SNIRLEVI.COM — Snir Levi שניר לוי

In their recent interviews with Jake Tapper on CNN's State of the Union, U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton are asked about the issue of disproportionality in Israel's 'Operation Protective Edge' (The Israel-Gaza Conflict/War in 2014). This issue has now become more than just an ethical question -- it has become a very politicized 'hot topic' in the Democratic primaries following Bernie Sanders' self-admitted mistake of recently condoning Israel's "killing of 10,000 innocent Gazan civilians its 'recent war on Gaza'" -- a huge overestimate. He was corrected, and has taken ownership of his mistake and has noted, that a more accurate figure is that of 2,100 Gazan civilians killed in the crossfire. While to the naked eye this might seem to be yet another example of popular media channels' tendency to hyper-focus on and 'tabloidize' candidates' slips-of-the-tongue both for ratings and vested political and economic interests, to us Israeli or Jewish Americans -- and all other American supporters of an eventual Two-State Solution -- peace in the region (whether we believe it be a matter of fiction or reality, yet choose to believe and work towards it rather than reject the idea altogether,) the interviews with both candidates raise some important issues I would like to point out.

1. Bernie Sanders' Ignorance on Israel-Hamas Conflicts Suggests Weakness in Foreign Policy

Sanders' misrepresentation of the most recent conflict's death toll is only the tip of the iceberg of his very 'surface level' contextual understanding of Israel-Palestine. Sanders' blanket statements on the issue reflect a lack of orientation to accurate and balanced historical and political detail in popular discourse on the wars between Israel and Hamas. Sanders' regard of "the Palestinian people" and "Gaza" as one entity (i.e., "Israel's disproportionate offensives on the Palestinian people" without addressing the dynamic on the ground which is much more complex). For one, Gaza is more like a rogue terrorist cell in which overcrowded innocents are caught in the traps of conflict and an extremist terrorist organization's rule, whereas the West Bank is subject to completely different circumstances. In this interview -- more importantly -- Sanders shows no understanding of what led Israel to its 'disproportionate' attack on Gaza, both in terms historical context (Hamas' "chronic rocket rain" of rockets on Israel on a daily basis for years on end), and Israel's military strategy to wipe out the source of these rockets.

Gaza is ruled by Hamas, while the West Bank's Ramallah is ruled by Fatah, a much more moderate party with whom Israeli moderate parties hope to return to the negotiating table with for an eventual peace agreement. Hillary Clinton undoubtedly has a better grasp of these details as made clear through her detailed discussions on the issue of Israel-Palestine. While Hamas is internationally recognized as a terrorist organization with links to Al Qaeda and other groups, pro-Palestinians who support a one-state solution call them 'liberators of Palestine.' This enters a dangerous arena of distortions and conflicting analyses of history, wars, etc. -- a very complex arena in which most recognize Israel as a legitimate post-Holocaust refuge for Jews as supported by most UN member states in 1948 while some claim it to be a 'colonialist, racist, imperialist force' due to the subjugation of Palestinian innocents to a complex society in which its leaders are more interested in 'forcefully resisting' (suicide bombings, rocket attacks on Israel to 'liberate Palestine',) instead of negotiating a two-state solution with Israeli moderates. This reality unfortunately requires an omnipresence of Israeli security and intelligence forces be placed at the borders, and sometimes within, Palestinian territories; until their civil disputes meet at a moderate 'midpoint' (as should be mediated by moderate Israeli parties, American foreign affairs parties, and other Western allies' economic interventions such as lifting of sanctions and the building of a highly surveilled port -- supporting the creation of an impressive rather than an oppressive society, which encourages individuals to turn to terrorism, all the while continuing to manage/prevent the terrorism itself.)

