Quite disappointing episode. Glenn usually plays the devil’s advocate regardless of his personal opinion on any given topic. This skill was glaringly absent in this podcast. Glenn let his guest express his opinions unchallenged for almost the entire segment.
One of the few real questions Glenn posed, Mr Barton simply did not answer. Glenn didn’t even pose the question himself, he just passed on a viewpoint of a student.
Mr Bartov offered extensive sentiments on the failure of Israel. Not once did he offer any tangible steps Israel could take to address the savagery of October 7 or Hamas in general. Clearly a cease fire will accomplish nothing. How do you respond to a organization (Hamas) that openly advocates for your (State of Israel) destruction?
I missed the discussion about Hamas' rules of engagement. Prof Bartov's is wrong on too many specifics to list here and he must know this, but the reason may be driven by seeing everything through the Woke lens that those with more power are wrong for no other reason than that they have more power and that the supposedly oppressed completely lack agency and only -their- actions must be seen "in context." Not no discussion about the hostages other than hose who were killed by the IDF and somehow views the actions of Houthi s terrorizing intl shipping ass caused by Israel instead of themselves and not once did Prof Bartov mention Iran. In fact in his history he depicts this as a conflict solely between Israel and the Palestinians and dismisses Arab Israelis when all of Israel's wars have involved other Arab nations. He said that Israel only responds to pressure but forgets that Israel unilaterally left Gaza from which this attack came and does not say a single word that Hamas fighters do not wear uniforms (a violation of law) and have made the civilian infrastructure indistinguishable from the military as a feature and not a bug of their tactics.
God this guy was unconvincing. Accuses Israel of indiscriminate killing of civilians but not a word about Hamas embedding into civilian population. The Israeli right was to blame for everything after all… simpler that way! His description of female IDF telling machismo blinded higher ups about the attack felt forced and just more partisan BS. Bartov just comes across as another progressive academic, no need to even try to provide balance or nuance. Yelling genocide like yelling racism, too easy. No wonder our university students can’t think straight about this, if this guy is typical. Is this best Brown has to offer?
Why is Gaza not considered a Palestinian state?
Why don’t we hear more about Palestinian support for Hitler in the 1930s? Or is that also attributed to Netanyahu?
" it takes two to tango". The Palestinians were offered a state by GB in a 1937 partition. Again in 47 and at least twice around 2000. Never did they say " yes" .
Your guest's idea of an outside imposed settlement is a fantasy . Israel would never outsource its security and too many of the Palestinian leaders are doing just fine under the current situation.
Your guest almost exclusively spoke about Israel and its current government. He glanced over the pogrom of 10/7. He spent less than 60 seconds mentioning Iran and its proxies . Does he honestly think that a deal with the Palestinians would satisfy Iran , Hezbolla or any of Iran's other proxies?
Finally, how does he propose to eliminate Hamas without killing lots of people, given that Hamas hides within the civilian population? Your hedge fund guys have it right .
Thank you Glenn for providing us with another point of view on this dismal war. Bartov's heart seems in the right place with some forceful arguments. However, his argument really fell apart when Glenn questioned him about the UN as the international coalition that would govern Gaza, the West Bank and insure security for Israel. Bartov admitted that the UN could not provide this role. But then who exactly could do it? Iran? Britain? the U.S.? Does Bartov believe the U.S would be permanent peacekeepers? Let's say somehow international group could make this happen. How long would it be for Hamas remnants to start the acts of terrorism all over again? Not that long. No easy solution here until Palestinians admit that Israel is not going anywhere and give up on obliterating Israel. By the same token, Israel needs to respond to parts of the Palestinian narrative (although they might not agree with it).
Omer Bartov is exactly right, and the official positions and actions of the majority of Israeli parties support his statements.
I'd love to see a demographic breakdown of those unwilling to recognize Israeli extremism and terrorism is part of it's very makeup, and existed prior to the Holocaust.
To all those justifying the "Historical Homeland", it's a fool's errand to try and correct all the ills of the Roman Empire and Crusades. Every border in Eurasia and Africa would be affected.
To those thinking some self-serving storybook where an imaginary sky person gave them land has any bearing on rights to the land or borders...Bless your hearts...and I mean that in it's understood meaning with all my being.
