The Jerusalem Post Conference and Caroline Glick

Caroline GlickThe second annual Jerusalem Post Conference, subtitled Fighting for the Zionist Dream, was held in New York City rather than Jerusalem – probably to attract the widest possible audience of supporters of Zionism and Israel.

The highlight of the conference was the speech and later panel appearance by the polarizing senior contributing editor of the Jerusalem Post and editor of Latma, Caroline Glick.

Latma, which is similar in concept to Jon Stewart’s The Daily Show except with satirical songs thrown in, depicts two leftist and clueless television reporters editorializing on the current Israel-related news. Cutting through all the propaganda surrounding events, such as the Mavi Marmara flotilla, the songs can be devastatingly funny and spot-on accurate. The flotilla song We Con the World (sung to the tune of We are the World) drew millions of hits and was worth more to the Israeli side than any hasbara, as it countered the exasperated horror routinely expected from the Arab world and the EU. To say that Ms. Glick is an Israeli national treasure would be an understatement.

Born into a middle-class Jewish home in Chicago, she was raised in a traditional left-leaning liberal environment. After making aliyah to Israel, she claimed to have come to understand realpolitik. To her, leftists are fools who wish for a world that doesn’t and will never exist. For example, the fact that Israelis, Americans, and the European countries want there to be peace in the Middle East and want there to be a two-state solution for Israel and the Palestinians, doesn’t mean that the Palestinians or the Arab world wants the same. She believes that the Palestinians will never give up the idea of the destruction of Israel and at best will yield to a two-stage solution in which the Jewish state is first stripped of defensible borders and is then attacked with missiles and bombs until it is defeated, whether it takes decades or centuries. She has a long-term strategist’s view of the Middle East that is not pleasant, but certainly devastating.

Thus, when she speaks even to a pro-Israel audience, she can be condescending, and when she replies to other speakers, she can be dripping with sarcasm and animus. She is like an elementary school teacher who must tell a clueless kindergartner over and over again not to place his wet hand over an electrical outlet. Like the greater public, the student never quite gets the danger even if he is shocked over and over.

Like Snidely Whiplash, the evil enemy of Dudley Do-Right in Rocky and Bullwinkle Show, she curled her lip in a snarl that said it all. Except in this version, she was the hero and Dudley was a dud who didn’t know what he was doing. She is brilliant, incisive, cutting and just a shade paranoid. But in the world she lives in, paranoia can be life saving.

So is she the wunderkind of Israeli politics or just the enfant terrible? Maybe she is just an acerbic Daniel Patrick Moynihan, who, against the wishes of his superiors, railed at the UN against the passing of the Zionism is Racism resolution in 1975. I believe she is a brilliant person – with a blind spot. That is, she doesn’t see that we Americans do see what an impossible and unfair situation Israel is in. Where anything Jews do is biased and under-handed, whereas whatever their opponents do is above-board and laudable. Where suicide bombing and indiscriminate rockets are simply tools of resistance, but Israeli defense is a war crime. Where an American Jew is accused of dual loyalty if he supports Israel, but an Irish American is just supporting his heritage when he supports Ireland. Where 12 million Jews are said to control the world, while a billion Moslems are helpless and a billion Christians wring their hands in silence. In such a world, it is not surprising that Caroline Glick is angry and frustrated. It is only surprising that more of us citizens of the world are not.

Glick does not think too highly of Americans. When she started her presentation, she stated that she would much rather speak on another topic, but that we Americans needed to hear her. She said that the purpose of the BDS (boycotts, divestment and sanctions) movement was the destruction of the state of Israel, not just the elimination of Israel from the West Bank. She asked why Jews are inviting anti-Semites, including former President Carter and BDS members to speak at Jewish forums? Are we fools and dupes?

After the 1973 Israeli–Arab war in which Israel conquered the West Bank, part of Jerusalem, and the Golan Heights, the international left abandoned Israel. Leftist Jews now join with Israel’s enemies to destroy it, while stating how courageous they are. But Israel and American Jews need each other, and might not survive without each other. There is an unwillingness to call things by their names. These are uncomfortable truths. Glick is very angry but still hopeful.

