As for the helicopter incident, I would want to learn the facts before publishing that story – so that I could at least include what I (perhaps naively?) believe were extenuating circumstances. The building may have had civilians on the roof, but it was also likely a legitimate military target. I am not justifying the strike, but just raising the question of why you included it (and likely not in its entirety). Same with the undercover military squads. Every military in the world attempts to infiltrate the enemy with undercover units posing as locals. In Israel, they exist in order to make arrests or to kill terrorists in the process of preparing attacks, not to go after and kill political enemies.
If you have not seen the drama series, “Fauda,” that does a decent job at exploring the nuance and moral quandaries inherent here, I highly recommend it. Bottom line, the way you wrote this feels to me more emotional than the rest of the article and I think you are too quick to call these extra-judicial “death squads” and hold them in such clear contempt.
A note about your discussion of the different forms of anti-semitism. I very much appreciate you asking for people to stop conflating anti-Semitism with anti-Netanyahu or his policies. It would be wonderful if they did stop. But, in practical terms, anti-Semitism has always, and will likely continue to exist on both sides of the left-right/liberal-conservative spectrum. The differences have no meaning, because in my view, right and left political extremes do not exist on a linear plane. Rather, at their most extreme, they meet at the two ends of a circle to form an insidious alliance of intolerance and violence – inevitably seizing on Jews as a scapegoat for whatever ills they see themselves as victims of (e.g. Nazi Germany).
In other words, as a Jew, I don’t care why they hate me. I fear both those who see me as a white-elite occupier and as a Christ-killer. With all that said – I absolutely agree that it is wrong for those who use arguments against anti-Semitism to justify this Israeli government’s policies.
A couple more points. I completely agree with and appreciate your statement that we can both, “have supported precision strikes to eradicate Hamas and Hezbollah, and still draw a line 18 months later at the wholesale devastation, blockades and humanitarian crisis in Gaza and the West Bank.”
With that, I think it is important to recognize that from Israel’s perspective, the world did not, as you argue, stand with us for a few months after October 7th and is only now turning on us. From our point of view, the world turned against us as soon as October 8th, long before our troops went into Gaza. Yes, we saw some sympathy and diplomatic room to manoeuver from several governments, but what the typical Israeli saw was the immediate reaction on social media and on college campuses condemning us. Rallies calling to “Free Palestine” and “From the River to the Sea” in London and New York. UN leaders had to put the attack “in context.” West Bank Palestinians celebrated in the streets and polling showed their overwhelming support of the attacks. South Africa filed its formal complaint of “genocide” to the ICJ in December 2023, not 18 months after the war began.
It is important to understand that the Israeli mentality, especially following October 7th, has been one of living in fear under existential threat. We have a very strong tradition of political protest, as demonstrated in the 10 months prior to October 7th. Yet, none of us were protesting the war in its first year because we mostly saw it as justified – not for revenge as you imply in the article, but in order to root out the perpetrators so that they will not be able to do it again. We recognize the dilemma of fighting an urban war against a guerilla enemy that actively tries to put its own civilians in harm’s way. But because of our own fear, it became easier to look the other way at Palestinian civilian suffering.
And we still largely believe that the culpability for those civilian deaths is on Hamas and not us. I still wish for the death of every single member of Hamas or IPJ who took part in the October 7 attack. I just prioritize diplomacy and getting our hostages back over continuing the war at this point. And I certainly hope we can attain the expulsion of the Hamas leadership from Gaza as part of any end-result.
Now, of course, many of us are outraged at this government and at Netanyahu – even those who supported them before the war. We see that Bibi needs to keep this war going – not, primarily because it is keeping him out of prison as you claim, but because at its conclusion, there will be no way for him to prevent a formal commission of inquiry into the events of October 7th. That commission will inevitably find him responsible and force his government to fall. Bibi sees himself in historic terms, as a great leader of the Jewish People and the Jewish State. He needs to protect his legacy at all costs. Unfortunately, both we Israelis and the Palestinians are paying the price.
Hoping that this all lands with you as I intend it, with an open heart and with deep thought about issues intimately relevant and personal. As I wrote, I agree with your overall premise and appreciate you taking a stab at this incredibly complex set of problems. Ultimately, I am doing what I can to heed your call to “do better” and hope everyone else who reads your piece will as well. It is no easy task, and not in anyone’s comfort zone, but if I have learned anything in my 58 years, it is that the things really worth doing make us uncomfortable.
If you have the time, I would love to hear your thoughts in response.
The whole time I was writing this, was thinking of an American friend who now lives in Israel and consider himself a "Progressive Zionist." I sent him a pre-pub draft and asked for his comments. Feel like they were such a well-argued counterpoint to my original piece that it would be worth a read for anyone interested in this broader topic and/or who felt my essay missed or elided certain critical points.
