Crossing Swords: Joel Pollak and Doron Isaacs

In July this year, a group of South Africans headed off to Israel on a tour (SA Human Rights Delegation) which would later cause a great degree of consternation within the Jewish community. Critics argued that the tour was not balanced; that the itinerary overwhelmingly focused on the Palestinian narrative, ignoring almost completely the mainstream Israeli one. Worse still, argued some of the critics (including the authors of this blog), most of the tour delegates already held irascibly vexatious opinions on Israel - they went with their minds made up and were fed an all too familiar diet.

Organisers of the tour countered that the reality of life in the Palestinian territories had been ignored for too long – and more space was needed in the Jewish community for debate about the occupation. They claimed that they aimed to simultaneously express solidarity with grassroots activists in Israel, such as the Jewish Struggle Coalition, as well as improve the often acerbic relations between the South African Jewish and Muslim communities.

This blog has already engaged with the Delegation. Doron Isaacs, one of the organisers of the delegation, penned a reply to our criticism which we cordially published. We also had a somewhat positive discussion with another co-organiser, Nathan Geffen, in the comments of one of our critical posts.

It is against this backdrop that we introduce to you a new feature that we hope to repeat at regular intervals – a debate which we have entitled “Crossing Swords”. This first instalment of this feature stars Doron Isaacs and Joel Pollak as the two protagonists. I couldn’t imagine two better equipped personalities to represent the two split camps regarding the Delegation that visited Israel.

Both Joel and Doron will author three contributions to the debate. Each contribution will be posted approximately four days apart. We want to get you, the audience, involved so at the end of the three installments Doron and Joel have agreed to address three of the best questions which we will select from the comments. Doron has agreed to start things off.

Doron Isaacs works as the Coordinator of Equal Education, a community-based civil society formation working for educational quality and equality in South African schools. He has degrees from the University of Cape Town in business and law. In 2003 he was Secretary General of Habonim-Dror Southern Africa. Thereafter he became active in student politics on issues including HIV-AIDS, judicial independence and Israel-Palestine. While studying law Doron provided legal support to the Treatment Action Campaign. He established the Student Society for Law & Social Justice in 2007 which now has branches in most law faculties in South Africa. Doron was a co-organisers of the SA Human Rights Delegation to Israel & the Occupied Palestinian Territories in July 2008. He has family and friends in Israel and visits regularly.

Joel Pollak is the author of the forthcoming book "The Kasrils Affair: Jews and Minority Politics in Post-Apartheid South Africa”. He is a former speechwriter for Tony Leon of the Democratic Alliance, the official opposition in South Africa. He is currently studying international human rights law at the Harvard Law School where he is chairperson of the Alliance for Israel. In 2007 Joel spent his summer volunteering at the Association for Human Rights in Israel. During his time in South Africa, he received a Master of Arts with Distinction in Jewish Studies from the University of Cape Town. Whilst studying in Cape Town Joel was involved in many interfaith activities aimed at encouraging dialogue between Muslims, Christians and Jews about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. He blogs at the popular Guide to the Perplexed.

Part 1 – Doron Isaacs instalment 1

Dear Joel,

The Human Rights Delegation has prompted a fair amount of criticism from members of the Jewish community. A little less publicly there has been a big current of support. Our discussion can focus on the delegation itself or on its organisers, but I’d suggest we focus on the reality in Israel and the occupied territories, or as Israelis call it, the “matsav”.

To deal first with the criticisms. “The tour lacked balance and context”: not so, we spent more time with Israeli victims, state officials, members of civil society and academics than we did with their Palestinian counterparts. This was due to practical constraints, but is nevertheless true. All Israelis and Palestinians who hosted the group reject the use of violence. “The tour did not consider Israeli security needs”: false, in an interview in the Jewish Report Geoff Budlender reported learning about the “very deep impact” that the suicide bombings have had on the Israeli people[1]. “The members of the delegation single out Israel”: laughable, these are among South Africa’s most vigorous internal critics, and as one example, I can provide references to campaigns and criticisms by one of the tour’s organisers, Nathan Geffen, in regard to Zimbabwe, China, Ghana, Iran, Swaziland, Darfur, the US, Uganda, Namibia, Saudia Arabia and Iraq during Saddam’s reign. “The group aimed to delegitimise Israel”: wrong, we have consistently said we reject the notion of calling for Israel’s destruction[2].

