J-Street is a new group that calls itself “…political arm of the pro-Israel, pro-peace movement.”Matt Stoller of Open Left writes:
It’s a significant moment for progressive Jews who have previously not had our voices represented in the foreign policy realm, drowned out by right-wingers intent on the most hawkish policies out there.
This is not a lie.
It is not a statistic.
It is a damned lie.
Remember after Israel forced thousands of Israelis from their homes and made Gaza Judenrein? This was supposed to be the first test of Palestinian self government.
Israel reasonably wanted to keep control over the Rafah border, but Secretary of State Rice prevailed upon Israel to leave its security in the hands of European observers.
And who voiced their support of this policy? Why it was the very progressive forces who claim that they’ve been silenced all these years.
Don’t take my word for it. Let’s roll the way-back machine.
Here’s an APN action alert from November 2005:
The arrangements you helped broker in the November 15th accord are enabling Palestinians, for the first time, to control entry and exit from Gaza, via Rafah. They will also lead to the upgrading and expansion of other crossing points between Israel, Gaza, and the West Bank, and the expediting of the export of this season’s agricultural goods from Gaza. In addition, the accord paves the way for the passage of people and goods between Gaza and the West Bank, and should lead to a reduction in the obstacles to movement within the West Bank. The agreement will permit the Palestinians to begin, for the first time, to construct a seaport, and recognizes the importance of continued discussion regarding the re-opening of a Palestinian airport. The components of this breakthrough will dramatically increase investment in Gaza by the private sector as well as financial assistance from donor countries.All of these developments will take place in the context of providing for Israeli security. This includes, among other things, the presence of the European Union as third-party monitors at Rafah, the provision of high-tech security equipment and appropriate training for personnel working at border crossings, coordination between Israel and the Palestinians with respect to travel of certain individuals, and explicit recognition in the agreement that “security is a prime and continuing concern for Israel and that appropriate arrangements to ensure security will be adopted.” The agreement also stipulates that security services from Israel, the PA, the U.S., and Egypt will continue to coordinate on security issues and will participate in the security working group.
I’ve highlighted some of the more egregious examples of failed expectations, but the short story is that Israel’s ceding of control of Rafah has brought neither prosperity to the Palestinians nor security to the Israelis. It has strengthened Hamas. Hamas now has 20000 men under arms and is regularly increasing the quantity and lethality of the materiel it possesses. (Now like minded folk are advocating talking to Hamas!) The prescription Americans for Peace Now – represented on J-Street by its CEO, Hillary super delegate, Debra Delee – advocated has failed miserably. Is APN expressing its regrets? Or condemning Hamas?
No, it’s still claiming that the main obstacle to peace is Israel’s failure to cede enough territory and the Administration’s failure to press Israel to cede more. (This applies not only to APN but to the other constituent groups and individual who populate J-Street.)
Does it matter that when the administration did press Israel and Israel acceded to the pressure that it led to more violence and less security for Israel? No. They still advocate more of the same. So not only do they advocate policies that failed in 1996 (when Israel withdrew from cities in 1995, it led to an increase in terror in 1996), in 2000 (when Israel withdrew from southern Lebanon it strengthened Hezbollah) and in 2005 (Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza strengthened Hamas), these progressive organization advocate policies that increase violence and hurt Israel. Yet they have the chutzpah to claim that they are pro-peace and pro-Israel. They are neither.
These same people couldn’t wait to get rid of PM Netanyahu, yet when Netanyahu was Prime Minister, Israel saw a lessening of terrorism and Palestinians were more prosperous.
The morally bankrupt groups claim that it is skeptics of the peace process who threaten Israel and who are ideological rather than realistic. But the progress (if you can call it that) of the past 15 years has shown a much different story. I’m not the only one who sees that J-Street is anti-Israel. (via memeorandum)
I should also point out that these progressive groups get plenty of attention. They are regularly featured in the Forward. James D. Besser who reports on politics for nearly every single American Jewish weekly, is sympathetic and give them plenty of coverage. What’s remarkable is how much attention they get despite the fact that their views are a distinct minority, not just among Jews but among Americans generally.
J-Street is full of crap. And it’s time that someone called them on it.
I wrote previously about J-Street.
Crossposted on Soccer Dad.
Soccerdad,you don’t understand. Confidence building concessions are what Israel is supposed to do. It’s destructive of the road map to peace when it doesn’t make them. The Palestinians are supposed to…well, something.