"Given that your viewpoint on, and articulation of history and current events almost always resonate with me, I was not surprised to completely agree with the overall sentiment of your article. In my understanding, the gist of your argument is to point out the need to move away from the extremes and find a better way for settling our disagreements, no matter how deeply rooted or justified we feel we are.
Empathy for the “other”, as a protagonist, and for both sides if you are an outside observer or mediator, are always critical in understanding and eventually helping to resolve any conflict. And clearly, a giant missing piece in our conflict is the need to humanize the “other,” to recognize their suffering and point of view and acknowledge where our own side is culpable. So, as difficult as it is to acknowledge where my “side” has gone way off the deep-end in creating completely unjustified suffering, I appreciate that the documentary and your article both do those things. Thank you. I hope that your article will motivate many people to “do better.”
With that said, I would suggest several nuanced changes.
Your introduction describing the suffering and humiliation the Palestinians have faced over the years at the hands of Israeli settlers (and the army) seems to be, at least in part, in order to make the point that this is the reason for the radicalization of the Palestinians. It is “inevitable” you say, that there is terror and that Hamas did what it did because of Palestinian suffering. I would point out, however that the rejectionism and radicalization of the Arabs and Palestinians pre-dates any suffering they may have faced at Israeli hands. There was Arab terror long before Israel “occupied” the West Bank and Gaza in 1967. An example of this pre-dates by almost 20 years the creation of the state itself. This is the massacre in 1929 of the Jews of Hebron, a city in the heart of the West Bank, whose families had been living there peacefully for millennia.
And I am not bringing this up to compare or “one-up” the suffering of one side over the other. I simply use this as an example for why I see the conclusion you draw in your introduction as problematic. And this does not even touch upon the longer conversation necessary to get into the vast differences between grievance-based violence/terror and the religiously-motivated, messianic-based terror of Hamas… Not to mention how the fact that Hebron was a Jewish city before 1929, but free of Jews from then until 1967, demonstrates how, as you correctly point out, the situation and history is very complex indeed.
I also think the way you set up the very premise of what I see as your main argument calling for a middle ground between extremes, as problematic. You equate “anti-Semitic pro terrorism” and “patriotic pro-Zionism”. Your readers may conclude or infer from this that being a patriotic pro-Zionist, (as I consider myself, by the way), is the flip side, and “just as bad” as being an anti-Semitic supporter of terrorism. As you acknowledge a few sentences later, one can criticize Bibi and his policies while still accepting Jewish national rights. Why not put “radical” or “right-wing Israeli settler” on the other side of that equation so that “Zionism” can still be accepted as a normal, mainstream movement of Jewish national rights just like any other national right’s movement, including Palestinian?
Within your list of “hopefully non-controversial facts”, you include, “You can unequivocally support the right to a Jewish state (soft Zionism) while rejecting plans to expel all non-Jews from the region (hard Zionism).” I personally have never heard the terms “soft” and “hard” Zionism, but I think “radical Zionist” is much more accurate and descriptive than “hard Zionist”. As you know, about 22% of Israel’s population (not the West Bank and Gaza) are non-Jewish, full citizens of Israel – with representation in Parliament and even on the supreme court. Yes, there is still racism and yes, there are fringe, radical voices calling for expelling even them, but at least for now, those voices remain on the fringe of Israeli society.
As for the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza, you would be correct in claiming that more Israelis would be in favor of expelling them – and that sentiment gained a much larger following because of the attacks of October 7th and the support the West Bank Palestinians expressed for them.
And this brings me to a broader point about your article. While your list of hopefully non-controversial facts (all of which I agree with – with the added nuance I describe above), calls for empathy and reasoned consideration from both sides, much of the remainder of your article seems to highlight the wrongheaded thinking and actions of one side – the radical settler movement and the Netanyahu government’s policies in fighting the war in Gaza, not to mention the story of the helicopter pilot and the undercover units being treated with MDMA. Perhaps it is because we Israelis are seemingly in a position of power – certainly in comparison to Palestinians – and thus it is only natural to rail against that side more vociferously.
But, while Daniella Weiss’ views are abhorrent, they are also the fringe of the fringe. There are not many Jews who claim that the Land of Israel stretches from the Euphrates to the Nile. So what is the point of quoting her so extensively? We can easily find just as many Palestinian voices (and I am sure a higher percentage of their population) supporting their own rejectionist version of “God gave this to us first and therefore…” Not to mention, the entire liberal world (from mainstream media to college campuses) seemingly calling for or supporting those who do call for a “Free Palestine - From the River to the Sea.” I assume you know this, but just in case, I and every Israeli I know hears that phrase as a call for wholesale extermination of the Jews in Israel.
As a cultural American Jew, I’m gutted reading Ata’s story. Like the vast majority of American Jews I know—religious or not—I’m horrified by what Netanyahu and the Likud party are doing. Just as horrified as I was by the attacks on October 7.