Irgun, Lehi, Haganah...all terrorists every bit as evil as Hamas, and part of the foundation.
Ever since it's founding, Israel has denied the humanity of people that had lived there for 1000+ years, and defied UN Resolution 194 calling for reparations and a right of return for Palestinians that they'd violently attacked. The Nakba and Krystalnacht are both evil pogroms, carried out by evil people (And yes, Hamas was evil too, but on scale it pales in comparison.
Those who justify the Nakba, are just as disgusting as Holocaust deniers and those that deny the Armenian Genocide.
The lies about Israel's current murder spree are easily debunked. Israel's own numbers estimated 60k Hamas fighters in Gaza. That's 7% of males over 14. The easiest lie is 6000 Hamas fighters. That is more than the total number of adult male deaths. The more likely number, assuming they're twice as selective (which isn't likely since the bloodthirsty IDF is gunning down hostages and cripples in Christian churches) is around 1500-2000, which is a ratio of 10 innocent civilians for every Hamas fighter. And that's generous to the IDF.
Add on the targeting of reporters to cover up their crimes.
The extreme right wing in Israel is not "fringe".
Likud - 24.19% - Official position is against a 2 party state and supports the ongoing murders and theft of land of West Bank Palestinians. Platform had "From the River to the Sea" before Hamas.
Yesh Atid - 13.93% - Claims to support a two state solution, but this is a lie, as they also support the ongoing settlements.
Shas - 7.17% Opposes any restriction on settlers. Evil bonus points for "Gay people are scum and destroying Israel, but don't be violent against them (wink, wink)."
Yamina - 6.21% More "From the River to the sea", pro forced removal and against Palestinian family reunification.
Religious Zionism/Otzma Yehudit - 5.12% - Ben Gvir's party. Terrorist, racist, and very influential.
That's 56.6% that favor using settlements to shove out Palestinians, which falls under the UN definition of Genocide. I left off any that were uncertain. Many of these aren't any better than other extreme groups on LGBQTA+ rights. This is based on their own official positions.
Blue and White Coalition - 6.63% - Says two state solution, but no land concessions. I was unable to determine their position on illegal Jewish settlements being depopulated and the land returned to the rightful owners. I'm omitting them as supporting evil.
Labor - 6.09% - Only party I found so far in opposition to the Apartheid 2018 Nation State bill.
What tells us something is the words of the individual parties in Netanyahu's Coalition, and that the despicable hate speech by people like Ben-Gvir aren't the outliers that genocide and apartheid defenders claim.
It's become cliche at this point, but more and more people are being nice and telling us who they are. Israel is at the front of the line.
AIPAC's anti-Palestinian bigotry has long been apparent, and the ADL colors are finally being acknowledged as well, going after journalists and authors that have done no more than criticize the illegal, genocidal settlers, and doing the unthinkable and humanizing civilians the Israeli government calls animals.
Israel's hateful propaganda and indoctrination of children is every bit as evil as Hamas.
As a Jew (as people today like to say), I find it insulting to have Israel accused of genocide. In 75 years' time, the Palestinian population, including in Gaza and the West Bank, has gone up and up. Come on Archimedes, do you seriously think Israel is THAT incompetent?
Hopefully, Glenn will invite individuals who express the democratic views of Netanyahu's coalition. It is unhelpful for Omer Bartov to claim his "democracy" as how Israeli ought to be. Bartov's use of ethnic cleansing is polarizing. And not what is generally understood as such. Bartov's expectations are fanciful given how negotiation works in these situations, never coming close to explaining where there are willing and able Palestinian partners -- leaving the onus on Israel. He doesn't see that he expects more of Israel than any other nation facing the same circumstance. That's a double standard he should own up to.
The issue of "double standards" is important. The double standards with respect to Israel are so enormous I see no other way to explain them than as a form of antisemitism. Check out the huge number of resolutions the UN passes against Israel's 8 million or so Jews as compared to how many it passes against ALL the rest of the 8 billion people on this planet. It is obscene. Or in a different way, count the number of news stories you've seen about "civilian casualties" in the past year of fighting in, say, Sudan (in the many thousands) as compared to stories about Gaza's "civilian casualties" as asserted by the Hamas Health Ministry.
