Maybe those that shout “death to the Arabs” at soccer matches should be lectured on liberating themselves and the oppressed. I look forward to an essay from you describing what tactics they should use.

I never argued that we should wait for a Gandhi to make peace. Rather than “blame” either side, I explored the mutually reinforcing Palestinian and Israeli attraction to violence. I mapped the patterns of misunderstanding, humiliation and rage on both sides that have carried on the conflict. My goal in this essay, as in my other work, was to understand people and the tragedy of their situation in order to find a way out.

In a rightwing magazine, I argued forcefully against the belief Islam is the source of terrorism – rejecting what may be the most basic tenet of neoconservative thinking in recent years. I likewise rejected the simple formulation that the ongoing conflict is the entirely the fault of the Arab side. This is not what Standard readers expected in their mailboxes

(When the New Republic ran its Bell Curve excerpt or its assault on Hillarycare, it did not prove that the writers of those articles had become liberals. It showed that TNR was publishing pieces outside its expected ideological slot.)

I seem to have disappointed you, however, by refusing to put the “onus” entirely on the Israeli side. Victims can also be perpetrators; people can both suffer and cause terrible suffering. This is something that both the doctrinaire supporters and the doctrinaire critics of Israel refuse to see. Mirror images of each other, they argue endlessly, and uselessly, over who is the righteous victim.

I will not bother with your description of British colonial rule of India as “relatively benign” or your underestimation of furies of the Jim Crow South. Such descriptions, however, do not add to the seriousness of an argument.

It’s true that people not directly involved in the conflict may be able to offer advice. There’s some superb advice, for instance, in Jay Rothman’s book Resolving Identity-Based Conflict and in Marc Ross’s Cultural Contestation in Ethnic Conflict.

It’s also true – as our friend YBD shows – that one can be close to the scene and describe it in black and white terms. Nonetheless, distance obscures detail, and those further away do face a greater risk of simplification. This is equally true of the Mort Kleins of the US Jewish community, and of some of Israel’s critics who profess to be progressives.

And a last comment to Clif: Palestinian actions and Arab actions in general have had a clear effect on settlement effort since its beginning. The Palestinian-backed “Zionism is Racism” resolution helped create political backing for Gush Emunim’s original settlement efforts in the West Bank (as I detail in The Accidental Empire). Palestinian extremism has built support for the Israeli right, just as the Israeli right has built support for Palestinian extremists. When peace appears unachievable, the hardliners gain more public backing. One challenge of peacemaking is to break that cycle.

And with that, I’m moving on to new subjects for a while. Enough rehashing.

The “coarsening”, for me anyway, has to do also with being at war here: ie with the Weekly Standard and those who comment on there merely for being. The challenge is not only to change the dynamic in Israel and amongst the Palestinians, but to change it here too. There is no reason why Gorenberg should be crucified for daring to place his piece in a place where it should be read and discussed and perhaps taken on board on the Israeli side. Since this conflict is half Israel, what would non-violence ( or a change of 180 degrees in tactics/strategy) look like on the Israeli side?

That Morris has turned ugly along with many others ( I agree) is exhibit #1 of what exactly? it either makes Gorenberg’s case against violence or for ratcheting up the level of it to some fantasy level from the Palestinian side.

My own advise to the palestinians (seeing as I am not one) has always been just this – look after your own house as much as possible – and learn from the jews. That which is not written (and [much] talked) about does not exist (lessons learnt from the fate of the Gypsies – and the Kurds, of course). The more that is written the more effect it will have – not instantly, but eventually (insert smart chinese saying here. something about stones being ground by water drops). As for the Jews in America, I keep harping on the same theme – there’s has been profound damage to the collective psyche of israelis as a result of the occupation (nothing original here but a truth that needs deeper consideration than it gets). Cognitive dissonance that goes on too long has consequences. I get lots of tortured silence in response. I guess it’s hard to face. ideologies, idealizations and all that.

You are lucky – it’s easier in israel, where they talk about everything all the time. Of course, it’s fun and may even look (deceptively?) open minded. Though when I visit, it somehow seems a bit like the chatter in an asylum (specializing in paranoic schizophrenia?).

So how does one get the Gorenbergs of this world to take a real hard look at what there is?

I’ll submit to you again, that from your privileged position in israeli intellectual circles you cannot assess the true positions and potential reactions of your countrymen (and women) who perhaps do not quite share your lofty positions. You keep assuming they are like you – a peaceful bunch at heart (everyone wants peace, right?). But you seem to have completely failed to internalize what really happened in Gaza and the following Israeli elections. The dream you were talking about before indicates that sometimes the sub-conscious knows better.

maybe you should talk some more to Russian immigrants and to members of the settlers groups (especially ones not so surrounded by inteligencia). That’s well over 1.5 M people represented in Israel by these groups alone.

