NZ Friends of Israel Association Inc
Fighting racial intolerance in New Zealand and beyond
Inspiring stuff and ICYMI: An 85-year-old Israeli peace activist, who was abducted by Hamas and released in October, said she told Hamas chief Yahya Sinwar he should be “ashamed of himself” in a Gaza tunnel.
Prior to the current series of hostage and Palestinian prisoner releases, Yocheved Lifshitz met Sinwar where she was being held captive – a Hamas tunnel she described as an extensive warren.
For many, the Economist is a respected publication that gives insightful and easy to read reports of world events.
So its disappointing to see that the good people at Honest Reporting have found so many flaws in the Economist’s background briefing on the Arab-Israeli conflict.
“In what needed to be a well-researched piece, The Economist recently provided its readers with an A-Z glossary on the Arab-Israeli conflict. Unfortunately, it is rife with inaccuracies, omissions, and flat-out mistakes that mislead rather than inform.”
This afternoon we received this outrageous letter from the NZ Psychological Society.
Here is our response sent this afternoon.
To the Executive of the New Zealand Psychological Society
One of your members has sent us your open letter to the international community of Psychological Societies regarding Gaza.
We applaud your efforts to protect the civilians of Gaza from harm.
On the other hand, we deplore the absence in your letter of any condemnation of the atrocities carried out on October 7.
The absence of such condemnation leaves you wide open to the accusation that you find rape, summary executions of whole families in their homes, the beheading of babies, immolation of captives, gouging out of eyes, executing people at bus stops, and sitting in their cars, the abduction of civilians, children, babies, and the elderly, justifiable.
These are crimes against Israel, they are crimes against all Jews, and they are crimes against all humanity. They are therefore crimes against us, New Zealanders. This is evil.
The people of Gaza elected Hamas as their government.
With such power, Hamas has great responsibility.
On October 7, Hamas committed a series of atrocities on such scale that no right-thinking nation could ignore.
In so doing, Hamas has taken their people into war.
No government who carries out such an act of war can expect that there will not be any consequences for its citizens.
But Hamas’ ideology values martyrdom more than the lives of their people.
And therefore they have no regret in using their people as human shields.
Consequently they fight their war from residential apartment buildings, schools, hospitals and even designated safe zones.
This war is not a war of vengeance, it is not a war of evening up the score, it is not just about defending Israel, it is about making Israel’s people safe.
October 7, has shown the world that Hamas is prepared to throw aside its humanity in the furtherance of its cause. Their evil is revealed.
Any idea of coexistence, of living with Jews in peace and harmony, is far from Hamas’ mind.
History shows that unless evil is confronted then many more will die.
Although we sympathise with your goal of trying to protect the non-combatants in Gaza, we are deeply disappointed that your letter leaves you wide open to the accusation that you condone the October 7 atrocities as justifiable actions to further a political cause.
In doing so, you contribute rather than mitigate a tragedy.
There is also a war for the world’s heart and mind. For our hearts and minds.
Do not be taken in by the emotional messages currently before the media.
The number of casualties that was supposed to have died outside a hospital began with 500 and since then the number has steadily dropped.
There is much value in independent investigations after the conflict is over.
From past conflicts, Western news agencies have attested to Hamas’ misinformation campaigns.
You and your members are scientists, and if you as a society feel strongly enough to weigh into this conflict, then we urge you to examine this conflict and its history and the respective claims of both sides with the same forensic care you take in your professional life.
If you do, you may find that talk of apartheid practices, invasions, indigenous peoples, and colonization is not as simple as some would have you think.
We urge you to re-write your letter with these thoughts in mind.
Regards, etc.
