OPINION & EDITORIAL
Socialists misread Israeli history
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Andrew Wagner:
- Free speech should not protect bigoted Baptists (November 30, 2007)
- Immigration debate truly cultural, not economic (November 16, 2007)
- Pakistan nears extremism (November 9, 2007)
- ASM grocery store deserves chance (November 2, 2007)
- Party identifiers cloud judgment (October 26, 2007)
Related Stories:
- Israel promotes imperialism (September 27, 2006)
- UW socialist noble but wrong (September 10, 2007)
- Incoming editor discusses future of Opinion page (May 10, 2007)
- Opinion page needs more guest feedback (March 30, 2006)
- Readers kick butt, take names (September 29, 2006)
by Andrew Wagner
Friday, September 29, 2006
This past Wednesday, while I was reading the Opinion page of The Badger Herald, I read a guest column by Paul Pryce of the International Socialist Organization called "Israel Promotes Imperialism." The column, if not completely outrageous, was at the very least somewhat disturbing. It presents an inaccurate view of history that does not reflect the true nature of events or the reality of affairs in the Middle East. I intend to point out the gaps in the column's theory of a massive Israeli-American conspiracy and rectify the misrepresentation of history and events that Pryce engages in.
Various misrepresentations of history pepper the column. First off, Pryce implies that the Six Day War of 1967 was entirely the fault of Israel. He never mentions the constant border shelling from Syria or the massing of Egyptian troops in the Sinai in the days leading up to the war. Surrounded by enemies, is it any surprise the Israelis struck first? Further, his assertion that the Six Day War sparked American assistance is simply mistaken. Large scale American foreign aid to Israel spiked after the Yom Kippur War of 1973, when the Arab states launched a surprise attack upon Israel. Quite a different story of history appears after a few more facts are introduced into the timeline.
These historical "gaps" are important to note, but are not the main focus of the column. The main focus links the actions of Israel to the imperialism of the United States. According to Pryce, "Israel plays a unique role for the U.S., as a hired thug in the Middle East." Pryce views Israel's role as that of keeping the Arab states of Egypt, Jordan and Syria in line as well as ensuring Arab regimes cater to the interests of the United States.
This broad and ambiguous claim unravels when closely examined. While it is true that Israel has the most advanced and powerful military in the region, other factors render Israel extremely vulnerable. For example, Pryce does not mention the fact that the combined population of the four countries surrounding Israel is seventeen times greater than that of Israel itself. While Israel can threaten the countries around it, any sort of extended warfare would devastate Israel due to its smaller population and economic demands while fighting a war. The world saw this in its inability to properly destroy Hezbollah in southern Lebanon this past summer. All of this hardly makes Israel a good "hired thug" to police the Middle East.
Whenever the United States has gone to war in the Middle East, the Israelis have sat on the sidelines. As a matter of fact, the United States has never wanted to have Israeli backing in these matters. In the First Gulf War, the United States told Israel to sit out the conflict and avoid fracturing the coalition to liberate Kuwait. In the Second Gulf War, despite the obvious need for more troops in Iraq, there has certainly been no talk about bringing in Israeli brigades to police Baghdad. The United States recognizes that using Israel as an enforcer in the Arab world is counterproductive and ineffective.
In sum, Pryce's column haphazardly attempts to connect the Second Gulf War, imperialism and past Israeli actions with the historical relationship between Israel and the United States. In contrast to Pryce's view, Israel is almost certainly more of a liability than a help to the United States, at least in the Arab world. The support the United States gives to Israel has made the U.S. a target for embargo and terrorism for decades. This says to me that the U.S. relationship with Israel is based on a calculation that has less to do with power politics and more to do with protecting the citizens of Israel. Without the protection of the United States, Israel may have been destroyed long ago.
The view of history promoted by Pryce and the International Socialist Organization is wrong. Spending a little time with a history book or just thinking a little bit about events reveals a much more complicated situation than Pryce claims. Generally, people should take claims that every single action taken by a country over the past 60 years is evil, calculated and mercenary with a large, large, grain of salt. This sort of absolute view of history or events has no place in a modern society.
I do not claim that Israel acts in a particularly humanitarian fashion or that Israel has never committed any errors. However, the Israelis do not threaten to destroy or exterminate their surrounding neighbors out of hand. As for myself, I identify with Israel's outlook much more than I identify with jihad or genocide.
Andrew Wagner (aawagner@wisc.edu) is sophomore majoring in computer science and political science.
Anonymous (September 29, 2006 @ 2:45am):
Yup, blame it all on the muslims again. Everything is the arabs' fault. World War II. The Great Depression. Even the crucifixion of Christ. Judas was an operative of pre-natal Mohammad. Yeah, I said it.
Bet the comments can't get any worse than this. Prove me wrong, Campus Right!
Anonymous (September 29, 2006 @ 8:20am):
Refresh my memory, where was this country you call "Israel" from the years circa 500 b.c. through the end of WWII? When should we expect the return of Judah, perhaps following WWIII?
