Reviews for What Price Israel? 50th Anniversary Edition 1953-2003

The average rating for What Price Israel? 50th Anniversary Edition 1953-2003 based on 2 reviews is 3.5 stars.

Review # 1 was written on 2014-10-23 00:00:00 Gary Sugerman I came to this book at the suggestion of a Lebanese Christian who lost family in Beirut to Israeli cluster-bombs. One might expect that, with this title,the book might forecast the ultimate upset of Middle Eastern politics. While that is implicit in the formation of the Israeli state and its general behavior up to the publication of this book (Henry Regnery, 1953), the real subject is the manipulative political behavior of the Zionists and its effect on non-Israeli Jews and Judaism itself. Lilienthal does a good job establishing the historical development of Zionism and of the creation of Israel. He makes a serious charge in insisting that the Zionists rejected any attempt to allow the Displaced Persons to enter countries like England or the US, leaving them stranded until they could be moved to Palestine. The issue, he claims, was to establish a significant Jewish population and to force the issue of statehood. A recent letter to the LRB argues that Truman, President in 1947-48, was not a Zionist, but was "under enormous pressure from the American Jewish community"; Lilienthal notes that Truman's former business partner, Jacobson, had access and influenced the President as did one of his closest advisors, David Niles. The President, in his statements, on ore than one occasion did an end run around the Department of State which was much more leery of Zionist intentions because of the strategic importance of the Middle East and Soviet intentions in the area. Altogether, what might have been a feel-good moment seems to have been much less. While mentioning the plight of the Palestinians, the Israeli ignoring of UN resolutions, and the funding of Zionists by US Jews, the author underscores the Israeli insistence that world Jewry is Israeli despite their national allegiance and that they owe unconditional support to Israel's policies regardless of any conflict with the policies of their home nation. My view of Israel vis-a-vis the Palestinians has never been positive, but this book turned my stomach as Lilienthal detailed the manner in which Israelis have adopted ideas of "racial" superiority that echo those of the Nazis. In a late chapter, he undoes any attempt to establish a Jewish "race" because of intermarriage, wholesale adoption of Judaism, and other ethnic causes. This book made me angry, but it was difficult to finish because, after making its case, it seemed to beat a dead horse, as it were.

