Israel-Palestine conflict in Australia
I’ve been bombarded with propaganda on the Israeli Palestinian conflict and feel it my duty to write more fully about my position on it. I will try to include everything I consider to be relevant to the matter in this essay. To be as concise as possible, I will mainly focus on conclusions rather than the detailed way in which I reached them. If my reader wants me to elaborate on the reasoning behind any of my views, I will try to accommodate each request as best I can.
?People, as do I, tend to form an impression about someone based on a handful of comments, but Israel is not a topic on which a single remark can reflect the full range of issues which are involved, at least not for me. My target audience are Australian readers with a range of backgrounds and knowledge about the Israeli Palestinian conflict.
?Disclosure
?I shall start with a disclosure of my background and biases (perceived or actual):
?1.??????? I am ethnically Jewish, but I am not a proponent of Judaism.
2.??????? I am an atheist.
3.??????? I do not accept any faith-based argument to be legitimate. For example, I do not accept a land claim based in religious text or an alleged grant by a fictitious entity to be worthy of consideration.
4.??????? I was born and have lived all my life in the diaspora (i.e. outside Israel).
5.??????? Most of my extended family are Russian migrants who live in Israel (I may refer to them as “Russian”).
6.??????? I want my Israeli friends and family to live in safety and prosperity in the territory of modern-day Israel which excludes internationally recognised occupied territories unless such territories are formally and legally annexed by Israel.
7.??????? I want my immediate family to live in safety and prosperity in my chosen country of residence.
8.??????? I consider patriotism to be an undesirable trait.
9.??????? In any conflict between the preference of a state and an individual, I consider the individual’s rights should always prevail except where such rights cause harm to other individuals.
10.? I have been travelling to Israel since 1991 and have observed the development of its culture, improvement in standards of living and attitudes of Jewish Israelis towards the Palestinian dispute.
11.? I have a layman’s understanding of the Israeli parliamentary and civil justice system.
12.? I have studied the history of Israel, from the Zionist movement which led to the creation of the state in 1948, to today, including wars and negotiations.
13.? Subject to all of the above, I am pro-Israel.
?Israel is a sovereign state
?I consider the above statement to be axiomatic.
?There is no question about the legitimacy of Israel’s existence, right to defend itself from external enemies or to determine its internal laws. It may be an expansionist state, it may from time to time contravene international law, it may even be an apartheid state. It may be all of these things, but none of them change the fact that it is a legitimate state like any other legitimate state.
?Russia, China and USA are examples of states which do some or all the wrongdoings of which Israel is accused and I do not hear any credible voices suggesting that Russia, China or USA have no right to exist.
?Since I consider Israel to be a legitimate state in the same way as I consider Russia, China or USA to be legitimate states, I do not engage in discussions in which Israel’s legitimacy is questioned.
Zionism should cease to exist
Since the main purpose of Zionism was the creation of a Jewish state, the movement should cease to exist immediately as it has fulfilled its purpose.
?If Zionists do not cease to exist, they should explain how they justify their continued activities. The only probable justification I can imagine for the continued existence of the Zionist movement is that the current territory of the state of Israel does not fulfil the modern Zionists’ goal and the continued purpose of Zionists is to expand Israel to incorporate larger territory, perhaps land included in the ancient kingdoms of Judea and Israel currently partially comprised of territory outside the modern state of Israel and/or the occupied territories.
If the expansion of modern Israel is a purpose of modern Zionists, I oppose Zionism in the same way as I oppose Russia’s claims to land in Ukraine, Georgia, Moldova and other sovereign states.
Pro-Israeli propaganda
?I want to discuss the phenomenon of pro-Israel propaganda (“PIP”).
A sizable proportion (if not most) of the material I encounter on social media seeks to legitimise Israel’s right to exist. Since I consider Israel to be a legitimate state, I do not see any utility in the promotion of its right to exist. Most PIP is therefore superfluous.
?The problem with PIP is that it is not merely neutral. It is, mostly, highly misleading at best, or purposefully false at worst. Therefore, I consider PIP to be counterproductive rather than just redundant. It achieves the opposite result to the one it presumably seeks to achieve, assuming, of course, that the intention of the PIP authors is to increase credible support for Israel. I may, of course, be wrong in this assumption and it may well be the case that the PIP authors know that the PIP is based on false or misleading information and that is exactly how they design it to be. Perhaps all propaganda is, by definition, based on false premises because only defective material can contain the necessary emotive content needed to support an already biased interlocutor looking for content s/he can use to advance his/her unfounded views. You can now imagine a situation where a PIP carrier has the same or similar view as do I, but we are likely to disagree about the rationale for our similar views creating an impression that we are on opposite sides of the argument. Many of my Russian friends support Israel, as do I, but they often post material which is highly offensive to me and, in my view, to any rational person.
