 |
| David Friedman, Donald Trump, and his daughter, Ivanka (Ha'artez) |
During the campaign I thought that candidate Trump was an embarrassment
to the nation that should in no way become the leader of the free world. That hasn’t changed. He still has a penchant for getting even with his detractors by calling them the worst names he can think of. Not very Presidential to say the least. I still feel he is an embarrassment to the country practically every time he opens his mouth.
More
importantly, however, is the fact that he is still a loose cannon who will have his finger on the nuclear button. I am still apprehensive about it. That’s why I supported his opponent.
At the same time I conceded that his stated views (which
I wasn’t convinced would end up as policy) were more in line with my own.
In particular his views of Israel and the Jewish people. That was easy since
his own daughter, his son-in-law, and two of his top lawyers are Orthodox Jews
that are very pro Israel. These were the people he most trusted to advise him
on what American policy toward Israel should be.
As I predicted, much of his pre-election rhetoric turned out
to be just that: rhetoric that he knew would appeal to his base but would not be
implemented . It got him elected. Now reality has settled in.
The one thing Trump seems to have meant, though, is his strong
support for the State of Israel. That did not surprise me considering the above mentioned
advisers.
Yesterday he announced that he will nominate David Friedman,
one of those two Orthodox Jewish lawyers to be America’s ambassador to Israel.
And that he will be operating out of Jerusalem, Israel’s eternal capital.
Whether either of those things will happen remains to be seen.
Friedman still has to go through his senate confirmation
hearings. But unless there are some serious skeletons in his closet, I don’t
see a problem with that. Moving the embassy to Jerusalem is a bit trickier. The
repercussion of such a move may have negative consequences for Israel and the US… or may not.
Nevertheless Trump has said he has every intention of fulfilling
that promise and implementing congress’s decision to move the US embassy to Jerusalem. We’ll see. Not that this issue matters that much to me. But it’s
nice to see the President-elect still saying it with such conviction. The
symbolism of recognizing the obvious fact that Jerusalem is indeed the capital
of Israel is by itself – quite wonderful.
According to an article in Ha’aretz Friedman is more right
wing than Israel’s current prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu. So much so that
J-Street has vowed to fight the nomination with ‘everything they got!’ That fact
alone speaks very highly of Mr. Friedman. I can think of no better endorsement than J-Street’s opposition . Not only does Friedman
support settlement activity - he does not believe in a 2 state solution –
preferring a bi-national one state solution instead. He feels the Palestinian population
‘time bomb’ that would eventually make them a majority over Jewish Israelis - is
exaggerated.
I am very pleased at this development. This might make me
seem like a real right wing hawk that endorses settlers even in places like Chevron or deep in the West Bank.
They have the goal to populate all of biblical Israel with Jews and are
actively doing so. Despite opposition by virtually every single nation including the US.
But if you’ve been reading this blog long enough, you’d know
I am not some right wing hawk that supports those moves. I supported Oslo – and
still would if its goals if a true peace that would end the violence and lead
to peaceful and friendly relations with a New Palestinian. I was even
supportive of giving up sovereignty over East Jerusalem as their capital –
provided we had free and unfettered access to our holy places (like the Kotel).
So no… I am not a right winger. I still feel this way. I
just don’t believe that goal is realistic or even possible. There has been too
much indoctrination of hatred of Israel and the Jewish people in the Arab culture. Which now manifests itself in
murderous terrorist violence all over the world by Islamic fundamentalists. Not the least
of which is are Hamas and Hezbollah. Both of which are committed to
Israel’s destruction at all cost. They will never accept ‘Oslo’ other than as
an interim step towards Israel’s annihilation. At the moment, I support a military
occupation of all of the West Bank -
free of any settlers or settlement activity other than in border
enclaves like Beitar and Maale Adumim.
So if I supported Oslo, why am I so happy with someone who is so right wing and very likely opposed everything Oslo stood for? What about all the problems a policy
like Friedman’s would generate? What about Palestinian resistance to it in the
form of yet another Intifada which would lead to even greater violence against
innocent Israelis… and Jews all over the world? And possibly increased violence
to Americans right here?
I have no clue what will happen if America’s policy towards Israel
changes along Friedman’s lines. It has never been tried. Every administration since
the founding of the state has had a fear of upsetting the Arabs by supporting
Israel too much. Even the Reagan Administration listened to their state
department’s warnings of dire consequences for – not only Israel – but for
America. None of that has lead to peace. All we got is a world full of terrorism
with the appeasement policies of the past
On the other hand, relations between many Arab nations and
Israel have improved considerably under Netanyahu. We can thank Islamic fundamentalists for that. Those fanatics are a bigger danger to the Arabs states than they are
to Israel. So even though they still nominally oppose settlement activity and
support a 2 state solution - they are not all that ready to turn on the most
powerful nation in the region whose capability to fight Islamists is greater
than all of those nations combined. In other words the enemy of my enemy…
As a religious Jew I would like nothing better than to
re-settle all of Israel and to have an undivided Jerusalem as our eternal capital.
That I opposed all the right wing settlement activity is because I felt (and
still feel as things stand now) that it wouldn’t work and just make things
worse. Israel would lose whatever minimal support it gets from the nations of the world and it would harm its relationship with the US. Not to mention the violence that
might ensue if history can be our teacher in this regard.
But as I said, the US has never had such a pro Israel administration as the one Trump is promising. It’s possible that a toughness that has
never been tried might just work. Fundamentalism is on the rise. Netanyahu has improved relationship with Arab nations. Perhaps a vision that someone
like Menachem Begin had would be a path towards peace. A one state solution that
would set up autonomous Palestinian zones where they could govern themselves
under an Israeli flag. With an Israeli government helping them to accomplish it.
Now it’s true that Palestinians have much pride and investment
in the idea of a national homeland. And their hatred of Israel and Jews will
not go away anytime soon. But they do
not have any realistic hopes of creating a Palestinian state while Trump is
President.
Maybe negotiation through strength with an America that
backs you will work better than negotiation through the capitulations of the past.
On the other hand, things may go south
very quickly. We will have to see if any of this happens and where it will
lead. But in lieu of the current unstable situation where everything on the
left has been tried to solve the problem, maybe it’s time to try something on the right that
has never been tried.
Who knows. But I guess we are about to find out if Trump
is the best or worst thing to ever happen to the State of Israel since its
founding.