I couldn’t find a justifiable position anywhere in his discussion. Instead, this is what I hear. Forgive the analogy and rough approximation: A boy, is presented a home largely because millions of his forebears were murdered systematically. The people in this neighborhood, whom are all much bigger and in higher numbers, don’t like the boy living there, and support the aforementioned killing of this boy’s forebears, and say the home is theirs, despite the fact that the boy’s people since before recorded history have hailed from that very place. Because of the history of mass murder condoned by half the world and all of the boy’s neighbors, as well as many other attacks in which the neighbors acted first, the boy isn’t interested in talks of negotiation to give more of his home to his enemies in hopes of peace. Even so, the boy agrees to relinquish part of his home, in hopes of lessening tension between he and his neighbors. Despite the boy’s actions and efforts, the boy’s neighbors not only reject peace, but also invade his home, and drop mortar rounds and shoot into his home on a regular basis. One early morning on the morning after a significant anniversary of an event that’s important to the boy, his neighbors enter the boy’s home using the very part of his home that he relinquished in hopes of peace, and brutally rape and kill some of the boy’s family and record video footage of it and share it as widely as possible, especially with the victim’s families.
However, this is all the boy’s fault because he let his family grow too “right wing” and because he is unwilling to make further concessions, including giving more land and not seeking to find and eliminate those that entered his home illegally and murdered his family.
I’m sure this is an incomplete account of history. But I do think it’s an accurate description of the argument being presented, and it is wholly unpersuasive.
Not a bad analogy at all. When did self defense become a "right wing" thing, anyway? And of course, any "right wing" thing is automatically wrong these days.
Thanks Dr. Loury for an interesting conversation. Most of the points that I wanted to make were already mentioned by other people in the comment section, however I wanted to make two points that I did not see addressed.
1.) Amalek - I have so often heard secular people cite people making the claim that when Israelis compare Hamas to Amalek they are rooting for genocide. For those not familiar with the biblical story, the raison d'etre of Amalek was to exterminate the Israelites. The charter of Hamas reflects a common goal with Amalek. My question is, did it ever cross anyone's mind that the reference to Amalek is not a call for genocide but rather a description of the people who WANT TO DO the genocide?
2.) I find it interesting when people who criticize Israel act as if any positive view of Israel is some benighted and sheltered version they learned in their Hebrew Sunday School classes. War is ugly, it can be true both that Israeli soldiers made bad choices in incredibly insane circumstances (guerrilla warfare where the enemy is literally using their civilians as shields and props to attack you from) and all things considered it is the most moral army considering the circumstances. This is not just Israeli hubris, it is also echoed by American and British military experts. The last time Germany fought a war was World war II, so I think it's a bit disingenuous too cite what their guide book says as a valid comparison for battle strategy.
Although there are some of Professor Bartov's conclusions and takes that I do not agree with, many of his observations are spot on. And they are opinions very much shared in Israel.
Israel's society is divided as well, and what this government has tried to do is just a dismantling of Israeli democracy, an attainment that most Israelis were extremely proud of.
Strangely it may seem, but not so much in truth, the religious radicalisation of the Arab world around Israel has caused a progressive religious radicalisation in Israel as well. And it is bad.
It is also (aside from demographic factors) the consequence of living under constant attack. It is hard for foreigners to truly understand what it means to be used to, every day, hear two or three missile alarms and having to leave the place you are in and take shelter. People get used to it, but it works strange things inside. Constant aggression breeds fear, and fear breeds hatred.
Hamas knows this. Hamas keeps the Palestinians in thrall (do please listen to the Voices from Gaza linked off the Free Press of Bari Weiss) and Hamas has baited Israel into a war that is making Israel lose support all over the world, a war that may satisfy us but will not destroy Hamas. Ehud Olmert is not a progressive fool, and he has explained the problem very well.
Today Israel is an island besieged in the midst of a hostile sea, more than it ever was. I do not see a clear solution, nor a solution for hope. It is certainly not a solution that can be found by Israel's present extremist and corrupt government. Bartov is totally right that Netanyahu's government is in many ways a mirror of Hamas. And the blood of Rabin is on the far right ideology that now has poisoned too many of our youth -- and that still continues to launch campaigns for the release of Rabin's unrepentant murderer.