FOLKS
I’M TONY KAN,
PRESIDENT OF THE NEW ZEALAND FRIENDS OF ISRAEL
TO THE ORGANIZERS OF THE MARCH
TO THE OTHER MEMBERS OF NEW ZEALAND FRIENDS OF ISRAEL
TO ALL THOSE WHO HAVE SACRIFICED THEIR TIME TO BE HERE
WELCOME
I HAVE SAID THIS BEFORE AND WILL SAY IT AGAIN:
FOR DECADES NEW ZEALANDERS HAVE HOSTED ISRAEL TRAVELLERS
TRAVELLED THROUGH THE MIDDLE EAST OURSELVES
SERVED AS PEACEKEEPERS IN THE MIDDLE EAST
WE HAVE EATEN WITH ISRAELIS
LAUGHED WITH ISRAELIS
ARGUED WITH ISRAELIS
CELEBRATED WITH ISRAELIS
EVEN MARRIED ISRAELIS
WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO ISRAEL
IS A CRIME AGAINST ISRAEL
IS A CRIME AGAINST JEWS
IS A CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY
AND IT HAS BROKEN OUR HEARTS
NO MATTER WHAT DIFFERENCES ONE MAY HAVE ON A POLITICAL ISSUE
IT IS EVIL TO INVADE SOMEONE’S HOME
TO COLDLY SHOOT PEOPLE IN THEIR BEDS
TO COLDLY MAKE THEM KNEEL ON THE GROUND AND EXECUTE THEM
TO COLDLY KILL PREGNANT WOMEN BEFORE THEIR PARTNERS AND CHILDREN
TO COLDLY BEHEAD BABIES
NO MATTER WHAT YOUR CAUSE MIGHT BE
NO MATTER HOW RIGHT YOU THINK YOU ARE
THIS IS EVIL
THIS IS EVIL AND IT MUST BE CONFRONTED
ISRAEL’S MILITARY OPERATIONS TODAY
ARE NOT ABOUT VENGEANCE
ARE NOT ABOUT EVENING THE SCORE
IT IS NOT JUST ABOUT DEFENDING ONE’S COUNTRY
IT IS ABOUT ENSURING THE SAFETY OF THE ISRAELI PEOPLE
THE TRAGEDY IS THAT THE PEOPLE OF GAZA
ELECTED HAMAS TO BE THEIR LEADERS
AND WITH SUCH POWER COMES MUCH RESPONSIBILITY
AND HAMAS HAS CHOSEN TO ORGANIZE AN ATTACK
ON A SCALE THAT CANNOT BE IGNORED
THAT CONSTITUTES AN ACT OF WAR
AND IN SO DOING
THEY HAVE BROUGHT WAR UPON THEIR PEOPLE
BECAUSE ISRAEL MUST ACT BOLDLY AND COURAGEOUSLY
TO ENSURE THE SAFETY OF HER PEOPLE
PEOPLE
THAT WE KNOW AS FRIENDS
AND THEIR RELATIVES
GRANDPARENTS
UNCLES
AUNTIES
COUSINS
FATHERS
MOTHERS
BROTHERS
AND SISTERS;
BOYFRIENDS
GIRLFRENDS
THE TRAGEDY IS THAT IN SO DOING
MANY INNOCENT PEOPLE HAVE DIED
AND EVEN MORE WILL DIE
BUT THIS WAR WILL BE NO DIFFERENT THAN OTHER PREVIOUS CONFLICTS
THERE WILL BE A FIGHT FOR THE WORLD’S HEARTS AND MINDS
FOR OUR HEARTS AND MINDS
HAMAS OWES ITS EXISTENCE TO FOREIGN AID
THEY HAVE WATCHED THE RUSSO-UKRAINIAN WAR JEOPARDIZE EUROPEAN AID
THEY HAVE WATCHED THEIR ARAB ALLIES RECOGNIZE
THAT ISRAEL BRINGS TECHNOLOGICAL AND ECONOMIC BENEFITS
TO THE REGION
AND SEVERAL ARAB COUNTRIES HAVE CHOSEN TO RECOGNIZE ISRAEL
AND A BRISK TRADE HAS BEGUN
NOW THEY HAVE CALLOUSLY STARTED THIS CONFLICT TO
RE-IGNITE THE FLAME OF SUPPORT
TO REINVIGORATE THEIR GRIEVANCE INDUSTRY
BY ENSURING THAT INNOCENTS
WOMAN,
CHILDREN AND
THE ELDERLY
ARE PUT IN HARMS WAY
UNLIKE OTHER WARRING NATIONS
ISRAEL WILL NOT INDISCRIMINANTLY BOMB CIVILIANS
THEY WILL USE ALL THEIR INTELLIGENCE RESOURCES
TO IDENTIFY HAMAS’ OPERATIONAL CENTERS
AND MUNITIONS STORAGE SITES
CARPET BOMBING IS NOT ON THE TABLE
BUT THEY HAVE AN ENEMY
WHO VALUES DEATH BECAUSE
THEY HAVELUE MARTYRDOM MORE THAN LIFE
