
Thursday, August 26, 2010
Becoming Israeli

Friday, August 20, 2010
IDF- The best (and most moral?) time of your life
Recently, Eden Abergil, an Israeli and former IDF soldier (discharged last year) posted some “controversial” photos of herself and Palestinians on her facebook page. In an album labeled, “IDF- the most beautiful time of my life,” Abergil, in IDF uniform, is posing with Palestinian prisoners while they are blindfolded and handcuffed. The comment under the picture, posted by a friend, reads, “That looks really sexy for you”, while Abergil jokes back that she should find the prisoner on Facebook and tag him. (This is one of the topics in Tuesday’s Reading List)
I am questioning whether these photos are controversial because Abergil herself denies that there’s any controversy in them. In an interview with Army Radio last Thursday, Abergil claims she still doesn’t understand what’s wrong with the pictures because they were taken in good will–only to depict her military experience.
The first time I saw the photos, I was flabbergasted and shocked. It’s disguising the way that these Palestinians, prisoners or not, are being used as mere objects. A soldier’s duty in taking prisoners should be one of the more difficult tasks of being in the army. Having to handcuff and blindfold another human being shouldn’t be categorized as the “best time of your life.” And so it shocks and abhors me even more that Abergil never saw anything wrong with these photos, posted them on facebook and joked about them. This kind of attitude, point of view and behavior have obviously become normalized within Israel. I have been told that the IDF is the most moral army in the world; yet, I can’t cover up this action as something that fits my idea of morality.
To Israeli teens, the army is their life come age 18. While American teenagers pack off for college for the “time of their life,” Israelis are handed guns and uniforms for “the time of their life.” There are great things that the army does for Israelis: it adds years of maturity, exposes them to experiences and understanding of the other, offers them camaraderie and friendship unlike anything outside the army, and it allows them to do service for their country– todefend, stand up for and love Israel. But at the same time, it’s still the army. At the end of the day the fact that Israel still needs a standing army isn’t a good thing. I pray that by the time I have children, there won’t be compulsory service: peace is the song of all our hearts. Yes, there are advantages to needing an army, but we all know that war is bad, and soldiers are used for war. But when did this kind of conduct become normalized in Israeli society? Today it was Abergil that posted the pictures, but her friends commented jokingly and I’m sure she is not the only person doing such things. Her denial of guilt that her actions are justified rather than seeing them as “base and crude”, as an IDF spokesman was quoted saying, really do reveal a societal normalization, which frankly scares me.
Before she posted the picture, did she ask herself who this man was who was handcuffed beside her? We know he was a Gazan attempting to escape into Israel. We don’t know who he is- sure, he could be a bloodthirsty terrorist, but he could also be a man attempting to escape the bad conditions of life in Gaza in search of something (or someone, a family member) in Israel. In the picture he’s a prisoner; an object, not a man. His humiliation in the photograph of a girl depicting the “best time of her life” is rude, stupid and immoral. Not the reflection of the most “moral army in the world;” yet this only reveals how much of those morals filter down to the 18, 19 and 20 year olds who are actually in the army- and what has become normalized in their lives.
Tuesday, July 6, 2010
A Political Parade

In my last blog I confided in my joy that QuAIA was banned from the parade. I believed that QuAIA was spreading hate and ignorance towards Israel and I worried about the bystanders who would be unfairly swayed. My statements were criticized: my fear, that allowed me to support censorship, was accused of being unfounded because the media and public are not as “susceptible and defenseless” as I believed they were. Instead I should trust that the media and my fellow citizens have the ability to think critically. Sure enough, my worries were unfounded. What followed from QuAIA’s ban, and then removal of that ban was an attack from the media against QuAIA, rather than support towards them. Mainstream media (Toronto’s most popular newspapers, The Toronto Star and the National Post) did not sympathize with QuAIA, but attempted to expose their hypocrisy. Journalists questioned the morality of QuAIA singling out Israel in their campaign for human rights. They pointed out the horrible conditions homosexuals have in all the middle eastern countries surrounding Israel, and also the supposed apartheid in Lebanon. The conclusion became that because QuAIA singles out Israel, “an oasis for homosexuality”, they clearly have some anti-Jewish state issues, rather than regular, healthy criticism of Israel’s government and politics. It is this perceived negative attitude that had everyone worried. Justine Apple who is the executive director of Kulanu Toronto, a Jewish LGBT social and educational group, said that QuAIA’s participation in the parade will create a “toxic and fearful environment”.
