It is not a secret that Caroline Glick’s infatuation (politically-wise only, of course) with Bibi has been replaced lately by a markedly cooler attitude. Her latest JP column Exposing the puppetmasters shows that her heart is captured by another hero. I avoid the word “knight”, because in my worstest nightmares I cannot use it in this case, and I hope you are with me on this point.
In the article Caroline rushes to the defense of indefensible: the highly unfortunate Knesset decision to create a parliamentary commission of inquiry into the foreign funding of Israeli NGO. Let me start with a few words of explanation: NGOs are non-profit organizations, bound to keep publicly accessible reports of their incoming moneys and the sources of their financing, as well as of the use of the money. We have enough financial institutions, such as the omnipresent Tax Authority, the ministry of finance, the comptroller office, eventually the police for especially hardy cases of financial mayhem. There is nothing this new commission could (or is qualified to) do better than the above mentioned institutions.
Clearly the initiators of the whole idea had something other in mind than just some financial monkey business. And this something doesn’t have much to do with transparency, but much more to do with politics and with Lieberman’s totalitarian mindset (not only Lieberman’s but many of his party’s notables and his supporters from other parties). Of course, Lieberman means much more than the finances: according to Caroline herself:
He said that these groups “help terrorists, and their main aim is to weaken the IDF and its ability to protect the citizens of the State of Israel.â€
Even if we disregard the incendiary and Soviet-like language for now – if these allegations are even half-true, why didn’t Lieberman call the General Security Services (Shin Bet) and the police to act on his behalf and on behalf of his endangered motherland? Doesn’t he know the relevant phone numbers? Guess…
But Caroline, although (unlike Lieberman) born and raised in a democratic country, doesn’t seem to notice his clearly totalitarian and thuggish behavior – if anything, it makes her hot under the collar. She applauds his thuggery as if it was a shining example of bravery and nobility. And when he attacks Tzippi Livni who opposes the commission or when he loses it totally, calling Likud (!) ministers “traitors to the national camp†(why not call them “enemies of the people” directly?) , this Chicago – bred girl adores him even more!
I can’t abide a few of the NGOs Caroline mentions in the article, am indifferent to others and see some sense in two or three of the rest. But in any case, rushing into a witch hunt of this intensity is an indication of a sickness, of some bug we caught and definitely don’t know how to treat.
Funnily, the article is very long for one simple reason: Caroline, with a great deal of expertise and knowledge, tells about funding of many NGOs, making it even more unclear why do we need to have this abominable commission. What is clear that never in the short history of the state of Israel there was a danger to its democratic institutions such as Yvette/Avigdor Lieberman and his thuggish cohorts. And if there is a person who should be investigated for causing extensive damage to the image and international standing of Israel during the reign of the current government, it is no other than Mr Lieberman himself.
Interestingly, in the same edition of JP appears an article The battle of rights and wrongs by Liat Collins, where Liat, another foreign-bred JP journalist, opposes the committee, albeit in her usual chirpy and unfocused manner. But her conclusion hits the spot:
No wonder Israeli commentators have been struggling to pronounce the word “McCarthyism.†This is not just a slippery slope; it’s a slippery slope with land mines.
This is a slippery slope indeed. And we seem to be willingly skating towards it, while a leading editor of a leading Israeli English newspaper lauds the person who pushes us all to that slope…
Cross-posted on SimplyJews
And why does a Knesset committee investigating finances of “supporting Israel” JS is thuggish and fascist?
As far as I have read about it, the JS and some “pro-Israel” NGO were rather secretive and sometimes outright
lying about their financial sponsors. You think this must have been due to pure democratic reasons? Or some
other noble purposes? I believe that the Solomonia blog has a very good rundown of JS and their ilk shenanigans.
But it’s all for the betterment of Israeli democracy – right?
Marek,
The committee by itself is neither thuggish nor fascist (by the way I didn’t use this word in this post). The motives underlying the push for that commission are, though.
If an NGO is secretive or even lying about its sources of financing, Israel has enough ways and means to punish it. The committee, on the other hand, doesn’t have means, ways or experience in these matters – nothing aside of political zeal.
If you are expecting me to protect NGOs, you are looking at the wrong person, and I start suspecting that you didn’t actually read the whole post. Or did you?
Meryl,
Surprise, I’ve read it before I’ve commented. I do not suspect you of protecting those NGOs – I read your blog for ages. What I suspect is that you are still thinking/feeling that only “left” has the privilege of using all political tools to their advantage.
Now, NGO are all about politics and seldom about criminal activity. Even if their activities border sometimes on criminal in my view. NGOs financing quite often comes from “legal” anti-Israeli sources. Consequently it is conceivable to investigate their financing with political tools rather than legal. Whether the motives underlying the idea to investigate and perhaps even to discredit the offending NGOs should be called thuggish is arguable. I can’t see why investigations of NGO finances by a political body is thuggish. It’s political. And if a Knesset committee could justly discredit JS and/or other “pro Israel” NGOs – then more power to it.
Marek,
Surprise – it is not Meryl’s post. Another surprise: I don’t think or feel that only “left†has the privilege of using all political tools to their advantage.