?There are many low-quality examples of PIP. One such common but inherently deficient argument is that:
a.??????? Israel is very small
b.??????? Israel is the only Jewish country in the world
c.??????? Arabs have 22 countries
d.??????? Arab countries have many times more land than Israel
This PIP implies that the Arabs are somehow being unreasonable in failing to let Israel have its little piece of land. The structure of this argument is akin to a poor person stealing a million dollars from a billionaire and attempting to categorise the billionaire’s dismay as greed in failing to share a tiny portion of the billionaire’s wealth with the thief.
Some of the less obviously false PIP arguments are as follows:
Jews have lived in the land of modern Israel for 3,000 years and have had an uninterrupted connection with it
?This statement is misleading. Firstly, in my view, 100 years (or one lifetime) is a much more relevant period to consider for the purpose of establishing connection to land. But even if we go to 200, 500 or even 1,000 years, the vast majority of inhabitants of the relevant land were Bedouin, Druze and, more generally, Muslim Arabs. They cultivated the land (e.g. harvested Olive trees) or maintained a nomadic lifestyle. Furthermore, there is no meaningful connection between the tiny minority of Jews who lived in the area to the Jews who migrated in the past 100 years to form the state. In fact, by this logic, Jews have a bigger claim to forming a Jewish state in Spain, Poland, Ukraine or New York than they did in modern Israel last century.
Israel has always offered peace and coexistence with a sovereign Palestinian state while Palestinians have never accepted Israel’s right to exist and have always insisted that all of the land of modern Israel should be Palestine
This PIP is false and misleading.
While Palestinian officials have threatened to withdraw recognition over Israeli policies, the Palestinian Authority has formally recognized the state of Israel as per the 1993 Oslo Accords. It continues to hold this position to this day, despite the deterioration of the peace process.
As for Israel’s side, we can only judge Israel’s position towards the resolution of the Palestinian dispute by Israel’s actions and known policies. We know that Netanyahu’s open policy in the past 25 years has been to reject the possibility of a two-state solution. We also know that when Israel appeared to be the closest in its history to achieving formal peace with Palestinians and the negotiation of the formation of a Palestinian state, its leader Yitzhak Rabin who was instrumental in the peace initiative, was assassinated by a Jewish Israeli in 1995. Israel’s policy reversed after his death.
Eternal and undivided
The reference to Jerusalem as the “eternal and undivided capital of Israel” is a phrase pinned by Netanyahu. Such a categorisation of Jerusalem is an attempt to put a final nail in the coffin of the two-state peaceful solution as the inclusion of East Jerusalem as part of the Palestinian state was at all relevant times an essential condition of agreement. The words “eternal” and “undivided” also create a false historical narrative for obvious reason.
Netanyahu’s words are reminiscent of the first stanza of the anthem of the USSR:
Союз нерушимый республик свободных
Сплотила навеки Великая Русь.
Да здравствует созданный волей народов
Единый, могучий Советский Союз!
领英推荐
which means:?
The indestructible union of free republics
United forever by the Great Rus'.
Long live the united, mighty Soviet Union
Created by the will of the people!
Every claim is historically false. The Soviet Union was not:
·????? created by the will of the people
·????? comprised of free republics
·????? formed for eternity (but a mere 69 years)
·????? indestructible (it didn’t even need destroying as it collapsed by itself)
It is especially ironic to see Russian migrants buy into the PIP of “eternal” retrospective re-engineering. I consider the Russian Jewish community (of which I am part) to be one of the main reasons why Israel is at war today. I say this on the basis of my own observations of the extreme right-wing views of Russian migrants in Germany, Israel, USA and Australia, as well as the observation of Bill and Hillary Clinton who identified Russian immigrants to Israel as a central obstacle to achieving a Middle East peace deal, a deal which the Clintons tried very hard to achieve but ultimately failed.
I can spend another 10 pages writing about PIP but the main message of this essay is that propaganda cannot serve anyone well in the short, medium or long term.
