Want to delegitimize Israel? Be careful who you mess with
Delegitimization - the new buzzword of pro-Israel activists -has become a major rallying point for the American Jewish community and is the up-and-coming cause for Jewish organizations.
By The Forward and Nathan Guttman Tags: AIPAC Jewish World Israel newsDelegitimization - it's the new buzzword in the world of pro-Israel activism.
The term, used to describe a broad spectrum of anti-Israel protests, has become a major rallying point for the American Jewish community and is the up-and-coming cause for Jewish organizations.
In particular, supporters of this emerging advocacy effort point to the campaign to boycott, divest from and sanction - BDS - Israel as a primary marker distinguishing "delegitimizers" from genuine critics. It's a campaign that has gained traction on the left in recent years. And in the past few months, pro-Israel advocates have begun to mobilize against what they perceive to be efforts to delegitimize Israel as a Jewish state, whether via BDS or other means.
"The delegitimization and BDS movement is nationally coordinated, and it requires a national response," said William Daroff, the Jewish Federations of North America's vice president for public policy. "We need to move forward as a community to counter this cancerous growth."
But while supporters of Israel see the fight against delegitimization of the Jewish state as a new frontier in the pro-Israel battle, critics believe that the term is used mostly to discredit opposition to Israeli policies.
"To be frank, the 'de-legitimization' issue is a fraud," historian Tony Judt, director of New York University's Remarque Institute, wrote in an e-mail to the Forward. Judt, a harsh critic of Israel, said: "I know no one in the professional world of political commentary, however angry about Israel's behavior, who thinks that the country has no right to exist... 'De-legitimization' is just another way to invoke antisemitism as a silencer, but sounds better because [it's] less exploitative of emotional pain.?
Judt has written that he believes Israel's settlement policies have made a binational one-state outcome to the Israel-Palestinian conflict all but inevitable - a stand that has led Israel advocates to label Judt himself a delegitimizer.
In the past year, JFNA and the Jewish Council for Public Affairs adopted resolutions calling for communitywide action against delegitimization. And the American Israel Public Affairs Committee?s executive director, Howard Kohr, outlined a plan to fight Israel's delegitimization by demanding the state?s admission into international bodies, such as the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.
A March 10 meeting in New York marked the most significant attempt yet to formulate a communitywide response to this perception of delegitimization. Israeli officials and participants from major Jewish organizations and federations discussed the possibility of creating and funding a mechanism to track and respond to what they see as delegitimization efforts.
As a first order of business, participants raised the need to educate the Jewish community about the issue.
"Members of our community need to be knowledgeable and need to be able to answer to these allegations," said Martin Raffel, JCPA's senior vice president. "There is no one-size-fits-all solution. We will have to have tailored responses for each constituency."
But seeking a response to delegitimization requires a clear definition of the problem. An in-depth study released in March by the Reut Institute, a Tel Aviv-based think tank, identifies delegitimization as an organized movement and goes to great lengths to define the elusive term in a way that draws a line between what authors of the 92-page report see as legitimate criticism of Israel and forms of protest that fall under the delegitimization category.
"We are asking people to go into the nuances. We need to keep in mind that not everyone is an Israel hater, but not everything is Israel's fault," said Gidi Grinstein, Reut's founder and president.
The think tank's paper defines delegitimization as criticism that "exhibits blatant double standards, singles out Israel, denies its right to exist as the embodiment of the self-determination right of the Jewish people, or demonizes the state."
But, as Grinstein pointed out, identifying Israel's delegitimizers can be tricky, since most do not see themselves as denying Israel?s right to exist.
"The effectiveness of Israel's de-legitimizers, who represent a relatively marginal political and societal force in Europe and North America, stems from their ability to engage and mobilize others by blurring the lines with Israel?s critics," the Reut paper states.
Would the students who disrupted the February 9 speech of Israeli ambassador Michael Oren at University of California, Irvine be delegitimizers? For most activists in the Jewish community, the answer is clear.
"They definitely are," said Michael Kotzin, executive vice president of Chicago's Jewish federation. "Instead of asking [Oren] about Israel?s policy, they are denying him the right to speak."
Kotzin said that many of those pursuing the delegitimization agenda are naive and are exploited by activists who deny Israel's right to exist.
