Will the Anger of the Arab Street Cross the Atlantic?

Huffingtonpost.com just posted some extraordinary photos of protests in Egypt. The Egyptian protests follow two weeks in which the Arab street has exploded in anger against their respective governments. Tunisia, Yemen, Jordan, Lebanon, and Iran, amongst others, are all experiencing political turmoil. Yes, we are used to seeing the Arab street explode over an array of minor issues –like the Muhammad cartoon saga. But this time is different, the street is not (yet, anyways) protesting the “meddling Americans” or the “Zionist occupiers”, this time they are directing their collective anger inwards -against their own governments. Moreover, this is the first time that so many Arab and Muslim nations have simultaneously experienced political unrest. There are no jobs, the government is unable, or unwilling, to end the economic woes, and there is a complete disconnect between the people and their governments and elites.

The narrative of the Arab protests is familiar. There is rampant unemployment, extremely low government approval ratings, and individuals willing to do more than sulk at home. In Greece and Ireland, two western states, the street exploded, and their respective governments have been hit hard. Who’s next?

From this perspective, the economic woes of the past two years have spawned a global wave of protests. Wikileaks exposure of routine two-faced political dealings by governments has added fuel to the fire of mistrust and dissatisfaction so prevalent in many societies. The real question is whether we can expect the same results in America?

It is true that Americans have historically weathered economic malfeasance and ineptitude –like during the great depression- with relative calm. But America has changed since the 1930’s, and nobody can say with certainty that a single digit approval rating of our government will not translate into burning tires and bodies on the streets of New York and Chicago. The Muslim Brotherhood and other such Islamic groups have not yet hijacked the protests. Just as the far left –or right- in America have not yet coalesced into an effective anti-government apparatus. But the possibility exists.

So I ask: Will the Anger of the Arab Street Cross the Atlantic?

A Convenient Excuse: What Role do the Israeli "Settlements" Play in the Middle-East? Part ll

The Israeli Perspective:

Israel’s use of settlements has a lot more nuance reflecting the diversity of Israel’s free political landscape.

The Left blames the settlements for all the woes of Israel “if only those settlers would disappear, Israel could finally achieve its potential”.

On a psychological level, the Left feels guilty (justly or otherwise) for supplanting so many Palestinians. However Israel is their home, and ensures Jewish survival, so they shift their guilt on to the settlements. On the rational (or irrational) level the Left protects its own homes, in Tel Aviv, by arguing that the only reason why there is violence against Israel-proper is because of the occupation, i.e. settlements. They conveniently ignore the stated beliefs –described above- of both religious and secular Muslims and Arabs. Ironically this is the real reason for the collapse of the Left in Israel; the illusion that there will be peace once occupation has ended has been completely dispelled by the Gaza fiasco. It seems obvious but it is a fact that has been conveniently ignored by the left-leaning media in Israel.

The secular right sees the settlements as a useful bargaining tool.

If the Arabs don’t fall in line and accept Israel’s right to exist, the right claims: "we (Israel) will maintain the settlements, and the anger that they engender in Arab countries!" The recent ascendancy of the Israel Beitanu party and its leader, Russian-born, Avigdor Lieberman is a reflection not only of a political coming-of-age of former Soviet Union immigrants but also a consequence of the left's now discredited belief that “settlements are the problem”. For the secular-right the settlements have always been a convenient bargaining tool. Think Menachem Begin (Yamit-Sinai) and Ariel Sharon (Gush Katif- Gaza).

For the religious-Right the settlements are the tangible manifestation of their core beliefs that Israel belongs to the Jews not because of the 1917 Balfour declaration, or the 1947 UN partition plan- but because it says so in the Bible. The settlements are the ideological breeding ground for the religious-Right. As the settlements grow and prosper, the religious-Right grows and prospers.

The settlement enterprise serves many interests. It is a convenient tool for the Arab, Muslim, and anti-Israel world to focus their “justified hate”, and it is a convenient football for Israeli politicians to kick around.

Meanwhile there are over 500,000 thousand “settlers” in the West-Bank and East-Jerusalem. To remove them from their homes would be no less traumatic and wrong then the expulsion and self-imposed exodus of the 600,000 Arabs from Israeli lands after the Arab world refused to recognize the 1947 partition plan.

A Convenient Excuse: What Role do the Israeli "Settlements" Play in the Middle-East? Part l

The anti-Israel crowd is obsessed with illegal settlements in Israel. So I decided to share some relevant facts regarding the so-called settlements:

But first an update:

Arab nations have submitted a draft resolution to the UN Security Council condemning Israeli settlements in the West Bank. The resolution is only one part of a larger effort by the PA/Fatah, to garner international support for establishing a de facto Palestinian state. The impetus for this resolution and the call for states like Brazil, to recognize a Palestinian state, is a result of the inability of the Palestinians to force Netanyahu into extending the freeze on settlements. In other words, Abbas and co. recognize that violence will not work, that America will not turn its back on Israel, and that the only other option is the UN.

Yet the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) has, since the 1967 war, been in the Palestinians corner. However this has been almost meaningless because the UNGA's support is not-binding. When it comes down to business, which is conducted by the UN Security Council (UNSC), countries like Britain, which freely condemn Israel in the UNGA, refuse to act on those condemnations in the UNSC. Indeed, the US has already blocked a vote on this resolution in the UNSC.

So why are Abbas, the PA, and the Arab states putting so much effort into introducing more inane resolutions, this time opposing settlement expansion? On that note, why are the Palestinians seeking international recognition for their state, when that recognition will be meaningless, unless America and Israel accept it –which they won’t?

There are many potential answers to this question. But the question is significant because it leads the observer, in this case me, to analyze the settlement issue from a multitude of perspectives.

