Soccer Dad

Some say that the new york times is anti-israel

With an article titled Some question insistence on Israel as Jewish State, the New York Times officially joins the anti-Israel crowd.

No doubt there are those who disagree with Netanyahu as to whether Israel should be called a Jewish state. However, since one of the premises of Palestinian nationalism is the denial of the historical connection between Israel and the Jews, the demand is of utmost importance. If the Palestinians cannot accept Israel as a Jewish state, they are not serious about peace.

It's ironic. During Netanyahu's first term in office he withdrew Israel from most of Chevron. He took a concrete step for peace. But even the most basic steps of showing acceptance of Israel are too much to ask of the Palestinians. As long as the Palestinians don't repudiate their denial of Jewish history, their commitment to peace is nonexistent. It makes their various "special sessions" moot.

As Jeff Jacoby recently wrote:

And yet to Israel's enemies, Jewish sovereignty is as intolerable today as it was in 1948, when five Arab armies invaded the newborn Jewish state, vowing "a war of extermination and a momentous massacre." Endless rounds of talks and countless invocations of the "peace process" have not changed the underlying reality of the Arab-Israeli conflict, which is not about settlements or borders or Jerusalem or the rights of Palestinians. The root of the hostility is the refusal to recognize the immutable right of the Jewish people to a sovereign state in its historic homeland. Until that changes, no lasting peace is possible.

But instead of questioning the Palestinian commitment to peace the New York Times does what's comfortable: pretends that Israel is being unreasonable.

Crossposted on Yourish.