Analysis News
Visit our Hebrew site, "Local Call" , in partnership with Just Vision.

What we left behind in Egypt: Mizrahi thoughts on Israel

Even when they had reached the borders of the Promised Land, after 40 years in the desert, all the Children of Israel wanted was to go back to Egypt. In Erez Biton’s poem, the immigrant from Algeria and his son fail to build a home in Israel. Independence Day is also the tale of the rift in our identity, created by immigrating here.

By Mati Shemoelof

“And the children of Israel said unto them: ‘Would that we had died by the hand of the LORD in the land of Egypt, when we sat by the flesh-pots, when we did eat bread to the full; for ye have brought us forth into this wilderness, to kill this whole assembly with hunger.’” [Exodus 16:3]

“…And all the children of Israel murmured against Moses and against Aaron; and the whole congregation said unto them: ‘Would that we had died in the land of Egypt! or would we had died in this wilderness!;

And wherefore doth the LORD bring us unto this land, to fall by the sword? Our wives and our little ones will be a prey; were it not better for us to return into Egypt?’;
And they said one to another: ‘Let us make a captain, and let us return into Egypt.’” [Numbers Chapter 14 2-4]

Before we discuss the Mizrahi present in Israel, let us examine the trauma as it is reflected in the desire of the Israelites to return to Egypt and postpone the narrative of redemption in the Promised Land. Looking back at this theological question is important for a psychological understanding of the modern perception of identity, and the impossibility of achieving inner autonomy within Zionism and its holidays and Independence Day in particular.

At the beginning of the Israelites’ journey, and at the end of it after 40 years, the Israelites ask to return to Egypt. Both requests are impossible, as Egypt is already impossible. They are in a never-where, in the desert, which is neither the Promised Land nor Egypt. But in both cases they do not speak to God or to Moses and Aaron, and if they do, all they ask for is life and death in the land of Egypt, which still seems like a safe place to them. How could Egypt be a safe place for them, after having left it with such sturm und drang? How could they ask to...

Read More
View article: AAA
Share article

Facing down Breaking the Silence, Israel tries to play the underdog

The state prosecutor stages a refined production in which it pretends to be the weaker party facing down a massive organization. The state wants Breaking the Silence to reveal the identity of a soldier it suspects of committing crimes during the Gaza war.

By Alma Biblash

An Israeli Magistrate’s Court this week heard a challenge by anti-occupation group Breaking the Silence against a warrant ordering it to reveal the identity of a soldier who provided it with testimony about alleged crimes committed during the 2014 Gaza war.

Breaking the Silence is an organization of former Israeli soldiers that collects, verifies, and publishes first-person testimonies about Israel’s occupation and military control over Palestinians.

In court Sunday the state objected to a request by the Association for Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI) to join as amicus curiae, arguing that prosecution was unfamiliar with its legal opinion and needed to prepare. In the meantime the court delayed making a decision, yet allowed Attorney Michael Sfard, who is representing Breaking the Silence, to reference ACRI’s legal brief in court.

Sfard argued that Breaking the Silence is not only a human rights organization, but also a journalistic initiative, and that removing its journalistic immunity would harm the public interest — far more than any delay in a criminal investigation into the former soldier or even closing that probe. The judge gave the state until July 18 to submit its response.

The feeble state

During the hearing, the state put on a refined production of what the prosecution has turned into an art form: two attorneys representing the prosecution, women, young lawyers without much experience, sent to face Atty. Michael Sfard — a sharp, veteran litigator backed up by a courtroom packed with around 50 Breaking the Silence supporters. Not a single person came to support the prosecution, save for a spokesperson for far-right-wing group “Im Tirtzu.”

The state attorneys asked to delay the hearing. In response to most of the judge’s questions they responded that they did not know, were not sure, or claimed to not have the authority to answer. Only a small portion of their arguments and objections were even defensive: “it is hurtful when they say the prosecution is affected by political influences and the public atmosphere,” and, “it’s insulting and not nice when they laugh.” The latter came in response to laughter among the crowd after Atty. Sfard brought...

Read More
View article: AAA
Share article

Why I'm not afraid of Avigdor Liberman

My dear leftists, there’s really no reason to ask the last person to leave Israel to turn out the lights, as many of you have done over the last 48 hours. Most chances are that things will remain just as bad as they are – which is, in itself, hardly a reason to rejoice.