In fact, recent growth in discussion of a so-called one-state solution makes urgent, from the Israeli point of view (quite apart from the daily suffering of Palestinians) the need to end the occupation[3]. In the view of many of the members of the delegation, this would help safeguard Israel’s future.

I think most people are bored of hearing criticism and defense of the delegation.

I’d like to deal rather with our political paradigm. In so doing I will criticise the commonly expressed view that Israel is eager to end the occupation but is hamstrung by security imperatives, and that this willingness was amply demonstrated by the withdrawal from Gaza. Dov Weisglass, Sharon’s senior adviser and bureau chief, and the man credited with conceiving of the disengagement, has made clear that Gaza was about prolonging the occupation, not ending it: “The disengagement is actually formaldehyde. It supplies the amount of formaldehyde that's necessary so that there will not be a political process with the Palestinians… It legitimizes our contention that there is no negotiating partner ... There is a decision here to do the minimum possible in order to maintain our political situation.”[4]

Undoubtedly, there are security considerations. In the same interview Geoff Budlender said that one could not dispute the fact that the separation wall had been effective in putting an end to suicide bombings. But the barrier includes around 11% of the West Bank on the Israeli side – a unilateral act which impedes negotiations – and requires any Palestinian living there to get a permit. The difficulty in acquiring permits is resulting in the area being depopulated by Palestinians.

The Occupation of the West Bank is driven by the settlements. Dismantling them will entail domestic political strife that no Israeli Prime Minister has the majority to confront. As the Council for Peace and Security – a body of 1000 military and diplomatic veterans – has said in regard to the checkpoints needed to protect the settlements: “When all elements of the equation are considered, the barriers have a negative and even dangerous effect upon Israel’s security.”[5]

Can you agree that were it not for the settlements the occupation would have ended by now?

Warm Regards,

Doron

Notes

[1] Moira Schneider ‘Israeli visit “depressing and inspiring”’ SA Jewish Report 7/17/2008.
[2] Moira Schneider ‘High Powered SA Rights Group off to Israel’ SA Jewish Report 3/7/2008.
[3] Sari Nusseibeh ‘The One-State Solution’ Newsweek 20/09/08 http://www.newsweek.com/id/160030; Steven Gutkin ‘Palestinians Despair of Independence Effort’ The Associated Press 21/09/08 http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jlgsgPgwZ2Kczmg9vIU0IOMXuaYgD93AK33G1; Jonathan Freedland ‘The Two-State Solution is Nearly Dead’ The Guardian 17/08/2008 http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/sep/17/israelandthepalestinians.middleeast. [4] Ari Shavit ‘The Big Freeze’ Haaretz 10/11/2005 http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=485929.
[5] Council for Peace and Security: Letter from the Council to: The Prime Minister, Mr. Ehud Olmert, The Minister of Defense, Mr. Ehud Barak, The Foreign Minister, Ms. Tzipy Livni’ 28/04/2008 http://www.peace-security-council.org/flashes.asp?id=726

The story so far

• Part 1 - Doron Isaacs instalment 1
• Part 2 - Joel Pollak instalment 1
• Part 3 - Doron Isaacs instalment 2
• Part 4 - Joel Pollak instalment 2
• Part 5 - Doron Isaacs Closing
• Part 6 - Joel Pollak Closing

Comments

[shaun]

Hi Dororn

With regards to the Matzav and the occupation. Israel faced terrorist attacks prior to 1967, when there were no settlements, checkpoints or a security wall.
While you might believe that Palestinians you met believe in non-violence, the majority of Palestinians still voted for HAMAS, whose platform calls for the destruction of Israel. Saying that this is just rhetoric's or that it was done for economic reasons, is as outrageous as saying that in 1933 Germans ignored the anti-Semitism expressed by the Nazi part for which they voted en masses.

