By Ami Nadiv
This past week, Nachshon had the pleasure of hearing from the celebrated author and journalist, Matti Friedman. Originally from Toronto, Friedman immigrated to Israel a little over 20 years ago. While in Israel, Friedman worked as a news reporter for the Jerusalem bureau of the Associated Press (henceforth: AP). The AP is one of the premier accumulators and organizers of news material in the world. Friedman’s insights on the media’s “obsession” with Israel stem from his personal experience working for the AP.
Friedman’s central argument is that Israel currently experiences a disproportionate amount of attention in the global media. He reported that more than 40 full-time staffers cover Israel and the Palestinian territories, which is greater than the number of staffers covering China, India, or Russia, and more staffers than those covering the entirety of sub-Saharan Africa. Furthermore, Friedman observed that the death toll from the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in recent years is equal to that of some of America’s safer cities, which receive far less media attention. Moreover, in the last 100 years the Arab-Israeli conflict has claimed fewer lives and displaced fewer people than the Syrian genocide has in just the last few years, and yet, the international spotlight shines ever brighter on Israel.
Friedman argued that the “global mania” surrounding the Arab-Israeli conflict is rooted in a history of anti-Semitism. He suggested that Western society often projects its moral dilemmas onto the Jews as a way of externalizing moral conflict. For example, in America, people of color face systemic oppression and persecution at the hands of a white hegemony. Thus, America, in an attempt to escape moral responsibility, projects its own moral struggles onto the Jewish people and, accordingly vilifies Israel for “Israel’s” moral shortcomings. Friedman also underscored the hypocrisy inherent in such a process: China accuses Israel of cultural erasure, America accuses Israel of displacing a native people, and Russia accuses Israel of deploying disproportionate force. According to Friedman, the news has become the medium by which these countries are able to project – and thereby escape – their own moral failings.
One may also consider how the current obsession over Israel originates in a history of European colonialism and evangelicalism. Israel has remained the focal point of Christian and Muslim conflict; the West’s struggle to control Israel reflects its perennial crusade to control the “Holy Land” and the “barbaric” Middle-East. In this way, the obsession over the conflict also reflects a unique admixture of European colonialism and anti-Semitism.
Friedman does make a strong case for the disproportionate amount of attention Israel experiences in the media, and while most of his analysis resonates with met, I believe his attempt to locate a history of anti-semitism as the exclusive - or even primary – source for Israel’s attention obscures the structural inequalities that exists in Israeli society.
By playing the “anti-Semistism card,” Friedman fails to accept the national responsibility necessary to make difficult decisions.
As aspiring Jewish educators and Jewish professionals, there’s no question that Israel will continue to play a central role in our students’ and community members’ religious identities. There is, perhaps, no more pressing moral issue for modern Zionists than the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Our understanding and discussion of the conflict matters. After all, there’s a reason why Nachshon brought us to Israel for the semester. However, while I do believe there’s space to discuss the concerning resurgence of anti-Semitism in Europe and North America, we cannot allow this phenomenon to eclipse our – the Jewish people’s – real moral shortcomings. While the Israeli-Palestinian conflict may not fully deserve all of the attention it currently receives, it does warrant attention and reckoning, and in the long run, our failure to accept responsibility for our own actions will only do us harm. Traditional Jewish educators offers apologetics and seek to deflect blame and responsibility. However, in my experience, these have become tired tropes and leave most students feeling unsatisfied. If we hope to be exceptional Jewish educators and bring lasting and meaningful change to our Jewish communities, then it’s up to us to embrace the daunting task of confronting our own shortcomings, embrace the tension of a trying conflict, and find the courage to start having difficult and vulnerable conversations.
