|
Home
About IsraCampus
Search
עברית
Русский
Ben Gurion U
Hebrew U
Tel Aviv U
U of Haifa
Other Schools
A-C
D-G
H-K
L-N
O-R
S-V
W-Z
Israeli Academic Extremism
Israeli Academic Extremists outside
Israel
Anti-Israel Petitions Signed by Israeli
Academics
ALEF Watch
IDI Watch
IsraCampus Essays
How to Complain
Contact Us |
Editorial Article
Tel Aviv
University - Yehuda (Judd) Ne'eman (Dept of Film and Television) has
no problem accepting the Israel Prize (and the prize money) from the
State he condemns
Alon Ben Shaul
3.3.2009
see the Editorial in Hebrew,
go here
An Independent Day's Farce
The "prestigious" Israel's Prize is moving rapidly from the outrageous
to the ridiculous. Last year it lavished the honor on Prof. Zeev
Sternhell, who advised Palestinian suicide bombers to confine their
terrorism to the settlers. This year it is
the turn of Yehuda (Judd) Ne'eman of Tel Aviv Univeristy, for
"film making." He has accused Israel of Apartheid and war crimes,
called to boycott its institutions and supports the right of return.
Yet again the far-leftists, inspired by a like-minded failed
minister of education (Yuli Tamir, Labor Party), are scratching one
another's back...
On 5 January; while the war in Gaza was still raging,
"Judd" Ne'eman signed a petition that was presented to many
embassies in Israel. He and many of his far-leftist anti-Zionist
colleagues were calling for an urgent international intervention in
order to stop Israel from continuing the war it was waging.
According to them the war was not against Hamas, but against "the
Palestinian people in Gaza."
He and the other signatories expressed the belief that
"Israel’s atrocities will not cease without a massive intervention
by the international community." They also called upon the UN
Security Council to "convene an emergency session and adopt concrete
measures, including the imposition of sanctions, in order to ensure
Israel's fulfillment of its obligations under international
humanitarian law." They cited Article 146 of the Fourth Geneva
Convention and called the UN to prosecute those Israelis
"responsible for grave breaches of the Convention." Ne'eman and his
crowd did not stop there. They contacted EU embassies in Tel-Aviv to
advise their governments to cease the dialogue in which Israel's
status upgrade is under discussion.
It is intriguing to see how, time and again, the
Ne'emans do not let any facts alter their one-sided arguments about
the conflict in the Middle East. In their assault upon their own
country, they knowingly ignore the events that preceded the recent
military operation in Gaza. Not a word has been uttered by them
about the constant barrage of missiles, rockets and mortar shells
that turned the life of so many Israelis living around Gaza Strip
into a living hell for so many years. They simply chose to ignore
the plight of citizens in Sderot and Ashqelon, who lived under the
shadow of mortal danger since the beginning of the decade.
On the contrary, in their zeal to condemn Israel, the
new "prize winner" and other extreme leftists view the Palestinians
as people who could do no wrong. "As if the occupation was not
enough," they wrote in their petition, "the brutal ongoing
repression of the Palestinian population, the construction of
settlements and the siege of Gaza, now comes the bombardment of the
civilian population: men, women, old folks and children. Hundreds of
dead, hundreds of injured, overwhelmed hospitals, and the central
medicine depot of Gaza bombed… Even the 'ship Dignity of the Free
Gaza movement,' which brought emergency medical supplies and a
number of physicians was also attacked. Israel has returned to
openly committing war crimes, worse than what we have seen in a long
time."
Worst still, Ne'eman and his ilk condemn other
countries for not attacking Israel for its "destructive criminal
policy." They exclaimed, "Except for some rather weak official
condemnation, the international community is reluctant to intervene,
The United States openly supports the Israeli violence and Europe,
although voicing some condemnation, is unwilling to seriously
consider withdrawing the 'gift' it handed Israel by upgrading its
relations with the European Union."
And then the Ne'emans returned to their favorite theme
– the Israeli Apartheid. "In the past the world knew how to fight
criminal policies. The boycott on South Africa was effective, but
Israel is handled with kid gloves: its trade relations are
flourishing, academic and cultural cooperation continue and
intensify with diplomatic support."
Even by the standards of the Israeli far left, these
extremist ranting words deserve special attention. The protesters
crossed all boundaries of decency and fair argument, by pleading
with outside governments to bring Israel to its knees. They lament
the fact that their own country is still able to function, and they
call upon the international community to bring it to the verge of
impoverishment and isolation. Here Prof. Ne'eman advocates not only
a policy that would disintegrate Israel's economy, but also an
academic boycott, including of those colleagues who sit next-door to
his office at Tel Aviv University. And without the inevitable
comparison to the white minority regime in Pretoria no anti-Israel
argument is complete today, when advanced by the Ne'emans.