You’d think that leaving Gaza would be considered a pretty substantial gesture, and the Palestinian response to be pretty significant, but apparently not.
I am not the only American Jew who believes that AIPAC’s influence faces no significant countervailing force and probably should. If I don’t agree with how Israel is handling the problem, and moreoever I, as a taxpayer, and partly paying for it, then I get to speak up.
We are not monolithic, nor should we be.
You know what amazes me? The constant drumbeat of people who disagree with AIPAC and “neocons” on Israel that insist that nobody is allowing them to speak up about it.
Please. I’m so tired of the Walt-Mearsheimer crowd pretending that they’ve been suppressed when they’re in every major news outlet, pretty much anytime.
On my comments thread, not so much. But the First Amendment doesn’t apply here. My blog, my dime, my rules.
I didn’t claim to be oppressed, so please don’t project what you think I’m thinking onto me.
I just think the solution to speech with which you disagree is better speech. I don’t hate AIPAC and nobody’s trying to muzzle me. But maybe J Street will turn into something I can support. AIPAC certainly isn’t.
Good day to you.
It appears that many leftists would rather see Israel destroyed than admit that Peace Now was the dumbest idea since the Revolts against Rome. Most of the former Peacers have learned what a dumb idea it was, from viewing the disasterous consequences of the recommended policies (Tom Paine is one example), but some will never learn.
The Muslims are at war with Israel to destroy the country and murder the Jews, Reaper. And they are convinced that they can grind down the Israelis until they surrender in exhausted desperation. People like J Street are helping to give them this confidence. Just what will you offer the Muslims that they will prefer to getting the whole falalfel, country, genocide and all?
What concessions do you think are reasonable on the part of the Israelis. If you consider anything less than a two state solution reasonable, then your position precludes the possibility of peace.
This occupation is a moral disaster, and breeds far more enemies than can ever be killed.
What concession are reasonable on the part of the Israelis? Surely you jest.
What the Israeli government has done over the past 15 years would have been considered fringe-left 20 years ago. Israel has changed a lot. (I don’t think that’s a good thing, but that’s what’s been the case.)
And yet despite the movement of the Israeli government towards acceptance of a two state solution, there has been no reciprocal effort on the part of the Palestinians who are motivated not by a sense of nationalism but by a sense of grievance. And that grievance, above all else, must be maintained.
Even with Abbas withdrawing his nominations of terrorists for the highest honor his government can confer he – as well as Fayyad – denies the rights of a Jewish state.
It is not Israel that lacks a commitment to a two state solution. For better or worse, that’s where the state of Israel is. What’s lacking is the commitment on the part of the Palestinians to accept the same.
What J-Street and its allies advocate is continuing to pressure Israel to concessions in the face of an implacable foe. That’s a moral disaster and will continue breeding enemies.
You know Reaper, Israel offerred to give back all the land captured n the Six Day War in August 1967, except for East Jerusalem. I think it is reasonable that the Jews have control over their most sacred site, just as it is reasonable that Muslims have control over Mecca and Medina. When Jordan ruled Jerusalem Jews were not allowed to enter the city, let alone live there. In exchange Israel wanted peace with internationally recognized borders, for Israel’s 1967 “borders” were not borders, they were simply armistice lines. I think that is pretty reasonable.
What was the Arab reaction? It was The Three No’s of Khartoum issued in September 1967: no negotiations, no recognition, no peace. And they all kept that up until Sadat made peace and got back every rood of land he wanted, whereupon the other Arabs assassinated him (done by a group associated, like Hamas, with the Muslim Brotherhood).
Now, forty-one years later, continual and relentless Arab hostility, terrorism, and wars have been the norm. What do you want to give them to reward the Muslims for that record, and will it bring peace? No, it will not. The Muslims will pocket any and all Israel concessions and push for further war, as they have done constantly. The PLO never lived up to its agreements at Oslo, remember. It is the Muslims who drive this war, not Israel. There is nothing Israel can do or give them that will bring about peace or even a cessation of violence. The last 15 years should have proven that over and over.
Remember this, and you will understand the Muslim-Israel conflict. When the Muslims say “Peace in the Middle East” they mean the destruction of Israel and the genocide of its Jewish inhabitants. When they whine for “American evenhandedness” what they mean is that we should help them do this.