I am still muddled by the true intension of the delegation.
Prior to leaving it became apparent that many of the delegates, yourself included had already expressed a variety of Anti-Israel views, you personally discouraged Nadine Gordimer from visiting Israel. How then could you reasonably expect us to believe your claims of balance?
Further more, we have seen, on the one hand, delegates like you and Dr Davis tell the Jewish community that the Apartheid analogy is not appropriate and how you attempted to balance your meetings and experience.
Yet on the other hand, Nozizwe Madlala-Routledge happily invokes the fact that what she saw was "worse that Apartheid." When speaking to the Palestinian solidarity committee and writes about Israel being EVIL.

[Lawrence]

Doron

post your piece up at a neo-Nazi and/or a Muslim fundamentalist Hamas supporting website Doron, it may well earn praise and approbation. If you beg to differ Doron I challenge you to post your piece up in toto at any neo-Nazi or Muslim fundamentalist website and see for yourself what response you get, maybe I should do it myself...

Maybe Doron doesn't care what response he gets from Neo-Nazis and Hamas supporters...

If the occupation of the West Bank were to end, nothing would stop Hamas from taking over as they did in Gaza and as they openly boast that they will, after all they have the majority support of West Bank Palestinians as Shaun points out above. Once Hamas take over the West Bank there would be nothing to stop them from firing rockets into Eastern and Southern Israel as they have fired them from Gaza into towns like Sderot, in fact West Jerusalem and dozens of other towns and communities in Israel proper would be easy targets within range of Hamas and Islamic Jihad rockets. Not only this but a terror supporting Muslim fanatical state in the West Bank that nearly cuts Israel in two is a very grave threat to Israel's very survival - in any possible future war with our neighbours (a very real possibility given the three major wars in Israel's past - '48, '67, '73) it would be far easier to cut Israel in two with a Hamas ruled state controlling the West Bank, in combination with attacks from nations like Syria, Hezbollah, even Egypt and Jordan with support as in times past from other Arab Muslim states (the possibility always exists of the peace with Egypt and Jordan eventually coming to an end given growing fundamentalism in both countries - the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt which is garnering ever-growing support calls for Israel's extinction - is the radical Muslim Brotherhood founded in 1928 the fault of the occupation of the West Bank Doron?).

So Doron favours a scenario that makes Israel less safe and secure, that makes Israel an easier target for terrorist rocket attacks as the Israeli withdrawal from Gaza made Sderot and other towns and kibbutzim bordering Gaza an easy target for rocket attacks. What do the settlements have to do with Muslim fundamentalism? What do they have to do with Hezbollah which calls for all Jews everywhere to be killed, what do the settlements have to do with the terrorist attacks and pogroms from Palestinians and other Arabs against Jewish communities in Israel proper in say the 1920s and 1930s? What do the settlements have to do with Arab Muslim support for the Nazis during WW 2? What do the settlements have to do with the war of 1948 in which our Arab neighbours tried to destroy Israel the very day it was founded as a modern state? What do they have to do with the Fedayeen and Fatah who in the 1950s and early 1960s launched terrorist attack after attack on Jewish men, women and children from Israel's neighbouring territories including Egypt, Syria and Jordan and that includes the West Bank controlled by Jordan at the time? The PLO in its charter of 1964 called for the destruction of Israel, there was no occupation of the West Bank, no settlements. The Hamas charter calls for the killing of every Jewish man, woman and child on the face of the earth, do you blame the settlements and occupation for this? The occupation of the West Bank was occasioned by the '67 War when Israel faced the very real threat of extinction from its neighbours who made no secret of their desire to drive the Jews into the sea as Nasser himself boasted Egypt would do before the outbreak of the war, Egypt and Syria were both shelling Israel prior to the outbreak of the War. The Arab League called for the destruction of Israel at Israel's founding in '48. Were the non-existent settlements and the non-existent occupation to blame? Were pogroms against the Jews in the Middle-East under the rule of the Ottoman Turks in centuries past occasioned by the settlements Doron?