According to Israel supporters dealing with the issue, the key is focusing not on the protesters' actions but on their intentions, even if they do not acknowledge these intentions publicly.
"You need to dig under the surface and see what drives them," Grinstein said. "Most of the students who protested Oren's speech don't understand the subtleties and believe they are not engaged in delegitimization, but those organizing them are."
Nancy Kricorian of CODEPINK, a women's anti-war group, might be seen as such an organizer. Kricorian coordinates CODEPINK?s boycott campaign against Ahava cosmetic products because the products are manufactured on a Jewish settlement in the occupied West Bank. But she rejected the thought that she was seeking to delegitimize the state. "This is only a way of changing the subject," said Kricorian. "All we want is [for] Israel to respect human rights and international law. I don't see how that delegitimizes Israel."
At the same time, the broad-based coalition of Palestinian civil society groups that launched the BDS movement in 2005 declares that one of its goals is to promote the right of Palestinian refugees to return to the homes they lost - sometimes through mass expulsion - during Israel's 1948 War of Independence. A 1948 United Nations Security Council Resolution endorsed this right, but Israel rejects it on the grounds that the flood of returnees would spell the end of Israel as a Jewish state.
Reut and advocates for Israel argue that singling out Israel and demanding that it adhere to higher human rights standards than its adversaries is another form of delegitimization.
Yet, a higher standard for Israel is something that Judt, for one, unapologetically upholds. "People will say, 'Why are we picking on Israel? What about Libya, Yemen? Burma? China?'" he writes in the March 25 issue of the London Review of Books. "Fine. [But] Israel describes itself as a democracy, and so it should be compared with democracies, not with dictatorships."
As a country in "a difficult relationship" with its neighbors, Israel should be allowed a "certain margin of behavior," Judt acknowledged in his email. But Israel's relative strength compared to other regional nations gives it "even less excuse for criminality, law-breaking or violence than they do," he said.
Amos Guiora, a law professor and former Israeli army senior military counsel, objected that Israel is judged by double standards even when compared with other Western democracies. Guiora, noted that attacks by German and American forces in Afghanistan that caused heavy civilian deaths received less censure from the international community.
"By what standard does Israel want to be judged?" Guiora asked. His reply was, "By a standard in which you judge countries that are in a very, very special situation."
Those seeking to distinguish legitimate criticism of Israel from delegitimization cite another criterion: the labeling of Israeli policies as "apartheid."
Yet, in recent years mainstream Israeli leaders have used the word to describe the danger the country faces if it does not resolve its conflict with Palestinians.
Recently, Ehud Barak, Israel's defense minister and Labor Party leader, said bluntly, "If millions of Palestinians cannot vote, that will be an apartheid state."
Grinstein warned that fighting delegitimization must not devolve into hasbara, or public relations. The struggle, he said, is both about confronting those who question Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state and making sure Israel pursues a path of seeking peace and an end to the occupation.
The Reut document states, "Clearly, an Israeli and Palestinian comprehensive Permanent Status Agreement that establishes a Palestinian state and brings about an 'end of conflict'... would weaken the grounds of Israel's de-legitimization."
Why Facebook Connect?
Comment on Haaretz.com articles with your Facebook login, and share your thoughts on your own wall.
- Latest
- Most Viewed
- Most Rated
- Open all
Excellent response Mo,had the euro-jews integrated with the Palestinians,as opposed to subjugation. occupation,murder,and colonization. Then legitimization would not be an issue.
China has, Soviet Union did, USA also did not require agreement of its borders [Hawaii] ..look at France and African nations and many others
There's been a war waging in Newton, Mass. between Gaza peace activists and others who want to silence them, and though this city is just a tiny spot on the Globe, the well read Solomonia.com site has become heavily involved. To see a spotlight shining on Solomonia, check out this blog here: http://www.mynewtonlife.blogspot.com/ Praying for peace for us all and thank you.
are sensitive to the subject of delegitimization and antisemitism, as it never fails to mean trouble for Jews, so they deep down inside know that they must act on any perceived antisemitism as they know all to well where it leads. As I know from personal experience, if encounters with females are increasingly traumatizing each time, then so shall a person keep away from females because they know it's just going to be worse than the last time. Human nature. "Fool me once, shame on you, fool me three times, shame on me" or something like that. Jews will not be fooled again, they shall not let antisemites walk upon their backs.
