The war in Gaza, rising extremist Jewish terror in the West Bank and the US-Israel war with Iran have highlighted the need for a fundamental reassessment of the US-Israel security relationship.
J Street is on the right track here. There must be restrictions tied to all US aid to Israel. There must be consequences for Israel when it allows the wanton abuses of Palestinians, whether in the Occupied West Bank of in Gaza. The same need for restrictions should apply to any Israeli offensive military action.
This is a sensible and well thought out plan, Jeremy. Shkoyach to J Street for all of the wonderful work that it does. It truly is the voice of what American Jews, and most Americans, want around U.S.-Israel policy.
I would also include a piece of legislation called the Block the Bombs Act (H.R. 3565), that restricts the transfer of specific American offensive weapons to Israel that Israel has used to perpetrate human rights atrocities against Palestinians inside Gaza.
And the legislation that Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders recently introduced that would prevent the U.S. from selling hundreds of millions of dollars worth of munitions to Israel with no conditions attached on how they are allowed to be used.
And another piece of legislation introduced by Senator Sanders that would restrict M-16s manufactured in the U.S. form being transferred to Israel. Because they are being used by Israel to commit human rights abuses against Palestinians in the illegally occupied West Bank.
J Street may have already expressed support for these bills; I’m not sure.
All I can say is... it's about time! Personally, I think J Street should go even further to distance itself from Israel (and U.S. support). But this is a good start.
Defenders of financial aid, as opposed to arms sales (which J Street) support have an obligation to explain what the pitch should be to US voters. Most people do not want to see their money supporting settlement expansion, settler violence, and attacks against the rule of law. I fully believe that the Gaza war would have been perceived differently (and no, it’s not a genocide) if Israel had shown a commitment to democratic values and human rights elsewhere.
Yes war crimes were committed, as they were on Oct 7 and literally every armed conflict in human and recent history. No, it was not genocide. Yes, anti-Israel people have been using that libel against us even before the war started.
There is just no comparison betweeen the vicious October 7th hit and run attack by rag-tag Hamas guerillas and the sustained, high tech, systematic, long-term destruction of Gaza and its civilian inhabitants by a 21st century state-controlled military. Much of the world has condemned this Israeli action, including many Jews both inside Israel and around the world. To paint them with a broad "anti-Israel" brush is not reasonable.
The opinions of highly politicized organizations captured by activists means nothing to me and most critically thinking people. Major institutions endorsing libel against the Jewish people is not a new phenomenon in our history. What is important is an analysis of what actually happened and whether it meets legal criteria. Any serious analysis shows that the charge of genocide, leveled against Israel on Oct EIGTH and even before, is entirely specious. It’s prima facie ridiculous even without such an analysis; what armed party in a conflict has facilitated as much aid to its enemy as Israel has in this case.
In any case, why the fuck are you fighting with me on this specific point when my post was overall supportive of a much harsher stance towards Israel? You people just can’t help yourselves.
Israel is under pressure to act like they aren’t trying to commit genocide, but no thinking person could ignore the wanton cruelty of its policies, which seem designed to increase suffering and give Palestinians every incentive to leave Gaza. Israel wants ethnic cleansing, obviously, but lacks a green light by the U.S. and the West. The Biden Administration did everything it could to pretend Israel wasn’t committing massive war crimes, but an actual forced expulsion into to Egypt against the will of the Egyptian government would have been impossible to whitewash.
As for human rights groups, these are the same ones that condemn Hamas and clearly do their best to employ the same standards in judging crimes no matter who commits them. Ideologues of all types, across the political spectrum, find this offensive.
The only reason I can see for helping Israel in any way at all is that by maintaining ties we might have some leverage, but that argument is worthless unless we employ the leverage and achieve real results for the Palestinians. Otherwise we are just continuing the support of an apartheid state guilty of genocide and can expect further crimes committed with our support.