Let me be clear: I oppose violence on all sides. And still, I’ve asked myself for decades, “If a schoolyard bully keeps picking on you, how long before you retaliate?” That question isn’t meant to justify October 7—but to highlight a painful truth: when people feel endlessly oppressed or erased, retaliation begins to seem inevitable. The same could be said for Israeli strikes after terrorist attacks. The cycle keeps feeding itself.
And so we stay stuck. As long as both sides cling to their justifications, peace remains out of reach.
There are efforts to bridge this chasm. I just saw No Other Land and hung out with the director and two of the women featured in it—at a psychedelic community gathering here in the Bay Area, of all places. Films like Ajami, movements like Combatants for Peace, voices like Simone Zimmerman’s in Israelism—all point toward a shared humanity that’s too often forgotten.
But stories like Ata’s remind us: we are witnessing a tragedy with ancient roots and modern consequences. And every time we look away, it deepens.
Hi Jamie, As a Reform Rabbi who reads you regularly, I want to say a sincere thank you for sharing that list of uncontroversial facts, all of which I say Amen to. My liberal Zionism strives to see and hold the humanity of Palestinians and Israelis, condemn right wing settler violence, and left wing terror (like what happened last night in Washington DC) and hold multiple narratives at once. I've also spent ample time in the West Bank, and was heartbroken, but unsurprised, to hear about the story of Subud. Grateful for your voice, and your nuance.
As an Israeli I was sad to read about the story shared in Subud, and am inspired by the nobility of Ata.
The actions of the israeli right wing settlers are awful and in my eyes cause harm both for the palestinians and for the israelis. Many israelis (including myself) are protesting and working against that for decades. this film is actually part of thie struggle.
I totally join your "uncontroversial facts".
here are some more points to consider:
1. not all settlers are the same. only a few of the commit the violent acts, and many of the settlers don't approve of these violent acts. Daniela weis whom you quetes is an extreme even among the setlers.
2. terror didn't start in Oct 7th. terror acts were perfromed against israelis since the begining of the return of jews to israel. there is a lot of terror acts in the west bank.
And yes- I can understand how a young palestinian becomes a terrorist.
3. Palestinians again and again chose to struggle to independence through violent terror. I read an interview with a palestinian proffesor in the US. he shared that in the 70s the PLO requested advice from a consultant to such struggles. he told that to do non violent struggle because it will be more effective (in other cases he did support violent struggle). they refused.
"What if" is always a guess, but i'm pretty sure that if the palestinian stopped the violence and chose a non violent struggle they would have had a palestinian state years ago.
Terror ruins the abitliy to trust the other side and generate true feas. terror is an attack on peaceful solution
Actually i still believe that once the palestinians totally abondon terror, they'll have independence within a few years.
I appreciate you for being able to write such a balanced article that sees much of the complexity.
I have several thoughts about this Jamie. 1- I am about two weeks into one of my longest essays, titled "Colonialism, Worldviews and Imperial Modernity – Their Legacy and Impact Today." It could itself be a book and if I was inclined, would finish it and present to you guys for your upcoming writing class.
The essay was inspired by two essays: Namoi Klein's chapters from her latest book Doppelganger that discusses the Israeli/Palestenian conflict, then one about worldviews which caused an "aha" moment for me. I also read and will include Ben Ehrenreich's lastest in Harpers which covers this same ground as what sounds like the documentary does.
But, reading this essay, which covers nearly every point in my too-long essay in process, I'm inclined to just re-write the essay saying - Hey I have this too-long essay but decided to just link to this one from Jamie Wheal of Flow Genome project, it makes nearly all the points I wanted to make but without much of the academic references or jargon.
I have not written the closing but was going to essentially feature Pope Leo XIV's confession to African president Ibrahim Traore for the Catholic Church's complicity in Colonialism. It is titled (available on YouTube) "A Message of Truth, Justice & Reconciliation."
If the Pope can do it, then we all can do it. I believe a massive dose of Truth, Justice and Reconciliation could go a long way these days if people would follow his lead.
I commend you Jamie for watching Subud and telling people about the film. Also for stepping in to this territory as it takes courage.
As the Palestinians are the people who inhabited and still inhabit that land , they are not terrorists or anti -Semitic, as that is the name given to people of that region. The Palestinians have tried non violent resistance and it has achieved nothing in the 70 odd years they have been occupied and brutalised. They are the resistance against Zionism and Empire.
I agree we do not need hate , neither do we need naivety or ignorance.
This is colonialists, theft and now genocide on stolen land and nothing can justify this.
Have you considered the possibility that October 7th was a false flag ?
That this take over and genocide was planned and supported a long time before that ?