The day that an Israeli Jew committed murder for religious reasons was the day that Israel discovered in its midst a religious fundamentalist ideology very much similar to fundamentalist Islam. Both declare that God leads their actions. Both despise the secular characters of their society (in the case of Israel, the established secular nature of the state) and want to transform it into a theocracy not dissimilar from Iran, just ruled by Rabbis instead of Imams.
You may want to look into Har Hamor Yeshiva, and Mr Tavi Maoz and his acolytes, who want to re-educate the whole of Israel through compulsory schooling in their version of religion and establish THEIR halakha as the law of the land, replacing secular law and right ideas. These people are not dissimilar, in their hatred of Western Enlightenement and rational values, from our woke decolonisers, and from the fundamentalists of every religion.
If you love Israel, you cannot support Netanyahu and his government, for they are working to transform Israel in something that you would never recognise. And they are using the war to push this both internally and externally. Netanyahu paid Hamas, and some may say that it was a miscalculation and that he hoped that they would stay put. Netanyahu sent the troops away from the Gaza border to intimidate the Arabs of the West Bank while the settlers there celebrated. Someone else has to get the helm of the state before it is too late.
And believe me, these are the opinions of half at least the Israeli population, and of the majority of the kibbutznikim whose families were massacred on October 7, whose loved ones are being held hostages.
The situation is not simple, nor black and white, nor easy to solve. Israel is not innocent of wrongs. The Palestinians are far from innocent of violence. But until both rise above the hatred and agree to talk about the future, hope is dead.
There are bad actors in the region, who will not cease to create war and horrors until their ideology is vanquished. And there is a culture clash, like Benny Morris says.
Unfortunately the culture that surrounds Israel (a culture that never has acknowledged the separation of church and state, like most of the world has not -- and is today encouraged by our "liberal" friends to despise the entirety of Western values), this culture has contaminated Israel itself. And this is the greatest challenge that what I call civilisation is facing in the millennium. Because it is the threat of unreason from within... and then, if it wins, whoever wins the other wars becomes irrelevant. There will be no more civilisation as we know it, but only tribes in conflict, where Might makes Right.
It's funny how quickly Israelis, in the midst of this cosmic showdown of fascism versus democracy, were able to form a unity government in the face of Hamas' war of extermination. What this cosmic showdown seems to be all about is mainly the battle over Israel's Supreme Court, which has vastly more power than ours does or ever would be permitted to have even by the left. Yes, there is a culture clash in Israel. And yes, a small fringe religious party is part of Netanyahu's coalition. But it is over the top to say, "If you love Israel, you cannot support Netanyahu and his government." Netanyahu has been a key figure in Israeli politics for two decades, and he most recently cobbled together a coalition entirely within the bounds of the way Israel's parliamentary system works. But suddenly in this conflict over the Court we are supposed to see him as the enemy?
You point out that Netanyahu "paid Hamas." Yes, as did all of Israel for a long time, through three other vicious attacks by Hamas in Gaza, in hopes that Hamas would settle down and govern. So, in that sense, Netanyahu was every bit as much a part of the wishful thinking as all the rest of Israeli society, all of it that does not want war. Now, according to Bartov, Netanyahu is suddenly "echoing genocide." So, which is it, Netanyahu the appeaser or Netanyahu the war criminal? What exactly is it we are all supposed to fear so terribly much?
Has Hamas ever given an estimate of how many of those Palestinians deaths are Hamas fighters?
BTW, should Israel get reparations for being attacked by several Arab countries in 1967?
I am still listening to the podcast, the part where he talks about the Gaza debris. But at no point, yet, has he dealt with the fact that Hamas uses the population as human shield.
A minor point worth adding to your first sentence. Bartov at one point makes a claim about how so many of the dead are under the age of 18. Given the way Hamas works with UNRWA to run schools as training camps for martyrs, does anyone think male Hamas fighters are all 18 or older. How many child soldiers are among the children Hamas says have died in Gaza?
Quite disappointing episode. Glenn usually plays the devil’s advocate regardless of his personal opinion on any given topic. This skill was glaringly absent in this podcast. Glenn let his guest express his opinions unchallenged for almost the entire segment.
One of the few real questions Glenn posed, Mr Barton simply did not answer. Glenn didn’t even pose the question himself, he just passed on a viewpoint of a student.