Review # 2 was written on 2014-08-20 00:00:00 John Goddard A provocative book written by an American Jewish man of Reform extraction who was opposed to Zionism and the creation of the state of Israel. In the main, his opposition rests on theological as well as practical foundations. He views Judaism as universal, carrying a message for all, while he sees Zionists and those in favor of nationalizing/politicizing "Jewishness" as reducing it to a clannish, exclusive club. Further, he objects to the way Zionists claim the loyalty of all the world's Jews, both in terms of the entitlement that makes them feel, as well as the precarious position of conflicting loyalties that appears to put on the non-Israeli Jews. Lilienthal is surprisingly dismissive of Hasidism and very strongly partisan in favor of Reform Judaism, making a very lucid argument for the universality of Reform Judaism, if perhaps glossing over how it fails to directly address the gap between the divinely-revealed Deuteronomical laws and Reform Judaism's much more flexible application. Israel's rejection of Reform Judaism certainly doesn't play well with Lilienthal, though one gets the impression from his work that this is just icing on the cake, his opposition to Israel began before this development and was based, in fact, on his focus on Judaism's simplicity and universalim, focusing instead on its period of proselytizing and expansion in the pagan and post-Roman world. Lilienthal is a classic liberal and his rational understanding of Liberalism is flawless: "The significance and, indeed, the meaning of Western man is his free will. The American way of life, drawing upon Judeo-Christian heritage, is nothing if it is not the person's right to choose freely and the person's duty to face the consequences of his choice. And what is totalitarianism if it is not a vice of determinism, of having an irrevocable choice made for the individual even before he is born? I have written this book because I, an American of Jewish faith, have not the slightest doubt that American Jewry, too, has a free choice--and must face the consequences of whatever it will choose." (p viii) Naturally, the political program of Zionists is deterministic--one is born a Jew and therefore must support Israel and her specific political programs and policies, no matter what; this is the more secular objection of Lilienthal. Lilienthal presents a classic (and judging from the Islamic Republic of Iran, still valid) expression of the benefits to religion of a separation of state and religion: "Rabbi Joseph Lookstein, of Manhattan, pointed out that the 'grave error' of his colleague Dr. Silver 'might have been avoided had he on that morning (Saturday) been where a rabbi should be--in the synagogue... When a religious teacher enters the arena of a political campaign he does a candidate little good and religion much harm..." (p 120) As someone who has read and studied extensively on this subject, Lilienthal's work does not broadly bring anything new to light for me. However, he does fill in some very good detail and context on what was happening in Washington and inside influential Jewish circles in the late 1940s and early 1950s, which I found very instructive. Naturally, he annotates his sources, including providing his own personal experience at the hands of Zionists when he had the audacity to voice his opposition. Lilienthal's analysis is striking for the many contemporary parallels that could be drawn: When a reactionary and repressive movement of fanatical nationalists wrapped itself in "liberal humanitarianism," it could immediately command the liberal press, exploit its venerable clichés and ensnare its unthinking audience. Even worse, the traditionally liberal press of this country has, at least in the Palestine controversy, sinned more than anybody else against the very essence of liberalism--the appeal to the reasoning and open mind in an honest debate of opposing views...it has been indeed an old and liberal tradition of this country to extend a helping hand to struggling small nations. Yes, it is only natural that American editors have been led to give warm encouragement to a new country, many of whose settlers have escaped the gas chambers, a country whose desert pioneering had been widely admired. But the terrible shame of American liberalism is that it has ferociously suppressed, at least within its own orbit, even the most moderate and most sympathetic opposition to high-pressure Zionism. (p 145) One of the most eye-opening parts of the book is the documented exposure of the crass manipulation of the suffering of displaced Jewish refugees in Europe after World War II, then targeting them to cause even further suffering to obtain the sought-for Zionist political goals. Lilienthal quotes Chaplain Klausner's plan to force the reluctant European Jewish refugees to move en masse to Palestine: To effect this program, it becomes necessary for the Jewish community at large to reverse its policy and instead of creating comforts for the Displaced Persons to make them as uncomfortable as possible. The American Joint Ditribution Committee supplies should be withdrawn...A further procedure would call for an organization such as the Haganah to harass the Jew. Utilities would be tampered with and all protection now given by the Adviser on Jewish Affairs, D.P. Chaplains, and Agency personnel be withdrawn...we are dealing with a sick people. They are not to be asked, but to be told, what to do. (p 195) Lilienthal further records the reports of a U.S. labor leader as to conditions among the survivors of the Nazi holocaust at the hands of the Zionists: "The means employed towards these ends included confiscation of food rations, dismissal from work, smashing of machines sent by Americans to train D.P.s in useful skills, taking away legal protections and visa rights from dissenters, expulsion from camps of political opponents and, in one instance, even the public flogging of a recalcitrant recruit for the Israel Army. (p 196) Lilienthal criticizes the dual-loyalty problem Zionists foist on Jews worldwide and backs his object by quoting President Wilson: "You cannot become true Americans if you think of yourselves in groups. America does not consist in groups. A man who thinks himself as belonging to a particular national group has not yet become an American. And the man who goes among you to trade upon your nationality is not worth to live under the Stars and Stripes." (p 232) Clearly, arguments such as these remain current today with the unfortunate escalation in identity politics. So what's wrong with the book? My chief objection is Lilienthal's naïve idea that the Arabs were ready for peace with the state of Israel the moment the Israelis learned to play nice. He clearly ignores the millennium-and-a-half worth of history of Islamic "tolerance" and the great violence it did to Jewish (and other non-Muslim) communities under its sway. Had Lilienthal lived today I would have advised he read the three magnificent works on Dhimmis and Dhimmitude by Bat Ye'or. While there is much to be criticized of the Zionists and individual Israeli policies, history has yet to show the Israelis can retain their country and live in any kind of long-term peace. Hamas' idea of a cease-fire is to launch only 11,000 or so rockets at Israel over three years. Hizbullah's idea of achieving its wildest ambitions and securing the withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon has been to go on the offensive and provoke Israeli military responses. Yes, Lilienthal's treatment of the Arab side of this issue was totally lacking. That said, his treatment of the American Jewish perspective, especially during the key years during which Israel became a state, is quite good and well worth reading. I never advise accepting any book uncritically, but this one forms a good link in an important debate and ongoing issue.