Within the Jewish community, the attitude towards QuAIA is negative: many are up in arms and on the defensive. Their strategy has been to flatter Israel by promoting it’s democracy and support for homosexuality. QuAIA is portrayed as an antisemitic group out to unfairly demonize Israel.
With this thick air of controversy surrounding the parade, I decided to go and check it out for myself. Notwithstanding QuAIA, I was very excited for the parade, this is after all a celebration of Toronto’s LGBT community! When I arrived at the parade, I wanted to talk to members of both QuAIA and Kulanu. Upon finding Kulanu, I was immediately taken aback.
Their group looked more like a rally in support of Israel than a Jewish LGBT group. Speaking with Len Rudner of Kulanu, he expressed to me that despite what it looked like, Kulanu was marching in support and in celebration of Toronto’s Jewish LGBT community. When questioned about the staggering amount of Israel flags and signs promoting Israel’s support for it’s LGBT community, he said that the group is also speaking up for Israel’s LGBT community. They are walking with a positive voice of inclusiveness. However, I think that Kulanu’s mission was hijacked by Jews acting in defense of Israel reacting to QuAIA’s participation in the parade. The presence of the controversial group, Jewish Defense League, who marched with the group, gave me this hunch.
Elle Flanders of Queers Against Israeli Apartheid, points to this action by Kulanu (allowing the JDL to march with them) as an action of divisiveness. She claims that Kulanu is not provoking conversation but rather, defending Israel at all costs. She believes they are simply calling wolf on antisemitism, instead of creating debate and conversation on the issues. To Flanders, it is so important for QuAIA to march in the parade because to her, to be queer is to be a human rights activist. She argues that the struggle against oppression is a political struggle that the Pride Parade has been dealing with ever since it began, 30 years ago. Just because the LGBT community in Toronto has been afforded rights, doesn’t mean they are going to stop fighting for basic human rights for people, everywhere in the world, wherever that may be. Yael, a Jewish Israeli now living in Toronto, who marched with QuAIA, insists that there is no democracy in occupation and therefore no democracy for the Palestinians. This issue is therefore correlated to gay issues because as the LGBT community had to fight for their democratic rights in the past, now privileged with these rights, they must fight for those without them. Just as the Jews fought in the civil rights movements in America, one formerly oppressed group has a sort of obligation to fight for all those oppressed.
Is QuAIA a hate group? Are they discriminatory, as they have been again and again accused? Flanders argues vehemently against this statement. QuAIA are standing in solidarity with Palestinians, fighting for their rights as humans. She claims the group does not hate Jews (many members are Jews and Israelis). Yet, for me there is still something incredibly uncomfortable in their name; when I asked Flanders why the negative name, she responded that sometimes you can’t just be in solidarity with something, you have to take a stand, make a statement, stir controversy. Sex sells- right?!
However, to me the name doesn’t stand for a criticism of Israel’s government and politics, it criticizes Israel right down to it’s core- right to it’s legitimacy. An Apartheid state suggests illegitimacy and therefore to be anti-Israeli apartheid suggests an attack against the state itself; not Israeli policies. While I’m the first to say that criticism against Israel’s government is not only warranted but essential for it’s own survival and upkeep of it’s democratic values, I think that QuAIA takes it one step too far by fumbling over the line of criticism into the realm of state permissibility. An apartheid state needs to be dismantled but Israel needs to end it’s occupation of the West Bank.
As the march began, the crowd was impressed by QuAIA, with it’s cute and catchy slogans like, “hey hey! ho ho! Israeli apartheid’s got to go!” and how it walked beside the reactionary group “free speech”. (Free speech was a group created in May as a reaction against Pride’s original ban against QuAIA: the group does not necessarily politically agree or disagree with QuAIA but supports their right to free speech) While Kulanu got the occasional cheer, the Israeli music that was played did not connect to most of the non-Jewish, non-Israeli crowd. Their group looked more like a poster for Israel than an expression of pride for Toronto’s Jewish LGBT community.