By Gilad Halpern

The pioneering 1970s rock band Kaveret (Hebrew for beehive) was groundbreaking in many respects. Other than their huge musical contribution, the band’s repertoire included comical, sometimes nonsensical songs that stood in stark contrast to the earnest, stuffy folk songs that had hitherto characterized Israeli music.

One famous example is a song called “The Grocery Store,” where an unnamed man expresses his love for a fellow shopper, whom he sees between the aisles searching for semolina and caraway bread. In Kaveret’s hugely successful concerts, the song was preceded by a sketch (the band members, especially Gidi Gov and Danny Sanderson, were also talented comedians) about a downtrodden boy, Yudokolis Lifshitz, who experiences an epiphany and realizes that opening a grocery store would be an apt redress for his plight.

Yudokolis’ despair was so great, that even as a young boy his parents tried to encourage him, unsuccessfully: “They told him: ‘Cheer up, son. Things could be a lot worse.’” And then the narrator adds: “So he did cheer up, and things indeed got a lot worse.”

Many Israeli leftists on Thursday, when Avigdor Liberman’s appointment as defense minister was confirmed, felt they were in Yudokolis’ shoes. Their general feeling was that the only thing missing in the hawkish, illiberal and flagrantly populist motley crew that is Netanyahu’s government was a cynical, authoritarian and divisive figure like Liberman, holding the most senior portfolio – second only to the PM – no less.

Liberman, who in the past threatened to bomb Egypt’s Aswan Dam and fire indiscriminately at Gaza until the Hamas government collapses, has now been given the authority to shape Israel’s security policy. All of this is pending the cabinet’s approval, of course – but that’s hardly grounds for reassurance, given that the other decision-makers are the equally belligerent far-right settler leader Naftali Bennett and the deeply suspicious and vulnerable Netanyahu, who knows full well that Liberman holds the key to the survival of his government.

However, similar things were said in 2009, when Liberman’s party clinched 15 seats (as...

Read More
View article: AAA
Share article

Naftali Bennett's vision: Equality through Jewish supremacy

Behind all the pretty words, Bennett’s speech at the Israel Prize ceremony reveals exactly what he’s after: a Jewish nationalist theocracy. 

By Gil Gertel

During last Thursday’s annual Israel Prize ceremony, Education Minister Naftali Bennett gave a speech laying out his vision. He called for the establishment of a national, Jewish state, and in order to justify his outlook he used a history that doesn’t even exist in the bible, scorned diaspora Jews, and promised equality for all through Jewish supremacy. “This is the only way,” he summarized his speech in support of Jewish theocracy, to the applause of those in attendance.

Bennett’s vision

First let us summarize Bennett’s speech, which opened with a question: “What is the next stage of Zionism?” Bennett then responded to himself: “To enrich Judaism and lift it up”; later on he would expand on the idea: “To grant an equal opportunity to every child in the State of Israel, regardless of origin, skin color, tendency, or place of residence.”

From there Bennett went on to look into the necessary conditions for reaching that “next stage.” This required an interrogation of history, in which the education minister established: “Throughout ancient history Judaism contributed to the world three big ideas that changed the face of humanity.” According to Bennett, those three ideas are: monotheism, according to which every human was born in the Image of God, and thus are equal; Sabbath, according to which rest from labor is a right accorded even to the weak; education and erudition, according to which knowledge and wisdom belong to everyone.

Then came the heart of Bennett’s argument: “Back then, when we were a sovereign power in our land — there was a Jewish state here — Judaism contributed to entire world. But when there was no Jewish state, when we weren’t sovereigns, Judaism did not contribute to humanity.” Bennett’s conclusion is that we must adopt the national-religious outlook: “Only a combination between Judaism, nationalism, and universalism will lift up our people toward our goal […] this way, and only this way, will we be able to be a light unto the entire world.”

Inventing a new history

Bennett’s speech is based on an imaginary history. Even those who have as simplistic a reading of the bible as Bennett, there is no connection between his three “big” ideas and the concept of a Jewish state. Monotheism, according to tradition, was...

Read More
View article: AAA
Share article

For Washington Post, cheap labor is key to Mideast peace

A recent article in the Washington Post praises efforts by the Israeli government to bring in cheap labor from Jordan as a sign of growing peace. The problem? It all comes at the expense of Palestinian workers.

By Hagar Shezaf

A Washington Post article published earlier this week praised a new pilot project between the governments of Jordan and Israel. Calling the plan a “little peace” in the Middle East, the article applauded the fact that room cleaners named Ahmad and dishwashers named Mohammad are being brought in from Jordan to work in Israel’s southern city of Eilat.