AND SO THEY ARE WILLING TO PUT THEIR CIVILIANS AT RISK
BY FIGHTING THEIR WAR FROM HOSPITALS
BY FIGHTING THEIR WAR FROM SCHOOLS
BY FIGHTING THEIR WAR FROM RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS
BY FIGHTING THEIR WAR FROM BEHIND THEIR WOMEN, CHILDREN AND CIVILIANS
BY FIGHTING THEIR WAR FROM UN FACILITIES
AND EVEN BY FIGHTING THEIR WAR FROM SAFETY ZONES
IN 1938 THE BRITISH OFFERED THE ARABS STATEHOOD
ALONGSIDE THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A JEWISH STATE
THE ARABS REJECTED IT THEN
IN 1948, THE UN RECOGNIZED THAT THERE WERE TWO ETHNIC GROUPS
THAT HAD A DEEP HERITAGE IN THE REGION
WHICH WAS ONCE PART OF THE TURKISH EMPIRE
THEY VOTED TO CREATE TWO NATIONS
THEY MIGHT LIVE SIDE BY SIDE AT PEACE WITH ONE ANOTHER
THE ARABS REJECTED THE OFFER OF NATIONHOOD THEN TOO
IN 2000
STATEHOOD WAS AGAIN OFFERED TO THE ARABS
AND THIS TOO WAS REJECTED
EVEN THOUGH 90% OF THE ARABS’ DEMANDS WERE MET IN THE OFFER
IN FACT THE ARABS WOULD REJECT OFFERS OF STATEHOOD TWICE MORE
EACH TIME THE DEAL WAS SWEETENED WITH EVEN MORE CONCESSIONS
IN THE TWENTIETH AND TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY
THE ARABS HAVE REJECTED STATEHOOD A TOTAL OF FIVE TIMES
THE ONLY GOAL THEY SEEK
IS THE COMPLETE DESTRUCTION OF ISRAEL
YOU WILL HEAR
ACCUSATIONS OF JEWISH COLONIZATION
ACCUSATIONS OF DISPLACED INDIGENOUS PEOPLES
AS IF THERE IS ONLY ONE INDIGENOUS PEOPLE
BUT HISTORY TELLS US THAT FOR THOUSANDS OF YEARS
BOTH JEWS AND ARABS
HAVE LIVED IN THE REGION
SO WE IN THE WEST MUST TAKE ONE OF THE KEY STRENGTHS THAT WE BRING TO CIVILIZATION
AND THAT IS THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD
AND CAREFULLY SIFT THROUGH THE INFORMATION WE RECEIVE THROUGH THE MEDIA
AND WEIGH THE EVIDENCE
BEFORE WE JUMP TO ANY CONCLUSION
THE TRUTH WILL NOT EASILY COME TO YOU
WHEN EVIL WILL SEEK TO MISINFORM
WAIT FOR INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATIONS AFTER THE CONFLICT BEFORE JUMPING TO CONCLUSIONS
YOU WILL HEAR HOW GAZA IS ONE OF THE MOST DENSELY POPULATED AREAS OF THE WORLD
IMPLYING THIS IS THE SOURCE OF THEIR POVERTY
BUT IF YOU RESEARCH IT
FOR EVERY GAZA THERE IS A SINGAPORE
FOR EVERY DELHI THERE IS A TOKYO
FOR EVERY JAKARTA THERE IS AN AMSTERDAM
DON’T BELIEVE EVERYTHING YOU HEAR
THE SOURCE OF THEIR POVERTY IS THEIR GOAL OF WAGING WAR OVER BUILDING A NATION
FINALLY OVER 200 HOSTAGES WAIT TO BE RETURNED
AND WE ARE EXTREMELY FEARFUL FOR THEIR SAFETY
BECAUSE WE KNOW IN TRYING TO ENSURE THE SAFETY OF THE MAJORITY
ISRAEL IS PUT IN THE IMPOSSIBLE DILEMMA OF JEOPARDIZING THE SAFETY OF THE HOSTAGES
THANK YOU FOR COMING OUT TO SUPPORT ISRAEL TODAY
IN DOING SO, YOU SUPPORT
THE RIGHT OF AN INDIGENOUS PEOPLE TO BE SAFE IN THEIR HOMELAND
YOU SUPPORT THE IDEAL THAT HUMANITY SHOULD NOT SETTLE THEIR DIFFERENCES THROUGH VIOLENCE
THAT IF WAR IS INEVITABLE THAT HARM TO WOMEN, CHILDREN AND THE ELDERLY SHOULD BE MINIMIZED.