Susan - I doubt it was false flag in that the Israeli's did not do this but, and this is possibly why you suggest it, they knew about the Oct 7 plans, having them a year in advance of the attack, and, it did give the go-ahead for the radical right wing of Likud to do what they are doing now, with nobody stopping them. But, with 1960s "Operation Northwoods" an engineered provocation presented by the US Joint Chiefs to President Kennedy, which he rejected, called for the killing of Americans to enable it as a pretext to attack and destroy Cuba. Gulf of Tonkin also followed that template for Combat troops in Viet Nam with 58,000 dead Americans and 2M dead Vietnamese. So, it was certainly convenient for the war hawks to unleash what they are unleashing, but it might have just been convenient for them to do so, with 1100 slaughtered on the Israeli side and, what's the count now, 60,000 dead Palestenians and counting?
you wrote "The Palestinians have tried non violent resistance"
Please write the period (years) in which the palestinians tried non violent resistence and NO violent action and terror against the jews in israel was performed.
October 7th took the israeli citizens, army and government by total surprise. very few people thought the Hamas has the capability to do such a thing, and especially without israel knowing in advance. I can understand that the fact is was so surprising and israeli defence failed so miserable leads some people to think it was a false flag or treason (as right extremist claim).
Hi Jamie, and thank you for your relentless courage in engaging such complex and nuanced topics. I wanted to offer a bit of context around one of the distressing side effects you mentioned. What is often described in policy circles as moral hazard is more commonly referred to within the veteran community as moral injury.
This soul-level wounding, affecting both those who were unwilling perpetrators and those who carry survivor’s guilt for not having done more, can persist long after the conflict itself. It is also, in many cases, a driving force behind cycles of continued violence.
Exploring and addressing moral injury is the focus of my doctoral research, and I’m currently working on advocacy efforts to distinguish moral injury from PTSD in the next edition of the DSM. For more background, the VA offers an excellent summary here: https://www.ptsd.va.gov/professional/treat/cooccurring/moral_injury.asp.
Thanks for being so brave and speaking on such a subject and most likely one that will bring the Zionist mob against you. I can't look anymore because it is so disturbing to see this kind of Ethno-supremacy, by people who like to bring up every chance they get, their own holocaust, do the same against another group of people. all the while trying to cover it up and gaslight the world into ignoring it. Nothing to see here. I will say no more but you get the point.
Have you noticed several zionist (including myself) support the main ideas in this article in the comments?
Most israelis and jews are what Jamie considered "soft zionists". We oppose the current israeli goverment, but whole heartedly support the existence of israel as the national country of jews (that accomedates 20% arabs as equal citizens with full rights).
You want to be noticed?.. I think you should look at what you've said above and please try to see the racism and violence in what you just said. Just saying, please notice that... these are people and families being blown up and starved to death in numbers that are simply appauling. Please, have more compassion for these people who have been displaced and their lives utterly ruined, because after all "your country of jews" is not worth the murder of other people.
and one more thing- your way of thinking is actually exactly the same as the israeli extreme right.
you say '"your country of jews" is not worth the murder of other people'
they say- the palestinians of gaza slaughtere, raped, and most of them celebrated the 7/10 attack. we saw how the palestinians in the street hit and spit on 10 years old israeli hostage when he was kidnapped to gaza. they will attack us again once they can. they don't worth living.
Both extremes lead to more violence and death.
I liked this article because Jamie directed towards a middle way, that hopefully many zionists and palestinians can agree on, and end violence.
so you mean the "solution" is to kill all jews in israel? to displace all jews from israel?
And I don't support what israel does right now in gaza. I voted against this government in the elecation, and in the last 2 years protested against it hundreds of times.
But I do support the right of jews to have their national state, just like any other nation. I do support to right of israel to defend itself against extreme islamic terror attacks whose final objective is to kill all jews.
Listen, I can see that you are a compassionate person who is conflicted by what's going on there in the "holy" land. I would like to point out that a big part of the problem with this, as well as so many other genocides in history is, the "us against them" POV. There is no other, "they" are literally your brethren, fellow sons of Abraham. I think a "solution" here is to do a very radical thing and listen to one of "your people" from the past and "love thy enemy" and turn the other cheek.
But unfortunately is seems for every Ata there are 50 people who support terror, and 1 who is an active terrorist (just a week ago a pregnent woman was shot and killed on her way to the hospital to give birth).
3 years ago i visited a palestinian village. the tour was organized by a group of people who bring sick palestinians to israeli hospitals* - they take them in their cars.
We met the palestinian coordinator. he was charming and peaceful like Ata.
But even he admited he has to keep a low profile, and while palestinians use his services, most of them in his village don't support him and he has to keep a low profile.
*several of the leaders of this organization lived near gaza and helped gazans come to israeli hospitals. they were murdered at oct 7th
(cont'd from prior comment post)
As for the helicopter incident, I would want to learn the facts before publishing that story – so that I could at least include what I (perhaps naively?) believe were extenuating circumstances. The building may have had civilians on the roof, but it was also likely a legitimate military target. I am not justifying the strike, but just raising the question of why you included it (and likely not in its entirety). Same with the undercover military squads. Every military in the world attempts to infiltrate the enemy with undercover units posing as locals. In Israel, they exist in order to make arrests or to kill terrorists in the process of preparing attacks, not to go after and kill political enemies.
