Iakov Levi

 

A Comment on an Article by Caroline Glick: Column One: Where Israel Went Astray”

2007-01-24

 

Caroline Glick is Deputy Managing Editor of the Jerusalem Post. She writes most valuable articles on the Israeli situation. In the sea of stammering and insipid comments by so called “political observers” flooding the world and Israeli media, her lonely voice outstands as an exploit of the scarcest commodity in our days: Lucidity.

I always enjoy her almost daily contributions, and I usually find no need to comment to what seems to me a perfect analysis.

She vividly and correctly points to the shortcomings of our political and military leadership, and I have nothing to add to what is an accurate description of what seems to be the most idiotic possible way of handling our public affairs.

However, as a psychohistorian, I am focused not only on the “What”, but on the “Why”, namely on the psychological reasons that induce a person or a collectivity to behave in one way rather than in another.

Since we, the Jews, are more known for our wit than for our stupidity, when a Jewish entire political class behaves in a such an idiotic self – destructive way, we must ask the “Why” even with a more impellent sense of urgency. And let’s not forget that a ruling political class usually is the interpreter of the unconscious needs of the public which it represents. Otherwise - in democracy as in tyranny – its days will be very short indeed.

In short, especially reading Caroline Glick’s articles, we are more and more permeated by the impression that we are not just dealing with some politicians’ mishaps, but with a national mood.

Now, to the article itself, which I report almost in its entirety. I have colored in red the most meaningful expressions:

There are two reasons that IDF chief of General Staff Lt.-Gen. Dan Halutz's resignation this week was essential. First, during the war last summer with Hizbullah, Halutz failed to conceive of a war fighting plan for the IDF. Having failed, he needed to go. Second, both during the war and in the six months since its cessation, Halutz lost the faith of his officers and soldiers. A commander cannot function without the faith of his men, and so, again, he had to go.

There is every reason to expect that Halutz's replacement will win the faith of troops and officers. And it is essential that he do so quickly for as the war made clear, the IDF needs to undergo a massive, painful and rapid process of reform and overhaul if it is to meet the wide-ranging and acute challenges it faces.

Yet even if Halutz's replacement is an Israeli version of General George Patton, it is doubtful that he will have the opportunity to apply his military talents to the conceptualization and implementation of a fighting doctrine capable of defeating Israel's enemies. The IDF's doctrinal discussions are framed by the larger national debates in Israel. And today those debates remain captive to the same fantasies and lies that since 1993 have prevented the IDF from planning properly for war - whether in Lebanon, Gaza, Judea and Samaria or even Iran.

US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's visit to Israel this week reinforced this untenable situation. In an interview with The Jerusalem Post, US Ambassador Richard Jones explained that during her visit, Rice "picked up" Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni's plan to hold "discussions" with Fatah terror group commander and PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas about the establishment of a Palestinian state in spite of the fact that the PA is ruled today by the Hamas terror group.

According to Jones, Livni convinced Rice that it is necessary to provide a "political horizon" to convince the Palestinians to replace Hamas with Fatah. After the Palestinians overthrow Hamas, he explained, it will be possible to implement the agreement and handover Judea and Samaria to Fatah (and Hamas).

That is, the Israeli government is pushing a national strategy that is based on a total lie. While Abbas plans his visit this weekend with Hamas terror master Khaled Mashaal in Syria in the hopes of facilitating the formation of an Iranian-Syrian sponsored Fatah-Hamas unity government, the Israeli government wishes to "strengthen" him.

A revitalized IDF will be unable to secure Israel under these conditions. As long as the guiding strategic principle dictating Israel's policies is that Israel must establish a Palestinian state, and to that end, the policy debate revolves around issues such as whether protecting the residents of Sderot from rocket attacks will strengthen or weaken Abbas, the IDF will be incapable of defending Israel regardless of who its leaders are.

SINCE THE inauguration of the 1993 Oslo peace process, Israel's national debate has largely ignored the only question that should be guiding it: How are we to advance Israel's national interests? Rather, since 1993, our national debate has been anchored around the question of how best to establish a Palestinian state. This question, rooted in the false Arab narrative which consciously rejects the morality of the Zionist revolution, has brought us to a position where the IDF is cognitively barred from rationally approaching Israel's security challenges.

Things needn't be this way. The Israeli public is quite sick of hallucinatory peace processes and is keen to reignite a Zionist national discussion. Consistent opinion polls show that the overwhelming majority of the public knows there is no possibility of achieving peace with the PA and that any Palestinian state will be a terror state. Moreover, in poll after poll, the Israeli public expresses its patriotism and its desire to strengthen and preserve the Jewish, democratic character of the State of Israel.

And there are options other than delusion. On Wednesday, one such option was presented in Washington at the American Enterprise Institute. There, the American-Israel Demographic Research Group (AIDRG) presented a plan for Israel's future called "The Fourth Way."