At the end of the day, the controversy that had been following the parade for months now did not signify the end of the world. The crowd did not turn into bloodthirsty antisemitic Israel hating people poisoned with QuAIA rhetoric. So by the time both groups had proudly marched by me, I just began to feel fed up. QuAIA does have some legitimate points, but they take it too far for me… yet at the same time so did Kulanu. The issue may have been pushed to the front pages of Toronto’s newspapers, but all that was said was a bunch of nothing. No intellectual conversation was forged, no debates began and no understandings were made, and the issue of the parade, gay pride.. was pushed to the side.
Friday, May 28, 2010
Booting out Queers against Israeli Apartheid

On July 4th Toronto will hold it’s 30th annual Pride Parade. Approximately 500,000- 1 million people attend the event to celebrate the many gay and lesbian groups that march through the streets of Toronto in honor of the proud gay community in Toronto. However, this year is not without it’s controversy; one that is forcing the entire city into discussion. The other day Pride Toronto declared that the group “Queers against Israeli Apartheid” cannot march in the parade under this name, although the members themselves are welcome to the event. The decision was made because the Gay Pride committee was pressured by the City of Toronto, who have threatened to cut their funding if QuAIA participate in the festivities. The City believes that the term ‘Israeli apartheid’ amounts to both hate and discrimination against Toronto’s Jews and Israelis. Without this essential funding provided by the city, Gay Pride will not have enough money to run the parade, therefore explaining their decision to exclude the group.
What do I have to say about this?? THANK YOU GAY PRIDE! (and the city of Toronto) Why though? Isn’t my siding with Gay Pride only supporting the censorship of free speech and ideas?? Is it best to allow such a group, despite disagreeing with their ideas, only to defend our core values of democracy? I have struggled with this question, however after doing research on the group and spending hours angrily sifting through QuAIA’s website and thinking about the point of the parade, I think that this decision is correct.
It is becoming well known that Israel Apartheid Weeks in Universitys across North America are becoming increasingly popular, and are becoming more of a venue for blatant antisemitism and hatred towards Israel, rather than fair and constructive criticism against state policies and actions. Jews have become more threatened, and feel as though they are outsiders within their own campuses. While Israel Apartheid Week is secluded to University campus, and therefore University students, what makes this incident in Toronto so interesting is that even though QuAIA may appear to concern only a limited number of people, they are staging their politics (rather than their personal sexual orientations) in front of Toronto and Canada’s media, splashing themselves in news stories and newspaper articles. They are gathering protesters, gay and straight, who believe in their cause, rather than the gay issues. While they attempt to explain that only with equal rights for Palestinians within the occupied territories (not sure how they believe this should come about) can gay rights be fought for. However, their ties are sloppy and unconvincing. Their website looks more like an advertisement against Israel than it does for advocacy for advancing gay pride or rights. They provide a completely one-sided approach on the conflict in the middle east, with large holes in their “history” section. Forgetting my own knowledge of history and reading their website alone, I too would be outraged at the atrocities Israel has supposedly committed. Their website features a video, Who We Are?, that splashes probably as many Jews as they could find in order to legitimize themselves as a cause against Israel, not Jews. Yet the video also provides no intellectual and reasonable explanation on supposed “apartheid in Israel”. One Jew proclaims that Israel must be an apartheid because she never heard the word Palestinian or occupation in her “Zionist education system”. Others just claim that their visits to the West Bank were similar to South Africa.
I think that University students, above all else, know the atmosphere that these types of groups are attempting to create. QuAIA its trying to inject themselves into the gay pride parade as a large venue to spew their anti-Israel ignorance. If the pride parade wants to be inclusive, it should attempt to include these gay and lesbian members, but not as part of a propagandist group that makes many more people feel attacked and excluded.