I think that it is ridiculous to think that Israel could become delegitimized in anyway shape or form. It is the same as saying that Judaism is irrelevant, it would be the same as tearing many of the most relevant pages from our history, which in fact only makes what would remain an incomprehensible lie. No one can deny the legitimacy of Israel no individual or institution will ever be able to achieve anything remotely close to delegitamization and to suggest something like that is complete and utter ignorance, a mere self absorbed fantasy about one?s own delusional importance. However I find it astounding that any plain thinking intelligent and educated person would even give a moment?s credence to any suggestion of something like this. It makes me wonder if there is a creeping culture of paranoia or post traumatic stress affecting the psyches? of those who are making decisions in Israel. The road to peace is symbolically called a road map because it is a pathway to where we all wish to be. By giving things like the suggestion of delegitimization any consideration at all, indicates a willingness to go off that road for any whim or whiff of something that doesn?t warrant consideration, let alone stopping the ultimate goal of peace which will destroy that kind of suggestion ever rising up its head again.
remember therefore form whence thou art fallen and repent and do the first works or else i will come unto thee quickly and will remove thy candlestick out of his place except thou repent he that hath an ear let him hear what the spirit saith to him that overcometh will i give to eat of the tree of life which is in the midst of the paradise of elokim i know thy works and tribulation and poverty but thou art rich and i know the blasphemy of them which say they are jews and are not but are the sin-agogue of satan repent or else i will come unto thee quickly and will fight against them with the sword of my mouth he that hath an ear let him hear what the spirit saith to him that overcometh will i give to eat of the hidden manna and will give him a white stone a new name written which no man knoweth saving he that receiveth it i know thy works and charity and service and faith and thy patience and thy works and the last to be more than the first and he shall rule them with an rod of iron
Democracy or not the intl law regarding refugees is clear that it is not heriditary, nor is there the option of return generations later unless there is a law made in contravention to this that applies to one people and one peoples alone... Hmmm. A law that didn't exist at the time but was passed retroactively later on Interesting how haaretz hints but doesn't explain this point why? Do you believe it is self evident? Incorrect? Or what?
Back in the 1970's the most effective way that Jews dealt with those who used Israel as a proxy to attack and spread hatred of Jews was to de-legitimize those who did these things. After enough ridicule they usually crawled back under the rock they came from. Might be a good idea to apply this today?
Ultra-Rightist Jews should realize that their radical views are hurting Israel in concluding a final peace agreement with the Palestinians & Arabs. Israel should approach the Arabs in a manner (very visible fanfare) by which the world can finally realize that it's the Arabs and not Israel that do not want peace. Let the Arabs put their money where their mouth is!
If criticism of Israel's behavior is anti-semitism because Israel is a Jewish nation, is criticism of Serbian behavior anti-christianity because Serbia is a Christian nation? Should being Jewish confer some kind of immunity?
Same old, same old. First, there are to my knowledge no Chinese or Russian news services on which one may post criticism in English. Second, even if there were, if Israel is doing something wrong, it is valid to criticize it. Israel may not be (isn't) in the same league as North Korea or Myanmar, but it is doing things which should be criticized without the obligation of going after them first. Should wrongdoing not be criticized?
Ron Lauder (a right wing Republican) takes out a supposedly "mainstream" ad on behalf of the World Zionist Organization attacking the US president in the name of the Jewish community. The head of the South African Zionist Federation (and affiliate of WZO) in Johannesburg persuaded the Bais HaMedrash Hagadol there to prohibit Judge Richard Goldstone from his grandson's bar mitzvah. THESE are actions that delegitimize Israel in a worse way that any anti-Semite could dream up!
