Ben Perlmutter
Last Monday, College sophomore Andrew Alter responded to a piece that I wrote two weeks ago about Netanyahu and the recent Israeli election.
I liked Alter’s article. It was intelligently and clearly written, and I learned from it. And moreover, I appreciate that he took the time and energy to stand up for his beliefs in the public forum of the Wheel.
But I strongly disagree with the article. I would like to address some of Alter’s points and critiques of my points.
Alter argues that the United States should remain allies with Israel and that the American Jewry should remain supportive of the Jewish state, regardless of the administration in government. He frames these arguments in opposition to what he asserts is my argument — that America and American Jews should distance themselves from the State of Israel.
In fact, this is a mischaracterization of my article. I do not think that the United States should cease an alliance with Israel. Rather, I fear that if the Netanyahu government continues its bellicosity towards Palestinians, the American public will turn away from Israel, and American policy will follow. I am not advocating abandoning Israel but warning that it may happen if the Netanyahu government’s policies continue. I agree with Alter that the American-Israeli relationship is vital to both countries’ security and the flourishing of the global Jewish community.
Alter’s second critique of my article is more concerning. He argues that the Netanyahu government is not in fact extremist, as I portray it in my article. But he is cherry picking examples of Netanyahu’s civility and brushing over vital areas of the administration’s extremism.
Alter defends Israel’s tactics in last summer’s Gaza campaign, which I used as an example of the government’s extremism. He cites independent American military officials, who concluded, “Hamas intentionally placed military targets near civilian areas to increase civilian casualties and garner international support” to defend Israel. While some military officials may have said this, many other international actors have condemned Israel for excessive force. Human Rights Watch, an international non-governmental organization, has criticized Israel for using excessive force, as did the United Nations, as did the European Union, as did the Obama administration. Israel surely has the right to defend itself from Hamas’ rocket attacks, but that is not a warrant to totally disregard Gazans’ lives.
Alter also brushes over areas that need to be substantively addressed. For example, Alter dismisses Netanyahu’s statement prior to the election that the prime minister does not want a two state solution as “clearly rhetoric to mobilize voters before the election.” While this statement is not incorrect, it must not be brushed aside.
Alter fails to mention that after the election, when Netanyahu’s Likud party had secured a plurality of the vote, Netanyahu backtracked on this position, saying, “I don’t want a one-state solution. I want a sustainable, peaceful two-state solution. But for that, circumstances have to change.”
While Netanyahu’s pre-election remarks may have been a politically cunning move to get Likud a larger share of the vote, they were contrary to the internationally accepted goal of a two-state solution, which Netanyahu previously supported.
Accordingly, this flip-flop outraged the international community. In response to the prime minister’s duplicity, Obama said the United States would have to reevaluate its relationship with Israel.
This is not the only instance in which Alter underplays important examples of the Netanyahu government’s extremism. Alter also downplays the importance of the government’s continued settlement construction by noting, “settlement construction only occurs in about [two] percent of the disputed territories.”
The settlements are in fact incredibly detrimental to the peace process and further increase Palestinian suffering. These settlements explicitly violate international law, drawing condemnation from world leaders. They have also acted as forums for the zealous Israeli settlers to harass their Palestinian neighbors with virtual impunity from the Israeli government.
Alter’s arguments are certainly internally coherent, so without prior knowledge of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, they could be convincing. But, the truth is not as he portrays. The Netanyahu government is far more extreme than Alter chooses to admit.
I have absolutely no doubt that Alter has absolutely nothing but the best intentions for Israel and the Jewish people. But the grim reality is that supporting the sustained flourishing of the Israel Jewish community means distancing ourselves from Netanyahu’s extremist government.
I worry about Israel. Prior to the establishment of Israel, anti-Semites terrorized the disparate Jewish community. But in the country’s almost 70-year history, it has built a flourishing economy, a vibrant democracy and a powerful military. In no small part, Israel’s success has been a result of the international community’s support, led by the United States. But the Netanyahu government’s corrosive actions are quickly eroding the will to support Israel. We, the international Jewish community, must wake up to the reality that despite Israel’s many strengths, it is under an existential threat of international isolation and democratic regression as a result of the Netanyahu government.
Ben Perlmutter is a College junior from Chappaqua, New York.
Ben Perlmutter is a College junior from Chappaqua, New York majoring in Math and Political Science. In addition to being a staff writer for Editorials, he's involved with the Emory Journal of International Affairs, TableTalk, the Center for Law Politics and Economics and the Media Council.
