Israel supporters often lament the Jewish state's failure to convince the world of its cause. It's so obvious, they say, that Israel is in the right and the Arabs are in the wrong. How can it be that Jews, who have attained such high positions in fields such as law, mass media and advertising, can't do a better job making their own case to the world in matters that affect their very existence?
Before we ask ourselves why Israel has failed to deliver its message successfully, we need to ask a more basic question: exactly what is Israel's message? Maybe the problem is not the delivery, but the message itself. In fact, Israel has never spoken to the world in a coherent voice about why it has the right to exist, or why it has the right to possess any particular piece of real estate. Instead of defining itself in a confident way, it has allowed the world to define it, and it has deferred to the world's definition.
In the meantime, people who think that Israel's battered reputation is a mere public relations problem are constantly trying to devise better PR campaigns.
One approach is to constantly stress how badly Israel wants peace. This is probably the worst possible approach. It not only signals weakness, but also makes us look like amoral cowards who have no values worth fighting for, and who are willing to sacrifice every ideal and principle for the sake of our own personal safety. It not only doesn't gain us respect, but it arouses contempt from friend and foe alike. In a world that respects strength, we win no admirers by constantly announcing how many of our vital assets we're willing to surrender to our enemies, in exchange for a peace agreement that everyone knows isn't worth the paper it's written on. Focusing on the desire for peace merely encourages the Arabs to make maximalist demands, while severely weakening our own bargaining position.
Another approach is to point out all the faults of the Arab side, including their systematic campaign of falsehood and slander, their history of broken agreements, their clear intention to annihilate Israel, and their deliberate creation of a culture whose very basis is hatred and violence. Although this approach may have some merit, its weakness is that it doesn't really explain why Israel has a right to exist. It's not enough to give a negative message about our adversaries; we have to have a positive message about ourselves, as well.
A third approach is to explain Israel's right to exist in terms of international law, by invoking things such as the Balfour declaration and UN resolutions. These arguments are fine for those who put high value on international law, but most people, and especially our enemies, do not. Also, relying on international law can easily boomerang. If the nations have the power to grant Israel legitimacy, they also have the power to take it away. In fact, Israel's right to exist doesn't depend on the approval of other nations at all, but comes from a different source altogether.
In my opinion, the best approach for Israel to take is as follows:
The land of Israel belongs to God, and He has decided to give it to the Jewish nation, in accordance with the covenant sealed on Mount Sinai, a covenant that no other nation was willing to undertake. After a long exile, we've returned home. We bear no malice toward anyone and seek no harm to anyone. But we will not surrender any portion of our land to foreign powers, and if foreigners rise up against us to destroy us, we will fight against them and, with God's help, we will destroy them.
Many people will say that we can't take this position, because the world doesn't believe in our covenant. But this argument misses the point. What's important is not that the world accepts the covenant, but that we accept it. If we live up to it, and achieve the promised results, the world will have no choice but to accept it.
But what about the fact that many Jews themselves don't believe in the covenant? This is indeed a problem, just as it has been a problem through every period of Jewish history. Belief can't be forced and it is pointless to castigate the disbelievers. Instead, the task of the believers is to make sure that they themselves stay on the path shown to us at Mount Sinai, and not let themselves be pulled off that path by either bribes or threats from those who doubt.
We should be well-spoken toward non-believing Jews, avoiding arrogance, insults or anything else that might provoke unnecessary anger. We are still one people, after all, and purity of speech is one of the prime factors in winning the favor of HaShem. But at the same time, we should stand firm on matters of principle. When a critical mass of believers is reached, we will finally be in a position to steer Israel in the direction it was always meant to go, the creation of a society which acknowledges the sovereignty of God, sees the divine spark in every human being, is a source of blessings to the entire world, and knows how to recognize and repel threats, whether they're spiritual or physical.
One final thought. To say that Israel has to make its "case" to the world implies that it's being judged by some kind of international jury, and that it needs to win the approval of that jury before it can take measures necessary for its continued existence. This is flawed thinking.
To draw a comparison, imagine that the ancient Canaanites had challenged the ancient Israelites to a debate about who really had the right to Eretz Israel. The Canaanites could probably have made a good case for themselves, and maybe they would even have convinced the judges that they were right. But ultimately, their arguments would be irrelevant. What really matters is that God owns the earth and apportions it to whomever He chooses.
