Please remain seated

Editorial

No sooner had the new academic year begun than a young York University student marched out of her sociology class and straight to the complaints office, outraged at what she perceived to be an antisemitic comment by her professor.

The (Jewish) professor, it seems, was trying to explain to a presumably dense cadre of undergrads the difference between a statement supported by facts and an unsupportable opinion. As an example of the latter, he chose: “Jews should be sterilized.” The professor apparently overestimated at least one member of his class and, in refusing to back down as Canadians learned about the kerfuffle and the context of the comment came out, the student dug in deeper.

“The words, ‘Jews should be sterilized’ still came out of his mouth, so regardless of the context, I still think that’s pretty serious,” she said. By that standard, as at least one commentator pointed out, the student is equally guilty, since the words came out of her mouth as well.

Someday, if she stays in her seat long enough to let her education kick in, the poor young woman will realize her impetuousness and feel the embarrassment so many of us are feeling on her behalf. But the York case may be a silly microcosm of a much larger and far more serious failure of Jewish observers to listen attentively and stay in our seats.

Much of the Jewish reaction to U.S. President Barack Obama’s statements on Israel and the Palestinians has been about as nuanced as that York student’s misplaced outrage at her professor. Last week, the congressional seat previously held by the promiscuous Anthony Weiner, since 1923 considered a safe Democratic seat in a heavily Jewish area, fell to a Republican challenger in a special election, eliciting prognostications of a mass Jewish exodus from the Democrats to the Republicans. At its root, this assumption is founded on perceptions of Obama and his approach to Israel. Perceptions, that is, rather than realities.

In matters that really matter, the relationship is as strong – or stronger – than ever. On intelligence-sharing, defence and diplomacy – serious bilateral relationship- makers or -breakers that matter infinitely more than rhetoric – the U.S.-Israel fraternity is as unshakeable as ever. Indeed, at press time, it appeared that the United States was preparing to go to the mat for Israel at the United Nations, vetoing, if necessary, the Palestinians’ unilateral declaration of independence.

This is, of course, not a favor to Israel. As much as haters try to portray American Zionism as a symptom of Jewish control and manipulation, this is a truly bilateral relationship. Israel may not be as important to America as America is to Israel – this one reliable friendship is existential and essential to Israel – but Israel is nonetheless America’s most important ally in the region, if not in the world, for strategic, political, security and moral reasons.

Nevertheless, despite the landslide Obama received among Jewish voters in the presidential election, approval has slumped, a shift apparently based on nothing but perception. The president’s speech in May, in which he idealized a two-state solution based on 1967 borders “with mutually agreed [land] swaps,” has become a touchstone for Jewish fears that Obama is secretly against us. Yet, a two-state solution based in some fashion after 1967 borders with fair swaps has been the consensus position among Zionists for years now. Why did outrage ensue when the U.S. president expressed it?

Some modest theories:

After eight years of neo-conservative rule, in which Israel was the lynchpin of the Bush administration’s worldview, any deviation must necessarily be a retreat. This is another case of perception trumping reality, of course, since all the neo-con lip service of the past did not bring peace to Israel or, at last report, to anyone else in the region.

Impatience is another possible explanation. Thoughtful observers routinely condemn politicians for having a vision that extends only to the next election. In Obama’s case, we seem to demand immediate results with no long-range strategic consideration.

Then there is the small matter of race, religion and ethnicity. To over-simplify, African Americans and Jewish Americans have a complex history, for a range of historical and economic reasons, some real and some perceived. But perception, of course, cannot be underestimated, especially in American politics today, where facts (such as Obama’s religion and place of birth) are simply not believed by a startlingly large number of Americans. Now that Americans (and, perhaps to a lesser extent, Canadians) are tuning in to media that reflect our prejudices rather than challenging them; falsehoods are becoming more entrenched, not less. So, while no real evidence exists to suggest that, under Obama, the United States is any less committed to Israel’s security, that perception seems almost as tenacious as “Obama, the foreign-born Muslim.”

If there is anything to learn from the case of the silly York student, it may be that we should stay in our seats and pay attention at least long enough to understand what is happening around us.

^TOP