Mr Bartov offered extensive sentiments on the failure of Israel. Not once did he offer any tangible steps Israel could take to address the savagery of October 7 or Hamas in general. Clearly a cease fire will accomplish nothing. How do you respond to a organization (Hamas) that openly advocates for your (State of Israel) destruction?
I want my devil’s advocate back.
I missed the discussion about Hamas' rules of engagement. Prof Bartov's is wrong on too many specifics to list here and he must know this, but the reason may be driven by seeing everything through the Woke lens that those with more power are wrong for no other reason than that they have more power and that the supposedly oppressed completely lack agency and only -their- actions must be seen "in context." Not no discussion about the hostages other than hose who were killed by the IDF and somehow views the actions of Houthi s terrorizing intl shipping ass caused by Israel instead of themselves and not once did Prof Bartov mention Iran. In fact in his history he depicts this as a conflict solely between Israel and the Palestinians and dismisses Arab Israelis when all of Israel's wars have involved other Arab nations. He said that Israel only responds to pressure but forgets that Israel unilaterally left Gaza from which this attack came and does not say a single word that Hamas fighters do not wear uniforms (a violation of law) and have made the civilian infrastructure indistinguishable from the military as a feature and not a bug of their tactics.
God this guy was unconvincing. Accuses Israel of indiscriminate killing of civilians but not a word about Hamas embedding into civilian population. The Israeli right was to blame for everything after all… simpler that way! His description of female IDF telling machismo blinded higher ups about the attack felt forced and just more partisan BS. Bartov just comes across as another progressive academic, no need to even try to provide balance or nuance. Yelling genocide like yelling racism, too easy. No wonder our university students can’t think straight about this, if this guy is typical. Is this best Brown has to offer?
Why is Gaza not considered a Palestinian state?
Why don’t we hear more about Palestinian support for Hitler in the 1930s? Or is that also attributed to Netanyahu?
No, sorry, don't send the Gazans here to Canada. We don't want them for the same reason the Middle East doesn't: Hamas.
You , Glenn, Will remember the old song
" it takes two to tango". The Palestinians were offered a state by GB in a 1937 partition. Again in 47 and at least twice around 2000. Never did they say " yes" .
Your guest's idea of an outside imposed settlement is a fantasy . Israel would never outsource its security and too many of the Palestinian leaders are doing just fine under the current situation.
Your guest almost exclusively spoke about Israel and its current government. He glanced over the pogrom of 10/7. He spent less than 60 seconds mentioning Iran and its proxies . Does he honestly think that a deal with the Palestinians would satisfy Iran , Hezbolla or any of Iran's other proxies?
Finally, how does he propose to eliminate Hamas without killing lots of people, given that Hamas hides within the civilian population? Your hedge fund guys have it right .
Thank you Glenn for providing us with another point of view on this dismal war. Bartov's heart seems in the right place with some forceful arguments. However, his argument really fell apart when Glenn questioned him about the UN as the international coalition that would govern Gaza, the West Bank and insure security for Israel. Bartov admitted that the UN could not provide this role. But then who exactly could do it? Iran? Britain? the U.S.? Does Bartov believe the U.S would be permanent peacekeepers? Let's say somehow international group could make this happen. How long would it be for Hamas remnants to start the acts of terrorism all over again? Not that long. No easy solution here until Palestinians admit that Israel is not going anywhere and give up on obliterating Israel. By the same token, Israel needs to respond to parts of the Palestinian narrative (although they might not agree with it).
Omer Bartov is exactly right, and the official positions and actions of the majority of Israeli parties support his statements.
I'd love to see a demographic breakdown of those unwilling to recognize Israeli extremism and terrorism is part of it's very makeup, and existed prior to the Holocaust.
To all those justifying the "Historical Homeland", it's a fool's errand to try and correct all the ills of the Roman Empire and Crusades. Every border in Eurasia and Africa would be affected.
To those thinking some self-serving storybook where an imaginary sky person gave them land has any bearing on rights to the land or borders...Bless your hearts...and I mean that in it's understood meaning with all my being.
Irgun, Lehi, Haganah...all terrorists every bit as evil as Hamas, and part of the foundation.
Ever since it's founding, Israel has denied the humanity of people that had lived there for 1000+ years, and defied UN Resolution 194 calling for reparations and a right of return for Palestinians that they'd violently attacked. The Nakba and Krystalnacht are both evil pogroms, carried out by evil people (And yes, Hamas was evil too, but on scale it pales in comparison.