Knesset (or any other parliament for that matter) are not investigative bodies by their nature (or definition, if you want). Not in a democracy, at any rate.
Snoopy,
1. Sorry for mistaken identity. The comment was addressed, mistakenly, to Meryl.
2. Apologies to Meryl.
3.I don’t claim that Knesset is an investigating body. But it can set up an investigating body – a commission. I believe there is quite a number of precedences in Israel’s short history. So, setting up a commission to investigate finances of a NGO makes Israel not democratic?
4. Perhaps the Congress of the US is not exactly a parliament of any kind but it has committees or sets up commissions to investigate all kinds of matters – political, financial and others. But you might be right, the US is not a democracy – it is a republic.
I think that terming the whole thing a “witch-hunt” is as incendiary as calling opponents of the commission “enemies of the national camp”. I don’t necessarily support the formation of such a committee, but I don’t see it as the birth of a totalitarian Israel either. Let’s try to look at the facts clearly and rationally, despite it being such a heated subject:
1. There are NGOs abound in Israel which take part in explicitly political activity. Some of them belong to the right; many to the left. many if not most (on both sides) either turn to financial support outside of Israel or are directly funded by other nations. This has been documented numerous times and isn’t in by question by anyone who knows what he’s talking about, regardless of his own agenda. I think we can all agree on that much, right?
2. To the best of my knowledge, there are no countries in the Western world who allow such blatant interference by other nations in their own internal politics. Israel, due to its precarious condition, is the last nation in the world who should allow such interference.
3. I don’t approve of Lieberman’s methods nor his expressions. Yet, consider: after a series of international attacks directed against Israel’s actions and often its own existence, did anyone honestly think there would be no backlash? After Durban? The Hague Barrier Trial? The Goldstone Report? The Marmara Incident, to name just a few? Israel’s incredibly thoughtless lack of foreign agenda is coming home to roost.
Given all that, is the committee a good thing or not? Well, no, but it might be the lesser of two evils. The obvious thing to do would be to simply legislate laws that would outlaw ANY political activity financed by sources from abroad, whether right- or left-winged; Israel’s system of government (one of the worst in the world) did not allow such a simple solution simple to take place before, for pretty much the same reasons that forbade the enactment of a constitution or that allowed the despicable “Tal Act” to be legislated. Bureaucracy and committees are pretty much the standard modus operandi here, sad to say.
If Lieberman, through his brash and undiplomatic means (I think “thuggish” isn’t applicable here – as far as I know he only had the committee investigate finances, not declaring the anyone guilty would be lined up against a wall) manages to wake Israelis up to the fact that the entire world, including their sworn enemies, are free to intervene in their affairs, not only will I not oppose him, I will thank him. The outcry might make such a committee unnecessary in the first place. If not, then I’d rather see some NGOs losing their highly questionable funds if that means a semblance of sanity returning to this country. Again, my only real concern is that financing political activity from abroad must apply to ALL spectrum of politics, not just the left.
P.S.
Sorry for the grammar errors. I lack sleep. I’ll use Word next time I write a mini-essay.
The US Congress calls for investigations and subpoenas people all the time to testify, so I think the Knesset is doing anything different. If the US Congress wanted to find out the funding sources of NGOs in the US, they could call for an investigation. No big deal. It’s just data mining.
I shall try to answer all of the commentators above, if I may.
Most of you see the creation of the committee as an act that is supposed to fill a breach in existing laws or lack of existing bodies that are supposed to take care of a problem. Listening to the supporters of the committee one might get an impression that NGOs and possible financial wrong doings are some revelation that Lieberman and his gang discovered and now are at pains to resolve and that there are no existing means. Not so.
I hope to impress on you one point at least: that the whole brouhaha by Lieberman is not, in fact, meant to resolve a problem. It is a purely political act of rude and crude exhibitionism by Lieberman, gaining some points where Likud missed.
Think about the whole story in another way: assuming Lieberman is right and there is some financial or other wrongdoing: what is the sequence of events a reasonable person will prefer: to send the police in and then to announce his/her act of civil consciousness or vice versa?
Yannai: I am not apologizing for “thuggish” or other strong expressions. Lieberman, in my opinion, deserves these and more. Again – he is a clear and present danger to democracy, I strongly believe. And not I only…
Snoopy,
Now you are talking beliefs…
I believe that calling the FM of Israel and his supporters “Lieberman and his gang” is thuggish and
a clear and present danger to Israel’s democracy. And not I only…
Getting hysterical and calling names for a pure political act that even does not involve police is desensitizing
to real abuses of democracy and sometimes law. And this hypocrisy is more dangerous to democracy than calling for
a Knesset commission.
Talking truth in plain language and badly accented English is most likely less dangerous to Israel’s democracy
and survival than some NGOs’ and left’s cooperation with Israel’s enemies. Good intentions not withstanding…
Marek, you are getting all het up, I feel that continuing in the direction you have taken doesn’t add to the discussion. So let’s agree to disagree.
Snoopy,
Agreed…