If one were to agree that gay rights for Palestinians is of utmost importance for the gay community here in North America, than in my opinion there are many more obstacles than “Israeli apartheid”. Considering that both Fatah and Hamas are Muslim movements, I’m guessing that neither of their platforms would be too friendly towards homosexuals, probably close to how Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon and Saudi Arabia treat homosexuals… not with much acceptance. Is this not a fight worth fighting? Further, why is it that in order to fight for Palestinian gay rights QuAIA decides to politically attack Israel (through it’s bias and uninformed doctrines) through it’s labeling it an apartheid. The word screams with a certain heaviness that motivates the uninformed bystander to side against Israel. (THE POINT) Wouldn’t it be more constructive to name the group, “Queers for Palestinian gay rights”? I suppose I just don’t understand that if one opposes the status-qua of Israel today, as many Zionist do, would we not ask how can we go about to improve the situation? Should we not be searching for a solution to this conflict, whether that means supporting the 2 state or 1 state solutions, or engineering a creative new answer. However, QuAIA are satisfied enough with spreading lies and hatred against Israel rather than seeking or supporting a solution. And I thought we Canadians were supposed to be the polite ones?
Thursday, May 6, 2010
The beautiful Golan Heights
Our tour guide also reminds us that 78% of Israelis do not approve of giving up land for peace with the Syrians. They understand that this swap would be the loss of the Golan Heights, the incredible place in which I was standing. This is the loss of a gorgeous area that is great for vacationing in return for a peace that is not assured. Israelis have Gaza as a model to provide them with skepticism on the “success” of giving up land for apparent peace. I suppose this cynicism is warranted. Perhaps it is because Gaza is so fresh in their minds that land for peace isn’t memorable. But we also have to remember that Israel has swapped land for peace with both Egypt and Jordan, and both of these peace agreements are lasting.
The benefits of peace with Syria are numerous. In fact, these benefits have been the focus in the news lately as the situation with Iran heats up. Peace with Syria is not just peace with Syria but can also be seen within a larger context. It holds the potential to shift power in the Middle East. Iran is perceived as one of Israel’s largest threats because of it’s nuclear ambitions and incredibly hostile attitude towards Israel. Syria is one of its great allies. Forging peace with Syria would help isolate Iran therefore decreasing its threat against Israel. Furthermore peace with the Palestinians has currently hit a brick wall; Bibi and Abbas have yet to return to the bargaining table and even Obama has lost hope. By focusing on Syria and making peace with them, it might help motivate and encourage the entire peace movement, restoring faith in peace negotiations.
Syria has said it is willing to go back to the negotiating table. This is not a guarantee for peace, only an attempt at it. However, this feat has fewer challenges than those with the Palestinians. Yet, if there is one thing that is a guarantee, it is that for peace to come, the Golan will have to go. Goodbye to wineries, ski resorts, brewers, vacationing, gorgeous views, and the overall pride in gaining the Golan during the ‘67 war. While this may seem impossible for many to give up, I think it’s worth a try if the ultimate goal is peace. The situation is not guaranteed, the path is not easy, and the consequences are hazy, but for peace and prospects of stability, are we not willing to jump mountains??

Wednesday, May 5, 2010
For Jerusalem

Perhaps I’m feeling a touch of disappointment in what I accepted as something more from a wonderful man. The last thing I would want to do is de-valuate his work, however I am inclined to think critically on his latest statements, of which I disagree. I find myself in agreement with the “leftists” that spoke against Wiesel on his recent ad. What ad am I talking about? In his ad, “For Jerusalem”, Wiesel argues on the sensitivity of Jerusalem, and says that, “Jerusalem must remain the spiritual capital of the world’s Jews, and should serve as a symbol of faith and hope – not as a symbol of sorrow and bitterness”. He argues that no one should pressure Israel on the debate of Jerusalem, and that discussions on it, should be postponed. WAIT- who is this talking Elie Wiesel or Netanyahu?