Led by American economist Bennett Zimmerman and former Israeli diplomat Yoram Ettinger, the AIDRG first burst onto the screen in early 2005 when it presented the first comprehensive analysis of Palestinian population data.

Since 1997, Israel's leaders have based their policies towards the Palestinians on what was perceived as a madly ticking Palestinian demographic time bomb. The public was told that the Palestinian population in Jerusalem, Gaza, Judea and Samaria was rapidly expanding and that by 2015, Jews would lose our majority west of the Jordan River. If we didn't hurry up and hand over Judea, Samaria and Gaza and partition Jerusalem, we would find ourselves forced to choose between a Jewish state and a democratic one.

       The AIDRG took it upon itself to do what no Israeli governmental body had considered doing: Its members just started counting heads. It worked out that the doomsday scenario was based on a massive fabrication.  […]

Here the author enters into details of the massive fabrication on the demographic aspect, and then she continues:

 NEXT WEEK Israel's premiere policy conference, the 7th Annual Herzliya Conference, will take place. The "Who's Who" of Israel will again present their "visions" for the country. In most cases, the speakers will regale us with tales of how they will make peace with the PLO and will warn us that we have to be nice to Abbas, (and eat our peas and carrots,) or be destroyed by Iranian nuclear bombs.

At last year's conference, the AIDRG team presented the data they had painstakingly compiled. They were greeted with unabashed hostility. Many walked out in the middle. Others groaned or chatted loudly with their friends trying to drown out the presentation. The audience of elitists didn't want to hear proof that for the past decade, Israel's national debate - which they themselves have led - has been based on a lie aimed at destroying the Zionist idea.

This year the team will return to the conference. But rather than being allowed to present their newest data and their plan, they were given a mere three minutes to speak at the end of a session about something else entirely.

Halutz's resignation was a good and necessary thing. But in and of itself, it will have little significance for Israel if it remains a lone incident. For Halutz's exit from the scene to be a harbinger for a better, safer future, it needs to be followed not only by the resignations of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni and Defense Minister Amir Peretz.

Our failed and delusional leaders must take their mendacious and defeatist national debate along with them. As they depart, we must regain control over our national conversation and build it upon the firm foundations of reality and a renewed commitment to advancing and securing Israel's national interests.

 

Now, beginning from the end, should it not be obvious that commitment to advancing and securing Israel's national interests is the highest priority of every truthful citizen, politician or other?

After all, in a civilized society we are not used to call as traitors the ones who think differently than ourselves.

The point is that we, as a nation, have lost sight of what is our interest. We no more care about our survival because we have other things in mind. Our priority is no more to survive, but to satiate another more impellent need. It is the Moloch inside ourselves, who is demanding  a human sacrifice.

Politicians, as journalists, intellectuals, artists and other elitist groups - in short, our representatives, who represent our unconscious and darkest needs - are out to satisfy their mandate, which is to relieve the people of their sense of guilt.

 

That is the reason why Caroline Glick - no matter how lucid and accurate she is, no matter how deeply her reasons are rooted in the Reality Principle, vis a vis her opponents’ stammering and confused ways – cannot convince the Israeli establishment to change its ways. There will always be a Peretz, a Holmert and a Tzipi Livni to seduce the guilt ridden Israelis to surrender their security – in short their very life – in the name of the appeasement of their inner sense of guilt.

Don’t forget that Menashe, king of Judah, sacrificed in the Tophet his very son, in the name of such an appeasement.

 

The IDF's doctrinal discussions are framed by the larger national debates in Israel.

Of course. However, it is not just an intellectual confrontation on the best ways to preserve our security, but a debate between those who feel a compulsion to surrender, driven by an overwhelming and compelling sense of guilt, and those who can discern between the Reality Principle and the masochistic fantasies induced by a self destructive sense of guilt. Those fantasies are what in the article Glick called “those debates remain captive to the same fantasies and lies…”

Fantasies are rooted in the Pleasure Principle, in our case a masochistic pleasure, and in order to be acted out they need the cover up of lies. Lies that are covering the acting out of a pleasure cannot be easily defused, because the libidinal pleasure is invested with many energies in order to self – preserve.

The sense of gilt induced into a retrenchment – a contraction – and vital energies, which at the beginning were meant for self –preservation, now are dedicated to self –destruction. That is the nature of masochistic pleasure: a deviation of energies from a vital libidinal target to a contorted self defeating aim.

 

to implement the agreement and handover Judea and Samaria The expression returns afterwards in:

If we didn't hurry up and hand over Judea, Samaria and Gaza and partition Jerusalem
“Handover Judea and Samaria” and “hurry up and hand over Judea Samaria and Gaza and partition Jerusalem”.  The “hurry up” is symptomatic both of a libidinal need and of the urgency of undoing a drive perceived as sinful and aggressive. The sinful object of the lust – the Land of Israel – must be surrendered. On the Jewish sense of guilt induced by the lust for the Promised Land, I have written in my previous articles Jews Hugging and Kissing Ahmadinejad and The Assassination of Rabin and Its Consequences for the Israeli Palestinian Conflict


the policy debate revolves around issues such as whether protecting the residents of Sderot from rocket attacks will strengthen or weaken Abbas, the IDF will be incapable of defending Israel regardless of who its leaders are.

