America and Israel - a match made in heaven?

Remove all ads!

NOG,
yes, of course I can see a concern for the continuity of the Jewish People, in particular after what happened during the holocaust. But stuff like fertility as a political topic, pursued through the government as policy, really is are a strange, tribal thing, not to mention what it says about the roles of woman in a society (which are apparently limited to breed and be a mother). I find it extremely creepy to see the such ethnic nationalist tendencies in Israel's right wing government.

I think there's an simple explanation for why that is so: In the US liberals are accused by conservatives to bring their tree hugging, liberal pet causes into politics. It is often forgotten that conservatives have theirs. So, when ethnic nationalist tribal ultra-right wingers come into positions of power, they make their respective pet cause into official policy. Israel has simple shifted to the right in the recent years, as indicated by election results. I don't think that's a good thing for the country. How far right parts of the Israeli right exactly are is something that doesn't all that often hit the news in the US.

Here the most recent episode: Israel has recently closed off the Al-Aqsa Mosque, i.e. the Temple Mount. Why? Ultra-nationalist Jews wanted to go there to ritually slaughter goats, implicitly laying claim to the Muslim site, on which they want to rebuild the Third Temple, and reinstate the biblical rituals including animal sacrifice. In this they enjoy the full support of American Armageddonites, for whom the re-establishment of the Jewish temple in the old place (enter the story about an American Armageddonite trying to breed the red heifer ...) is, with a great Middle East war (hello Iran!), an indispensable ingredient to their end times prophecy. IMO destroying the third holiest Muslim site (the area from where Muhammad is said to have ascended to heaven) may be something a billion Muslims would probably find disagreeable (while them freaking out over it is probably expected with breathless anticipation by rapture-ready Armageddonites due to their reading of what they see as biblical prophecy), which explains why Israeli authorities, to their credit, chose to not allow it. But speak about extremist currents in Israel, and among the Armageddonites in the US.

Considering Israel's economic situation and Israel's peace and stability, they are under no threat whatsoever to be overrun by the Palestinians. The occasional rockets are all but a nuisance. To the contrary, they have them under firm and about complete control, even more so now that the separation wall has been completed. There have been no successful suicide attacks in Israel since 2006. In the words of the very pro-Likud Tom Friedmann:

So why bother to make peace and go through the inconvenience of giving up things you got used to like? Like Skiing in the Golan or Golan wine?

As an example for how tight and complete Israeli control over the Palestinians in Gaza and their everyday life is: For the first time in three years Israel allowed the shipment of shoes into Gaza

Israel asserted that shoes, like clothes, are 'dual use technology'. Under that reasoning, Israel has in the past banned the import of clothes and shoes into Gaza i.e. because shoes and clothes are worn by soldiers, these shoes and clothes, too, could be worn by soldiers, - thus they are a 'dual use technology', and thus allowing them in poses a security threat. Err ... I assume that if one puts his mind to it, one can rather easily re-label petty harassment as 'countering security threats'.

My hunch is that Netanyahu's government doesn't want peace because the status quo in the absence of either formal peace or existential threats is pretty great for them. If they made peace they could only lose - land, primarily. The Golan, nominally a part of Syria, is now settled by about 18.000 Israelis. The Golan is popular in Israel. Israelis like to go there for skiing and holidays, and Golan wine is quite popular in Israel. Peace deals, inevitably resulting in the loss of territory, can only result in losing such niceties.

Last but not least there is the annoying overuse of the term anti-Semitism for everything critical of whatever Israel does. There are real anti-Semites out there. Questions of fairness and civility aside, in the long policy of crying "wolf" over anti-Semitism is unwise, if not outright dangerous, in the long run.

 

While I understand the upset the Muslim world would feel over the Israelis taking over the Temple Mount, I have to wonder what they'd do if they were in a similar situation to the Jews. Remember, this may be the third holiest site in Islam, but it's the holiest site in Judaism and it's the key to their entire religious system of forgiveness for sins. In orthodox judaism, there is no forgiveness of sins without sacrifices at the Temple. That means that, for the last 2,000 years, all jews have been living in a perpetual state of sin and condemnation in the eyes of their God. Presumably, He's allowing for extenuating circumstances, but it's not a good situation for them.

 

NOG,
for most Jews the holiest site is the Western Wall, where they lament the destruction of the Temple. In mainstream Orthodox Judaism the rebuilding of the Temple is generally left to the coming of the Jewish Messiah and to Divine Providence. Because of that they have no interest in rebuilding the temple. They, rightly so, think that hurrying up God is plain hubris (and that is also my problem with the Armageddonites).

That is to say, most Jews read biblical prophecy different than those people. They are a radical fringe group with radical fringe views. Still, the political impact of their plans is profound.

To paraphrase the closing remarks of this article: Believers stream into Jerusalem, the site that all three religions believe will be the place of the Last Judgment. Evangelical Christians and Orthodox Jews expect their Messiah to walk down from the Mount of Olives through through the Golden Gate. Muslims believe that the Ka'aba will be transported to Jerusalem, and that all the dead will meet again in the streets of the city.

The author is absolutely right. As long as people try to exclusively 'own God', and the symbols standing for HIM, there will be blood. What foolishness.

I think there also is a lingering lesson in that what caused the destruction of the Second Temple was Jewish zealotry, even though that was before Jerusalem became the holy site for three world religions.

 

Those are some good points, Ragusa. And no, I didn't realize most Jews had left the reconstruction of the Temple to the Messiah. I agree that it isn't Man's place to rush the plans of God, though.