UTJ Viewpoints

At the beginnings of their governmental tenures, President Barak Obama and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu both made speeches regarding their Middle East visions, Obama in of all places, Cairo, Egypt, and Netanyahu, at Israel’s largest school of higher learning, Bar Ilan University.

President Obama first apologized for “over-reacting” to the tragedy of 9/11/2001.

He then made remarks that would seem to be pro-Israel:

• he decried Holocaust denial
• he viewed Israel as response to the Holocaust

What he did not do is to identify not only Ahmadinijad of Iran but Abbas of Palestine who both deny the Holocaust on one hand but wish to complete it on the other hand as both refuse to recognize Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state as Palestine has a right to exist as an Arab state.

By suggesting that the state of Israel’s right to exist is the affirmative action booby prize for the Holocaust genocide, Obama

• misread history
• denies the Jewish people a right to their own narrative
• forgets that Israel was ejected from its by force and never betrayed its national identity—with the unfortunate exceptions of the early classical Reformers like Abraham Geiger and the neo/pseudo Orthodox Samson Hirsch, both of whom denied Jewish nationhood as the price to be paid for the prize of citizenship in the emerging nation states

Obama’s speech in Cairo emphasized that his name was Barak Hussain, i.e., one of them.

We recall with amusement or horror when political opponents of Obama did this, they were accused of using the “race card.”

He claimed that

• there is a parity between Israel’s Holocaust suffering and Palestinian suffering
• Moslems must become builders and Israel must stop building
• Islam must embrace democracy

1. There is no parity between Palestine and Israel. As a nation, we were recognized as such by Pharaoh Merenptah that Israel is a people in his stela of 1206 BCE. Palestinian nationhood is a fiction of Arab propaganda, with “Palestine” being viewed as southern Syria. Israel’s claim to the land goes back to the Bible, the Arab claim derives from its professed right religion to demand submission, Islam, to its political elites.
2. The Holocaust suffering was the result of European anti-Semitism, a maniacal painter who usurped power, and an indifferent west. Arab suffering was the result of a false estimation of Jewish resolve, the unwillingness of Islam, the religion of zakat, charity, to care for Islamic refugees and to give them a home.
3. The land of Israel belongs to the people Israel. Accommodations through negotiations may be made. Imagine telling a Jew that she or he may not live in Baltimore’s Roland Park, Philadelphia’s Main Line, or Westchester’s White Plains, or that an Afro-American may not reside in Park Heights or in Boro Park?

Natural growth for Jews is not allowed, because Mr. Obama has decided

• what is a Jewish narrative
• that Jewish growth is an obstacle to peace
• that Arab violence has no consequences other than shed Jewish blood, which is expendable

If land for peace were an option, why did the leaving of Gaza

• begin a war
• which Israel did not start
• but was told that it was not permitted to win

Mr. Obama pressures Israel but not the Arab states. He ignores real facts:

1. Israel is willing to talk, the Arabs are not
2. It was Jimmy Peanut Carter who called the settlements illegal, UN resolution 242 called for negotiations
3. The Arabs are not willing to accept a state that is Jewish. Arabs can live among Jews, Jews may not live amongst Arabs, so let Israel be sacrificed.
4. It was Carter who betrayed the ally, the Shah, the oldest dynasty in the world of that time, and gave us the rule of Shiite Islam
5. Mr. Obama knows what the Arab and Jews want like Mel Gibson knows what women want:
6. Sober husbands
7. Husbands who stay and do not stray
8. Who live the religion they profess
9. Who hold their tongue, their cup shot glasses, and their pants
   1. what do the Palestinians want
   2. The right to bind others without themselves being bound
   3. An Arab state without Jews and a bi-national state that will be overtaken by Arabs and become an Arab state
   4. There remains unanimity that Israel may not remain a Jewish state
   5. Arab states that exclude Jews are Islamic; a Jewish state, however, is racist
      1. The Saudi plan, that Mr. Obama endorsed,
      2. Requires that Israel return to 1948 borders—which the Saudis did not accept
      3. Arabs have a right to their ancestral homelands
      4. Jews do not have a right to their ancestral claims
      5. Implied is that Israeli Jews are western colonialists and should return to their diasporas
      6. Israel may not be a Jewish state—even though Saudi Arabia is an Islamic state
      7. Palestinians may work and purchase land in Israel; Israelis may not work or purchase land in Palestine
      8. And this position is not negotiable. Got that right.

PM Netanyahu’s speech was statesmanlike, Zionist, and realistic He affirmed that

1. Israel wants peace and will compromise for peace. No platitudes; just respect
2. a non-threatening Palestinian state is possible
3. a jihadist Arab Palestine will not happen
4. there will be a Jewish, Zionist, State of Israel
5. In 1947, the Arab world went to war to kill Israel. Implied is the horrific question, do Arabs hate the Israelis more than they love their children
6. Jews were attacked because we were Jews and not dhimmis. Implied is the fact that giving up Gaza gave us war and not peace. Withdrawals brought suicide bombers, but not blessings and breadbaskets
7. The Arab right of return is impossible. It is a front for the dismantling of Israel.
8. any sovereign Palestine will be demilitarized. Implied is the probing question, “do you want your own country more than you do not want us to have ours?”
9. Hamas wants war. Fatah says it wants peace. Make your choice. A choice for Hamas is a choice for conflict, not country.
10. We must add, Abbas did not accept a Jewish Israel.

The brilliance of Netanyahu’s speech is that it is fair. To reject his challenge is to show the Islamic hand, war or peace, democracy or autocracy, a great life for the privileged or a decent life for all, a state of citizens or subjects, of conversation or conflict.

If Mr. Obama is really even handed, then the same rules that apply to Jews should apply everywhere. If he is not even handed, may he be reminded that Jews vote in America, where there are choices, and ballots. In Islam, we have no ballots, only blades and bullets.

Last 10 posts by Rabbi Alan Yuter

• The December 2009 Mosque Incident - August 1st, 2010
• What is the Relationship between Torah narrative and Torah law? - Parashat Miqqets - July 30th, 2010
• The Hanukka Confict - July 27th, 2010
• Why Rabbis are Not Trusted - July 25th, 2010
• The Piety Polemic and its Implications for Orthodox Judaism: Identifying the Real Religion of Jewish Extremism - July 22nd, 2010
• The Barzilai Hospital Crisis - July 18th, 2010
• Why Middle East Peace is Not at this Time Attainable - July 11th, 2010
• Avot 1:16 Sages’ advice should be sagacious - July 6th, 2010
• The Quest for the Original Torah - July 4th, 2010
• Avot 1:17 The Attentive Disposition - June 30th, 2010

This entry was posted on Monday, December 21st, 2009 at 7:13 pm and is filed under Viewpoint. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.