Liberal Zionists are interesting people. Richard Cohen’s op-ed piece in the Washington Post this morning illustrates how someone with a sincere liberal bias (Cohen’s heart bleeds for the plight of Saudi women) can simply be blind to the fact that Israeli apartheid is not just a question of the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, but extends to the Israeli treatment of its own Arab citizens.
Last weekend I attended a lecture by British journalist Ben White who documents Israeli apartheid and has an explanation for the liberals’ blind spot: Simply because Israeli apartheid differs from South Africa’s, Zionists are incapable of recognizing it. The fact that Israel was a strong supporter of South Africa during it’s apartheid era would cause me to question this analysis, but as if intent on proving White’s insight, Cohen writes, “The Israel of today and the South Africa of yesterday have almost nothing in common.”
The list of differences? White South Africa “harshly ruled the majority black population.” If Cohen is claiming that the Arabs of Israel are not ruled harshly, he is not paying attention. If he is claiming that they are not a majority, he is overlooking the significant detail that the Zionists have driven them out with the aforementioned harsh policies and engaged in the wholesale importation of a majority population of Europeans (including some whose Jewish credentials are so tenuous that they are classified as “other” rather than Jewish by their citizenship papers).
Cohen notes that non-whites in South Africa were denied civil rights. He overlooks the significant detail that in Israel there are a set of rights granted only to “Jewish nationals” which Muslim and Christian citizens are not. Cohen protests that black South Africans were even denied citizenship, and one must ask is Cohen unaware that Arab Jerusalemites are denied citizenship, suffered instead to be given the status of “permanent residency.” The word “permanent” is a misnomer since this residency can be summarily revoked for people who spend too much time abroad, for example in pursuing their studies. White reports that in 2008 alone over 4500 persons were stripped of their residency. In Jerusalem (as elsewhere) the Israelis use zoning laws to systematically deny building permits for non-Jews while liberally granting them to Jews. White says the situation in Jerusalem is drastic, with renovations to Judaize the city given to settler groups being the most likely cause for a new resistance.
The bottom line for Cohen is that “Israeli Apartheid Week” is driven by Antisemitism, by “imaginary” rather than legitimate grievances. He insists, “Security concerns are not rooted in racism.” I’m sure that’s how the Roosevelt administration viewed its mistreatment of the Japanese, but when an indigenous people resist the takeover over the land and the imposition of second class status, disentangling racism from security becomes a very difficult task. Accusing the victims and their defenders of Antisemitism when they protest the apartheid policies to which they are subjected doesn’t make the task of achieving security any easier.
Imad-ad-Dean Ahmad, Ph.D.
Minaret of Freedom Institute
www.minaret.org
Leave a Reply