"Israel did not declare its existence unilaterally." What is a declaration of INDEPENDENCE?? The clue is in the word I N D E P E N D E N C E It is a completely unilateral notion. "It did it following the UN partition vote." The vote was ONLY to present the opportunity for either to unilaterally declare sovereignty, if they wished. Even if they wanted to, the Palestinians could not by the 14th May '48 because Jewish forces were already in control of territory slated for the new Arab state when the British mandate ended. In fact, the Palestinians have NEVER in the entire history of the region been able to declare independence. "It became a member of the UN and is recognized by more than 150 countries" It is recognized based on the information it supplied the International Community of States, by the boundaries outlined in UNGA Res 181 http://wp.me/pDB7k-sa
however israel wishes to see itself, outside the country, the very name "Israel" has become synonymous with brutal occupation and dispossession of another people. A day does not go by that we don't hear about the myriad of ways israel is flounting the law - most often its own. Whether its the Kamm/Blau affair that brought to light the policy of "targeted" murders against unarmed people who happen to be palestinians, or the irrational rejection of the findings of the Goldstone report which held israel to account for war crimes, or the new expulsion orders from the west bank or the endless uprooting of ancient olive trees on which livelihood of people depends - it all adds up to one very ugly picture. Israel which held itself once to high standards, has sure slid down the slippery slope to something akin to Pinochet's regime and the junta ruled Myanamar. The movie exodus is a fading memory and the high tech industry a footnote. When the world sees Israel now, it's all Lieberman & Dagan
what kind of historian selectively ignores entire periods?
as the embodiment of the self-determination right of the Jewish people" So, if all nations decide to "exist as the embodiment of the self-determination right of " our particular ethnic groups, wouldn't that mean that minorities have no right to representation anywhere? After all, you had a more than a little trouble with the Germans when they started their "Germany for ethnic Germans" campaign back in the 1930s, didn't you? And if the U.S. were to decide it has a right to "exist as the embodiment of the self-determination right of " its Anglo-Christian majority, I imagine you'd pretty vociferously object to that as well, and rightly so. So be honest with yourself, how would you react to the rest of the world trying to behave the way you are? Aren't you really just demanding uniquely preferential treatment?
"Like antisemitism...delegitimization is a deflection" Bull. "These are legitimate tactics to change Israels behavior not to end its existence. Its inexorable march of settlements will end Israel and that is self imposed" Meanwhile, you are on an Israeli news service, criticizing Israel. Are you on any Chinese services criticizing China? Are you on any Russian news services criticizing Russia? I doubt it. The disproportionate criticism of Israel is an attempt to delegitimize it.
Can I delegitimize Iran? Can I call Iran a democracy? Can I call for sanctions on Iran? Can I call for bombings on Iran? Did Iranians have the right to self defense? Now replace Iran with Israel in the above sentences.
"Israel did not declare its existence unilaterally" Oh? Who co-signed the declaration? Where in UNGA Res 181 is the article requiring co-signing or agreement with another party over Declaration? "It did it following the UN partition vote." The partition vote only gave the opportunity to for either party to declare, if they wished (no obligation). The resolution itself did not form any state, it only gave the LEGAL conditions under which they could. " It became a member of the UN and is recognized by more than 150 countries" It is recognized ONLY by the boundaries of UNGA Res 181. http://wp.me/pDB7k-sa
Israel did not declare its existence unilaterally.It did it following the UN partition vote. It became a member of the UN and is recognized by more than 150 countries.
first you got nothing right and then you draw the conclusion the world is wrong not zionist...failure to learn the lessons of history means repeating them just like junior high school (did you ever pass?) until you get it right
You are barking up the wrong tree if you believe that Israelis will change their behavior to live up to some ethical standard, set internally or externally, while there is an existential threat to their population. With barely a half century of existance, and Scuds being imported to the North lately, you really believe that there is room for Israelis to retreat? As a son of Holocost survivors, and an IDF combat veteran, I could care less what the world says, or thinks about Israel, while at the same time genocides are perpetrated all over the world by those very countries who originate the criticism. Don't throw stones when you live in a glass house. Never again.
"they are willing (as explicitly stated by their leaders) to have millions of iranians vaporized in order to be able to nuke jews in israel (along with their palestinian neighbors of course, but who cares)." Just for my information, where did you get this?
Really? 3000 years ago? Tell me, 3000 years ago it was strictly Jewish? Or part of the Kenaanite culture? What about the others who were living in that area also? Lower class subhumans? tell me, you remember what happened 3000 years ago? Are you seeing a therapist over it? No please tell me And finally, tell me, what has archeology told ya... so far the majority of your findings is about the Abbassid caliphate, Kenaanite cultures, and the sort. Prior to 1920 actually, the Ottomans Empire was a safe haven to Jews Last but not last, if the Palestinians are the ones who ethnically attacked you 2000 years ago (given the fact they were natives as well over there), on what basis you argue specially you would under these circumstances be the same people who crucified the Messiah of the Christians. (Now that doesn't sound logical, eh?). The Palestinians are delighted with people like you JW, because radicals like you are pushing world opinion to the Palestinians. Nothing is God Send.