If you have not seen the drama series, “Fauda,” that does a decent job at exploring the nuance and moral quandaries inherent here, I highly recommend it. Bottom line, the way you wrote this feels to me more emotional than the rest of the article and I think you are too quick to call these extra-judicial “death squads” and hold them in such clear contempt.
A note about your discussion of the different forms of anti-semitism. I very much appreciate you asking for people to stop conflating anti-Semitism with anti-Netanyahu or his policies. It would be wonderful if they did stop. But, in practical terms, anti-Semitism has always, and will likely continue to exist on both sides of the left-right/liberal-conservative spectrum. The differences have no meaning, because in my view, right and left political extremes do not exist on a linear plane. Rather, at their most extreme, they meet at the two ends of a circle to form an insidious alliance of intolerance and violence – inevitably seizing on Jews as a scapegoat for whatever ills they see themselves as victims of (e.g. Nazi Germany).
In other words, as a Jew, I don’t care why they hate me. I fear both those who see me as a white-elite occupier and as a Christ-killer. With all that said – I absolutely agree that it is wrong for those who use arguments against anti-Semitism to justify this Israeli government’s policies.
A couple more points. I completely agree with and appreciate your statement that we can both, “have supported precision strikes to eradicate Hamas and Hezbollah, and still draw a line 18 months later at the wholesale devastation, blockades and humanitarian crisis in Gaza and the West Bank.”
With that, I think it is important to recognize that from Israel’s perspective, the world did not, as you argue, stand with us for a few months after October 7th and is only now turning on us. From our point of view, the world turned against us as soon as October 8th, long before our troops went into Gaza. Yes, we saw some sympathy and diplomatic room to manoeuver from several governments, but what the typical Israeli saw was the immediate reaction on social media and on college campuses condemning us. Rallies calling to “Free Palestine” and “From the River to the Sea” in London and New York. UN leaders had to put the attack “in context.” West Bank Palestinians celebrated in the streets and polling showed their overwhelming support of the attacks. South Africa filed its formal complaint of “genocide” to the ICJ in December 2023, not 18 months after the war began.
It is important to understand that the Israeli mentality, especially following October 7th, has been one of living in fear under existential threat. We have a very strong tradition of political protest, as demonstrated in the 10 months prior to October 7th. Yet, none of us were protesting the war in its first year because we mostly saw it as justified – not for revenge as you imply in the article, but in order to root out the perpetrators so that they will not be able to do it again. We recognize the dilemma of fighting an urban war against a guerilla enemy that actively tries to put its own civilians in harm’s way. But because of our own fear, it became easier to look the other way at Palestinian civilian suffering.
And we still largely believe that the culpability for those civilian deaths is on Hamas and not us. I still wish for the death of every single member of Hamas or IPJ who took part in the October 7 attack. I just prioritize diplomacy and getting our hostages back over continuing the war at this point. And I certainly hope we can attain the expulsion of the Hamas leadership from Gaza as part of any end-result.
Now, of course, many of us are outraged at this government and at Netanyahu – even those who supported them before the war. We see that Bibi needs to keep this war going – not, primarily because it is keeping him out of prison as you claim, but because at its conclusion, there will be no way for him to prevent a formal commission of inquiry into the events of October 7th. That commission will inevitably find him responsible and force his government to fall. Bibi sees himself in historic terms, as a great leader of the Jewish People and the Jewish State. He needs to protect his legacy at all costs. Unfortunately, both we Israelis and the Palestinians are paying the price.
Hoping that this all lands with you as I intend it, with an open heart and with deep thought about issues intimately relevant and personal. As I wrote, I agree with your overall premise and appreciate you taking a stab at this incredibly complex set of problems. Ultimately, I am doing what I can to heed your call to “do better” and hope everyone else who reads your piece will as well. It is no easy task, and not in anyone’s comfort zone, but if I have learned anything in my 58 years, it is that the things really worth doing make us uncomfortable.
If you have the time, I would love to hear your thoughts in response.
Best,
Evan"
The whole time I was writing this, was thinking of an American friend who now lives in Israel and consider himself a "Progressive Zionist." I sent him a pre-pub draft and asked for his comments. Feel like they were such a well-argued counterpoint to my original piece that it would be worth a read for anyone interested in this broader topic and/or who felt my essay missed or elided certain critical points.
"Given that your viewpoint on, and articulation of history and current events almost always resonate with me, I was not surprised to completely agree with the overall sentiment of your article. In my understanding, the gist of your argument is to point out the need to move away from the extremes and find a better way for settling our disagreements, no matter how deeply rooted or justified we feel we are.
