Foxman smartens up.

Yesterday Ron Torossian wrote

[..] Uncle Abe Foxman of the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) guaranteed himself a spot at President Obama’s Passover Seder this year – by selling out Israel.

Knesset Member Motti Yogev gave an interview this week where he said that American Secretary of State John Kerry is not a fair mediator in peace talks because he has “anti-Israel roots,” and Kerry seeks “unequivocal answers that could only mean shrinking Israel’s borders.” Yogev continued on to state that Netanyahu has to maneuver under Kerry’s relentlessness and “unprofessionalism, which may also have anti-Semitic undertones to it.”

The ADL demanded that Yogev apologize to Kerry for his “disparaging comments” and accusations that were “offensive, inflammatory and totally without any basis.”


Subscribe to Israpundit Daily Digest for Free

Foxman claimed that “…while you and other members of the Israeli government and Knesset may disagree – even strongly object – to the initiatives of the US and Secretary Kerry, it is beyond the bounds of legitimate critique to disparage the intent of the Secretary’s intensive commitment to and investment in the negotiations, and simply indefensible to accuse him of harboring anti-Jewish beliefs.”

Foxman is wrong and Yogev is right.

No matter where one may stand on the political map, Israel is subject to intense pressure, unlike the Palestinian Arabs. There can be no question at all that treating one party different than another party denotes bias, and clearly no question at all that a Secretary of State who threatens boycotts and intifadas is forcing Israel to negotiate under duress.

The majority of Israelis agree that John Kerry is clearly on a mission to force Israel to sacrifice land – and more. As Israel’s Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon said, Kerry “operates based upon an unfathomable obsession and a messianic feeling” — and employs a dangerous double standard against the State of Israel.

Motti Yogev was right – just as Moshe Ya’alon was right.

In an open letter to Kerry he writes:

[..] Describing the potential for expanded boycotts of Israel makes it more, not less, likely that the talks will not succeed; makes it more, not less, likely that Israel will be blamed if the talks fail; and more, not less, likely that boycotts will ensue. Your comments, irrespective of your intentions, will inevitably be seen by Palestinians and anti-Israel activists as an incentive not to reach an agreement; as an indicator that if things fall apart, Israel will be blamed; and as legitimizing boycott activity.

What is particularly troubling about your comments is the absence of similar tough talk about the consequences for Palestinians should the talks fail. We make this comment not in search of some theoretical balance. Rather, its absence suggests a historical amnesia about why there has been no peace and no solution all these years. Israel always must be willing to compromise for peace and at different times it is not unreasonable to ask Israel to do more.

But the core of the conflict was and remains Palestinian unwillingness to accept Israel’s legitimacy and permanence as a Jewish state. That is why the Palestinians rejected the 1947 partition, that is why they rejected recognizing Israel after the 1967 war, and that is why Israeli offers at Camp David in 2000 and Annapolis in 2008 were rejected or allowed to go unanswered. It is Palestinians who must hear the message that not only has their rejectionism been the major obstacle to peace, but it has also been the main source of their suffering and misery over the years. It is time for them to make the qualitative leap toward peace and acceptance of the legitimacy of the Jewish state.

It is encouraging that reportedly in the talks you are raising these matters with the Palestinians. Your comments in Munich, however, threaten to undo all this by ignoring the historic compulsion of the Palestinians to look for ever new reasons and incentives to reject the Jewish state. Concerns of the kind you expressed therefore would have been better left unsaid or at most discussed in private conversations with Israeli representatives.

We wish you continued success in moving this process forward. We urge you to understand, however, that those who are most against peace are the ones who will benefit the most from the unintended encouragement in the comments you expressed in Munich.