Jewish
Frontier

Today it seems that being left of center or even the slightest bit critical of the status quo is met with scorn, disdain, and usually generous servings of ignorance. This is troubling and I thought I would explain by relating some personal experiences representing the leftist cause and then try to analyze why it has been and continues to be such a challenging predicament.

By far the most complex period has been these last few years that I have believed in, and spoken on behalf of, the Israeli left. For those who know me, they will not be surprised that I have been involved in countless arguments that pit "right vs. left" or, as I sometimes like to call it, "right vs. right." Among others things, I have argued against settlers, settlements, targeted assassinations, bulldozers, and the occupation. I have simultaneously argued for dialogue, peace, borders, cooperation, and human rights. I find, in almost every argument with fellow Zionists that I am cornered into defending the Palestinians and, as a consequence, accused of being self-hating or even supporting terrorists and suicide bombers.

This is obviously not true. I am a Zionist. I support and love Israel. And when I speak against something that Israel does, it is not because I do not care. It is precisely the opposite; it is because I care so much. Israel exists, and it is our job as Zionists to do two things. First, to ensure the continuation of the state; second, to ensure that our country is the kind of country we want and expect it to be. For me, this is a country that respects human rights for all human beings, loves peace, promotes egalitarian ideals, and is something of which we can all be proud. When I see something with which I disagree, something that I believe runs contrary to what I hope for in Israel, I am obligated as a Jew and a Zionist to speak up.

So what does it mean to be leftist today? For me the answer is fairly straightforward and lies at the heart of the leftist ethos: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you! Try to understand others rather than judge them. Listen and hear them before you tell them that they are wrong, guilty, or evil. Try to ask yourself how you would act under similar circumstances. By looking at only one side of the story it is easy to become biased, subjective, and clouded. Furthermore by looking principally at one side alone you will necessarily become angry, disillusioned, and upset with the other. By taking a holistic approach, however, I believe that a more moderate and sensible view will emerge.

Consider the Arab-Israeli conflict. There is no doubt that the history of this conflict can be viewed from at least two, if not several, points of view. By viewing one side and not the other, one necessarily adopts that one side's argument: its pain, its triumphs, and its defeats. One will also be blinded to the plight of the other. This perhaps explains differing views of an event like the Israel's declaration of independence in 1948, which is seen by Jews as the culmination of the Zionist dream and by Arabs and Palestinians as Al Nakba, the Day of Catastrophe. So is one right and one wrong? The answer must be a resounding no! Both narratives reflect the feelings, emotions, and points of view of the sides involved, and no conflict is capable of resolution without at least trying to listen to the other side and understand its point of view. From this point only can discussion with that other side begin on a mutually agreeable solution. It is my belief that if this were done but a couple of times in human history, much today might be different and the better for it.

So where does one go from here? When I present my views to others they often tell me, "I agree with you in principle, but matters have gone too far. Your solutions might have worked thirty years ago, but they are irrelevant today!" To this, I always respond that we must listen to one another, since only doing so can ultimately reinforce the message of nonviolence, peace, and eventual reconciliation. Consider Australia's relationship to the Aborigines. The most groundbreaking event affecting interracial relations there was the delivery of a court-case judgment that did not so much reconcile differences as simply recognize that Australia was not an empty land before the English arrived. It was this admission that began the difficult process of reconciliation that continues today. For me the same applies to Israel and the Palestinians. Both are afraid to take responsibility for their actions, past and present. Both, in turn, need to admit to having made mistakes. They must focus less on the guilt of the other and admit that just because they have wronged one another does not mean either has the right to continue acting wrongly. Peace begins with changes in how we act now, not after meeting conditions that depend solely on our own grievances.

An old proverb states that the best way to get rid of an enemy is to turn him into a friend, and as usual the wisdom of old sayings proves wise again today. The best way to get rid of a terrorist is not to kill him; it is to take away his motivation for wanting to use terror. The greatest tragedy on both sides of this horrible conflict is that previously marginalized voices like Hamas and Islamic Jihad -- or alternatively Kach and fundamentalist Israeli groups -- have received growing support. There will always be those who oppose peace, but we can choose whether they are viewed as the enemy of both sides and of important, peaceful progress or as the heroes of their cause. We must remarginalize these voices in the hope that those who continue to call for peace, nonviolence, and reconciliation will one again be heard, and that we can all truly move forwan towards solving a conflict which I believe is solvable and must be solved!

Thus I return to the original question: why does everyone seem to deplore the left? With what I hav argued, is it now because we are too optimistic and unrealistic? I don't think so. I think it is becaus everyone hates to admit they were or are wrong. No on wants to take responsibility for their actions and mak the more difficult choice of acting contrary to popula sentiment. It is always easier to play the victim, ignor the other side of the argument, point the finger, and tr to hurt your opponent. Well, to the Palestinians ani Israel I say: "Grow up! Get off your moral high-horse and deal with the issues at hand. Neither of you has clean hands."

While both have their points, neither is listening to the other. Or rather, both are listening, but neither is hearing. It is time to hear and it is time to act. It is time to stop asking why started it and start asking who is going to finish it. It is time for both sides to stand up and say, as Yitzchak Rabin had, "Enough." Neither nation can afford to continue in this way. The only way forward is shalom, salaam, and peace.

As an epilogue I would like to discuss some comments made about this piece when first presented:

Some have commented that it lacks a practical, tangible element to it. But that is the point. I wanted to present a challenge to the underlying, ideological basis for the decisions and actions being taken by those on both sides. Clearly no one expects parties involved to shake hands and be friends. But a very basic level of acknowledgment must occur without conditions.

Others have mentioned that my ideas are too idealistic, perhaps too optimistic. This article, however, is not a solution. It is but an attempt to open up dialogue on topics not discussed often enough. Solutions and change are rarely logical and never easy; they always involve painful sacrifice and compromise. They also require vision and healthy doses of idealism.

Ariel Jankelson is secretary general of Habonim Dror Australia.