Half witte

As the successor to Scott Wilson, the Washington Post’s Israel correspondent Griff Witte had some mighty low expectations to meet in terms of reporting objectively. Witte has very quickly managed to establish himself the equal of Scott Wilson in terms of adopting the Palestinian narrative. A recent Q & A about Israel’s 60th birthday is very revealing.

The first question he actually handled quite well.

Silver Spring, Md.: Mr. Witte, you write that “Israel remains an unfinished project” and I am frankly glad that it is. Can any nation on the face of this earth truly be deemed a “finished project”? Wouldn’t that mean stasis and stagnation? But please do not attribute this status of Israel to the lack of a constitution — Israel is far from alone among the nations of the world to operate without a constitution. Great Britain, for one, comes to mind.

Griff Witte: An excellent question, so thank you. You’re right that no nation ever truly is finished, but I think there’s more debate in Israel than there is in most places about the nature of the state. What are Israel’s borders? How does Israel handle the Palestinian territories? Are its neighbors friend or foe? Is Israel just for Jews, or is it multireligious? Within Judaism, how does Israel balance the needs of the ultra-Orthodox against the needs of the secular?

All of these are questions I hear being batted around this Independence Day. Of course, Israel’s relative youth may account for a good part of the uncertainty.

Another possibility is that Israel has a very strong and vocal left wing that has its own newspaper.

But then we get to the second question.

Oslo, Norway: A common complaint against Israel is that they “kicked out the Arabs.” Not only do Arabs still live in Israel, but there are more Arabs living in Israel now than in any other time in history. What is the reason for the continuation of this myth?

Griff Witte: I don’t know that this is a myth. It has been well established by historians that hundreds of thousands of Palestinians were forced to leave their homes — either directly or through intimidation from the advancing Israeli forces. They ended up in the West Bank, Gaza, Jordan, Lebanon, Egypt and many other places beyond.

It’s also well-established, and hardly a secret, that there’s a significant Arab minority still living in Israel. About 20 percent of Israel’s population is Arab.

No mention that most of the Arabs left on their own accord or were encouraged by their leadership to leave their homes.

Then he gets to this:

Concord, N.H.: It seems to me that the founding of Israel has resulted in 60 years of war, fractured relations with the rest of the Middle East and contributed to an ever-rising U.S. debt, at the expense of several hundred thousand Palestinians who had lived on that land for hundreds of years and now exist in poverty. Why does Israel deserve the billions of dollars we send to them? How are their aggressive military actions any less terrorist than the rest of those we condemn in the Middle East?It is amazing to me that a race/religion of people who have borne so much pain at the hands of ethnic cleansing agendas so easily would commit such crimes against the Palestinians — yet we not only give them a free pass to do so, we arm their efforts. They are not innocent in this endless fighting. What gave them the right to banish all of those people from their homes — people with centuries of history on that land?

Griff Witte: This is certainly an argument one hears quite a bit from Israel’s critics. I think Israel’s defenders would point to its record as a staunch U.S. ally, the Jewish people’s historic ties to the land, and the attacks carried out almost daily by radical Islamist groups such as Hamas against civilian targets.

Not an argument we’re going to solve here today.

“Israel’s critics”? No it isn’t an argument that he’s going to solve, but he could have been more forceful. Every single thing that Witte wrote is accurate, so why does he qualify it with “Israel’s defenders.” The questioner was more than a critic of Israel, he was opposed to Israel’s existence.

Wheaton, Md.: Why is there so much hostility against Israel among the Arabs? Arabs occupy 80 percent of the Middle East and half of Africa. Do they really think is such a “grave injustice” that Jews have a tiny country of their own?

Griff Witte: Ahh, here’s another point often made by Israel’s backers: It’s a small country, and it’s the one true homeland that Jews can call their own.

“Israel’s backers.” Witte treats Israel’s critics and backers equally regardless of the accuracy of their assertions.