YOU SUPPORT TRUTH OVER MISINFORMATION
THAT YOU SUPPORT THE IDEA THAT GOOD PEOPLE SHOULD NOT STAND ASIDE LEAVING EVIL TO TRIUMPH
THANK YOU
In May, we had a commemorative luncheon to mark Israel’s 75th anniversary of its establishment.
Here is the audio recording of the event. Enjoy! Thanks to David Allan for his efforts in putting this together.
This is the speech given by Tony Kan, President of NZ Friends of Israel Association Inc at the Israel at 75 commemorative lunch held in Christchurch on April 30, 2023.
Mr Ambassador, Shmuel and the other members the Board of Management of the Canterbury Hebrew Congregation, to the committee members of NZ Friends of Israel, to the members of the NZ Friends of Israel and other supporters of Israel, on behalf of the New Zealand Friends of Israel, welcome.
One of the earliest records of New Zealand’s support for the Jewish people is recorded in a speech before the House of Parliament by Sir George Grey, in 1891, who said:
“…that New Zealand take for the first time a place amongst the nations of the world, in moving a question which is of common interest to all mankind, and formally recognize that it is the duty of the New Zealand nation, however small or however great it may be, to do all the good it possibly can for people in all parts of the world.”
He then placed before the House a motion:
“That a memorial be addressed to His Imperial Majesty of All the Russias, respectfully praying that all exceptional and restrictive laws which afflict His Jewish subjects may be repealed, and that equal rights with those enjoyed by the rest of His Majesty’s subjects may be conferred upon them. That the said memorial be signed by the Speaker, and be by him transmitted to his Majesty.”
Zionism, which is the movement for the establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine, was supported by many countries in the early part of the 20th century, including New Zealand.
One of the ways in which New Zealand supported Zionism was by endorsing the Balfour Declaration of 1917, which expressed the British government’s support for the establishment of a national home for the Jewish people in Palestine. New Zealand was one of the countries that voted in favor of the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine in 1922, which gave Britain the responsibility of administering the territory and preparing it for self-government.
Peter Fraser, who served as the Prime Minister of New Zealand from 1940 to 1949, was a supporter of the establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine.
Figure 1 Sir Peter Fraser
Fraser had extensive contacts with New Zealand’s Jewish community and local and visiting Zionists. Like Savage, he was a close friend of the Jewish brewer, Ernest Davies. He attended a reception given by the Auckland Jewish community for David Ben-Gurion in January 1941 when Ben-Gurion was returning to Palestine after an unsuccessful attempt to arouse American Jewish opposition to the 1939 White Paper. When the Zionist Federation of New Zealand held its first Dominion Conference in Wellington in 1943, Fraser delivered an understanding and thoughtful address.
In addressing the United Nations delegates at the San Francisco Conference in April 1945, Fraser asserted that:
“Whatever can be done to help the persecuted Jewish people shall and must be done to the utmost ability of all right-thinking men…
There should be no antagonism or misunderstanding between the Jewish and Arab peoples, everyone living in Palestine would naturally benefit from what the Jewish people have made out of a land which was once desert, until the desert bloomed as a rose. Palestine is very akin to the ideals of New Zealand except that the Jewish people went into Palestine with a tradition of privation…
…I hope and believe that the representatives from this country who take part in the counsels stand foursquare for justice for the ancient home and new hope of the Jewish people.”
New Zealand supported the establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine, and eventually voted in favor of the UN partition plan that called for the creation of separate Jewish and Arab states in Palestine.
Yizthak Triester reports that: Yet before the vote, the New Zealand Prime Minster was torn: He wanted the United Nations to succeed as an international body. He wanted Britain to be allowed to withdraw from Palestine. But he knew that without an international military presence, the Partition Plan would lead to war. He voiced his concerns to Carl Berendsen, New Zealand’s delegate to the United Nations.
