A country on probation
Yair Sheleg
Haaretz, November 20, 2003
Israel is now the only country in the world that not only is facing physical extermination by a
country like Iran, which is developing weapons to provide it at least with the option to fulfill the
threat, but also, lately there have been voices in the West seeking to fulfill the Iranian goal
through more "convenient" ways, by turning Israel into the only country in the world whose existence is politically and morally challenged - a state on probation.
A clear-cut example of this was the Italian poll showing that one sixth of the Italians (17 percent) believe Israel must "cease existing." The results of the poll justifiably shocked many Israelis, but apparently we have all grown so used to such matters that we did not pay attention to the problematics of the question being asked. Did the poll's editors think of such a question about Iran, Syria or North Korea? At the same time, not only the broad public but the intellectuals in the West
are beginning to see Israel's existence as a nation state as "anachronistic."
Along with the natural, clear rejection of this trend, we are not absolved of the need to ask
ourselves why is the process of delegitimization taking place at this stage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, when difficult and controversial steps were already taken by Israel?
Apparently the reason is to be found in the fact that the last few years of conflict were not
simply "another round" of conflict, but a stage in which the feeling that perhaps the conflict
is truly insoluble was sharpened. If that's the case, then in the eyes of many Europeans the
Jewish "settlement" in the heart of the Middle East has turned into "a situation that
permanently threatens peace in the world."
They are not really interested in who is guilty and responsible for there not being a peace
agreement, they only want some "quiet" and as far as they are concerned, it's natural the
smaller side should pay the price.
Moreover, the Jewish state does not appear to have the same natural right to existence that
other states have, but is rather a special favor granted by the international community to
the Jews because of the Holocaust, a gift that could be taken back if the price is deemed too
expensive.
The fact that attitude is taken in no other conflicts in the world raises suspicions that
there is indeed some deep anti-Semitic dimension, not in the simplistic sense of
hating Jews for being Jews, but based on the superstitious anti-Semitic image of the Jews as
eternal "troublemakers" an image that in the past, as today, was based on blaming the victim
for the "ferment" created - that the Israeli control in the territories as well as the current sense of the conflict being insoluble, is because of Arab refusal to accept Israel.
Israeli policy with regard to this process should be double-edged. On the one hand, there
must be an intensive campaign against the trend while it is still in its earliest stages. All
the country's experts in such information campaigns must make clear to the international
community that Israel is not on probation as a state and even if there is criticism of its
policies, Arab acceptance of Israel is not a condition for Israel's existence.
On the other hand, for that campaign to be credible, Israel must constantly keep on the
table a sincere proposal to end its control over millions of Palestinians. Moreover, it
must be understood that it is in Israel's interest for the significance of a new process
creating a sense of hope for at least moderation and "management" of the conflict,
even if a comprehensive solution appears far off.
That is the positive side of the Geneva accords, with all its problematic details and the
problematic process that brought it forth. Nonetheless, if it really turns out that there
is no chance for a permanent solution with the Palestinians under conditions that Israel could
allow itself to accept, a unilateral move would at least ease and moderate the daily aspect of
the military-civilian conflict - and that is also an Israeli interest.
There is no contradiction between the two moves, and the attempt to create a sense of hope is
not surrender to anti-Semites. Just as Zionism from its earliest days did not make do with
criticizing the anti-Semitism of its era but sought to be free of it through a political
solution, the Zionism of today must add to the rejection of anti-Semitism, an attempt to
cancel the motive for its revival.
