I recently attended the Brisbane’s Writer’s Festival and one of my papers discussed Israel and Zionism (Brisbane Writer’s Festival discussion paper – Loewenstein). I debated Melbourne academic and “left-winger” Philip Mendes (more on Mendes here), a man seemingly torn between critiquing Israeli occupation yet incapable of truly condemning it. His heart and head are hopelessly conflicted.
Unsurprisingly, the Australian Jewish News (AJN) reported proceedings:
Cultural differences in the definition of peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians, not Israel’s actions in isolation, pose an obstacle to resolving the enduring conflict, a Melbourne-based Jewish academic said in Brisbane.
“Israel has always viewed peace in highly western terms as the cessation of war and violence following negotiations and mutual compromise. In contrast, Palestinians seem to define peace not as the absence of war per se, but rather as the restoration of their national, territorial, and political rights,” Monash University social work lecturer Dr Philip Mendes told an audience of around 150 people at the Brisbane Writers’ Festival on Saturday.
Dr Mendes was responding to strident Israel critic and rookie author Antony Loewenstein in a debate on “The Israel question”, a take on the title of Loewenstein’s controversial debut book My Israel Question.
Loewenstein, 31, argued that the claim by its supporters that Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East is a “lie”.
“Israel’s behaviour in the West Bank and Gaza are the tactics of a rogue, terror state,” he argued. “Enough with the Holocaust, alleged Palestinian ‘terror’ and victimhood. Take some responsibility for the parlous State of Israel in the international community. For all of us who want a safer Middle East, today’s Israel is currently the problem, not the cure.”
Defending his criticism of Israel, Loewenstein said he was a “proud Jew who believes in Israel, but not at the expense of the Palestinians. I believe in an independent Palestinian state.”
Dr Mendes, who is the author of Jews and Australian Politics, said another prerequisite to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the cessation of the Arab world’s 58-year-old military, political, trade and intellectual siege of Israel.
“If this change in attitude occurred among both fundamentalist and secular Arabs, I believe we would then see a similar change in attitude within Israel leading to a far greater Israeli willingness to seek non-military solutions to political problems,” Dr Mendes said.
Among the audience members was Australasian Union of Jewish Students Queensland president Ariel Radzinski, who said Loewenstein needed a “serious reality check”.
“He needs to witness what it is like to live in Israel and be under constant threat of a suicide bomber … Then let him come back to Australia and try to make comments like Israel has caused untold trauma with the Palestinian people.”
The debate was chaired by La Trobe University’s Professor Dennis Altman.
Last month, Loewenstein made several appearances at the Melbourne Writers’ Festival, including a session on whether or not the West should negotiate with terrorists.
The AJN clearly decided some time ago to cover my book in a cynical and dishonest way. Calling me a “rookie author” is just the beginning (after all, how many AJN reporters have ever written anything longer than a 500 word article?) If I need a “reality check” for daring to highlight Israel’s occupation in the West Bank and Gaza, I’m more than comfortable leaving the young Zionist to his delusions. The newspaper’s journalism is best described as rehashing talking points from the Israeli foreign ministry. Independent thought must cost a premium.
The AJN’s coverage reminds me of a recent conversation with a senior Australian columnist. He recently spoke to a leading group of Australian Jews and told them that their overly aggressive tactics towards media players was leading to antagonism of Jews and Israel, opposite of the desired effect. I suspect this group of Zionists had no concept of approaching individuals any other way.
Keeping one’s head in the sand is far preferable, it seems, to actually wondering why Israel is increasingly hated around the world.
My Israel Question is now moving into a 3rd reprint and remains on the best-seller list (the latest review is here.) I’m being invited around the country to speak to various groups on the issues of Diaspora Jewry, Israel, Zionism and the Middle East. The response has been overwhelming.
The AJN and its fellow-travellers want to believe that victimhood is the preferred state of the Jewish community and robust debate about Israel is best done in private, if at all. Here’s a wake-up call: they’re being left behind in the debate by refusing to acknowledge legitimate criticisms of the Jewish state. Remaining silent in the face of ongoing Israeli barbarity in Gaza and the West Bank makes them complicit. But, of course, it’s only Palestinian suffering.
Just finished reading your book Antony. Well done.
Having read a lot, it was a refreshing change to see someone write on the ‘media conflict’ over Israel-Palestine from an Australian perspective. It wasn’t great to see just how parlous the state of debate is here, but it’s a welcome prod by reality for those who want our media to provide a more open, informative and challenging take on the conflict. At least, that is what I hope your book may stimulate. It would be interesting to monitor news/opinion output over the coming year and see if there was any discernable change in coverage.
Congrats.
Thanks Michael,
The response to the book thus far suggests that many people are really ready to challenge the Zionist agenda. As for journos and editors, well, we’ll be keeping the pressure up.
Thank you for coming to Brisbane – I attended the said gathering and appreciated three members of the Jewish family could speak with civil tongues about this topic. It has seemed to me that tying the existence of the state of Israel to the holocaust involves the tragic transference of the guilt of Europe onto the Palestinians. Not one Palestinian sent a Jew to their death in Europe. Nor was any Palestinian involved in the thousand plus years of progroms in Europe. Yet Golda Meir treated that as non persons. The rabbi at the funeral of the Jewish terrorist who killed Muslims at prayer in a mosque could say – a million palestinians are not worth the fingernail of a Jew. It doesn’t make sense. If he had said a million Germans or a million europeans, one could understand – even though it has a bad taste about it.
I trust you received some encouragement from you trip to Brisbane to continue with your voice being heard – for the sake of Israel and for the sake of justice for the Palestinian.
As a Christian, I recognise that I must needs be extremely cautious in what I say or write about Israel given what my co-religionists have done to Jews. But I do know I must address the Zionists within “my Chirstian family” who have, particularly in the US and to a lesser extent in Australia, influenced the political climate here. The way that so many treated Hanan Ashrawi when she came to Australia is indicative of this.
Antony,
Just finished your book… cover-to-cover which is a bit unusual for my short attention span… and found it to be an excellent approach to a conflict which none of us really believes will ever see a solution!! I missed your appearances in Brisbane but look forward to meeting you at some future time.
I thought one of the most significant aspects of your work was the fact that most of what you wrote was not your personal opinions but rather a compilation of many opinions and works from BOTH sides of the argument.
It was disappointing to read that you were prevented from going into Gaza. I have been there many times as a TV news cameraman and I just love going there. Hopefully you will visit one day. You’ll be shocked by what you see when you get there.
I was working in Israel during disengagement. It was an appalling time for everyone. I could feel for the pain of families forced to move after decades in the settlement bloc (many young people had known no other home) but I believed they never should have been there in the first place. More later.
Keep up the good work.
Craig Berkman
Taking a few steps back but staying with the response to your book, I was interested in how you felt the Late Line interview with Tony Jones went. Mr Lapkin was out of place. Tony Jones seemed at all time to show deference to him, to check with him. Yet at no time when Mr Lapkin, or others of the right wing commentariat from the Jewish community are interviewed is there another to check their story.
It all seemed very patronising. … so with the silly comment of “rookie Journalist” reported in this epistle.