Wiesel bases his argument on the importance, sanctity and holiness of Jerusalem to the Jewish people. He writes, “It (Jerusalem) is mentioned more than 600 times in Scripture – and not a single time in the Quran… Its presence in Jewish history is overwhelming.” Well if we are going to dictate our political discussions of land on Jewish history and importance, can’t we argue that Jews are more entitled to the West Bank than they are to say.. Tel Aviv? Hebron after all is the second holiest place in Judaism- if anything then can’t Tel Aviv, with no Jewish historical significance, be considered territorialsm?
Therefore, we must factor in the realities of today in order to access the current situation. Wiesel knows better than anyone that we can never predict what lies in the future, and therefore that our responsibilities lie in the today. If, as he always mentions, we strive for world peace and justice, than how can we ignore the justice for Palestinians? As Gideon Levy writes in a recent article in Haaretz about what Wiesel misses when speaking about Jerusalem, “Not about the need for an end to the occupation, not about the opportunity to establish a just peace (and a just Israel ), not about the outrageous injustice to the Palestinians. Only perpetuating the occupation.” How can we therefore continue to postpone the hottest topic in the debate for peace in the Middle East? Can we forget about the borders of a future state? Further, can we sincerely declare that every street in East Jerusalem, which is mainly inhabited by Palestinians, is the same Jerusalem our ancestors prayed to for years back? Or is it not true that through our modern years, we have extended the borders of what we call Jerusalem, and therefore what we call holy. As we extend the border of holy, we extend the borders of what we can’t touch and what we can’t give up. However, the idea of “Jerusalem” 200 years ago, was only the old city.
Wiesel ends his ad with the beautiful quote, “Jerusalem is the heart of our heart, the soul of our soul”. I couldn’t agree more with this quote- however not in the context it is being used. A divided Jerusalem isn’t a divided heart, or a divided soul, but rather a purer one and a more just one. An occupation simply stains the soul, stains the heart and threatens peace.
Monday, April 19, 2010
A cause for celebration
One aspect of the seminar is enrichment activities, lectures concerning Israel in order to deepen camp directors’ understanding of the land they are in and the Israelis they are hiring. Yesterday one of these lectures was led by a most enlightening man, Zohar Raviv, who spoke about the gap in Jewish identification between the Israeli and American communities. Summer camps receiving Shlichim have the amazing experience of bridging the gap between both areas, yet in order to link the breach it’s necessary to understand the differences that have developed between the two cultures. He sketched the main differences as something like a doughnut: Israelis are generally very nationalist and their Jewish identity is tied to the physical land of Israel itself rather than to the religion. North Americans, on the other hand, must seek out Judaism in order to be Jewish, and therefore for them Jewish identity is more about ritual and tradition.
Zohar told us about a great idea to connect the two communities. While many mitzvot pertain to us as Jews, some are also pertinent to the land of Israel itself. The biblical command to circumcise baby boys after eight days, for example, is also commanded regarding trees. People rest on Shabbat–the seventh day, and the land of Israel must also rest every seventh year. Finally, the act of social justice, or Tsaddaka, also applies to the land: the farmer is forbidden to plough a section of his field and must leave it for the poor.
There is a direct correlation between the land of Israel and the tradition. Just as mitzvot connect, so too must the Jews of Israel and North America. In Poland we see both Israelis and North Americans standing at the gates of Auschwitz declaring the same thing: Never again. But in the absence of a threat, what are we? Absorbed in the act of protecting, we sometimes forget what it is we are protecting. Only with understanding both Israeli and North American points of identity can we begin to see something worth guarding.
The act of coming together allows us to fill out our doughnut and become buns. Bringing Israelis and North Americans together in these summer camps allows for dialogue about information and transformation. Martin Buber once said that the moment we have pluralism, we have the potential to celebrate. Zohar argued that pluralism isn’t only the duty to embracing everyone, but also a moment of opportunity. It reminds us that each and every Jew is different. I sometimes feel as though I am a “north American” shlicha. While this experience has been a tremendous learning opportunity and has led me to confirm my resolve to make Aliyah, I believe I have taught Israelis too. This teaching has gone beyond reviewing their English homework and teaching them modern English slang (no one says “groovy” anymore); it has everything to do with teaching them our culture, our religion and our traditions. This a vision of a future to celebrate.