Figure 2 Sir Carl Berendsen
By November 21, Fraser had made up his mind. He told the British Secretary of State that, “We must support partition as the solution which offers the best possible hope, however small, of dealing with the situation as it exists at the present time.”
However, Berendsen continued pushing the UN to delay the vote until a better solution was found, preferably with the United States committing to send soldiers to the region to enforce the decision.
Figure 3 Chaim Weizmann
On November 22, Chaim Weizmann, who would become Israel’s first president, sent a telegram to Fraser, stressing that if New Zealand abstained from the committee vote on partition, “through doubt on certain issues,” New Zealand would prejudice the only chance for a decision.
As the deadline for the vote approached, Fraser replied to Weizmann that partition without enforcement was, “futile and seems calculated to lead to bloodshed and chaos.”
Isaac Gotlieb counted Berendsen as a friend and neighbour, though they did not see eye to eye on the issues of Judaism or Zionism. And Carl had his doubts about the partition plan.
By now, Fraser realized that without New Zealand’s vote, the Partition Plan may not receive the necessary two thirds majority. Although he feared the plan was flawed, he knew there was no alternative. So, before the vote, he went to discuss his options with Isaac Gottlieb.
Figure 4 Isaac Gottlieb
Isaac Gotlieb was a passionate Zionist. In 1943, he became the first head of the New Zealand Zionist Federation. He traveled the country raising money for the Zionist cause, and in 1946, he represented New Zealand at the first World Zionist Convention in Basel.
Isaac Gotlieb was born in Latvia in 1891 and emigrated to NZ in 1909, having completed his apprenticeship as a carpenter in Wales, and after a few years, in 1924 at the age of 33 opened his own company called The Art Cabinet Co.
He became a very successful businessman. During the depression years, while others went bankrupt, Isaac and his brother Morris flourished.
He mixed in social circles that included Fraser, and other government officials. When the prime minister and his colleagues came to visit my great uncle on just before the partition vote, he employed every argument he had to convince them that they should support it. It worked.
In a speech to the New Zealand Parliament on 27 November 1947, Fraser stated his government’s support for the partition plan, which proposed the creation of separate Jewish and Arab states in Palestine.
In his speech, Fraser said,
“It is the solemn duty of the General Assembly to create a free and independent state of Israel, and to guarantee it a secure existence in the world. This is an act of justice that we owe to the Jewish people, who have suffered so much in recent years. At the same time, we recognize the rights of the Arab people, and we hope that the two states will live side by side in peace and friendship.”
On 29 November 1947, New Zealand was one of the 33 countries that voted in favour of the partition plan, while 13 countries voted against it and 10 abstained. New Zealand’s support for the partition plan was based on its belief that the Jewish people had a legitimate claim to a homeland in Palestine, and that the partition plan was a fair and practical solution to the conflict between Jews and Arabs in the region.
After the establishment of Israel in 1948, New Zealand was one of the first countries to recognize its independence. New Zealand also provided military and other forms of support to Israel in its early years, including sending a small contingent of troops to serve with the United Nations Truce Supervision Organization (UNTSO) in the region.
75 years later, Fraser’s hopes for Israel have been realised. Today, Israel’s economy is a source of regional employment and wealth. With the Abrahamic Accords, regional peace is another step closer. And if further peace can be given a chance and maintained, then the economic windfall for all concerned, not just Jews, would be astronomical.
Today, Mr Ambassador, New Zealand continues to stand with Israel, affirming its right to exist, and working with Israel to ensure peace prevails, so that all may live and become anything they lawfully aspire to be.
In the desert, the Rose is blooming.
Thank you for your attention.
FAREWELL
Folks, thanks again for taking the time to come out and share in this special occasion.
Please do take home a balloon or two as a momento.
Before you go, I’d like to thank you, Shmuel, member of the Board of Management of the Canterbury Hebrew Congregation, for all your help in getting this event going. I’d also like to thank Rebecca Marchand, our secretary for ably organizing the ticket sales and communicating with ticketholders, to Yoko Allan, David Allan, Alison Clarke and John Clarke for all their work in scouting out the venue and for handling the decorations. I’d also like to thank you all for your support, without which this event would not be possible.
