In recent days, there has been a truly
frightening articulation of the US administration’s perception of Israel
vis-à-vis the Muslim world. On Friday, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta
essentially blamed Israel for its own “increasing isolation,” urging the
Jewish state to reach out to its neighbors.
He suggested that
Israel make diplomatic inroads with the Muslim Brotherhood’s Egypt, Recep
Tayyip Erdogan’s increasingly Islamist and anti-Israel Turkey, and
vulnerable Jordan, a country whose leadership – for the sake of
self-preservation – has been making concessions to its own Muslim
Brotherhood.
And when asked at the end of his speech at the
Brookings Institution in Washington what operative steps Israel could make
to advance negotiations with the Palestinians, Panetta said: “Just get to
the damn table.”
In other words, the clearly exasperated Panetta
believes that if only stubborn Israel would make more concessions to the
Palestinians, regional animosity toward Israel would miraculously
evaporate after decades of incitement.
Just two days before Panetta
made his disturbing comments, US Ambassador to Belgium Howard Gutman, the
son of a Polish Holocaust survivor, basically blamed Israel for Muslim
anti-Semitism in Europe.
Thankfully the White House later distanced
itself from Gutman’s speech, made to a conference held by the European
Jewish Union. Nevertheless, Gutman had carefully thought out what he said
in advance. This was no slip.
First, he noted the “significant
anger” and “yes, perhaps hatred and indeed sometimes an all too growing
intimidation and violence directed at Jews generally as a result of the
continuing tensions between Israel and the Palestinian territories and
other Arab neighbors in the Middle East.”
But instead of denouncing Muslims who
attack European Jews because Israel stubbornly insists on defending itself
in, say, Operation Cast Lead – a military incursion into the
Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip to stop rockets and mortar shells fired at
Israeli civilians – Gutman attempted to understand these outbursts of
violence as a legitimate reaction and, therefore, fundamentally different
from “traditional” forms of anti-Semitism.
Though one man was
talking about Muslim perceptions in Europe and the other focused on Muslim
political leadership in the region, both Panetta and Gutman had one thing
in common: a maddening insistence on mixing up cause and
effect.
No, Mr. Panetta, Israel’s isolation has not deepened as a
result of anything that it has done (besides existing). In Turkey, in the
Gaza Strip, in Tunisia and now in Egypt, governments have been voted into
power – in democratic elections – that have, or soon will, pursue foreign
policies exceedingly antagonistic toward the Jewish state.
After
all, what interest would any Arab country in the region have in
strengthening ties with Israel at a time when its citizens, given the
chance to choose, are expressing a distinct preference for a particularly
fundamentalist, illiberal and anti-Western – not to mention anti-Israel
and anti-Semitic – strain of Islamic leadership?
What Panetta
should have said – and didn’t – was that in light of the increasing
hostility directed toward Israel by an increasing number of Muslim states
in the region, the US reaffirms its commitment to Israel’s
security.
And Mr. Gutman, the hundreds of attacks on innocent
European Jews perpetrated by Muslims purportedly in response to Israel’s
settlement policy in east Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria or in response to
its attempts to defend itself through military means are no less
irrational than any other type of anti-Semitism.
Just as Jews such
as Gutman’s father were not responsible for the sort of anti-Semitism
directed at them during the Holocaust, so, too, is it unfair to point to
Israeli policies as triggering Muslim violence against European
Jews.
As in the US, the number of anti-Semitic attacks in Western
Europe outweighs anti-Muslim attacks, even though Muslims make up a
significantly larger population. And a large percentage of those
anti-Semitic attacks are perpetrated by Muslims. In contrast, the number
of anti-Muslim attacks perpetrated by Jews is negligible, if they exist at
all.
The sorts of views held by Gutman and Panetta are,
unfortunately, not uncommon. But it is more than just unfortunate when
these views are held by men who have a critical influence on US foreign
policy. It is downright scary, especially in light of Israel’s growing
need for American support as radical changes sweep the region.
|