answer, I always got puzzled look from them, these Syrians, Lebanese, Jordanians, Kuwaitu2019s, Egyptians, Iraqis, Iranians delegateu2019s became my beloved friends where well educated, most were educated in Europe are the US, I was invited inside their families which is not a very easy thing to accomplish because of their protocol, customs, culture and Islam religion. Note their families generally speaking are sacred/most valued. With closing my experience from this strife, and hatred is not an attitude, an attitude can be changed quickly but it is in the nature of the people which is the most dangerous of them all, it continues from one generation to the next and has become more violent with being justified, which means there is no end until it reaches total destruction on them are humanity
Here are three more things that people need to understand about the Arab-Israeli conflict:
1. The Palestinian movement is directly descended from the Nazis. They were Hitler’s volunteers in Palestine, with much of their ideology taken from Nazi radio broadcasts during the war. Whoever supports the Palestinian cause is *literally* supporting Nazis. This history has been covered by Jeffrey Herf in “Nazi Propaganda for the Arab World”, by John Loftus in “The Secret War Against the Jews”, and by Franciso Gil-White.
2. The “Palestinian people” were created through granting that Nazi movement control of the schools and the mosques for three generations of youth and counting, and by allowing them to kill any imam, mukhtar, or schoolteacher who failed to follow the party line. I am aware of no single source that covers this comprehensively, but there are records such as the Cairo treaty of 1969, statements by Arab leaders to the effect that the imprisonment of refugees in these controlled camps was a necessary measure to continue the war, and intermittent reports of assassinations of peace activists.
3. Leftist support for the Palestinians stems from Soviet marching orders issued in the early 1970s, as documented by Roberta Goren in “The Soviet Union and Terrorism”. It is devoid of any consistency with progressive ideology and is based instead on the tribalism of following the apparent consensus of the community, excluding Jews as the Other, and the pride and self-esteem in the power of denouncing Jews as lesser and inferior people without losing respect in the community. It is a self-sustaining mob psychology at this point.