I’d also present benny morris as exhibit #1 – the ‘dove turned hawk” which you implied is because of the trauma of suicide bombings. It’s not that he changed – it’s the magnitude and depth of the change, coupled with the smug sense of entitlement, exceptionalism and triumphalism he displays lately, that is so common now in israel’s streets. it’s not about Morris. it’s that he seems to have internalized the changes israel’s character has undergone more deeply than you have. It’s long past time to wake up and smell the flowers of evil that have sprouted in the not-so-holy-land.

I WOULD GREATLY APPRECIATE A RESPONSE FROM MR. GORENBERG.

Mr. Gorenberg, you did not give enough weight to the currently, presently existing (though on a low-flame) non-violent forms of Palestinian protest, which are hardly allowed any chance to develop by Israel.

As I commented previously, daily protests against the Wall and land-grabbing have become more violent over the past few years due to the border police’s “dispersal”, and HAMAS ITSELF planned on several occasions to march thousands in Gaza toward its besieged border, and form a “human chain” around the border, but Israel threatened to take lethal action and nothing came of it.

That is a prime example of how something sounds good in theory, but in reality verges on unfeasible. The fear of Palestinians to be chased away by the stinging tear gas, to be maimed by Magav beatings, to be arrested or shot cannot be waved away by saying that “the standard is not superhuman.”

The Raj in India was doubtlessly brutal in its tactics- often more than israel – and there are definite similarities as between all colonial situations, but we cannot deduce from one given case how to treat another simply because of several similarities.

The roadblock regime is a major hindrance on free movement. When Palestinians can’t get from village to village, city to city, without being stopped, checked, questioned, detained, there goes one of the building blocks needed for such a LARGE-SCALE movement to develop.

When the Shabak threatens even SMALL-SCALE Palestinians who wish to protest land-theft, or organize rallies, when people are black-listed and face consequences that can affect their day-to- day lives in the most fundamental way, when they are beaten and arrested and shot at, there goes another building block, what you patronizingly call “courage.”

When it difficult to leave the West Bank -let alone Gaza — to receive some western education and know you will be allowed to return to your home (as the case of Awad partially shows), the key need for an educated leadership is dwindled greatly, as it is by dismal economic conditions (far worse in Gaza than the West Bank).

And finally, you ignored violence against the Raj in India, such as the 19th century rebellion, that eventually lead to gradual British moderation. You ignored violence and sabotage against the Brits before and during Gandhi’s peaceful efforts.
The ANC in South-Africa was considered a terrorist group, and indeed acts of terror were carried out by blacks against the whites. Only when the apartheid regime began ceasing to consider the ANC and Mandela terrorists could reconciliation rapidly progress.
And closer to home (this rant is written by an Israeli), you ignore that Algeria was helped freed largely by terrorist bombs and cruel slaughter of thousands of French soldiers and settlers.

Unlike our own military leaders like Ehud Barak and Ami Ayalon, if I were asked what I would be if I were a Palestinian I would not say I’d like to be a terrorist or fighter. I too believe their violence is self-defeating, vicious and unhelpful — ultimately.

But so far it has got them Israeli recognition, the Oslo accords, the (foolish) Gaza disengagement — in addition to thousands of dead, right-wing governments and more settlements. A secret survey commissioned by Sharon, revealed a year or two ago on TV, showed that violence, AND PLEASE NOTE THIS – actually made Israelis more willing to make concessions.

Before the theory, establish the reality in an unbiased, un-patronizing way.

*****
for mr. gorenberg and anyone else who understands hebrew — i suggest you take a look at this fascinating 2007 report on channel 10 which i refered to — it’s very relevant.

http://news.nana10.co.il/Article/?ArticleID=507983

Here is a question for those who do think a Palestinian “non-violent” mass movement could work. Let’s say you are an Israeli military commander and it is announced that 50,000 Palestinians are going to march from Ramallah to the Temple Mount (Al-Aqsa mosque), presumably to “liberate” it “peacefully”. Now, tens of thousands of Muslims do gather there all the time, under Israeli control , in order to pray, so such a march would have to increase the pressure by demanding more than just to conduct prayers there. If you were the commander at the crossing point north of Jerusalem, what would you do? Would you take the chance given that it could turn into a mob that would attack the Jews encountered on the way to their destination, especially since the Palestinians have no history of doing “peaceful marches” of this sort? Seth Freedman at “Comment is Free” points out that many of the Jews who come to demonstrate at Bi’lin against the security wall on Fridays justify Arab violence, saying that is the only way they are going to get anything (Freedman disputes this), and that the Palestinians should be the ones to define the nature of the confrontation and that it should be violent. So where is the pressure coming from to switch to a “peaceful” form of confrontation if Jews are willing to see the Palestinians use violence?