Shouldn't Israel pay us for protection? Instead, we're giving them 30% of our foreign aid budget every year.
Anonymous (September 29, 2006 @ 9:40am):
There is a very simple reason that America defends Israel at almost every turn. America being a country run by Christians feels that it's interest (religious sites) in the area are safer under Jewish control rather then Muslim control.
Anonymous (September 29, 2006 @ 10:23am):
Thanks for the good article. The International Socialist Organization (Madison Nazi Party, Traitors United, or Terrorist Supporters of UW as they are also known) take a very narrow view of events. They think that because Israel has, inadvertantly and regrattably, killed some Arab civilians, that justifies any action the terrorists take in response. The US gives Israel weapons because Israel is surrounded by enemies. Even if you believed that Israel has no right to be there in the first place, does that justify the killing of Israeli children? As Andrew points out, history is not as simple as "they started it, therefore anything we do is justifiable." Both sides have done more than enough terrible things to make them even. If you don't think Israel should be there, well, they are, for better or worse. If you want peace in the middle east, the solution is not to take away Israel's weapons and let them get slaughtered. The solution is to get the terrorist groups to disarm and have the Arab countries work out a peacefuls solution with Israel. Anyone with half a brain would realize that Israel wants peace, and that they can hardly be deemed the instigator or agressor in most, and perhaps all, of the conflicts there.
Anonymous (September 29, 2006 @ 12:17pm):
The good old U.S.A. simply needs to end all foreign aid to all countries. We have IBMs, super-sized aircraft carriers,nuclear submarines, etc. We don't need a non-oil-producing "friend" in the Middle East. No country - no problem!
Anonymous (September 29, 2006 @ 1:15pm):
"America being a country run by Christians feels that it's interest (religious sites) in the area are safer under Jewish control rather then Muslim control."
Close, but not quite. Big fundamentalist power-players like Pat Robertson (and other historically anti-Semitic evangelicals) only want to expand control of Israel in order to destroy Muslim holy places to rebuild the Holy Temple, thus invoking the second coming of Christ and the judgement. Basically, the same people calling everyone anti-Semitic thinks of Jews only as pawns in their game of apocolyptic prophesy.
Anonymous (September 29, 2006 @ 1:22pm):
"Shouldn't Israel pay us for protection? Instead, we're giving them 30% of our foreign aid budget every year."
The amount of foreign aid paid out to Israel annually in no way even approaches 30%!
Anonymous (September 30, 2006 @ 2:18pm):
1. Israel is victim of surprise attack
2. Israel retaliates
3. Israel is blamed
4. Repeat until all Jews are dead
Anonymous (September 30, 2006 @ 7:20pm):
In reality the corporate media misrepresents history. Hezbollah's capturing of two soldiers could be compared to Israel's capture of two Lebanese two days before. Another fact that is not mentioned is that Israel was the first to bomb civilians, targeting infrastructure such as hospitals and airports with seeming disregard for human life before any rockets were launched at Israeli civilians. Who is distorting the facts? Socialists don't seem to be the problem to me. I'm not condoning Hezbollah but I think it's obvious that Israel has to accept blame for some of this and judging by civilian casualties (1,187:44) I think it should be more than many are currently willing to admit.
Anonymous (September 30, 2006 @ 8:35pm):
And the guy that links the ISO to the Nazi's is a moron. The ISO played an active role in organizing the anti-nazi rally.
Futhermore he his logic is flawed. One has to look to the cause of terrorism to understand and stop it. Those groups are responding to serious crimes commited against them by Israel that have never been remedied. From the very beginning as Israel appeared out of thin air despite the local population and proceeded to dominate the Palestinians with western support to now when Israel provokes attack by the its gross misconduct and war crimes which are never reported and to which they are never held accoutable. If Israel wanted peace they should not impose their will on the Palistinians and they should have serious negotionations that aren't ridiculously one sided as has been the case. Maybe the should stop destroying civilian homes with bulldozers and bombs both made in the US. Think about it.
Anonymous (October 1, 2006 @ 10:42pm):
"Another fact that is not mentioned is that Israel was the first to bomb civilians, targeting infrastructure such as hospitals and airports"
Not to mention they routinely fire missiles and rockets at government buildings in Palestine and Lebanon...
Anonymous (October 2, 2006 @ 12:53pm):
"The US gives Israel weapons because Israel is surrounded by enemies."
so thats what the US does? First of all, i was under the impression that both Egypt and Jordan have normalized relations with Israel. second of all, you count out all the countries in this world that are surrounded by enemies, and tell me how much aid the US gives them. Your statement is simply stupid.
"1. Israel is victim of surprise attack
2. Israel retaliates
3. Israel is blamed
4. Repeat until all Jews are dead"
Yes, that is how simple the world works. didn't israel capture lebanese citizens within a week before hezbollah's capture? and i am pretty sure they violated lebanese air space and water. but see, you can encroach on lebanon because they are, christian jewish or muslim, ARABS.