And of course, I’d like to thank the Ambassador himself for making the time to come, for sponsoring the event, and for the Israel-NZ badges, which may be obtained from Sarah, over there.
The Torah Prophet, Zechariah said,
Thus says the Lord: I have returned to Zion and will dwell in the midst of Jerusalem, and Jerusalem shall be called the faithful city, and the mountain of the Lord of hosts, the holy mountain.
4 Thus says the Lord of hosts: Old men and old women shall again sit in the streets of Jerusalem, each with staff in hand because of great age.
5 And the streets of the city shall be full of boys and girls playing in its streets.
6 Thus says the Lord of hosts: If it is marvelous in the sight of the remnant of this people in those days, should it also be marvelous in my sight, declares the Lord of hosts?
7 Thus says the Lord of hosts: Behold, I will save my people from the east country and from the west country,
8 and I will bring them to dwell in the midst of Jerusalem. And they shall be my people, and I will be their God, in faithfulness and in righteousness.” [1]
And the Torah prophet Ezekiel said:
37:1 The hand of the Lord was upon me, and he brought me out in the Spirit of the Lord and set me down in the middle of the valley; it was full of bones.
2 And he led me around among them, and behold, there were very many on the surface of the valley, and behold, they were very dry.
3 And he said to me, “Son of man, can these bones live?” And I answered, “O Lord God, you know.”
4 Then he said to me, “Prophesy over these bones, and say to them, O dry bones, hear the word of the Lord.
5 Thus says the Lord God to these bones: Behold, I will cause breath to enter you, and you shall live.
6 And I will lay sinews upon you, and will cause flesh to come upon you, and cover you with skin, and put breath in you, and you shall live, and you shall know that I am the Lord.”
7 So I prophesied as I was commanded. And as I prophesied, there was a sound, and behold, a rattling, and the bones came together, bone to its bone.
8 And I looked, and behold, there were sinews on them, and flesh had come upon them, and skin had covered them. But there was no breath in them.
9 Then he said to me, “Prophesy to the breath; prophesy, son of man, and say to the breath, Thus says the Lord God: Come from the four winds, O breath, and breathe on these slain, that they may live.”
10 So I prophesied as he commanded me, and the breath came into them, and they lived and stood on their feet, an exceedingly great army.
11 Then he said to me, “Son of man, these bones are the whole house of Israel. Behold, they say, ‘Our bones are dried up, and our hope is lost; we are indeed cut off.’
12 Therefore prophesy, and say to them, Thus says the Lord God: Behold, I will open your graves and raise you from your graves, O my people. And I will bring you into the land of Israel.
13 And you shall know that I am the Lord, when I open your graves, and raise you from your graves, O my people.
14 And I will put my Spirit within you, and you shall live, and I will place you in your own land. Then you shall know that I am the Lord; I have spoken, and I will do it, declares the Lord.” [2]
Zechariah spoke around 520 BCE and Ezekiel 586 BCE: They spoke over 2,500 years ago.
Can we not stand back and behold what has happened and not be marvelled?
Am Yisrael chai, the People of Israel live.
Please join me in saying it again.
Am Yisrael chai, the People of Israel live.
And again.
Am Yisrael chai, the People of Israel live.
As you leave with that thought to ponder, may you return to your homes safely. Thank you.
[1] The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Zec 8:3–8). (2016). Crossway Bibles.
[2] The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Eze 37:1–14). (2016). Crossway Bibles.
The PowerPoint Slide Deck may be found here.
UN Watch has put together a handy resource that lets anyone look up any country’s UN voting history with regarding to Israel.
Here’s a link to New Zealand’s voting record: New Zealand – UN Watch Database.
From there, you can look up any other country’s record too.
MEDIA RELEASE
19 JANUARY 2023 (Published in NZ Herald, 31 JANUARY 2023)
OPINION — Recently, there have been calls for resetting our foreign policy in respect of Israel.
For decades now, New Zealand has founded its policy on Israel on the idea of a two-state solution: the idea that a Palestinian Arab state could exist in peace alongside the modern state of Israel.
This idea is dependent on a number of assumptions:
We have sufficient history to see that each of these assumptions has been proven wrong.
Time and again, each Palestinian regime has shown that it has no appetite for peaceful co-existence with Israel. The Arab language rhetoric is clear: the annihilation of the State of Israel is the end goal, and that relentless and deadly violence will be pursued until this goal is achieved.
