Can You Be a Zionist and a Social Activist at the Same Time?

Printer-friendly version PDF version Send to friend Change the text size

December 15, 2010 • Volume 28 • Winter 2011

By Marian Pinsky

'Gandhi promoted food sovereignty in India as part of his "Britain: Quit India" campaign'. Free, free, Palestine! 'Supporting the fair trade movement enables poor farmers with the means of self-empowerment'. Buy fair trade oil from Palestine: grown in 'occupied groves '!. 'How can we bridge the gap between academia and activism for tangible application of research?' Teachers' unions align themselves with the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) Campaign, supporting academic boycotts of Israeli intellectuals.

The connection between social justice and the promotion of radical Leftist political alternatives has become so intertwined with an anti-Israel stance that it is often presumed that backing one cause is equivalent to supporting this hate-fest, much to the dismay of Zionist social activists. As the most recent 'cause celebre', the Palestinian cause has infiltrated social activism, capitalizing on the anti-globalization, anti-war, and anti-oppression stance adopted by many Left-leaning activists. The double standards perpetrated by Left-wing organizations consequently place Zionist activists, refusing to be co-opted in this charade to promote anti-Israel propaganda, in a conundrum.

Recent news reports attest to this shift; soon after Canada was overlooked for a position on the United Nations Security Council. those on the Left quickly attributed this decision to our "unpopular" pro-Israel stance, arguing that overt alliance with the Jewish state "cost" Canada this seat.

Who are the most vocal anti-Israel activists? Frustratingly, it is often human-rights and development-oriented non-governmental organizations (NGOs), notably, Medicins Sans Frontieres and Amnesty International. Favoring the Palestinian narrative, MSF has reportedly refused to work with "occupiers", that is, Israeli doctors, in the aftennath of disasters in Congo and Haiti. France's MSF president, Dr. Marie Pierre Allie, decried Israel's self-defense actions in Gaza as worse than the Darfur genocide. Similarly, Amnesty International exemplifies a human-rights organization which uses differential standards when it comes to Israel. The disproportionate application of resources to the Palestinian cause and the condemnation of Israel's "violations" in harshly worded and arguably one-sided reports discount the acts of genuinely oppressive regimes. Notwithstanding the fact that Hamas has readily admitted to using human shields for both protection of its fighters and as a means to catapult their cause onto the international agenda, the context behind the often-inflated numbers of casualties is never explored.

Naomi Klein, anti-globalization activist extraordinaire, has also lent her public persona to supportiog the pro-Palestinian cause, rarely refraining from making disparaging remarks concerning Israel, and apologizing to the Palestinians for not having promoted the BDS campaign earlier. Noam Chomsky, political activist and professor, has also been particularly vocal on this contentious issue, joining the ranks of other NIONs (Not In Our Name - Jews distancing themselves from Israel's actions) that include Klein and Norman Finklestein. The late Edward Said synthesized Chomsky's major claims in his preface to the latter's book, Fateful Triangle: The U.S., Israel and the Palestinians, noting (incredibly) how "Israel and the United States ... are rejectionists
opposed to peace, [in contrast] to the Arabs in the PLO, [who] for years have been trying to accommodate themselves to the reality of Israel". This book's publication io 1999 still has resonance today, in depicting Israel as the uncompromising aggressor facing an oppressed people.

It is distressing that reputable organizations have lent credibility to an odious campaign more dedicated to vilifying Israel and holding it to unfair standards, rather than actually assisting those in whose name they are purporting to help. Many NGOs claiming to represent the needs of the dispossessed have been hijacked by this anti-Israel agenda, yielding problematic results which include glossing over overt abuses in totalitarian regimes and neglecting to demand democratic refonns therein.

In response to the tendency to endorse the Palestinian cause at the expense of passing grossly one-sided and often de-contextualized condemnations, reports, and resolutions against Israel, the NGO Monitor organization led by Professor Gerald Steinberg remains a beacon of light in a time when even humanitarian organizations concede uncritically to the latest 'cause celebre'. Headquartered in Jerusalem, NGO Monitor seeks to "promote accountability and advance a vigorous discussion on the reports and activities of humanitarian NGOs in the framework of the Arab-Israeli conflict" in order to present Israel's case to the world.

Democratic Israel has excelled at technological achievements, made contributions to medical advancements, and hosts an impressive culture. It is thus critical to shift the focus of external observers away from a narrow military scene, to Israel's impressive accomplishments. Organizations like NGO Monitor, working to achieve these stated aims, seek to restore a modicum of objective analysis of complex conflict situations in ways which place Israel on the same - rather than an unrealistic and utopian - scale as other countries. This is essential in order for Zionist activism and social activism to no longer be mutually exclusive, but mutually reinforcing.