Empathy for the “other”, as a protagonist, and for both sides if you are an outside observer or mediator, are always critical in understanding and eventually helping to resolve any conflict. And clearly, a giant missing piece in our conflict is the need to humanize the “other,” to recognize their suffering and point of view and acknowledge where our own side is culpable. So, as difficult as it is to acknowledge where my “side” has gone way off the deep-end in creating completely unjustified suffering, I appreciate that the documentary and your article both do those things. Thank you. I hope that your article will motivate many people to “do better.”
With that said, I would suggest several nuanced changes.
Your introduction describing the suffering and humiliation the Palestinians have faced over the years at the hands of Israeli settlers (and the army) seems to be, at least in part, in order to make the point that this is the reason for the radicalization of the Palestinians. It is “inevitable” you say, that there is terror and that Hamas did what it did because of Palestinian suffering. I would point out, however that the rejectionism and radicalization of the Arabs and Palestinians pre-dates any suffering they may have faced at Israeli hands. There was Arab terror long before Israel “occupied” the West Bank and Gaza in 1967. An example of this pre-dates by almost 20 years the creation of the state itself. This is the massacre in 1929 of the Jews of Hebron, a city in the heart of the West Bank, whose families had been living there peacefully for millennia.
And I am not bringing this up to compare or “one-up” the suffering of one side over the other. I simply use this as an example for why I see the conclusion you draw in your introduction as problematic. And this does not even touch upon the longer conversation necessary to get into the vast differences between grievance-based violence/terror and the religiously-motivated, messianic-based terror of Hamas… Not to mention how the fact that Hebron was a Jewish city before 1929, but free of Jews from then until 1967, demonstrates how, as you correctly point out, the situation and history is very complex indeed.
I also think the way you set up the very premise of what I see as your main argument calling for a middle ground between extremes, as problematic. You equate “anti-Semitic pro terrorism” and “patriotic pro-Zionism”. Your readers may conclude or infer from this that being a patriotic pro-Zionist, (as I consider myself, by the way), is the flip side, and “just as bad” as being an anti-Semitic supporter of terrorism. As you acknowledge a few sentences later, one can criticize Bibi and his policies while still accepting Jewish national rights. Why not put “radical” or “right-wing Israeli settler” on the other side of that equation so that “Zionism” can still be accepted as a normal, mainstream movement of Jewish national rights just like any other national right’s movement, including Palestinian?
Within your list of “hopefully non-controversial facts”, you include, “You can unequivocally support the right to a Jewish state (soft Zionism) while rejecting plans to expel all non-Jews from the region (hard Zionism).” I personally have never heard the terms “soft” and “hard” Zionism, but I think “radical Zionist” is much more accurate and descriptive than “hard Zionist”. As you know, about 22% of Israel’s population (not the West Bank and Gaza) are non-Jewish, full citizens of Israel – with representation in Parliament and even on the supreme court. Yes, there is still racism and yes, there are fringe, radical voices calling for expelling even them, but at least for now, those voices remain on the fringe of Israeli society.
As for the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza, you would be correct in claiming that more Israelis would be in favor of expelling them – and that sentiment gained a much larger following because of the attacks of October 7th and the support the West Bank Palestinians expressed for them.
And this brings me to a broader point about your article. While your list of hopefully non-controversial facts (all of which I agree with – with the added nuance I describe above), calls for empathy and reasoned consideration from both sides, much of the remainder of your article seems to highlight the wrongheaded thinking and actions of one side – the radical settler movement and the Netanyahu government’s policies in fighting the war in Gaza, not to mention the story of the helicopter pilot and the undercover units being treated with MDMA. Perhaps it is because we Israelis are seemingly in a position of power – certainly in comparison to Palestinians – and thus it is only natural to rail against that side more vociferously.
But, while Daniella Weiss’ views are abhorrent, they are also the fringe of the fringe. There are not many Jews who claim that the Land of Israel stretches from the Euphrates to the Nile. So what is the point of quoting her so extensively? We can easily find just as many Palestinian voices (and I am sure a higher percentage of their population) supporting their own rejectionist version of “God gave this to us first and therefore…” Not to mention, the entire liberal world (from mainstream media to college campuses) seemingly calling for or supporting those who do call for a “Free Palestine - From the River to the Sea.” I assume you know this, but just in case, I and every Israeli I know hears that phrase as a call for wholesale extermination of the Jews in Israel.
(cont'd)
Jamie.
As a cultural American Jew, I’m gutted reading Ata’s story. Like the vast majority of American Jews I know—religious or not—I’m horrified by what Netanyahu and the Likud party are doing. Just as horrified as I was by the attacks on October 7.
Let me be clear: I oppose violence on all sides. And still, I’ve asked myself for decades, “If a schoolyard bully keeps picking on you, how long before you retaliate?” That question isn’t meant to justify October 7—but to highlight a painful truth: when people feel endlessly oppressed or erased, retaliation begins to seem inevitable. The same could be said for Israeli strikes after terrorist attacks. The cycle keeps feeding itself.