Yet this vision of a new, peaceful Middle East is a non-story and far from being a sign of peace.

The truth is that the number of employees entering Israel from Jordan is relatively small. In fact Jordanians are necessary only as a result of the ban on Palestinians in Eilat. Around 115,200 West Bank Palestinians are employed in Israel, yet they are all banned from the country’s most southern city. While Israeli officials have refrained from providing an official explanation for the ban, it is widely assumed that it stems from Eilat’s distance from the West Bank, which prevents Palestinian day laborers from going home after a day of work. This, along with Israel’s crackdown on the asylum seeker community — which came to replace Palestinian workers in the years following the Second Intifada — has created a shortage in workers for Eilat’s hotels industry. That’s where the Jordanians come in.

When SodaStream, one of the BDS movement’s main targets in the past few years, moved its factory from the West Bank settlement of Ma’ale Adumim to the Negev desert, 74 Palestinian workers were left behind after not being granted permits to work in Israel. SodaStream CEO Daniel Birnbaum launched a national campaign following the decision, condemning both the BDS campaign as well as the Israeli government, which declined the request for permits. In response the laid off employees launched a Facebook page called “The Peace Intifada” and took part in a heartfelt video where they gathered together to form a giant peace sign. The message was clear: SodaStream is a peaceful oasis in the heart of a violent conflict between Israel and the Palestinians.

The case of SodaStream is interesting, since much like the Washington Post piece, it presented Palestinian employment as a symbol of peace between people....

Read More
View article: AAA
Share article

Israeli soldiers detain Palestinian lawmaker in overnight raid

Soldiers detain Hamas-linked Abed al-Jaber Fuqaha in his Ramallah home. Fuqaha, who was released from administrative detention a year ago, has spent a total of seven years in prison. He is the seventh Palestinian lawmaker in Israeli custody.

By Noam Rotem

Israeli forces arrested Palestinian parliamentarian Abed al-Jaber Fuqaha in his home in the al-Masyoun neighborhood of Ramallah during an overnight raid Monday. According to members of Fuqaha’s family, soldiers burst into their home in the early hours of the morning, beat and took him into custody.

Fuqaha, a Hamas affiliate in the Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC), was released from administrative detention a year ago, and has spent a total of seven years in Israeli prison. In 2014 he joined a mass Palestinian hunger strike to protest against prolonged detention without charges or trial.

Fuqaha is the seventh Palestinian legislator in Israeli custody, along with Ahmad Sa’adat, the secretary-general of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) who is serving a 30-year sentence; Marwan Barghouti, who is serving four consecutive life sentences; Hatem Hafisha and Hassan Yousef who are being held in administrative detention, Jerusalem resident Muhammad Mahmoud Abu Tir, and PFLP lawmaker and feminist activist Khalida Jarrar.

Jarrar was sentenced to 15 months in prison last December after spending eight months in prison, some of which were spent in administrative detention.

According to Palestinian prisoners’ rights group, Addameer, 7,000 Palestinians are currently being held in detention by Israel.

Noam Rotem is an Israeli activist, high-tech executive and author of the blog o139.org, subtitled “Godwin doesn’t live here any more.” This article was first published in Hebrew on Local Call. Read it here.

Newsletter banner

View article: AAA
Share article

Jewish education’s sin of omission

Despite years of Jewish education, much of which focused on Israel, this young American Zionist was still ignorant of Israel’s occupation of the West Bank.

By David Sarna Galdi

The Israeli occupation of the West Bank will mark its 50-year anniversary next year. For five decades, since 1967, that occupation has been a central theme in any discussion of Israel’s politics, history, current events and obviously, conflict with the Palestinians — except, apparently, if you’re young and Jewish in America.

While recently reading a critique of the absence of any discussion of the occupation (or any criticism of Israel, for that matter) in the 2016 American presidential elections, I made a disturbing realization: I myself had only become aware of the occupation and all of its ramifications relatively recently, only after moving to Israel and actively trying to codify, for myself, the country’s political genome.

Despite being the product of an active Jewish diaspora community and intense Jewish education (I was the target audience for a thorough understanding of Israel’s political physiognomy) I had been utterly in the dark when it came to Israel’s greatest blemish.