Muslim immans and the like, both Sunni and Shi'ite call for the killing of Jews in Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Algeria and other parts of North Africa, in Europe, the UK, in Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, South Africa, North America, Australia and elsewhere; is the occupation of the W Bank occasioned by the Arab desire to openly annihilate Israeli n '67 to blame Doron?

Muslim fanatics (including those in the Palestinian territories) also call for the killing of homosexuals, the honour killings of women and girls, the genital mutilation of little girls, the beheadings of apostates and the enshrinement of Sharia Law and jihad against infidels including Christians in Sudan and the West and elsewhere, Hindus in India and Buddhists in Thailand - is this the fault of the Israeli occupation? Can you explain, if Israel is not to blame for these crimes, why this so called Human Rights delegation of which you are a part has nothing to say about any of the above, other than double standards?

The "Not in my Name" crowd had a letter of theirs published in a local SA Jewish newspaper giving a glowing tribute to Yasser Arafat upon his death as a partner for peace and more language in that vein. Do you endorse the opinion of Arafat expressed in that letter by "Not in my Name"? Don't forget not to answer this query Doron, I'm not holding my breath...

Which broadcaster, newspaper, journalist, commentator on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict do you consider reliable and objective Doron? Robert Fisk, Pilger, Chomsky, the SABC, the M&G? I don't expect an answer again, again I'm not holding my breath...

[Gary]

Good letters guys, but Dor is not going to answer you. He never answers tough questions.

[BLACKLISTED DICTATOR]

In South Africa, a propaganda war is being waged on a daily basis to destroy Israel; it is generally accepted that SA has the most anti-zionist press outside of the Muslim world. This is the political context in which The SAHRD operates.

One has to conclude that the "findings" of The SAHRD have been solely used to further denigrate Israel. Whether or not it was Doron Isaac's stated intention, the result of The SAHRD's mission has been to demonise Israel in the SA press and at various SAHRD meeetings. Only a naive fool would think otherwise.
Or In the words of Abraham Lincoln " The SAHRD can not fool all of the people all of the time."

[BLACKLISTED DICTATOR]

Btw, I used "demonise" in my previous comment quite literally. If you don't believe me, please ask Mondli and Nozizwe Madlala-Routledge.

[BLACKLISTED DICTATOR]

My question for Doron Isaacs...

"Do you think that Mondli's use of the word "evil" has helped
The SAHRD gain credibility with Jews who do not seek Israel's destruction? "

[BLACKLISTED DICTATOR]

Another question for Doron Isaacs..

""How do the views of Farid Easack (SAHRD), differ from those of Ronnie Kasrils with regard to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict?"

[BLACKLISTED DICTATOR]

More questions for Doron Isaacs...

"Why did you invite Drew Forrest of The Mail and Guardian to be a member of The SAHRD? Was Ferial Haffajee (editor of The M&G) unavailable? Were you at all worried that Drew Forrest publicly held such strong anti-zionist views? Or did you applaud his well-known stance prior to departure?"

[Mike]

Doron, I would argue that that Weisglass quote is completely out of date. The political reality and peace process has not been in a coma. It has significantly moved on from there.
Prime Minister Olmert for example was elected on the explicit platform of major unilateral withdrawals from the West Bank what he called his convergence plan. But with the Hamas coupe and the almost constant bombardment of Israeli population centers from Gaza, rocket attacks everything changed. This demonstrated to everyone that unilateral withdrawal is not feasible. It has served to resurrect in Israel the understanding that peace requires a Palestinian partner. Since this realization, the Olmert government and the Americans have gone to great length to resuscitate Mr Abbas and Fatah as a reliable peace partner. The vast majority of Israelis know and support handing over 90% of the West Bank to Abbas as part of the final deal. Olmert has publicly said so.
So I think Weisglass’s position is no longer relevant.