My problem with Caroline Glick is that I think the majority of Americans, including a majority of Jews, do understand Israeli-Arab problems and the unremitting prejudice against Israel from the Arab world, many EU countries, and especially the UN. I see a perceptible turning to Israel even among the twenty-somethings who are traditionally more to the left of the political spectrum. , the contemporary news site of the young, has gotten consistently more pro-Israel in its reader comments.  Several years ago, the majority of the readers’ comments were anti-Israel; today, the majority are either pro-Israel or at least understanding of its positions. In fact, I see that Israel today is in a far stronger position than its friends think and its enemies desire.

Why The World Isn’t Flat: Debunking Thomas Friedman

Ha-Joon Chang, a South Korean economist, gave a lecture for the New America Foundation on February 1, 2008 titled Why The World Isn’t Flat. The lecture was on why developing nations should look at the history of successful nations, rather than just adopting the orthodox free market approach being demanded of them. Chang’s speech was based on his book , in which he demonstrates why unfettered capitalism is not a good idea for developing countries.

The conventional wisdom states that out of thirty or so successful countries, Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan were the only ones to succeed with subsidies and government intervention while all the others had an orthodox free market, but Chang says that the opposite is actually true – the Netherlands, Hong Kong, and Switzerland were the only countries that managed to succeed with an orthodox free market.

Chang gives Japan’s support of Toyota as one example of the success of protectionism. He also brings up Alexander Hamilton’s support for a protected manufacturing economy in the United States.

A metaphor Chang uses to refute Thomas Friedman’s “flat world” in which all countries compete on a level playing field, is that of boxing’s weight classes. It makes no sense for an economic lightweight like Honduras to want to go up against a heavyweight like the United States. The global economic competition is a game of unequal players. The developing countries like Honduras need a titled playing field on which they can protect and subsidize their producers in order to compete.

Ha-Joon Chang’s full lecture is available to view below:

Hezbollah Goading Israel Into Overreacting

Hassan Nasrallah, the Secretary-General of Hezbollah, said today that Hezbollah was responsible for the drone that entered Israeli airspace last week. The drone was designed by Iran, assembled by Hezbollah in Lebanon, and then launched by Hezbollah.

It’s not the first time (that a drone was sent) and it will not be the last. We can reach all the zones” of Israel, said Nasrallah, referring back to a 2006 incident in which a Hezbollah drone badly damaged an Israeli warship.

The drone “overflew sensitive and important installations for dozens of kilometers until the enemy spotted it near (the nuclear site) Dimona”, said Nasrallah.

Nasrallah “wants to provoke Israel and play on Arab feelings that he is still holding the flag of the Arab resistance against Israel” said Sami Nader, professor of international relations at St. Joseph University in Beirut.

As a militant group, Hezbollah is most powerful and receives most of its support during wartime. In sending the drone into Israeli airspace, Hezbollah hopes to goad Israel into overreacting, thus justifying its own presence in Lebanon as well as garnering local support.

The drone incident also helps Hezbollah distract attention from the uprising in Syria against its ally Bashar al-Assad. Nasrallah said, “The regime in Syria doesn’t need us or anyone else to fight alongside it“, however opposition groups have claimed that Hezbollah members are fighting alongside Assad’s army.

Launching the drone into Israeli airspace was also a move by Hezbollah on behalf of Iran. Hezbollah receives financial and political assistance, as well as weapons and training from Iran. Part of the drone’s job may have been to gain intel on Israel’s military and nuclear sites to share with Iran.

Both Iran and Israel have been engaged in a cold war that is threatening to turn hot. Iran has fought Israel by proxy using Hezbollah, and any antagonizing that Hezbollah does to Israel will distact Israel from its bigger threat, Iran.

If Hezbollah successfully goads Israel into retaliating, the left would see it as an example of how violent and reckless Israel is, and as evidence for Iran being the non-belligerent one. If Israel strikes Hezbollah in Lebanon, it may also give Lebanon and their allies an excuse to join the fight against Israel.

The best move Israel can make at this point regarding the drone incident is to not react to Hezbollah’s provocations. The world opinion will not be with Israel if any retaliation is made.