The Left distorts morality

by Moshe Dann
The Jerusalem Post
September 7, 2004

That the Israeli "occupation" and settlement of the West Bank 
and Gaza is immoral is the hallmark of the Left in Israel. 
Many on the Left believe that all of Israel's problems stem 
from this "original sin." 

In their view, nothing is worse that oppressing another people 
or depriving them of their rights. 

These sentiments resonate in every Jewish heart because we are 
a people with a long history of suffering and oppression. 
More than most others, perhaps, we should examine our behavior 
so as not to do to others that which was done to us. 

But those who support a total withdrawal from the territories - 
and, I would argue, those who support Prime Minister Ariel 
Sharon's plan for unilateral disengagement from Gaza and the 
northern West bank - use "morality" to obscure something much 
deeper: a sense of shame and guilt. 

Ever since Israel entered Judea, Samaria and Gaza (Yesha) in 
1967, the Left has been apologizing for that miraculous victory, 
even though Israel's very existence was at stake. It is even 
more incensed that Israelis had the audacity to move into 
areas formerly forbidden to Jews. 

But Jews had lived in Yesha 1948, and the area holds deep 
historical and strategic significance for the Jewish people. 

Despite the fact that no Arab-owned land was taken (or "stolen") 
by Jews who built their homes in Yesha, the Left considers 
settlement building to be "occupation." 

But after the Oslo Accords in 1993, most Palestinians came 
under control of the Palestinian Authority. And until Yasser 
Arafat renewed his war against Israel four years ago, Arabs in 
Yesha experienced a period of enormous growth and prosperity. 

The land issue is a complicated one. Israel has legal, 
historical and religious claims to the West Bank and Gaza. 
The Palestinians claim that settlements have been built 
illegally on their land. But who owns state land - unclaimed 
and uninhabited - but the state? So we mustn't allow the UN or 
EU to decide issues involving our sovereignty. 

As for "occupying" the Palestinian people themselves, we involve 
ourselves in their lives only in self-defense by entering Arab 
towns to destroy terrorists and their network; Arabs are 
restricted at checkpoints only because we face the threat of 
suicide bombings. 

Our actions save lives. 

Moralists on the Left draw the line in 1967, but from the Arab 
perspective, the Nakba (catastrophe) occurred not in 1967 but 
in 1948. Arab "refugees" come from that failed attempt at 
anti-Jewish genocide. 

Using the Left's criterion of occupation, the establishment 
of the State of Israel itself was immoral. What frightens the 
Left is the possibility that Jews did "steal Arab lands," 
that Israel does discriminate against Arabs, that Israel is 
responsible for Palestinian terrorism. So they blame the 
settlers - it's convenient and diverts attention from the 
"original sin." 

In order to justify Israeli "occupation of Arab land" in 1948, 
the Left would sacrifice Jews who have "occupied Arab land" 
since 1967. 

This explains why the Left clings so desperately and tenaciously 
to the "peace process" idea even though most people understand 
that there is no Palestinian partner. 

For the Left, a Palestinian state would vindicate what happened 
in Israel's War of Independence; it would legitimize our 
existence and free us from the burden of responsibility for 
Arab refugees. 

Abandoning Yesha means no longer having to say "I'm sorry." 
If Palestinians can be convinced to accept a state in Yesha, 
pre-1967 Israel is off the hook. For the Left, a Palestinian 
state is doing tshuva (repentance). 

When I ask Leftist friends to accompany me to Judea, Samaria 
or Gaza to see for themselves what is going on they refuse 
on principle - visiting would imply support for the 
"occupation." They consider it immoral to visit these areas; 
except, perhaps, to demonstrate with Peace Now and the 
Palestinians against Jews. 

Yet these same people visit without compunction countries 
which oppress women and persecute minorities. Moreover, 
they appear unconcerned about the rampant corruption under 
the Palestinian Authority, though Israel helped create and 
sustains the PA. 

By using selective morality to justify their antagonism 
toward Jews who live across the 1949 armistice lines - many 
of whom are Orthodox - the Left ignores the humanitarian 
needs of Jews whose homes are threatened with destruction. 

Oblivious to the security consequences of withdrawal, 
the Left claims a moral high ground. But if Israel has 
no right to rule in Yesha, it has no right to rule over 
Israeli Arabs, or over property claimed by the 1948 Arab 
"refugees." 

In fact, the Left undermines the integrity of the state 
itself. If the Left is correct, Zionism is wrong. 

To make common cause with the underdog is an admirable 
quality. But to assist directly and indirectly those who 
would murder and create mayhem has no moral justification. 

The Left's most dangerous message is that - despite success 
in our ongoing war with Palestinian terrorism - we not only 
cannot win, but we should not win.
That is moral depravity. 
----------
The writer is a journalist living in Jerusalem.