[BLACKLISTED DICTATOR]

Doron,
One of the reasons why some Jews have been angered by The SAHRD is due to its marvellous access to the main-stream South African media. Those of us who questioned the validity of The SAHRD were not given such access. In the circumstances, it is not surprising that some people got extremely angry. Of course, threats to your well-being are totally unacceptable but it is also important for you to understand that they, to some extent, are the result of frustration engendered by the relative imbalance to media access.The SAHRD was able to bombard the media
with a concerted barrage of highly critical articles; it was as difficult as feeding bad candy to a mindless baby. However, those of us who wanted to expose exactly what you and The SAHRD were up to, were effectively told by editors to get lost.

[BLACKLISTED DICTATOR]

Doron, another question..
" How many of the SAHRD were publicly critical, prior to departure, of Ronnie Kasrils's well known views with regard to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict?"

Doron, if you can find such criticism in the public domain, please supply Supernatural readers with the relevant links.

I have to conclude that The SAHRD was a blatant set-up. The majority of its members were anti-zionists. It should have been called The SAAZD ( South African Anti Zionist Delegation). The SAHRD moniker was an arrogant PC joke and you had "the chutzpah in spades" to think that you would get away with it.

[Gary]

In his earlier 'right of relpy' article on IAS Doron Isaacs wrote:
"violence against civilians, has been a disaster for Palestinians. It has been a politically bankrupt strategy that has come at a terrible moral cost. As Nathan Geffen said on Monday night in Bokaap, the net effect of suicide bombing has been to kill off the once-vibrant Israeli peace camp, and to strengthen the right around the world".

They only condemn homicide bombings strategically i.e being disastrous for the 'Palestinian 'cause'.
No condemnation of homicide bombings because of the death and suffering they cause to Jews.

2 Isaacs refers to the unemployment and hunger of the Palestinians.
Is he aware that because of the sanctions and divestment campaign supported by Pro-Palestinian leftists around the world, a quarter of Israeli children do not have enough food to eat and Jewish children are going to school and passing out from hunger.

3 Did the 23 SAHRD visit the the popular display in a museum in the West Bank city of Nablus celebrating and recreating the Arab
homicide bombing of the Sbarro pizza family restaurant in which fifteen Israelis died (including women and children) and dozens more injured.

The display was complete with fake body parts and pizza piece strewn all over, and thoroughly enjoyed by thousands of Palestinian visitors.

4 Did the SAHRD visit the parent s of Jewish children killed in Palestinian acts of terror?

5 Did the SAHRD consider that the forced removals suffered by the Jews of Gaza is just as traumatic as anything suffered by the Palestinians?
Why do the Palestinians need a judenreihn state?

6 Isaacs talks of dispossession. Is he aware that in 1948 800 000 Jews were expelled from North African and Middle Eastern countries with nothing more than the clothes on their back and were resettled in Israel?

8 The Palestinian terror network started this war in 2000 in rejection of Barak's offer of all of the West Bank and Gaza as well as half of Jerusalem. They always thunder their aim is jihad and to destroy Israel.
If you start a war with the aim of genocide surely you cannot complain when your people also suffer as a result of that war.
The Arabs have being fighting tio destroy Israel and massacre it's people since before 1948. Surely they cannot then complain of the suffering that they bring on themselves.

9 All those pro-Palestinian lefties who cry such copious tears for the Palestinians should know that their pro-Palestinian work means that they think the genuinely oppressed people of the world like the Kurds, South Sudanese, Darfurese, Tibetans, Zimbabweans, Uighurs, Berbers, Maronites etc are worthless.
These people are far more oppressed and suffer far more than the 'Palestinians' and unlike the' Palestinians' it is not self-inflicted.
This Palestinian garbage is just a stick used to beat Israelis.
These trendy lefties don't give a damn about human rights, but as rabid Islamo-Leftists just want to fall all over themselves to join the racist hyena chorus and bashing Israel at every opportunity Notice Russia's invasion of Georgia, in which three thousand have died in a few days (more than 'Palestinians' have died in 7 years) has not elicited any emotive responses from those who point fingers at Israel so vociferously - no COSATU marches, no media outcry, no ANC/.SACP statements etc.
Is it a case of let everyone else die as long as Hamas and Hezbollah et al are happy?