Those who justify the Nakba, are just as disgusting as Holocaust deniers and those that deny the Armenian Genocide.
The lies about Israel's current murder spree are easily debunked. Israel's own numbers estimated 60k Hamas fighters in Gaza. That's 7% of males over 14. The easiest lie is 6000 Hamas fighters. That is more than the total number of adult male deaths. The more likely number, assuming they're twice as selective (which isn't likely since the bloodthirsty IDF is gunning down hostages and cripples in Christian churches) is around 1500-2000, which is a ratio of 10 innocent civilians for every Hamas fighter. And that's generous to the IDF.
Add on the targeting of reporters to cover up their crimes.
The extreme right wing in Israel is not "fringe".
Likud - 24.19% - Official position is against a 2 party state and supports the ongoing murders and theft of land of West Bank Palestinians. Platform had "From the River to the Sea" before Hamas.
Yesh Atid - 13.93% - Claims to support a two state solution, but this is a lie, as they also support the ongoing settlements.
Shas - 7.17% Opposes any restriction on settlers. Evil bonus points for "Gay people are scum and destroying Israel, but don't be violent against them (wink, wink)."
Yamina - 6.21% More "From the River to the sea", pro forced removal and against Palestinian family reunification.
Religious Zionism/Otzma Yehudit - 5.12% - Ben Gvir's party. Terrorist, racist, and very influential.
That's 56.6% that favor using settlements to shove out Palestinians, which falls under the UN definition of Genocide. I left off any that were uncertain. Many of these aren't any better than other extreme groups on LGBQTA+ rights. This is based on their own official positions.
Blue and White Coalition - 6.63% - Says two state solution, but no land concessions. I was unable to determine their position on illegal Jewish settlements being depopulated and the land returned to the rightful owners. I'm omitting them as supporting evil.
Labor - 6.09% - Only party I found so far in opposition to the Apartheid 2018 Nation State bill.
The bilious tone in this is breathtaking. But I guess that tells us something.
What tells us something is the words of the individual parties in Netanyahu's Coalition, and that the despicable hate speech by people like Ben-Gvir aren't the outliers that genocide and apartheid defenders claim.
It's become cliche at this point, but more and more people are being nice and telling us who they are. Israel is at the front of the line.
AIPAC's anti-Palestinian bigotry has long been apparent, and the ADL colors are finally being acknowledged as well, going after journalists and authors that have done no more than criticize the illegal, genocidal settlers, and doing the unthinkable and humanizing civilians the Israeli government calls animals.
Israel's hateful propaganda and indoctrination of children is every bit as evil as Hamas.
https://www.snopes.com/news/2023/11/20/israeli-children-singing-annihilate-gaza/
As a Jew (as people today like to say), I find it insulting to have Israel accused of genocide. In 75 years' time, the Palestinian population, including in Gaza and the West Bank, has gone up and up. Come on Archimedes, do you seriously think Israel is THAT incompetent?
Always good to hear these people flush out their ideas.
Thank you Glenn
Hopefully, Glenn will invite individuals who express the democratic views of Netanyahu's coalition. It is unhelpful for Omer Bartov to claim his "democracy" as how Israeli ought to be. Bartov's use of ethnic cleansing is polarizing. And not what is generally understood as such. Bartov's expectations are fanciful given how negotiation works in these situations, never coming close to explaining where there are willing and able Palestinian partners -- leaving the onus on Israel. He doesn't see that he expects more of Israel than any other nation facing the same circumstance. That's a double standard he should own up to.
The issue of "double standards" is important. The double standards with respect to Israel are so enormous I see no other way to explain them than as a form of antisemitism. Check out the huge number of resolutions the UN passes against Israel's 8 million or so Jews as compared to how many it passes against ALL the rest of the 8 billion people on this planet. It is obscene. Or in a different way, count the number of news stories you've seen about "civilian casualties" in the past year of fighting in, say, Sudan (in the many thousands) as compared to stories about Gaza's "civilian casualties" as asserted by the Hamas Health Ministry.
Yeah...that is what I fear, but I think I'm going to take the plunge, allowing myself to quit as you did if necessary!