It is an all-or-nothing philosophy that is prepared to grind its own people into perpetual poverty and suffering. During the 2000 Camp David Summit the Palestinians were offered nearly all of their demands. Amongst anyone who is familiar with such negotiations between peoples, a truly remarkable offer.
Yet the Palestinians declined it, setting off the second intifada. The Gaza peace for land deal only resulted in even more violence. The Palestinians have now received more foreign aid than Europe did to rebuild after the Second World War. And what have they done with it? They have used it to fund hatred, murder and misery.
The Abrahamic Accords have shown that there is an appetite for peace in the Middle East. The normalisation of Israel’s relations with Sudan, Morocco, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Oman, and Jordan show this.
Even Saudi Arabia has allowed Israeli civilian aircraft to fly through its airspace. These are monumental signs that the other Arab Middle Eastern nations are tiring of Palestinian narrow-mindedness.
The current Palestinian regime will try to turn us against Israel by accusing it of not holding to Western liberal values while pushing a totalitarian society within their own jurisdictions.
Today, Israel is a shining light in the totalitarian darkness of the Middle East. It demonstrates that Middle Eastern peoples can live together in a true democracy, where their vote counts, where there is no threat of governmental coercion as to how they can vote, where one’s civil liberties are protected by law, where its citizens have access to health care, education and state welfare assistance, where Palestinian Arabs can study law and fight for justice, where people can truly live and whatever they lawfully wish.
The Palestinian Regime needs to understand that its current goal of annihilating Israel, by fostering a grievance industry that enriches its leaders through the suffering of its people, has been discredited. New Zealand has to reset its foreign policy in regard to the Middle East.
Only by showing that this current regime has no credibility, will a new regime emerge that is free of corruption and is willing to enter into genuine peace negotiations with Israel. Only by strengthening our trade and diplomatic relations with Israel will we positively reinforce the regional behaviours we so desire.
We do need a foreign policy reset. We would be fools to continue to persist with the current policy that superficially shows even-handed support to the Palestinian Arabs, and yet has had so little success in bringing peace over so many generations.
Tony Kan
President
NZ Friends of Israel Association Inc
Box 37 363
Halswell
Christchurch
New Zealand
NZ Friends of Israel Association is a registered charity that fights prejudice and intolerance through raising awareness of Jewish history and culture.
NZFOI: A thought provoking piece from the Economist. Pragmatism v Idealism? What to do when there is a clash between societies over Vision and Values? Relevant issues that Israel has to daily wrestle with. In sharing this article, NZFOI is not saying we agree with the Economists ideas. But it is useful to start reflection and discussion.
For about 15 years after the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991, Western foreign policy seemed to rest on sure foundations. Liberal values—democracy, open markets, human rights and the rule of law—had just prevailed over communism. America, the first and only global hyperpower, had the clout to impose this moral code against terrorists and tyrants. And tough love was justified, because history had shown that Western values were the uncontested formula for peace, prosperity and progress.
Another 15 years on, Western foreign policy is in a mess. To see why, consider Muhammad bin Salman, the crown prince of Saudi Arabia. Our summer double issue, featuring profiles and long reads, leads with a deeply reported portrait of mbs, as he is known. It illustrates the erosion of each of the three pillars of Western foreign policy—values, power and that historic destiny.
The moral calculus turns out to be fraught. As our profile concludes, the crown prince has a tendency to be violent and erratic and to oppress his foes. He has been held responsible for the murder of a Washington Post columnist. Yet he is also a moderniser who has liberalised Saudi society, tamed the kingdom’s clerics and given women new freedoms. Even if you doubt mbs’s reforming zeal, Saudi Arabia produces oil that could help America and its allies withstand an even more dangerous man: Vladimir Putin. Is the ethical policy to shun mbs or sup with him?
mbs also shows that American power is less imposing than it seemed 15 years ago. Saudi Arabia has been close to America since 1945, but mbs long snubbed Joe Biden by refusing to take his phone calls, instead palling up with an assertive Russia and a rising China. Saudi Arabia is key to a region that America tried to mend by invading Iraq but, although America and its allies are still formidable, the fighting has worn out voters’ willingness to see their troops act as a global police force. Their reluctance is understandable. The desert wars demonstrated that you cannot turn people into liberals by firing guns at them.