They do not care about the rights of minorities in the Middle East such as minorities in the Middle East and North Africa such as the Jews, Christian Lebanese, Kurds, Druze, Berbers, Copts , Assyrians, Chaldeans, Yazidis, Black South Sudanese, Bahais, Zoroastrians etc.
The real struggle in Israel is over the rights of minorities in the Middle East as against total Islamic Arab domination.
The Islamic Arabs want every inch of the Middle East to themselves with no self-determination or rights for other groups.

10 Did the SAHRD ever hear of Elie Wiesel, holocaust survivor and nobel laureate, who, in a plea for the plight of his own people today, especially the youth and children of Israel being targeted by terror and forces of genocide (such as Hamas, Hezbollah and the Ahmadinejad regime as well as all who are sympathetic to these anti-Jewish elements), penned an open letter to President George W Bush. He stated: “Please remember that the maps on (former Palestinian leader) Yasser Arafat’s uniform and in Palestinian children’s textbooks show a Palestine encompassing not only all of the West Bank but all of Israel, while Palestinian leaders loudly proclaim that ‘Palestine extends from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, from Rosh Hanikra (in the North) to Rafah (in Gaza)’.

“Please remember Danielle Shefi, a little girl in Israel. Danielle was five. When the murderers came, she hid under her bed. Palestinian gunmen found and killed her anyway.

“Think of all the other victims of terror in the Holy Land. With rare exceptions, the targets were young people, children and families. Please remember that Israel – having lost too many sons and daughters, mothers and fathers – desperately wants peace. It has learned to trust its enemies’ threats more than the empty promises of ‘neutral governments’.”

[BLACKLISTED DICTATOR]

I have the suspicion that the majority of The SAHRD were actually feathering their nests for the post Mbeki era. They will be on the "left"/ right side of the anti-zionist PC line when the new Cosatu "boycott Israel" formally agenda takes over, probably after the next election.

Of course, Doron and Nathan will never admit to this but South Africa works in extremely mysterious anti-zionist ways. Call me a cynic, but if you want to keep your job with an NGO it helps to spout anti-zionist crap.

Doron and Nathan have certainly got these PC Brownie points for life. Mazaltov and Chag Sameach!!

[BLACKLISTED DICTATOR]

typo above..
should read "agenda formally takes over".

[Bigben]

I do wish Doron would stop defending the idea that the tour was not for de-legitimizing Israel. A number of the tour members were strictly anti-zionist before they even left. Participants like Nozizwe Madlala-Routledge were happy to speak to anti-semitic groups and openly (if euphemistically) call for Israels destruction. This to the sounds of toy-toying by the countries next political elite. There was no measured discussion as Issacs likes to claim, even neutral observers called it a political rally. A rally with only one thing in mind.

[David Hersch]

Doron,

How I envy you and your fellow ideologues when it comes to Israel-related issues!

It's so simple and straightforward. The thinking is absolutely airtight, the solutions obvious, and the counterarguments mere distractions. There's no room for self-doubt, no time for anguish.

If only everyone else would see things your way, all would be hunky-dory. Unfortunately, those who don't must, by definition, be out of step, behind the times, unenlightened.

So, as you ideologues pursue their sacred visions, impervious to competing facts, my prayer is for the courage, vision, and strength of Israel's leaders - and those who help shape the policies pursued.

In a real world where little is black and white, and where strategic decisions can be unimaginably close calls, let's hope for the wisdom required to get them right.

I am inclined to think that you and certain members of your "delegation" are motivated by huge self-interest, self-promotion and ambition. Is there a cure? I strongly doubt it.