No matter your position on the issue at large, one cannot ignore the final goal stated in Hamas' constitution and shared by all Hamas supporters: the eradication of the 68 year old, well-established State of Israel -- a home for all Jewish people following the horrors of the Holocaust, with Arab-Israeli and Christian-Israeli minority populations -- a thriving democracy, which amidst constant attacks by enemy neighbors, is still fighting to remain as democratic as could possibly be amidst the circumstances. Granted the key issue here is Israel's lax policies on settlement expansion, often backed up by claims of 'religious rights to the land', which Israel's secular centrist-left and left parties adamantly argue border "ethnocratic" and "fascist" rule as opposed to sticking to Israel's democratic roots. Thankfully, fruitful debate within Israel about these issues exists (how do we maintain democratic principles while being forced to occupy others?) -- the moderate parties within Israel (namely labour, Meretz, centrist parties and our very left-leaning Supreme Court) are doing their best for Israel to remain a truly democratic state realizing this would have to entail a two-state solution.

Additionally, Bernie fails to discuss what led to the recent war between Israel and Hamas. Prior to the most recent offensive by Israel, Israeli intelligence discovered that Hamas has dug tunnels to reach Israeli territory, and it has indeed done that in the areas of Israel closest to the Gaza strip -- with terrorists ("freedom fighters") emerging with rifles and shotguns aimlessly/blindly shooting at civilians to 'liberate Palestine' in the name of 'Allah'. Prior to this discovery, Hamas has been shooting hundreds of rockets on Israeli towns for years -- and still does. Each Israeli offensive aims to target these sources of terrorism/terrorist cells, but civilian deaths are unavoidable for they are caught in 'the crossfire' in a very dense region. Each Israeli 'defensive offensive' achieves some sort of temporary ceasefire -- temporary peace -- but of course only perpetuates more hatred on the Palestinian side. Which gets me to my next point:

2. Bernie Sanders' "Genius" on Israel-Palestine

Despite the damage that the lack of Israeli context in his pro-Palestinian statements poses in perpetuating popular ignorance on the issue; Bernie Sanders' "genius" lies in him being the first American candidate for presidency to blatantly point out that Palestinian oppression needs to be mediated by the United States and seriously addressed in talking about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as part of a balanced conversation about the conflict in the region. This falls in line with Israel's Labour party's rhetoric (while this statement is 'revolutionary' in an American electoral context, this has been brainstormed, discussed and argued in the Israeli Knesset for the majority of Israel's existence). This address can lead to innovations in foreign policy and mediation in the region. But, progressive statements and moves must be rooted in a fully contextualized comprehension of the region; a Sanders administration would have to educate itself much more thoroughly on the complexities, the minutia of the conflict (i.e. Sanders not knowing who Ambassador Michael Oren is in this interview - almost unbelievable), in order to truly make a good team with what I hope to be a future centrist/centrist-left Israeli government representing Israel's large "peace camp".

3. What Hillary's Doing Wrong

Hillary Clinton's one-sided pro-Israel statements might be a smart political strategy for her more conservative-Democratic audience to yield her more votes (she certainly knows her audience!), but is counterproductive in achieving what Sanders and many leftist Israeli politicians have understood for years: that change begins with discourse, and that discussing plans for bettering conditions in Palestinian society should be addressed in discussing the conflict. Sanders fails to do so with context in mind, and Hillary has yet to lay out a plan for this in the current electoral process.

Indeed, as you will see in the attached video, Clinton strictly sticks to a strong pro-Israel stance. Her statements are all very important, but without addressing the reality that poor Palestinian conditions on the ground perpetuate an endless cycle of hopelessness amongst their people, especially Gazan youth who have a propensity to become radicalized into fundamentalist islamic ideology and terrorism, she overlooks an integral part of the issue. What can be gained from addressing some of these Palestinian issues in popular interviews is paving the way back to the negotiating table through discourse; making clear that America's role is to both defend Israel's right to exist in security as a Jewish democracy, all the while mediating the conflict and backing moderate parties within the territories who are pro-two states and stand against terrorism.

4. Discussing the Role of Islamic Fundamentalism within Palestinian society *a must* in any candidate's address of Israel-Hamas Conflicts

Undoubtedly Islamic fundamentalism's tendency to chant 'death to America' and 'death to Israel' in its discourse is as rampant as ever and informs the current zeitgeist in Palestinian territories, as reflected for example in Palestinian national television's children's cartoons, teaching their children that "the Jews" are 'pigs that should be slaughtered', and so forth and so on. Both Clinton nor Sanders should shy away from speaking about it. This should not be a partisan issue.