I attended Jewish schools near New York City. I went to Jewish camps. I spent countless Saturday mornings in synagogue with my grandparents. I traveled to Israel with my family a dozen times. As a 17 year old I spent the summer hiking the length and width of Israel. Later, I spent a hot, sweaty summer volunteering in an economically depressed city in the Negev desert. One could argue that I had the quintessential Zionist Jewish-American upbringing.

Yet somehow, in all of those years of exposure to Jewish and Israeli reality, history and culture, I never heard one word about the occupation, or even the actual word, “occupation.”

I came of age during the giddy, hope-filled days of the Oslo Accords. In fact, I distinctly remember the 13th of September, 1993, when my modern-Orthodox Jewish high school cancelled classes and gathered all of the students in the auditorium to watch the live broadcast of the signing ceremony on the White House lawn.

Yet, for all of my school’s engagement with Israeli current events, they left out one huge detail of modern Israeli history: the fact that in 1967, after the Six Day War, Israel seized the West Bank and Gaza but didn’t absorb them, setting the stage for today’s reality in which the...

Read More
View article: AAA
Share article

'Every few minutes, one of them hit us with a rifle butt'

Three Palestinian teens speak about the abuse they say they endured in Israeli military custody after being arrested during a demonstration along the Gaza border.

By Yael Marom

Israeli military police are investigating the suspicion that over the course of three days, IDF soldiers abused three Palestinian teenagers who illegally crossed into Israel from the Gaza Strip during a protest late last year, according to a Haaretz report earlier this month.

On October 10, 2015, the three Gazan teenagers were participating in a protest along the border, during which protesters attempted to damage the fence, and threw stones toward soldiers positioned on the other side. The soldiers responded with gunfire, tear gas grenades and rubber-coated steel bullets.

At some point a number of protesters pulled up part of a gate in the fence. Military forces gave pursuit with the use of flares and K9 units. Six of the protesters, those who fled into Israeli territory, were arrested.

Several months after their release, three of the arrestees, minors aged 15, 16, and 17, told a researcher working for Israeli human rights organization B’Tselem what happened during the 72 hours following their arrest.

For three days, the teenagers say, soldiers kept them tied up in the open, repeatedly beat them, denied them food and drink, subjected them to various degradations, and kept them awake. One of the teens says that soldier extinguished cigarettes on his arms and legs.

The following are three testimonies collected from the three teenagers, as provided by B’Tselem:

‘Abd a-Rahman Abu Hamisah, 16 years old

A few minutes after I joined the demonstration, I went ahead with some other guys and we tore out the iron gate that’s part of the border fence. I entered Israeli territory and Israeli military jeeps started pursuing us, about five jeeps. The soldiers fired all around us. We kept running east into Israeli territory, into the vegetation. We ran a long way and couldn’t see the border any more. It was already evening and he sun had gone down. By nightfall, I realized we were in trouble and got scared. I couldn’t go back towards the border because the demonstration was over and the soldiers were occupied only with looking for us. I didn’t mean to go any further into Israel. I just wanted to get away from the soldiers and the gunfire. We kept running...

Read More
View article: AAA
Share article

Being beaten by settlers can get you arrested — if you're Palestinian

IDF soldiers find Palestinians beaten by settlers yet do not ask the right questions. An incident that will, inevitably, go completely under the radar.

By Yesh Din, written by Yossi Gurvitz

On November 21, 2015 B., a Palestinian youth, went with his friend H., from his village of A-Dik in the West Bank, to bring food to H.’s father, who was busy working the land.

At about 14:00, they found H.’s father and gave him the food. Then they went to another part of the same plot of land to gather “white fragrant flowers named ‘Jargas,’” as B. would later recount. They were about a kilometer away from the Israeli settlement of Bruchin when they noticed three horsemen approaching them. Only when they were very close did the Palestinians realize they were Israeli civilians.

Two of the riders were armed: one with a rifle, the other with a handgun. At gunpoint, they forced the two boys to stand still. The third rider, armed with a club, began beating them while the two others pointed their guns at them. The beating went on for a long while — B. thought it continued for a full ten minutes. The two didn’t dare to attempt an escape, since they believed they would be shot.

After that the Israeli civilians forced the two boys to take off their coats and shoes, and led them barefoot toward a guard tower near Bruchin. B. estimated they walked for about a kilometer, and said the guns were pointed at them the whole way. The tower wasn’t manned, and the settlers began hitting them again. As they beat the boys, a military jeep arrived.