We should use that leverage to achieve real results for the Palestinians, but we should be real about what that would entail: a demilitarized state on the WB and Gaza. This no Palestinian and arguably now no Israelis will agree too. Israelis withdrew from Gaza and were rewarded with continuous violence culminating in what you call a “rag tag” raid but which to Israel was multiple 9/11a in size and scope. Hence, the conflict. You will not getting that from reading Peter Beinart and Aaron Mate.
What remains unrefuted, because it is true, is my claim that the genocide claim was employed BEFORE Oct 7 and immediately after clearly as a rhetorical battering ram against Israel, and remains as such today. Here is a trenchant analysis, hardly from a right wing observer. https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/identity-crisis/id1500168597?i=1000721595831. More limited claims that Israel prioritized its own soldiers lives excessively over that of Gazan civilians are almost certainly true and worthy of debate.
J Street just keeps digging itself into a deeper hole. It's rather pathetic.
Oh and PS anyone else reading this: the formerly working 'US Security Assistance to Israel' link under their 'policy positions' now conveniently takes you to a dead page. Coincidence? https://jstreet.org/policy/us-security-assistance-to-israel/
PPS this memo in no way, shape, or form "reflects the views of most American Jews." Like at all.
So what’s your position? It’s not clear to me at all from your comments. From what I see of various scientific polls, not anecdotal evidence, J Street does align well with the views of most American Jews. Here’s an article exploring some recent polling that shows “One way to understand the survey results is that most American Jews maintain a high degree of emotional attachment to Israel (71%) and sympathy for its geopolitical situation (around 90% believe it’s under ‘constant threat from hostile neighbors who seek its destruction’ and that ‘Palestinian leadership has been corrupt and unwilling to negotiate in good faith’)”. Less than a third of respondents supported giving Palestinians in Gaza and the WB citizenship if it meant Israel was no longer a majority Jewish state. J Street supports full citizenship of these folk in a Palestinian state.
OK. So, the blockade wasn't instituted until Hamas came to power (shortly after the withdrawal). And yes, Hamas is sworn to Israel's destruction. But, once the blockade was put in place, it seems strange (intellectually dishonest) to continue describing Israel's actions from that point on as a withdrawal.
The alternative was what exactly? Just let a country continuously launch rockets into its territory. The alternative to the blockade was the war we got starting after Oct 7.
Maintaining a blockade around a civilian population, enforced by military force, that limits food and other non-military supplies, is normally considered an overt act of war, not a "withdrawal". Israel has maintained a blockade around Gaza since the time of the removal of the Israeli settlements.
Does JStreet support an Iron Dome for Gaza and the West Bank? There are plenty of civilians there and a defensive capability for Gaza would have saved tens of thousands of innocent lives, And I believe some living there are American. Though perhaps most or all of them fled because Gaza has no Iron Dome.
I am not joking, or only partially so. The argument here is that we should help Israel with its self defense needs in order to save innocent lives. The fact that Israel has a murderous government doesn’t make Israeli children any less innocent. Well, the same applies to Gaza.
So I suggest you give up the humanitarian argument for helping Israel, unless you wish to extend it to Gaza.
Better yet, countries that want our help defending themselves should stop blowing up homes and apartment buildings.
I was being snarky. Clearly Iron Dome covers the WB, since that is where so many hundreds of thousands of settlers live and as for Gaza, Israel murdered hundreds of unarmed protestors in 2018-2019 and nobody needs to rehearse the atrocities committed by Israel in Gaza — there is no excuse for atrocities committed by either side, no matter which side one thinks has the just cause.
J Street is on the right track here. There must be restrictions tied to all US aid to Israel. There must be consequences for Israel when it allows the wanton abuses of Palestinians, whether in the Occupied West Bank of in Gaza. The same need for restrictions should apply to any Israeli offensive military action.
Agree.
This is a sensible and well thought out plan, Jeremy. Shkoyach to J Street for all of the wonderful work that it does. It truly is the voice of what American Jews, and most Americans, want around U.S.-Israel policy.
