In an opinion post on Haaretz today, Gideon Levy calls Israelis racist, arguing:

The thought of MK Ahmed Tibi or someone like him ever being prime minister is the greatest, most horrible threat hanging over our heads. Worse than the Iranian bomb. This is the ultimate intimidation weapon against all Israeli Jews.

Mr Levy goes far to compare Israelis fear of an Arab PM to that that of some Americans of a black president.

What is this nonsense, Mr Levy?

Tibi is no Obama. His agenda is clear and consistent (unlike most other Israeli MPs). In Levy’s own words:

Tibi, of course, will never be prime minister here, and it’s doubtful whether he’d want to. His heart is with his people, the Palestinians.

I remember people saying many things about Obama during his presidential campaign, but never that him being black is anti-American. Tibi, on the other hand, openly rejects the spirit in which Israel was founded. Preferring Bibi on Tibi, as strange as it may sound to you, Mr. Levy, could be driven by many things, but not necessary racism. That is just cheap demagogy.

Disclosure: The author considers himself on the left side of the Israeli political spectrum and reads Gideon Levy’s columns religiously (no pan intended).

So the PLO executive committee approves proximity talks with Israel. What is this nonsense? Why not just sit to the table and negotiate? On the most difficult issues and with honest intentions to finish this long conflict once and for all? It’s not like the two parties are stranger dogs who need to sniff each other for the first time. They need to overcome a broken trust, you say; it’s because of past failures. But is it really?

Why should the Israel leadership trust their Palestinian counterparts who had many opportunities in the past to switch from a violent to peaceful struggle, who nurture hatred teachings in schools, abuse its own people with fake democracy, deprive it of the generous international funding and do nothing to install necessary institutions for a sovereign functioning state?

And why should the Palestinians leadership trust the Israeli government, whose head is like a lame duck after surrounding himself with delusional extremists, who continues to build in the west-bank which has never been and will never be part of an internationally recognized Israel, and who would rather send its bullying army to abuse a miserable population rather than deal with real threats, such as Iran and Hezbollah?

Here is the scoop: both sides do not really want to change the status quo. They don’t have the balls and the willingness to make peace. These are not Begin and Sadat, or Rabin and King Hussein. The current pathetic leadership would rather have ceremonies and sit around tables piled with food that could sustain 10 Palestinians families, or help 10 Israeli ones make an honest living in the economically struggling periphery.

We don’t need another round of inert blah blah. The people of both nations, Israelies and Palestinians, should call upon their respective impotent leaders to fulfil their historical obligation and work out a solution – not sometimes in the future, not when a million conditions are met. Now! It is not about about a broken trust between the parties – it’s about trusting our own leaders to do the right thing for our children.

In response to your opinion post on YNet today.

Dear sir,

I think you are absolutely wrong (was about to say ‘full of shit’ but having read some of your other writings I know it is not so).

You ask if BGU is a Zionist institution? The answer is Yes and if there is one talkback you should read, it’s 147 (not mine, but same spirit).

Dr Gordon is right in claiming that Israel is turning into an apartheid state as long as the occupation is going on – he is not the first one, smarter people have said it for years. However, he is definitely wrong in calling for a ban on Israel and Israeli academia. It is a cowardly move by a person who is funded by the same institutions which he criticizes. A more noble approach would be to: a) try to change the system from within, b) resign and criticize the academia as a non-zionist citizen, or c) leave the country and do whatever the heck he wants. Now please don’t throw the conditioned ‘fascist’ response at me – I think it’s vital that we have public debates and in fact (as you can see from my opening) my political views are far from being right.

As a BGU graduate I can tell you that I strongly support Prof. Carmi – BGU is indeed a Zionist institution and carries the vision advocated by Ben Gurion. Where is the shame in that? Furthermore, every state funded Israeli university, including yours, is Zionist institution and makes great efforts to entice and encourage young academics to immigrate to Israel and strengthen it’s academic ranks – why are you so uncomfortable with that?

Introspection and criticism are the corner stones of an intelligent discussion, but they must be done with dignity and courage, which neither you or Dr Gordon demonstrate.

Sincerely,

Nadav Zin.