Likewise, today, it is not necessary to win the world's agreement in order to take possession of our land. We are well able to take it. In fact, we've already taken it. All we have to do now is keep it and reject all pressure to retreat from it. In time, our right to the land will be evident to one and all.
Before we ask ourselves why Israel has failed to deliver its message successfully, we need to ask a more basic question: exactly what is Israel's message? Maybe the problem is not the delivery, but the message itself. In fact, Israel has never spoken to the world in a coherent voice about why it has the right to exist, or why it has the right to possess any particular piece of real estate. Instead of defining itself in a confident way, it has allowed the world to define it, and it has deferred to the world's definition.
In the meantime, people who think that Israel's battered reputation is a mere public relations problem are constantly trying to devise better PR campaigns.
One approach is to constantly stress how badly Israel wants peace. This is probably the worst possible approach. It not only signals weakness, but also makes us look like amoral cowards who have no values worth fighting for, and who are willing to sacrifice every ideal and principle for the sake of our own personal safety. It not only doesn't gain us respect, but it arouses contempt from friend and foe alike. In a world that respects strength, we win no admirers by constantly announcing how many of our vital assets we're willing to surrender to our enemies, in exchange for a peace agreement that everyone knows isn't worth the paper it's written on. Focusing on the desire for peace merely encourages the Arabs to make maximalist demands, while severely weakening our own bargaining position.
Another approach is to point out all the faults of the Arab side, including their systematic campaign of falsehood and slander, their history of broken agreements, their clear intention to annihilate Israel, and their deliberate creation of a culture whose very basis is hatred and violence. Although this approach may have some merit, its weakness is that it doesn't really explain why Israel has a right to exist. It's not enough to give a negative message about our adversaries; we have to have a positive message about ourselves, as well.
A third approach is to explain Israel's right to exist in terms of international law, by invoking things such as the Balfour declaration and UN resolutions. These arguments are fine for those who put high value on international law, but most people, and especially our enemies, do not. Also, relying on international law can easily boomerang. If the nations have the power to grant Israel legitimacy, they also have the power to take it away. In fact, Israel's right to exist doesn't depend on the approval of other nations at all, but comes from a different source altogether.
In my opinion, the best approach for Israel to take is as follows:
The land of Israel belongs to God, and He has decided to give it to the Jewish nation, in accordance with the covenant sealed on Mount Sinai, a covenant that no other nation was willing to undertake. After a long exile, we've returned home. We bear no malice toward anyone and seek no harm to anyone. But we will not surrender any portion of our land to foreign powers, and if foreigners rise up against us to destroy us, we will fight against them and, with God's help, we will destroy them.
Many people will say that we can't take this position, because the world doesn't believe in our covenant. But this argument misses the point. What's important is not that the world accepts the covenant, but that we accept it. If we live up to it, and achieve the promised results, the world will have no choice but to accept it.
But what about the fact that many Jews themselves don't believe in the covenant? This is indeed a problem, just as it has been a problem through every period of Jewish history. Belief can't be forced and it is pointless to castigate the disbelievers. Instead, the task of the believers is to make sure that they themselves stay on the path shown to us at Mount Sinai, and not let themselves be pulled off that path by either bribes or threats from those who doubt.
We should be well-spoken toward non-believing Jews, avoiding arrogance, insults or anything else that might provoke unnecessary anger. We are still one people, after all, and purity of speech is one of the prime factors in winning the favor of HaShem. But at the same time, we should stand firm on matters of principle. When a critical mass of believers is reached, we will finally be in a position to steer Israel in the direction it was always meant to go, the creation of a society which acknowledges the sovereignty of God, sees the divine spark in every human being, is a source of blessings to the entire world, and knows how to recognize and repel threats, whether they're spiritual or physical.
One final thought. To say that Israel has to make its "case" to the world implies that it's being judged by some kind of international jury, and that it needs to win the approval of that jury before it can take measures necessary for its continued existence. This is flawed thinking.
To draw a comparison, imagine that the ancient Canaanites had challenged the ancient Israelites to a debate about who really had the right to Eretz Israel. The Canaanites could probably have made a good case for themselves, and maybe they would even have convinced the judges that they were right. But ultimately, their arguments would be irrelevant. What really matters is that God owns the earth and apportions it to whomever He chooses.
Likewise, today, it is not necessary to win the world's agreement in order to take possession of our land. We are well able to take it. In fact, we've already taken it. All we have to do now is keep it and reject all pressure to retreat from it. In time, our right to the land will be evident to one and all.