And so we stay stuck. As long as both sides cling to their justifications, peace remains out of reach.
There are efforts to bridge this chasm. I just saw No Other Land and hung out with the director and two of the women featured in it—at a psychedelic community gathering here in the Bay Area, of all places. Films like Ajami, movements like Combatants for Peace, voices like Simone Zimmerman’s in Israelism—all point toward a shared humanity that’s too often forgotten.
But stories like Ata’s remind us: we are witnessing a tragedy with ancient roots and modern consequences. And every time we look away, it deepens.
I am gutted.
Hi Jamie, As a Reform Rabbi who reads you regularly, I want to say a sincere thank you for sharing that list of uncontroversial facts, all of which I say Amen to. My liberal Zionism strives to see and hold the humanity of Palestinians and Israelis, condemn right wing settler violence, and left wing terror (like what happened last night in Washington DC) and hold multiple narratives at once. I've also spent ample time in the West Bank, and was heartbroken, but unsurprised, to hear about the story of Subud. Grateful for your voice, and your nuance.
Hi
As an Israeli I was sad to read about the story shared in Subud, and am inspired by the nobility of Ata.
The actions of the israeli right wing settlers are awful and in my eyes cause harm both for the palestinians and for the israelis. Many israelis (including myself) are protesting and working against that for decades. this film is actually part of thie struggle.
I totally join your "uncontroversial facts".
here are some more points to consider:
1. not all settlers are the same. only a few of the commit the violent acts, and many of the settlers don't approve of these violent acts. Daniela weis whom you quetes is an extreme even among the setlers.
2. terror didn't start in Oct 7th. terror acts were perfromed against israelis since the begining of the return of jews to israel. there is a lot of terror acts in the west bank.
And yes- I can understand how a young palestinian becomes a terrorist.
3. Palestinians again and again chose to struggle to independence through violent terror. I read an interview with a palestinian proffesor in the US. he shared that in the 70s the PLO requested advice from a consultant to such struggles. he told that to do non violent struggle because it will be more effective (in other cases he did support violent struggle). they refused.
"What if" is always a guess, but i'm pretty sure that if the palestinian stopped the violence and chose a non violent struggle they would have had a palestinian state years ago.
Terror ruins the abitliy to trust the other side and generate true feas. terror is an attack on peaceful solution
Actually i still believe that once the palestinians totally abondon terror, they'll have independence within a few years.
I appreciate you for being able to write such a balanced article that sees much of the complexity.
backatcha. thanks for sharing additional nuance and context--+1 to all you said
I have several thoughts about this Jamie. 1- I am about two weeks into one of my longest essays, titled "Colonialism, Worldviews and Imperial Modernity – Their Legacy and Impact Today." It could itself be a book and if I was inclined, would finish it and present to you guys for your upcoming writing class.
The essay was inspired by two essays: Namoi Klein's chapters from her latest book Doppelganger that discusses the Israeli/Palestenian conflict, then one about worldviews which caused an "aha" moment for me. I also read and will include Ben Ehrenreich's lastest in Harpers which covers this same ground as what sounds like the documentary does.
But, reading this essay, which covers nearly every point in my too-long essay in process, I'm inclined to just re-write the essay saying - Hey I have this too-long essay but decided to just link to this one from Jamie Wheal of Flow Genome project, it makes nearly all the points I wanted to make but without much of the academic references or jargon.
I have not written the closing but was going to essentially feature Pope Leo XIV's confession to African president Ibrahim Traore for the Catholic Church's complicity in Colonialism. It is titled (available on YouTube) "A Message of Truth, Justice & Reconciliation."
If the Pope can do it, then we all can do it. I believe a massive dose of Truth, Justice and Reconciliation could go a long way these days if people would follow his lead.
Thanks for this essay.
As Steve says “gutted”… I’m not Jewish, just a regular old former Catholic, but this was both riveting and horrifying. My heart hurts for all of us.
PS 2
even though the current government is right wing
surveys show it no longer has much support in the public.
we hope for change
I commend you Jamie for watching Subud and telling people about the film. Also for stepping in to this territory as it takes courage.
As the Palestinians are the people who inhabited and still inhabit that land , they are not terrorists or anti -Semitic, as that is the name given to people of that region. The Palestinians have tried non violent resistance and it has achieved nothing in the 70 odd years they have been occupied and brutalised. They are the resistance against Zionism and Empire.
I agree we do not need hate , neither do we need naivety or ignorance.
This is colonialists, theft and now genocide on stolen land and nothing can justify this.
Have you considered the possibility that October 7th was a false flag ?
That this take over and genocide was planned and supported a long time before that ?