Most of the discussion about Israel on social media is focused on PIP (or similarly baseless pro-Palestinian propaganda which I do not directly address in this essay) rather than facts or analysis of the situation on the ground and we should all make a conscious effort to move away from propaganda-based discourse.
Current war in Gaza
I was against the commencement of military action in Gaza immediately following the October 7 Hamas attack on Israel and continue to oppose the manner in which the war is being conducted.
In my layman’s assessment, Israel had just been the victim of a gruesome unprovoked attack and it could have relied on the support of world governments, including Arab governments, to apply pressure on Hamas to release the hostages through diplomatic negotiations and achieve further positive strategic outcomes.
The Abraham Accords had extended Israel’s formal friendships to 6 Arab countries. Given some time for diplomatic negotiations, Israel could have built more goodwill with Saudi Arabia by limiting its military activities in Gaza having regard to pressing genuine strategic goals (e.g. freeing the hostages, disarming Hamas).
Even after 15 months of military action, Israel still found itself forced to negotiate with Hamas to seek the release of hostages. Furthermore, the Israeli government must have known that its stated purpose of the destruction of Hamas was an unachievable goal and that its action would not bring safety to Israeli hostages, Israeli soldiers, Israeli citizens, or Jews in the diaspora (ie what I would have considered to be its legitimate strategic goals).
?My proposed approach may not have worked, and military action may still have become necessary, but Israel did not try it. Israel could have at least built the case for military action like it did for its military activity in Iran, Lebanon and Syria. It did not do so. Instead, Israel decided to undertake what now appears to be illegal and, in my view, immoral, military activity in Gaza which significantly damaged its reputation in the world for a generation.
On balance, it appears more likely to me that the decision to commence the immediate mass bombing of Gaza was made at least in part to preserve the Netanyahu government in circumstances of substantial domestic unrest immediately preceding the Hamas attack. The personal self-preservation of a failed leader may well have prevailed over legitimate strategic goals of the nation.
Lebanon, Iran and Syria
In stark contrast to Israel’s immoral and strategically unjustified military activity in Gaza, its recent successful action in Lebanon against Hezbollah, in Iran, and in destroying Syrian army capabilities after effectively bringing about the circumstances which led to the overthrow of Bashar Al Assad, have all been resoundingly positive in almost all respects.
In fact, it feels like two very different entities were governing the Iran, Syria and Lebanon fronts to the front in Gaza. In Lebanon, Syria and Iran, Israel demonstrated best practice in modern warfare. I cannot imagine a more humane way in which it could have achieved its legitimate strategic goals in Lebanon, Syria and Iran than the way it did.
Israel’s incredible success in degrading Iran’s reach has brought it the victory it much needed and, in my view, deserved.
Impact of Israel’s actions on safety of Jews in the diaspora
Israel positions itself as the sole protector of Jews in a post-Holocaust world. As one such Jew, I question whether the unprecedented wave of violent antisemitism in my country, Australia, is caused by Israel’s unjustified military activity in Gaza. It certainly appears to be so. Therefore, I consider it reasonable to conclude that Israel has failed in its stated role as my protector. This failure is further exacerbated by the illegitimate premise based on which its war continues – the preservation of a right-wing Netanyahu government.
On the other hand, I cannot ignore the inverse relationship between antisemitism and Israel’s actual (rather than stated) self-interest. In fact, it seems to me to be perfectly reasonable to conclude that antisemitism is in Israel’s interest. The more antisemitism, the more migration by Jews to Israel will follow and, more importantly, the more support from the diaspora Israel will receive as it becomes a “Plan B” country for Jews subject to increasing discrimination and violence in our home countries.
Whether intentionally or not, Israel is a clear winner from rising antisemitism and I cannot ignore this conflict of interest between myself and the state.
Albanese government cause of rising violence
The current Albanese Labour government has taken a position which cannot be categorised as neutral or in the Australian national interest, which is to prioritise domestic harmony.
The Prime Minister has been consistently and purposefully slow to react to rising violent attacks against the Australian Jewish community.
Foreign Minister Wong has indirectly but knowingly supported military terrorism.
It appears that the government is pursuing illegitimate goals of appeasing Muslim and left-wing voters while pursuing international policies which have no hope of being helpful to the Palestinian people. Anthony Albanese, not unlike Benjamin Netanyahu, is a failed leader looking for (any) means of survival.