What did the IDF soldiers, the representatives of the sovereign power, do when they saw two young men standing barefoot, guns pointed at them, and a man beating them with a club? Did they detain the attackers, as any reasonable person would do?

Of course not. They didn’t even speak to the Israeli civilians, who now exit our story. The soldiers tied the young Palestinians’ eyes with cloths and kept them in the jeep for several hours. Later, described B., the soldiers would drive the detainees without any stated reason to Bruchin, where they were turned over to the police. A policeman named Shlomi used B.’s cellphone to call his father: come and pick your son up from the entrance to the settlement....

Read More
View article: AAA
Share article

A law criminalizing torture: The first step on a long path

Unless a law to criminalize torture is passed, we cannot begin combatting the view that a human being’s body and soul can be abused for punishment or to extract information.

By Rachel Stroumsa

Representatives of the Israeli Justice Ministry announced last week in Geneva that the ministry is working on a law criminalizing torture in Israel. A day later it became clear that these representatives were unable to address the content of the proposed law. Nor could they even venture a guess as to when it would be completed, despite the fact that the matter has been under debate for several months.

The initial announcement came as part of a set of answers questions posed by the United Nations Committee Against Torture, known endearingly as CAT. The questions posed by CAT should trouble us all: why is there systematic use of torture in Israel? Why are detainees held in solitary confinement for months on end? And why, in the face of over 1,000 registered allegations and complaints, has not one single criminal investigation been opened against Shin Bet interrogators?

Let’s be clear. The announcement is certainly welcome. After many recommendations — including those of two governmental commissions — Israel has finally declared it will work toward the banning of torture. Yet some fear that the state’s evasive answers the following day in Geneva indicate that it is too early to rejoice.

After all, Israel currently permits the use of torture, and members of the various security forces enjoy almost total impunity from allegations of torture or ill-treatment. It can hardly be denied that to this day the Israeli legal system has employed double standards towards Palestinian and Jewish detainees, exempted the suspects in “security offenses” from safeguards designed to protect them, and made light of torture outside interrogation rooms, such as the use of police violence against Ethiopian citizens.

In light of all this, it is reasonable to question whether a law against torture would indeed protect human rights. And yet, for so many years, the Public Committee Against Torture in Israel (PCATI) and other organizations have called for such legislation. What would be its value?

There is immense power in a state’s clear declaration that torture is not just another tool at the disposal of the governing forces — that there are some actions that civilized states do not carry out, and that these actions should...

Read More
View article: AAA
Share article

How I explained the Nakba to my kids

By Noam Rotem

Say Dad, what is independence?

An independent person is a person who can do whatever they want. They are free and nobody makes decisions for them. When a state is independent, it means that no one tells it what to do and it can decide for itself what it deems to be good and bad.

And what is Independence Day?

Independence Day is the day the State of Israel became independent. The rest of the countries in the world agreed it could assume control over the land of Israel without anyone else telling it what to do.

Who told it what to do?

Before there was a State of Israel, the British ruled here, and before them the Turks. They controlled the Jews and the Palestinians. After the other countries agreed to give up the country, the British departed and left it for the Jews and the Arabs.

And they gave us all of the Land of Israel?

No. The countries of the world agreed to give only part of the land to the Jews, and the other part they gave to the Arabs. Grandma and grandpa’s house in the Galilee, for example, was not inside Israel. It was supposed to be part of the state of Palestine. Here, see this map:

The orange part was where the Jewish State should have been and the yellow designated the Palestinian state. Jerusalem was not supposed to belong to anyone, which is why it is colored white.

So what happened?

There was a war. Some of the people who lived here weren’t willing to give up their homes for a Jewish state, and some of the Jews didn’t agree to it either, because they wanted Jerusalem and other places. Most of the Jewish leaders agreed to it, and most of the Arab leaders did not. Battles started, and then other regional armies got involved: Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, Saudi Arabia and even Iraq. In the end, the Jews managed to fight the armies and conquered more parts of the land that were designated to be a Palestinian state.

What is a Palestinian state?

It is the state where the country’s Arab residents — who are called Palestinians — were supposed to live.

So the Jews won?

You could say that, but a war is never good. A lot of people died, and a lot of people lost their homes...

Read More
View article: AAA
Share article

The role of Israeli Jews in planning for Palestinian return

Perhaps the most important area in which Jewish Israelis can be active regarding Palestinian return is preparing the Israeli public for that eventuality.