I would also include a piece of legislation called the Block the Bombs Act (H.R. 3565), that restricts the transfer of specific American offensive weapons to Israel that Israel has used to perpetrate human rights atrocities against Palestinians inside Gaza.
And the legislation that Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders recently introduced that would prevent the U.S. from selling hundreds of millions of dollars worth of munitions to Israel with no conditions attached on how they are allowed to be used.
And another piece of legislation introduced by Senator Sanders that would restrict M-16s manufactured in the U.S. form being transferred to Israel. Because they are being used by Israel to commit human rights abuses against Palestinians in the illegally occupied West Bank.
J Street may have already expressed support for these bills; I’m not sure.
All I can say is... it's about time! Personally, I think J Street should go even further to distance itself from Israel (and U.S. support). But this is a good start.
Defenders of financial aid, as opposed to arms sales (which J Street) support have an obligation to explain what the pitch should be to US voters. Most people do not want to see their money supporting settlement expansion, settler violence, and attacks against the rule of law. I fully believe that the Gaza war would have been perceived differently (and no, it’s not a genocide) if Israel had shown a commitment to democratic values and human rights elsewhere.
Gaza WAS a genocide in any enlightened community of minds. War crimes were committed.
Yes war crimes were committed, as they were on Oct 7 and literally every armed conflict in human and recent history. No, it was not genocide. Yes, anti-Israel people have been using that libel against us even before the war started.
There is just no comparison betweeen the vicious October 7th hit and run attack by rag-tag Hamas guerillas and the sustained, high tech, systematic, long-term destruction of Gaza and its civilian inhabitants by a 21st century state-controlled military. Much of the world has condemned this Israeli action, including many Jews both inside Israel and around the world. To paint them with a broad "anti-Israel" brush is not reasonable.
The opinions of highly politicized organizations captured by activists means nothing to me and most critically thinking people. Major institutions endorsing libel against the Jewish people is not a new phenomenon in our history. What is important is an analysis of what actually happened and whether it meets legal criteria. Any serious analysis shows that the charge of genocide, leveled against Israel on Oct EIGTH and even before, is entirely specious. It’s prima facie ridiculous even without such an analysis; what armed party in a conflict has facilitated as much aid to its enemy as Israel has in this case.
In any case, why the fuck are you fighting with me on this specific point when my post was overall supportive of a much harsher stance towards Israel? You people just can’t help yourselves.
Israel is under pressure to act like they aren’t trying to commit genocide, but no thinking person could ignore the wanton cruelty of its policies, which seem designed to increase suffering and give Palestinians every incentive to leave Gaza. Israel wants ethnic cleansing, obviously, but lacks a green light by the U.S. and the West. The Biden Administration did everything it could to pretend Israel wasn’t committing massive war crimes, but an actual forced expulsion into to Egypt against the will of the Egyptian government would have been impossible to whitewash.
As for human rights groups, these are the same ones that condemn Hamas and clearly do their best to employ the same standards in judging crimes no matter who commits them. Ideologues of all types, across the political spectrum, find this offensive.
The only reason I can see for helping Israel in any way at all is that by maintaining ties we might have some leverage, but that argument is worthless unless we employ the leverage and achieve real results for the Palestinians. Otherwise we are just continuing the support of an apartheid state guilty of genocide and can expect further crimes committed with our support.
We should use that leverage to achieve real results for the Palestinians, but we should be real about what that would entail: a demilitarized state on the WB and Gaza. This no Palestinian and arguably now no Israelis will agree too. Israelis withdrew from Gaza and were rewarded with continuous violence culminating in what you call a “rag tag” raid but which to Israel was multiple 9/11a in size and scope. Hence, the conflict. You will not getting that from reading Peter Beinart and Aaron Mate.