I couldn’t find a justifiable position anywhere in his discussion. Instead, this is what I hear. Forgive the analogy and rough approximation: A boy, is presented a home largely because millions of his forebears were murdered systematically. The people in this neighborhood, whom are all much bigger and in higher numbers, don’t like the boy living there, and support the aforementioned killing of this boy’s forebears, and say the home is theirs, despite the fact that the boy’s people since before recorded history have hailed from that very place. Because of the history of mass murder condoned by half the world and all of the boy’s neighbors, as well as many other attacks in which the neighbors acted first, the boy isn’t interested in talks of negotiation to give more of his home to his enemies in hopes of peace. Even so, the boy agrees to relinquish part of his home, in hopes of lessening tension between he and his neighbors. Despite the boy’s actions and efforts, the boy’s neighbors not only reject peace, but also invade his home, and drop mortar rounds and shoot into his home on a regular basis. One early morning on the morning after a significant anniversary of an event that’s important to the boy, his neighbors enter the boy’s home using the very part of his home that he relinquished in hopes of peace, and brutally rape and kill some of the boy’s family and record video footage of it and share it as widely as possible, especially with the victim’s families.
However, this is all the boy’s fault because he let his family grow too “right wing” and because he is unwilling to make further concessions, including giving more land and not seeking to find and eliminate those that entered his home illegally and murdered his family.
I’m sure this is an incomplete account of history. But I do think it’s an accurate description of the argument being presented, and it is wholly unpersuasive.
Not a bad analogy at all. When did self defense become a "right wing" thing, anyway? And of course, any "right wing" thing is automatically wrong these days.
Also,
I’m referring to this being posited as part of the reason that Israel is at fault by Glenn’s guest.
I don’t have a date specifically but probably right around the time that fitness, punctuality and well-kept green lawns did.
Thanks Dr. Loury for an interesting conversation. Most of the points that I wanted to make were already mentioned by other people in the comment section, however I wanted to make two points that I did not see addressed.
1.) Amalek - I have so often heard secular people cite people making the claim that when Israelis compare Hamas to Amalek they are rooting for genocide. For those not familiar with the biblical story, the raison d'etre of Amalek was to exterminate the Israelites. The charter of Hamas reflects a common goal with Amalek. My question is, did it ever cross anyone's mind that the reference to Amalek is not a call for genocide but rather a description of the people who WANT TO DO the genocide?
2.) I find it interesting when people who criticize Israel act as if any positive view of Israel is some benighted and sheltered version they learned in their Hebrew Sunday School classes. War is ugly, it can be true both that Israeli soldiers made bad choices in incredibly insane circumstances (guerrilla warfare where the enemy is literally using their civilians as shields and props to attack you from) and all things considered it is the most moral army considering the circumstances. This is not just Israeli hubris, it is also echoed by American and British military experts. The last time Germany fought a war was World war II, so I think it's a bit disingenuous too cite what their guide book says as a valid comparison for battle strategy.
Good point about Amalek.
I’m a great admirer of Professor Bartov, Glenn, and this interview did not disappoint. Thank you!
BTW, I take it everyone knows that Arafat was gay. Married with a daughter, but gay.
Thank you, Glenn.
Although there are some of Professor Bartov's conclusions and takes that I do not agree with, many of his observations are spot on. And they are opinions very much shared in Israel.
Israel's society is divided as well, and what this government has tried to do is just a dismantling of Israeli democracy, an attainment that most Israelis were extremely proud of.
Strangely it may seem, but not so much in truth, the religious radicalisation of the Arab world around Israel has caused a progressive religious radicalisation in Israel as well. And it is bad.
It is also (aside from demographic factors) the consequence of living under constant attack. It is hard for foreigners to truly understand what it means to be used to, every day, hear two or three missile alarms and having to leave the place you are in and take shelter. People get used to it, but it works strange things inside. Constant aggression breeds fear, and fear breeds hatred.
Hamas knows this. Hamas keeps the Palestinians in thrall (do please listen to the Voices from Gaza linked off the Free Press of Bari Weiss) and Hamas has baited Israel into a war that is making Israel lose support all over the world, a war that may satisfy us but will not destroy Hamas. Ehud Olmert is not a progressive fool, and he has explained the problem very well.