Memphis, Tenn.: There seems to be no hope of peace so long as the Palestinian economy is in ruins. If people had jobs to go to instead of bomb factories, wouldn’t there be a better chance of peace? Why are the U.S. and Israel so determined to cripple the Palestinian economy? We made friends of Germany and Japan after World War II by building their economies, not by destroying them.Griff Witte: This is one of the questions being batted around a lot these days, even inside Israel. The policy of the U.S. and Israel toward Gaza, in particular, has been one of isolation. The idea is to marginalize Hamas by not talking to it and by imposing strict economic sanctions on Gaza, with the hope of turning the people against the group. I’ve been to Gaza several times in recent weeks, and one point people there made to me over and over was that the sanctions actually have strengthened Hamas by making the population more dependent on the group for jobs, aid, etc.

“Marginalize Hamas?” No the point of the sanctions to is to reduce the resources that Hamas has so that Hamas can’t strike at Israel as easily. Of course Hamas’s priority is to attack Israel, not provide for its own people, so the precious resources go more for guns than for butter.

Washington: Why has there been no support for a plan that would have Egypt absorb Gaza and Jordan absorb parts of the west bank? This makes a lot more sense than a non-contiguous and practically-anarchic state of Palestine. Egypt and Jordan need to do more to help their brothers, rather than keeping them in the same old situation.

Griff Witte: This is an idea that’s floated from time to time by Israeli politicians, particularly those on the right. The problem with it is that the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza want their own state. They don’t consider themselves Jordanians or Egyptians — they consider themselves Palestinians.

They do consider themselves Palestinians, but that doesn’t obviate the point that Egypt and Jordan could do more.

Memphis, Tenn.: The Palestinian refugees have been severely maltreated by all parties; no other refugee population has been confined to refugee camps so long. Isn’t it time to start finding a solution for the refugee problem, rather than arguing about assigning blame?

Griff Witte: Not a bad idea.

If the Palestinians wanted a solution to the refugee problem they’d have had it by now. If Arafat in the past and Abbas and Fayyad currently had been dedicated to building an economy, fought terrorism and encouraged reconciliation, I don’t see how any Israeli government wouldn’t have acceded to the creation of a Palestinian state. (Not that I think it would have been a good idea.)

Arlington, Va.: Can one not celebrate the successes of Israel based on shear will to become the technological leader it has become today, and not try to contrast it with the sympathy cause of the Palestinians? One could assume based on this premise that Israel was granted the ability to succeed, while Palestinians were forced to suffer these 60 years. However, Israel’s success is evident from their persistent will to succeed, unlike their Palestinian counterparts who rather would invest in guns to kill Israelis than invest it in their infrastructure and research.Until the Palestinians realize they cannot live like the Israelis without first investing in their infrastructure, they will continue to suffer. It took 60 years for Israel to get where it is today; Palestinians have a long way to go before they can get to the point where they can consider themselves equals with Israel. However, it starts with ending funding for guns and using the money for infrastructure.

Griff Witte: Thanks for the comment.

Arlington certainly hit the nail on the head, and Witte dismisses the statement with “thanks.”

About 20 percent of Israel’s population is Arab: And they have the right to vote? The right to hold any job including membership in the legislature and in the government? The right to serve in the military and other defense organizations including intelligence? They have the right to settle in any part of Israel? Yes?

Griff Witte: You’re basically right on these points. I’ll just add, however, that Palestinians living in Israel feel strongly that they’re not treated equally, and that discrimination against them — in terms of where they live, how they fit into the democratic process, etc. — is on the rise.

And I’d add that if Jews were living in a Palestinian state. Oh never mind, that would never happen.

New York: Israel expelled Arabs, true. And all the Arab countries expelled their Jews. And the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem supported the Nazis. Israelis bulldozed Arab villages, and the Arabs said they’d “push the Jews into the sea.” The young Menachem Begin was a terrorist, and so was the young Yasser Arafat. It seems like there’s enough blame to go around. Why can’t the Israelis and Palestinians get past all this tit-for-tat recitation of reciprocal injustices and try to look to some sort of future? The idea that Palestinians think they have a “right of return” goes contrary to all of human history — it’s like saying the Turks should give Asia Minor back to the Greeks.

Griff Witte: Thanks for your comment.