Where to now for the Israel-Palestine dispute
Despite the supposed complexity of the conflict and many years of failed attempts at peace, the range of feasible outcomes is not extensive and can be summarised without oversimplification as follows:
Formation of a Palestinian state
The closest the parties have been to a peace deal was based on the formation of a Palestinian state with territory likely to be comprised of Gaza, part of the West Bank and East Jerusalem. Many world governments, including Australia, continue to support this outcome which now appears farfetched given the prevalence of right-wing sentiment in Israel and USA both openly opposing a two-state solution.
Status quo
More of the same is one of the likely outcomes in the foreseeable future because Netanyahu does not appear to want peace within current borders. By building West Bank settlements and waging a destructive war in Gaza, Israel appears to do everything in its power to make the lives of Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank unbearable, perhaps in the hope that in the right circumstances, they can be convinced to leave which would then allow Israel to extend its power and territorial control.
Annexation of Gaza and/or West Bank
Israel has not annexed its occupied territories most likely because of the demographic problem – Arabs given Israeli citizenship would outnumber and therefore outvote Israeli Jews, which is presumably seen as an existential threat. If, however, these Arabs are forced and/or motivated to move elsewhere, annexation may become viable, in which case Israel will continue territorial expansion. Trump has indicated that the USA may support the migration of Palestinians to Egypt and Jordan.
Conclusion
I have set out briefly my:
I consider the situation to be increasingly dangerous for Jews worldwide and the prospect of escalation of conflict and continued rise in antisemitism to be more likely than a de-escalation of conflict and reduction in antisemitic sentiment.
?In the premises, my call to action to my Australian reader is:
?1.??????? do not spread propaganda
2.??????? do not engage in discussions based on propaganda
3.??????? focus on your family’s physical security
4.??????? vote Liberal at the next election
Senior Lawyer, Family Law, Peninsula Community Legal Centre Inc.
2 周Thank you for a thought provoking piece. You have expressed many of my views in a way I could not.
-retired member of the RAAF and retired Research interviewer. Survivor of the forced adoption diaspora
3 周I agree with the vast majority of what you say. I only add that Palestinian by genetics and DNA are related to the Jewish people especially the Jewish people with a Asian middle east heritage and that is the problem. The Jewish immigrants have little in common with the peoples of semitic origin who lived in the region for centuries. They came with what I call settlers views that involved removing their genetic relatives which they did. But in a way that created a new diaspora of Palestinians. If there is going to be peace there needs to be a two state solution with Palestine being a state with no real military and it borders protected by the United Nation.
Ilya, overall you have written a good article. I understand that you express your own opinion and you make statements, with some of which people like me will disagree. I lived in Israel for 7 years and I continue to read and research history of the ancient and modern Israel. I prefer not to discuss politics on LinkedIn since it is a professional forum (not Facebook) and sometimes it's not worth to talk politics even with your friends if you don't want to lose them. However, some of your statements are absolutely incorrect and that forced me to write this comment. If you want to discuss, you can call me later and we can chat about it in a peaceful and respectful conversation ??
Managing Director at MSA Worldwide, Member IFA Board of Directors, Author, Lecturer, University Professor, Litigation Expert, Social Franchisor
4 周Ignorant understanding of the issues from the misunderstanding of the definition of Zionism - which is included more than establishing the state - to the comical thought of Israel’s better action on the 8th of turning the other cheek. The apparent thought that the Arab version of speeches should be ignored and the English version adopted means the writer has never bothered to look one inch below the surface at the issues. Has he ever bothered to even look at a school book used in Gaza? Is he aware of Bill Clinton’s comments at the time and recently on why a Palestinian state does not exist. Not understanding that js unforgivable in any discussion of why a Palestine does not exist. And ignoring the archeological finds, and historical facts of the lineage and how and why Jews were existed from the land is simplistic. Applying the same measure to Australia should mean the boats are being loaded for the trip back to England. The level of accuracy in the article reminds me of the great John Belushi assessment that the US entered WWII when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor.
Director and Lead Appliance Technician
4 周Well done Ilya. You’ve clearly put much thought into it. I don’t necessarily agree with some points. But in aggregate i do. I don’t feel Israel’s actions on Gaza were egregious. If that happened in Australia, or to Australia’s, we d have a massive influx of volunteers joining the ADF desirous of the blowing the shit through anyone remotely Arabic. This happened to a small population. Everyone knows everyone else. It’s much more personal. I’d have razed the whole damn Gaza strip and applolgised later. But I don’t get to do any of that. Certainly, some of this is because Bibi wants to stay in parliament instead of in jail.