And history has bitten back. A young man in a hurry, mbs believes he can achieve Western levels of prosperity without the inconvenience of democracy or human rights. Justin Bieber and Monster-Jam motorsports sit snugly alongside his despotic rule.
mbs is not alone. China is asserting the merits of “people-centred” human rights that put peace and economic development above voting and free speech. Mr Putin has invaded Ukraine in what can be thought of as a war on Enlightenment values by a regime in thrall to a Russian brand of fascism. When Western leaders entreat the global south to stand up for the international system by condemning Mr Putin, many say that they have lost patience with preachy, hypocritical Westerners who readily invade other countries whenever it suits them.
The Economist has not lost its faith in the institutions that emerged from the Enlightenment. Liberal values are universal. Yet the West’s strategy for promoting its world-view is sputtering and America and its allies need to be clearer-eyed. They must balance what is desirable with what is possible. At the same time they must cleave to the principles that save them from the cynicism of Mr Putin’s desolate, truth-free zone. That sounds like a counsel of perfection. Can it work?
The best way for Western leaders to avoid charges of hypocrisy is to refrain from staking out moral positions they cannot sustain. While campaigning, Mr Biden pledged to treat Saudi Arabia as a “pariah”. But this month he went to Jeddah and fist-bumped mbs and was widely condemned for hypocrisy and moral cowardice. In fact, his mistake was a crowd-pleasing pledge that was always going to be a millstone in office.
Western leaders need to be honest about how much influence they really have. The assumption that the rest need the West more than the West needs the rest is less true these days. In 1991 the g7 produced 66% of global output; today, just 44%. In hindsight it was hubris to think that dictatorships could be cured of their pathologies by battalions of human-rights lawyers and market economists. Leaders ought to be clear about right and wrong, but when they weigh up whether to impose sanctions on wrongdoers they should assess the likely results rather than the appearances of virtue.
Another principle is that talking is usually good. Some say that turning up bestows legitimacy. In reality, it generates insights, creates a chance to exert influence and helps solve otherwise insoluble problems—by means of climate deals, say; or getting grain out of Ukraine; or asking al-Shabab, an affiliate of al-Qaeda, to help save Somalia from starvation. Mr Biden was right to talk to mbs. Emmanuel Macron, France’s president, is right to talk to Mr Putin. Everyone needs to talk to China’s president, Xi Jinping.
There are ways to help keep talks honest. In meetings you can have your say on human rights. You can temper your contact, as Mr Macron did after Russian troops committed war crimes. You can insist on also speaking to the opposition and to dissidents. In this and other things, Western leaders should co-ordinate with each other so that they are less likely to be picked off by a policy of divide and rule—by China over its treatment of dissidents abroad, for example, or the abuse of the Uyghur people in Xinjiang.
A last principle is to acknowledge that foreign policy, like all government, involves trade-offs. For most countries that is so obvious it hardly needs saying. But the West came to think that it could have it all. Such trade-offs need not be grubby. A clearer focus on outcomes after the Russian annexation of Crimea in 2014 might have led to more effective action by nato countries than the weak, conscience-salving sanctions they actually imposed. Unfortunately, Mr Biden’s simplistic attempt to divide the world into democracies and autocracies makes wise trade-offs harder.
Ideals and their consequences
The West has discovered that simply trying to impose its values on despots like mbs is ultimately self-defeating. Instead, it should marry pressure with persuasion and plain-speaking with patience. That may not be as gratifying as outraged denunciations and calls for boycotts and symbolic sanctions. But it is more likely to do some good.
On June 20, a year and one week after it was sworn in, Israel’s 36th government ended with a press conference. Embattled Prime Minister Naftali Bennett, by now the head of a broken and divided Yamina (“Rightwards”) party, announced that he would be stepping down as PM. He further announced that his coalition partner and current Foreign Minister Yair Lapid, the chairman of the Yesh Atid (“There is a future”) party, would become Israel’s interim PM until an election is held.
Opposition Leader Binyamin Netanyahu was trying to avert this outcome by attempting to build an alternative majority to support his own leadership without an election but, at press time, he looked unlikely to succeed.
In any case, many Israeli analysts and politicians are now referring to the outgoing eight-party ruling coalition as an “experiment” which failed.