In terms of the future, right of return is certainly an issue, but hardly the only one. In the U.S.-backed negotiations going on as we speak, there are a whole host of final status issues that need to be addressed before there can be a deal between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. Among them: What are the borders? Who controls Jerusalem? Where is the capital of the Palestinian state? What assurances does Israel have about security? How do you deal with Gaza? There are many more. But point is, it’s not simple.

Here he ignores the historical comments to focus on the Palestinian “right of return.”

Washington: It’s often said in certain circles that one gets far more honest and forthright coverage of Israel and Palestine in some Israeli newspapers, such as Haaretz, than one does in most U.S. news outlets. Excepting the work of The Post, of course, do you find this to be true? If so, why?

Griff Witte: Haaretz and other papers here do a commendable job in their coverage, but as a rule, I wouldn’t say that’s so. We write for different audiences — theirs is primarily (though not exclusively) internal; mine is mostly external. We focus on different things, perhaps, because of the different audiences, but I wouldn’t say one is more honest and forthright than the other.

Actually I’d argue that Ha’aretz in some ways is more forthright than the Washignton Post. Ha’aretz, though no doubt it galls some of its staff often does publish material that’s inconvenient to the Palestinian cause. The Post of course will usually cherry pick and not include those items. (Very little mention of the Grad hitting the shopping mall in Ashkelon yesterday.)

Chevy Chase, Md.: I have a problem with how you characterize Israel’s Independence Day as a “day of mourning” for the Palestinian Arabs. It’s like you and other reporters can’t say one without the other in the same sentence or paragraph. Do we say “today is Columbus Day, a day of mourning for Native Americans” or “today is the Fourth of July, a day of mourning for the United Kingdom.” (Actually that could be a day of mourning for Native Americans too. And unlike the Jews in the Land of Israel, Europeans were always the colonialists. The Jews had at least some continuous presence in the land of Israel for 2,500 years, even if it was not a sovereign presence.) The fact is, as Richard Holbrooke reminded us in his op-ed piece yesterday, the founders of the Jewish state favored two states, one Jewish and one Arab, and that’s even though the Arabs of the Palestinian region already received a state carved out from the Ottoman Empire — (Trans)Jordan. Problem was that Jordan got its rulers from the Hashemites of the Arabian Peninsula, so the Palestinians did not get to rule their state, and the other post-Ottoman Arab rulers rejected a Jewish state in the midst of their many Arab states.

They created and have wallowed in the fetid and violent bed they have laid in for 60 years. It’s time they acknowledge that, stop using terrorism and wars to try to solve their problem and work on a peaceful solution with the State of Israel. Even the rest of the Arab and Muslim world (see Iraq) cannot overcome their tribalism. Palestinian Arabs have enormous potential to be a modern, prosperous, democratic state in the Middle East, if they only would seize the opportunity.

Griff Witte: Thanks for the comment. There are two peoples living on this land, and we cover both.

I don’t agree with him, but this was less a question than a speech. A fine speech. But it really wasn’t in search of an answer.

Memphis, Tenn. (hey, great discussion): The Israeli press is far more diverse than the U.S. press; minority and differing views turn up regularly even in papers like Haaretz, but rarely get reported in the U.S. Why is it that being “pro-Israel” in the U.S. has become so identified with being “pro-present Israeli government.” I can be pro-U.S. but not like Bush administration policies; why can’t I be considered pro-Israel if I support peace for Israel, and therefore oppose present Olmert policies?

Griff Witte: Thanks. You raise a good point — neither the Israelis nor the Palestinians can be seen as a monolith. The split in Palestinian society is far more dramatic right now — Fatah in the West Bank, Hamas in Gaza — but there are some pretty serious divisions in Israel, too. Whenever we can, we try to include voices from various points on the spectrum within each society.

Of course there’s one point that both Fatah and Hamas agree on and that’s the acceptability of terrorism if the Palestinians don’t get their demands fulfilled.

Witte is a lot more accepting of the Palestinian narrative than he is of the Israeli one. It’s little wonder that his coverage has been so skewed since he started.

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.