By Ted Belman
Carlo Strenger argues Zionism? Post-Zionism? Just give arguments. But what arguments does he give?
– What is Israel’s best survival strategy? Arens says Israel’s only viable survival strategy is to insist on some immutable right of Jews to live anywhere in historical Israel. He does not really explain how this will lead to Israel’s security and prosperity in the age of ballistic missiles and nuclear warheads. [..]
– What kind of country should Israel be? Neither Arens nor anyone else on the moderate right has ever provided an intelligible answer to this simple question. What rights will the Arab majority of the greater Land of Israel have? How can Israel be both Jewish and democratic if we do not stop the occupation? Arens has always been a liberal gentleman at heart, and I doubt he simply subscribes to some form of Jewish supremacy. Hence neither he nor lavishly funded right-wing think tanks provide an answer, because liberal democracy simply cannot be combined with disregarding the rights of other religions and ethnicities.
To ask questions is not to make an argument. He presupposes that Israel can’t be both democratic and Jewish at the same time but doesn’t define his terms and argue why. Note that he characterized right-wing think tanks as “lavishly funded”. What does that add to the argument? It assumes that the left-wing think tanks are not lavishly funded. What rights of minorities does he think are being disregarded. He doesn’t say.
But he redeems himself in the rest of the article.