|
|
A remarkable
report recently issued by an Israeli commission - appointed by Israelīs
Supreme Court to investigate police handling of riots which resulted in
the deaths of 13 Israeli-Arabs three years ago - provides a model for
appropriate criticism of Israel.
The "Or Commission," named after the Supreme Court justice who chaired
it, issued a scathing rebuke, not only of the Israeli police and political
leaders, but also of the systematic discrimination against Israeli-Arabs
that precipitated the riots and contributed to the police over-reaction
to the violence. The report pulled no punches in criticizing leading Israeli
politicians, including then-prime minister Ehud Barak and security minister
Shlomo Ben-Ami, both of whom are staunch advocates of peace between Israel
and the Palestinians. It went so far as to recommend that Ben-Ami be permanently
barred from holding a security position in any Israeli government.
Beyond its criticisms of individuals, the report pointed to "deep- seated
factors" that contributed to a perception - both among Arabs and Israelis
- that Israeli-Arabs are second-class citizens in the Jewish state. The
current minister of Public Security has asked the Israeli government to
adopt the Or Commissionīs findings in their entirety.
No other country in the Middle East, and few countries in the world, would
permit this kind of public self-criticism of its actions. Israel is a
vibrant democracy with freedom of the press and a long tradition of self-criticism.
Indeed, most of the books published by Israeli writers are deeply critical
of Israeli policies and actions.
That is why I decided to write The Case for Israel, since few Israelis
ever bother to make the case for the embattled democracy. Most Israelis
take for granted the basic arguments justifying Israelīs right to exist
and to defend its population against terrorist attack. But outside of
Israel - particularly in Europe, Canada, Asia and even on some U.S. university
campuses - this case is being increasingly challenged. One-sided critics
of Israel see only the bad and not the good.
They see that Israeli-Arabs are often treated as second-class Israeli
citizens, without also seeing that the average Israeli-Arab is treated
far better by the Israeli government than the average non- Israeli-Arab
is treated by Arab and Islamic government. Israeli-Arabs have the longest
life expectancy, the best health care, the lowest infant mortality, the
most freedom of expression, the best educational opportunities and the
most freedom of religion of any Arabs or Muslims in the Middle East. The
only court in the entire Middle East from which an Arab can expect justice
is the Supreme Court of Israel, which frequently rules against the Israeli
government and military in lawsuits brought by aggrieved Arabs.
Israeli-Arabs suffer by comparison only with Israeli Jews. That is not
good enough for a democracy, committed to equality of all citizens, as
the Or Commission correctly concluded. But nor can the comparisons with
other countries be ignored by outside critics of Israel. Inside critics
are always entitled to demand more of their own government and need not
look to other countries for comparison, but outside critics may not properly
impose a non-comparative double standard on one country without comparative
criticism of others.
In making comparative criticism, it must also be remembered why Israel
has more than a million Arab citizens, while Jordan does not have a single
Jewish citizen, and Egypt, Iraq and other Arab nations which had large
Jewish populations for millennia, now are essentially Judenrein. The majority
of Arabs who lived in what became Israel after the UN partition of 1947
remained in Israel, where they were accorded citizenship, whereas Jordan
enacted a law expressly prohibiting Jews from becoming citizens; and Iraq,
Egypt and other Arab states essentially expelled their Jewish populations.
Moreover, during the massive Arab attack that greeted the establishment
of Israel, Arab and Palestinian armed forces systematically murdered the
Jewish residents of captured towns after they had surrendered. The object
of the war was genocide, not the creation of Jewish refugees or a Jewish
minority in a Palestinian state against the Jewish residents of Israel.
Even if Israel can be faulted for contributing to the Palestinian refugee
problem, it is far better to be a live Palestinian refugee than a dead
Israeli prisoner. Even today, the Palestinian Authority contemplates an
eventual Palestinian state with no Jewish citizens or residents and an
established Islamic religion.
So continue to criticize Israel for its imperfections, as the Or Commission
has done. I certainly intend to, as I continue to criticize the imperfections
of all governments, and most especially my own. But if you are not an
Israeli, and do not want to be accused of applying an invidious double
standard to the Jewish nation, then make sure your criticism is comparative,
contextual and constructive.
(Originally appeared in The National Post)