Today Israel is an island besieged in the midst of a hostile sea, more than it ever was. I do not see a clear solution, nor a solution for hope. It is certainly not a solution that can be found by Israel's present extremist and corrupt government. Bartov is totally right that Netanyahu's government is in many ways a mirror of Hamas. And the blood of Rabin is on the far right ideology that now has poisoned too many of our youth -- and that still continues to launch campaigns for the release of Rabin's unrepentant murderer.
The day that an Israeli Jew committed murder for religious reasons was the day that Israel discovered in its midst a religious fundamentalist ideology very much similar to fundamentalist Islam. Both declare that God leads their actions. Both despise the secular characters of their society (in the case of Israel, the established secular nature of the state) and want to transform it into a theocracy not dissimilar from Iran, just ruled by Rabbis instead of Imams.
You may want to look into Har Hamor Yeshiva, and Mr Tavi Maoz and his acolytes, who want to re-educate the whole of Israel through compulsory schooling in their version of religion and establish THEIR halakha as the law of the land, replacing secular law and right ideas. These people are not dissimilar, in their hatred of Western Enlightenement and rational values, from our woke decolonisers, and from the fundamentalists of every religion.
If you love Israel, you cannot support Netanyahu and his government, for they are working to transform Israel in something that you would never recognise. And they are using the war to push this both internally and externally. Netanyahu paid Hamas, and some may say that it was a miscalculation and that he hoped that they would stay put. Netanyahu sent the troops away from the Gaza border to intimidate the Arabs of the West Bank while the settlers there celebrated. Someone else has to get the helm of the state before it is too late.
And believe me, these are the opinions of half at least the Israeli population, and of the majority of the kibbutznikim whose families were massacred on October 7, whose loved ones are being held hostages.
The situation is not simple, nor black and white, nor easy to solve. Israel is not innocent of wrongs. The Palestinians are far from innocent of violence. But until both rise above the hatred and agree to talk about the future, hope is dead.
There are bad actors in the region, who will not cease to create war and horrors until their ideology is vanquished. And there is a culture clash, like Benny Morris says.
Unfortunately the culture that surrounds Israel (a culture that never has acknowledged the separation of church and state, like most of the world has not -- and is today encouraged by our "liberal" friends to despise the entirety of Western values), this culture has contaminated Israel itself. And this is the greatest challenge that what I call civilisation is facing in the millennium. Because it is the threat of unreason from within... and then, if it wins, whoever wins the other wars becomes irrelevant. There will be no more civilisation as we know it, but only tribes in conflict, where Might makes Right.
It's funny how quickly Israelis, in the midst of this cosmic showdown of fascism versus democracy, were able to form a unity government in the face of Hamas' war of extermination. What this cosmic showdown seems to be all about is mainly the battle over Israel's Supreme Court, which has vastly more power than ours does or ever would be permitted to have even by the left. Yes, there is a culture clash in Israel. And yes, a small fringe religious party is part of Netanyahu's coalition. But it is over the top to say, "If you love Israel, you cannot support Netanyahu and his government." Netanyahu has been a key figure in Israeli politics for two decades, and he most recently cobbled together a coalition entirely within the bounds of the way Israel's parliamentary system works. But suddenly in this conflict over the Court we are supposed to see him as the enemy?
You point out that Netanyahu "paid Hamas." Yes, as did all of Israel for a long time, through three other vicious attacks by Hamas in Gaza, in hopes that Hamas would settle down and govern. So, in that sense, Netanyahu was every bit as much a part of the wishful thinking as all the rest of Israeli society, all of it that does not want war. Now, according to Bartov, Netanyahu is suddenly "echoing genocide." So, which is it, Netanyahu the appeaser or Netanyahu the war criminal? What exactly is it we are all supposed to fear so terribly much?
Has Hamas ever given an estimate of how many of those Palestinians deaths are Hamas fighters?
BTW, should Israel get reparations for being attacked by several Arab countries in 1967?
I am still listening to the podcast, the part where he talks about the Gaza debris. But at no point, yet, has he dealt with the fact that Hamas uses the population as human shield.
A minor point worth adding to your first sentence. Bartov at one point makes a claim about how so many of the dead are under the age of 18. Given the way Hamas works with UNRWA to run schools as training camps for martyrs, does anyone think male Hamas fighters are all 18 or older. How many child soldiers are among the children Hamas says have died in Gaza?