Indeed so. And the reason is that a group who feels guilty must sacrifice some of its members in order to relieve the sense of guilt The residents of Sderot are the sacrificed lamb on the altar of our collective sense of guilt. No more and no less than the son of Menashe, king of Judah, who was sacrificed to the Moloch.

the IDF will be incapable of defending Israel. It is not that the IDF is incapable of defending Israel, but that the IDF has been “instructed” not to defend Israel, in order to consummate the guilt – induced punishment. Therefore: regardless of who its leaders are.

Indeed the leaders themselves are only the instrument of the group unconscious needs.

Israel's national debate has largely ignored the only question that should be guiding it: How are we to advance Israel's national interests? Rather, since 1993, our national debate has been anchored around the question of how best to establish a Palestinian state.
Again, the national priority is not our own security and life but how to defuse the sense of guilt by surrendering as soon as possible - and as much as possible - of the Land of Israel, which is the object of our sinful drives. Therefore – and again - the IDF is cognitively barred from rationally approaching Israel's security challenges. Indeed Lust and Sense of Guilt are all but rational.

hallucinatory peace processes is a very precise definition. So exact that it is doubtful whether The Israeli public is quite sick of it. May be some of the public, but as long as the majority is led by the nose into hallucinatory rituals of self abashment – because that is what they feel comfortable with – I don’t know if we can expect any change soon.

 

the doomsday scenario was based on a massive fabrication. People who feel guilty love doomsday scenarios.

 

NEXT WEEK Israel's premiere policy conference, the 7th Annual Herzliya Conference, will take place. The "Who's Who" of Israel will again present their "visions" for the country. In most cases, the speakers will regale us with tales of how they will make peace with the PLO and will warn us that we have to be nice to Abbas, (and eat our peas and carrots,) or be destroyed by Iranian nuclear bombs.

If we are guilt –ridden little children we deserve to be spoken at as little children

At last year's conference, the AIDRG team presented the data they had painstakingly compiled. They were greeted with unabashed hostility. Many walked out in the middle. Others groaned or chatted loudly with their friends trying to drown out the presentation. The audience of elitists didn't want to hear proof that for the past decade, Israel's national debate - which they themselves have led - has been based on a lie aimed at destroying the Zionist idea.

What else?

As King Lear said to Kent: “Come not between the dragon and his wrath”. The one who tries to dissuade a dragon from acting out a libidinal need will indeed be greeted with unabashed hostility. It is even more true if a compelling sense of guilt is involved, which demands satisfaction.

Why otherwise the hostility? Why the obtuseness? Why they didn’t want to hear? Why to destroy the Zionist idea if not because of its unconsciously perceived lustful and sinful substance?

 

 

On Caroline Glick’s Our World: The rule of lawyers

 

I had just finished my comment on “Column One: Where Israel Went Astray”, that Glick published another article: Our World: The rule of lawyers.

From my point of view it is a continuation and a confirmation of the previous one.

Law and lawyers are strictly associated with sense of guilt. The Jews have built the most complex code of Laws –The Oral Law and the Talmud – because they harbour the most enormous and “disproportionate” sense of guilt of all the peoples of the world.

Our is not just a Law. It is a ritual. And the more compelling and disturbing is the sense of guilt, the more the ritual is complex and intransigent.

However, as Nietzsche said: " That someone feels "guilty" or "sinful" is no proof that he is right, any more than a man is healthy merely because he feels healthy. Recall the famous witches trials: the most acute and humane judges were in no doubt as to the guilt of the accused; the "witches" themselves did not doubt it and yet there was no guilt. "( Genealogy of Morals, third essay, 16).

 

Now, the columnist in her article deals with the absence of law enforcement regarding the gangs of Bedouin thieves in the Neghev, vis a vis the extreme severity inflicted on the Israeli farmers who try to defend their property. It is a way to “give back” the Negev, as they are in such a hurry to give back the West Bank, Jerusalem and Gaza.

At the source of the hurry, as I sustained afore, there is a compelling sense of guilt associated with the Land herself. In order to appease the sense of guilt, not only the West Bank, Jerusalem and Gaza must be surrendered but also the Negev and every other piece of the lusted object. Turning the Negev into an unsafe place to Israelis will achieve the aim.


[ Supplement: On the roots of Jewish and Israeli sense of guilt, I have written on the 21 March 2007 in A Tale of Two Cities. The Unfolding of the Sense of Guilt in Judaism and in the West]


Links:

From the Invasion of Lebanon to the Charges of Rape (October 21, 2006)
The Cease - Fire and the Hasty Retreat of Israel (August 25, 2006)
The Disproportionate Reaction of Israel (July 22, 2006)

 

Back to Home Page