By Eitan Bronstein Aparicio

The Nakba has entered the mainstream Israeli discourse in recent years in ways that were unthinkable in the past. A large majority of Jews in Israel know it is a word in Arabic connected to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and has a negative connotation, shows a public opinion poll to be published soon by De-Colonizer, a research and art laboratory for social change, that provides materials and tools to expose and challenge the colonialist nature of the Israeli regime.

In response to that public recognition we have seen a dramatic shift on the part of the Israeli government and right-wing group Im Tirtzu. The “Nakba Law,” which passed in 2011, is aimed at preventing the study and commemoration of the Nakba. At the same time, Im Tirtzu launched a major campaign encouraging Nakba denial. And yet, despite the burgeoning awareness of the Nakba, most Israelis do not know what it actually is.

Even fewer Israelis recognize that Israel has any kind of responsibility for turning most Palestinians into refugees and destroying most of their towns and villages in 1948 in order to establish the Jewish state. Among those who understand the importance of Israeli recognition of the Nakba, a minority supports recognition of the right of return (Hak al-Awda in Arabic) of Palestinian refugees as determined in international law and specifically in UN Resolution 194 from December 11, 1948.

Since Israel’s establishment, the bitter debate over the right of return has been dichotomous: Zionists are against and the anti-Zionist are for. It seems to be a dispute between two sides that aren’t engaging in any constructive dialogue. Obviously this is not a dispute restricted to legal terms, but one whose basis is the Jewish state, a state that uses legal mechanisms to maintain a Jewish majority and in which only Jews can be full citizens.

In order to move past this and achieve a real discourse on the matter, in order to promote the right of return, we should focus more on practical return and less on a theoretical right. In addition to studying and recognizing the Nakba, it is necessary to start planning the actual return itself. Planning for the return of Palestinian refugees is based on two fundamental principles: nobody should be uprooted...

Read More
View article: AAA
Share article

'The Jews are heading to the polls in droves'

It turns out that one of Benjamin Netanyahu’s most notoriously divisive statements in recent years reflects, almost identically, an anti-Semitic election slogan exposed and decried by none other than the founding father of right-wing Zionism, Jabotinsky.

By Gilad Halpern

Ze’ev Vladimir Jabotinsky, the founding father of the Zionist right and forebear of Likud, has been said to turn in his grave so many times he could produce enough energy to electrify a few new settlements.

It is often said that Jabotinsky, a liberal nationalist who imbibed 19th century romanticism, would have had nothing but contempt for the lowbrow jingoism that has become so characteristic of his so-called disciples in Likud.

One particularly notorious example was Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s Election Day warning that “Arab voters are heading to the polling station in droves,” in a desperate attempt to prod his supporters to save his right-wing government. Which they did: Netanyahu’s divisive remark proved to be extremely effective, and it is credited with having clinched him a victory in what seemed until the very end to be a losing battle.

But as it emerged this week, when Netanyahu uttered his now-infamous remark, Jabotinsky must have completed a double somersault six feet under.

Prof. Yaacov Shavit, a historian of Judaism at Tel Aviv University, has dug up a century-old, obscure quote from one of Jabotinsky’s many volumes of writings.

It was written in 1911, when Jabotinsky, an extremely prolific journalist and essayist, covered the racially tense municipal elections in Warsaw, Poland.

In archaic Hebrew that has nonetheless survived the passage of time, he conveys to his readers the “pogrom atmosphere” that prevailed during the campaign. To prove his point, he quotes a few tracts handed out by Polish nationalists, including one that says: “Calling on our people: Look what is happening at the polling stations. The Jews are heading to them in droves, and the Poles are scattered… If you vote for the pseudo-progressive party, Warsaw will be represented by Jews. Poles, save your capital!”

He then concludes: “I rest my case.”

Did Netanyahu know about the uncanny similarity between the two? That’s very unlikely. The quote appears in a new book of Jabotinsky’s writings published just this week. But to put it in Mark Twain’s words, “History may not repeat itself, but it does rhyme.”

Gilad Halpern is a journalist and broadcaster, host of “The Tel Aviv Review – Ideas from...

Read More
View article: AAA
Share article
© 2010 - 2016 +972 Magazine
Follow Us
Credits

+972 is an independent, blog-based web magazine. It was launched in August 2010, resulting from a merger of a number of popular English-language blogs dealing with life and politics in Israel and Palestine.

Website powered by RSVP

Illustrations: Eran Mendel