Susan - I doubt it was false flag in that the Israeli's did not do this but, and this is possibly why you suggest it, they knew about the Oct 7 plans, having them a year in advance of the attack, and, it did give the go-ahead for the radical right wing of Likud to do what they are doing now, with nobody stopping them. But, with 1960s "Operation Northwoods" an engineered provocation presented by the US Joint Chiefs to President Kennedy, which he rejected, called for the killing of Americans to enable it as a pretext to attack and destroy Cuba. Gulf of Tonkin also followed that template for Combat troops in Viet Nam with 58,000 dead Americans and 2M dead Vietnamese. So, it was certainly convenient for the war hawks to unleash what they are unleashing, but it might have just been convenient for them to do so, with 1100 slaughtered on the Israeli side and, what's the count now, 60,000 dead Palestenians and counting?
Hi Susan
you wrote "The Palestinians have tried non violent resistance"
Please write the period (years) in which the palestinians tried non violent resistence and NO violent action and terror against the jews in israel was performed.
October 7th took the israeli citizens, army and government by total surprise. very few people thought the Hamas has the capability to do such a thing, and especially without israel knowing in advance. I can understand that the fact is was so surprising and israeli defence failed so miserable leads some people to think it was a false flag or treason (as right extremist claim).
Hi Jamie, and thank you for your relentless courage in engaging such complex and nuanced topics. I wanted to offer a bit of context around one of the distressing side effects you mentioned. What is often described in policy circles as moral hazard is more commonly referred to within the veteran community as moral injury.
This soul-level wounding, affecting both those who were unwilling perpetrators and those who carry survivor’s guilt for not having done more, can persist long after the conflict itself. It is also, in many cases, a driving force behind cycles of continued violence.
Exploring and addressing moral injury is the focus of my doctoral research, and I’m currently working on advocacy efforts to distinguish moral injury from PTSD in the next edition of the DSM. For more background, the VA offers an excellent summary here: https://www.ptsd.va.gov/professional/treat/cooccurring/moral_injury.asp.
yeah--here's an article that Jack just sent me that he wrote on the subject as well in case it hasn't come up in your historiographical search https://www.psychotherapynetworker.org/article/hidden-trauma-moral-injury/
Awesome, thank you! I'll look into potentially connecting with him as I continue my research.
Thanks for being so brave and speaking on such a subject and most likely one that will bring the Zionist mob against you. I can't look anymore because it is so disturbing to see this kind of Ethno-supremacy, by people who like to bring up every chance they get, their own holocaust, do the same against another group of people. all the while trying to cover it up and gaslight the world into ignoring it. Nothing to see here. I will say no more but you get the point.
Hi Daymon
Have you noticed several zionist (including myself) support the main ideas in this article in the comments?
Most israelis and jews are what Jamie considered "soft zionists". We oppose the current israeli goverment, but whole heartedly support the existence of israel as the national country of jews (that accomedates 20% arabs as equal citizens with full rights).
You want to be noticed?.. I think you should look at what you've said above and please try to see the racism and violence in what you just said. Just saying, please notice that... these are people and families being blown up and starved to death in numbers that are simply appauling. Please, have more compassion for these people who have been displaced and their lives utterly ruined, because after all "your country of jews" is not worth the murder of other people.
and one more thing- your way of thinking is actually exactly the same as the israeli extreme right.
you say '"your country of jews" is not worth the murder of other people'
they say- the palestinians of gaza slaughtere, raped, and most of them celebrated the 7/10 attack. we saw how the palestinians in the street hit and spit on 10 years old israeli hostage when he was kidnapped to gaza. they will attack us again once they can. they don't worth living.
Both extremes lead to more violence and death.
I liked this article because Jamie directed towards a middle way, that hopefully many zionists and palestinians can agree on, and end violence.
so you mean the "solution" is to kill all jews in israel? to displace all jews from israel?
And I don't support what israel does right now in gaza. I voted against this government in the elecation, and in the last 2 years protested against it hundreds of times.
But I do support the right of jews to have their national state, just like any other nation. I do support to right of israel to defend itself against extreme islamic terror attacks whose final objective is to kill all jews.
Listen, I can see that you are a compassionate person who is conflicted by what's going on there in the "holy" land. I would like to point out that a big part of the problem with this, as well as so many other genocides in history is, the "us against them" POV. There is no other, "they" are literally your brethren, fellow sons of Abraham. I think a "solution" here is to do a very radical thing and listen to one of "your people" from the past and "love thy enemy" and turn the other cheek.
PS
Ata is really an inspirng man
But unfortunately is seems for every Ata there are 50 people who support terror, and 1 who is an active terrorist (just a week ago a pregnent woman was shot and killed on her way to the hospital to give birth).
3 years ago i visited a palestinian village. the tour was organized by a group of people who bring sick palestinians to israeli hospitals* - they take them in their cars.
We met the palestinian coordinator. he was charming and peaceful like Ata.
But even he admited he has to keep a low profile, and while palestinians use his services, most of them in his village don't support him and he has to keep a low profile.
*several of the leaders of this organization lived near gaza and helped gazans come to israeli hospitals. they were murdered at oct 7th