What remains unrefuted, because it is true, is my claim that the genocide claim was employed BEFORE Oct 7 and immediately after clearly as a rhetorical battering ram against Israel, and remains as such today. Here is a trenchant analysis, hardly from a right wing observer. https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/identity-crisis/id1500168597?i=1000721595831. More limited claims that Israel prioritized its own soldiers lives excessively over that of Gazan civilians are almost certainly true and worthy of debate.
All major international human rights organizations AND many (most?) Holocaust and genocide experts (including Israeli) have called it genocide.
J Street just keeps digging itself into a deeper hole. It's rather pathetic.
Oh and PS anyone else reading this: the formerly working 'US Security Assistance to Israel' link under their 'policy positions' now conveniently takes you to a dead page. Coincidence? https://jstreet.org/policy/us-security-assistance-to-israel/
PPS this memo in no way, shape, or form "reflects the views of most American Jews." Like at all.
So what’s your position? It’s not clear to me at all from your comments. From what I see of various scientific polls, not anecdotal evidence, J Street does align well with the views of most American Jews. Here’s an article exploring some recent polling that shows “One way to understand the survey results is that most American Jews maintain a high degree of emotional attachment to Israel (71%) and sympathy for its geopolitical situation (around 90% believe it’s under ‘constant threat from hostile neighbors who seek its destruction’ and that ‘Palestinian leadership has been corrupt and unwilling to negotiate in good faith’)”. Less than a third of respondents supported giving Palestinians in Gaza and the WB citizenship if it meant Israel was no longer a majority Jewish state. J Street supports full citizenship of these folk in a Palestinian state.
You want my position? Here you go:
https://theliberaljew.substack.com/p/israel-bashing-is-not-about-israel
https://theliberaljew.substack.com/p/democratic-socialists-of-america
https://theliberaljew.substack.com/p/the-terrible-awful-truth-about-j
https://theliberaljew.substack.com/p/yes-anti-zionism-is-always-antisemitism
OK. So, the blockade wasn't instituted until Hamas came to power (shortly after the withdrawal). And yes, Hamas is sworn to Israel's destruction. But, once the blockade was put in place, it seems strange (intellectually dishonest) to continue describing Israel's actions from that point on as a withdrawal.
The alternative was what exactly? Just let a country continuously launch rockets into its territory. The alternative to the blockade was the war we got starting after Oct 7.
That is an argument for why a blockade was necessary. It doesn't sound like an argument for why a blockade should be called a withdrawal.
Maintaining a blockade around a civilian population, enforced by military force, that limits food and other non-military supplies, is normally considered an overt act of war, not a "withdrawal". Israel has maintained a blockade around Gaza since the time of the removal of the Israeli settlements.
This is actually not really true. Until Hamas violently came to power in a civil war Gaza was on the path to full liberalization.
Does JStreet support an Iron Dome for Gaza and the West Bank? There are plenty of civilians there and a defensive capability for Gaza would have saved tens of thousands of innocent lives, And I believe some living there are American. Though perhaps most or all of them fled because Gaza has no Iron Dome.
I am not joking, or only partially so. The argument here is that we should help Israel with its self defense needs in order to save innocent lives. The fact that Israel has a murderous government doesn’t make Israeli children any less innocent. Well, the same applies to Gaza.
So I suggest you give up the humanitarian argument for helping Israel, unless you wish to extend it to Gaza.
Better yet, countries that want our help defending themselves should stop blowing up homes and apartment buildings.
The Iron Dome already covers the West Bank.
In Gaza, the way to prevent innocent lives is not to start a war with Israel, and that does not require an Iron Dome.
Is this the level of ignorance that J Street is entertaining now in crafting its poorly conceived policy papers? Pretty hilarious.
I was being snarky. Clearly Iron Dome covers the WB, since that is where so many hundreds of thousands of settlers live and as for Gaza, Israel murdered hundreds of unarmed protestors in 2018-2019 and nobody needs to rehearse the atrocities committed by Israel in Gaza — there is no excuse for atrocities committed by either side, no matter which side one thinks has the just cause.
Love all of this!