The Muslim and Arab Perspective:

The fact of the matter is that the argument that the so called "settlements" are the barrier to peace is a convenient excuse. For all the anti-Israel voices, Arabs, Muslims, and the Europeans who can find little else to harp on. Think about it, religious Muslims reject Israel’s right to exist, because the Koran implies that Jews were rejected by G-d for their sins, and have permanently lost their claim to the land of Israel -green-line or otherwise. Secular Muslims and Arabs can never accept the idea of a Jewish state in the Arab heartland. I mean how humiliating is it for the average impoverished and politically suppressed Muslim and Arab to watch how the Jews -the same people who 65 years ago were living with few rights in Muslim lands- thrive and dominate them in war and peace? The same can be asked regarding the many anti-Semites, who just can’t figure out why the Jews and Israel, despite all their efforts, are so successful.

On the other hand very few Muslim and Arab nations are willing to honestly explicate their true beliefs, usually because of overarching economic and political interests. But these states feel threatened by Israel’s inexplicable growth in the face of every type of challenge. They also have to contend with their own perpetually angry populations. So they target the settlements, not just in the West Bank, where they know Israel is willing to compromise, but also in Jerusalem where Israel will not. Thereby the Muslim and Arab states, (and the rest of the anti-Israel crowd) can portray themselves as reasonable state actors on the international stage, while also suppressing the anger of the Muslim street, by their opposition to the Israeli occupation.

So why did the Arabs offer this resolution now? It’s likely that the economic anger and political turmoil that is spreading from Tunisia to Egypt has a lot to do with it.

Regardless the anti-Israel crowd uses Israeli settlements as a convenient excuse to condemn all of Israel and, in many cases, all Jews. America recognizes this and refuses to jump on the bandwagon of hate.

In Part two I will discuss the many Israeli perspectives on settlements.

This 9/11: Islam Needs ChaBaD!

Many Muslims, including a close friend, argue that Islam is not violent, suicidal, or expansionist. Yet people like me, see the reality. Homicide bombings, stoning, insult laden mosque building, and little self criticism. Which one is it?

Some of these said acquaintances have concluded that even if some Muslims are genuinely opposed to the hate and pain that their coreligionists cause it is because they are “reform” Muslims or they are afraid of discrimination and would otherwise be quick to support the hate.

I do not agree with this absolute bifurcation. Nor do I not subscribe to the following proposal out of naiveté or even unwarranted optimism –on the contrary as a lover of America and a proud Jew I cannot forgive, nor close my eyes to the unrepentant terror and hate that Islam-inspired extremism has directed against my nation and people. Rather I make the following assertions based on my personal experience with scrupulous orthodox-Muslims who proudly acknowledge that their religion has a violent past and even seeks to convert others, but who are also adamantly opposed to both Sunni motivated Saudi extremism and Shia instigated terror.

Furthermore these same Muslims concede that they -peace and Koran loving Muslims- are not doing enough to fight this real corruption within the ranks of their coreligionists or preventing the insidious/misguided acts by moderate Muslims (such as the ground zero mosque). Then again, they justly contend, they do not have the oil of Iran or Saudi Arabia to propagate their view.

It is to these Muslims that I address the following suggestion:

To be clear I offer this suggestion not as a patronizing snob but as a religious Jew who has seen with my own eyes how ChaBaD, an uncompromising cadre of orthodox Jews who focus on the Jewish believe in unqualified acts of goodness and kindness, has revolutionized and revitalized international Judaism. Not through trying to convince other orthodox streams of Judaism to mimic them but by reaching out to largely secular world Jewry with words of inspiration, lessons in fundamental Jewish practice like charity, "love thy neighbor", acts of goodness and kindness, and heartfelt prayer. This all the while accurately emphasizing that this is not a form of “Judaism-lite” but rather essential practice; a prerequisite to Torah/Rabbinic-true Judaism.

Does this mean that ChaBaD obscures that orthodox Judaism is opposed to same-sex marriage, abortion (under most circumstances), and the expulsion of Jews from parts of Israel? Does it mean that ChaBaD Jews are apolitical and do not have strong, even offensive, personal beliefs? No and no. What it means is that the focus of outreach and study is on the affirmative practice of fundamental Judaism to the best of the individual’s ability.

The upshot is that even the most hard-core ultra-orthodox Jews have recognized the validity of ChaBaD’s efforts and focus, and have themselves been reinvigorated and strengthened in the practice of Jewish principles like love thy neighbor (irrespective of religious practice or background) and general acts of goodness.

I believe that if orthodox Muslims (not easy to dismiss reform/apologist) began a movement that focused on spreading the positive FUNDAMENTALS of Islam to their secular Muslim brothers and sisters -not a watered down presentation offered by “Muslims at heart” but a Koran true message taught by practicing main stream orthodox Muslims that focused on charity, prayer, and belief in their creator- ChaBaD-like results could be achieved.

Likewise, as in the ChaBaD approach, the outreach should not target the hard headed extremists THAT DO GATHER in some mosques and educate the unwary youth regarding all those kaufers (infidels) and how the world is out to destroy Islam. Rather it should focus on secular Muslims; those that know their religion only as it is depicted by Al Jazeera, Memri, Drudgereport, or the New York Times –if at all.

True orthodox Muslims believe that they must proselyte non-Muslims and that defaming the prophet is wrong, but so do Christians. The point is that Muslims can be true to their religion and offer a purely positive message to those around them. The face of Islam need not be defined by incendiary community-center projects, flag burning, or threats against the expression of free speech. On the contrary devout Muslim-Americans who seek what Islam demands –peace- should grasp the opportunity, economic and political, that America offers.

Indeed if you, American-Muslims, gathered to fight extremism through education, the totality of America would put its powerful shoulder to the same wheel and support you to the benefit of all.