As is the case with any rabid "anti-Israel" Jew, Judt displays therein what Douglas Murray calls a pathology in these weird scenarios. "'De-legitimization' is just another way to invoke antisemitism as a silencer, but sounds better because [it's] less exploitative of emotional pain.? " Oh really. It couldn't have occurred to him that this is precisely what anti-semites routinely use to hide behind. It's just his comrade and islamist friends that use it but obvious nazis and other species of fascists that assume that they can jump on the band wagon and obfuscate. This guy is such a tool.
Just read any NY Times reader's blog in response to a column involving Israel to see how many of its "progressive" readership ape the standard Arab slander by describing Israel as nothing more than a foreign colonial land grab. 3000 years of Jewish history in this land? How do you spell it? Sounds like delegitimization to me? And if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and sounds like a duck . . .
call is deligitimizing or call it neuvo-antisemitism, its the same old story: people using the jews as a useful devil that they could lynch. most germans at the time of the nazis never saw a jew in their life and yet hatred of jews became their reason for living. almost no iranians have ever seen an israeli jew (or a palestinian arab) and yet they are willing (as explicitly stated by their leaders) to have millions of iranians vaporized in order to be able to nuke jews in israel (along with their palestinian neighbors of course, but who cares). leftist in europe and the US could care less about moslems being slaughtered by other moslems (e.g. what iran is doing to opposition, how egypt simply executes refuges, palestinians pushing each other off of rooftops etc.) but if hamas has a shortage of foie gras then its of course its "a holocaust". you see, its not about "deligitimization", its all about scapegoating.
If Israel can declare its borders unilaterally, what is the purpose of the negotiations over the years? What were the Oslo Accords about? Did the negotiators just sit around drinking British tea and chat about rugby?
The P.A. does not agree with you. According to international law a border is established when the peoples on either side of it agree to it. Nothing else matters. It is the business of those peoples and nobody else's. The rest of the world then accepts what the local peoples agree upon. I cannot understand why you cannot understand this. Who is programming you?
they style and craftmanship were perfect...the price was for cheap...the knife and maker were in isreal....i supressed the erge to buy it as did everyone else on ebay....sorry to the maker but please move to another coutry
Of course, Israel can declare its border with the Pals unilaterally. It just doesn't want to, because it prefers the current state of uncertainty. The only unilaterally declared border the world will recognise is the Green Line and Israel is greedy for more than that. But it doesn't want to actually annex the West Bank because then it has to give the Pals citizenship. To quote you Moxie, get with the programme and stop believing the hasbara!
it is liberman and bib who deligitimize zio-land with their rude words and arrogant behavior ...the BDS campain is just one reaction....more to come
No country unless it is an island can declare its borders unilaterally. The declaration must be in agreement with the country on the other side of the border. You advise that Israel should declare its borders is impossible to fulfill by itself. Israel succeeded in doing this with Egypt and Jordan, is in the process of negotiating with the P.A., and there is no activity with Syria and Lebanon. Instead of blaming Israel, you should advise the P.A., Syria, and Lebanon to get with the program.
Like most critics of Israel, I accept Israel within its 1967 borders. However, Israel does a lot to delegitimize itself. One pre-requisite for recignizing any state is that it declares its claimed borders which other countries then recognise. Israel has never done that, which is why we have the dangerous farce of Issraelis settling in 'disputed territories' which many Israelis regard as theirs, but the rest of the world views as occupied. It's also how Israel gets away with an apartheid system on the West Bank. If it declared it was annexing the West Bank, it would have to offer the Pals Israeli citizenship. The occupations and undeclared borders is what is delegitimizing Israel and that's all Israel's own doing,
This article is a great example of word play and semantic diversion. For most people in the world the answer is simple -- end the colonization of and discrimination against the Palestinian people, either by giving them a just state or by declaring a state of all its people, and there will be no need for legitimization or delegitimization, boycotts and resistance. That's the deal. You bring delegitimization by your illegitimate policies.
These are legitimate tactics to change Israels behavior not to end its existence. Its inexorable march of settlements will end Israel and that is self imposed