"A Jewish life-support drug"
Long before the
Gaza operation, Ne'eman was party to another initiative. It was
called the Olga Declaration, the brainchild of a few radical
leftists who scribed a mission statement in the Israeli town of
Givat Olga. "The State of Israel," the document started, "was
supposed to grant security to Jews," but instead, "it has created a
death-trap whose inhabitants live in constant danger, the likes of
which is not experienced by any other Jewish community…"
The petitioners
asserted that the State of Israel was supposed to tear down the
walls of the ghetto and instead "it is now constructing the biggest
ghetto in the entire history of the Jews." For them Israel is not
even a democracy, "as it has set up a colonial structure, combining
unmistakable elements of apartheid with the arbitrariness of brutal
military occupation."
The Ne'emans
(some of them are known notorious ultra-leftists like Michael
Warshavsky and Haim Hanegby – surely they will be next in line for
the prize) wrote that since its foundation "Israel has lived by its
sword." But they also have an interesting psychological observation.
They note that an incessant succession of 'retaliations,' military
operations and wars has become the "life-support drug of Israel's
Jews." And now, almost four years after the beginning of the 'second
Palestinian Intifada,' "Israel is up to its neck in the mire of
occupation and oppression, while it goes on extending the
settlements and multiplying the outposts, repeating to itself ad
nauseam that "we have no partner for peace."
In their
diatribe they write: "We are living in a benighted colonial reality
- in the heart of darkness. Thirty-seven years after Israel
conquered the last of the Palestinian territories in the West Bank
and the Gaza Strip, over three and a half million Palestinians under
its rule are penned up in their towns and villages. The term
'Palestinian State' - which for years embodied the peace option - is
being used by many Israeli politicians as a mirage phrase, a spin on
the reality of occupation: 'In the future,' they whisper with a
knowing wink, 'the Palestinian entity in the Territories may be
called a 'state'.' And meanwhile Israel is amplifying the
devastation of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, as if determined to
pulverize the Palestinian people to dust"
The Ne'emans
propose an alternative outlook based upon the following principles:
"Coexistence of the peoples of this country, based on mutual
recognition, equal partnership and implementation of historical
justice." All that may sound nice, but they do not hide their
real intention. As people who are "united in a critique of
Zionism," they condemn Israel's refusal to acknowledge the
indigenous people of Palestine and on denial of their rights..."
Then, "adding insult to injury, Israel persists in its refusal to
bear any responsibility for its deeds, from the expulsion of the
majority of Palestinians from their homeland more than half a
century ago, to the present erection of ghetto walls around the
remaining Palestinians in the towns and villages of the West Bank."
They inevitably
reach the conclusion that "this country belongs to all its sons and
daughters - citizens and residents, both present and absentees (the
uprooted Palestinian citizens of Israel in ‘48) - with no
discrimination on personal or communal grounds, irrespective of
citizenship or nationality, religion, culture, ethnicity or gender.
Thus we demand the immediate annulment of all laws, regulations and
practices that discriminate between Jewish and Arab citizens of
Israel, and the dissolution of all institutions, organizations and
authorities based on such laws, regulations and practices." In
short, they see no reason why Israel should continue to exist as a
Jewish state.
Enjoying
both worlds
Yehuda Ne'eman, like so many of members of the Far Left academic mafia,
is a hypocrite. He already made clear that he would not refuse the
Prize, awarded by the "judges" Prof. Ram Levi, director Orna Ben Dor
and Dr. Anat Preminger. "I feel like I belong and I don't belong;
the part that belongs very much wants to be a part of things and
receive recognition, while the part that doesn't belong is kicking
and telling me all the things a person has to say to himself and not
to anyone else," he told Ha'aretz, after expressing delight
at the news of the Prize. "With all the horrible things Israel does,
I know that from the perspective of history, on the scale of evil,
we are not at the top of the chart." How comforting.
His arguments are as flimsy as his previous political accusations. He is
willing to accept the honor of the state of Israel on Independent
Day because, according to his logic, Israel is not as criminal as,
say, Sudan, Burma, Zimbabwe or Nazi Germany. And if we consult
history, the logic could be stretched even further, as far as the
last world war. Maybe Israel is not that atrocious after all, at
least not when it comes to his receiving a great big cash prize!
Would he be willing to become a Zionist if it would win him the
lottery?
But at least his gross hypocrisy is bizarrely consistent. Two and a half
years ago, at the annual Haifa Film Festival where he won an award
for his contribution to Israeli film, Ne'eman noted his difficulty
in accepting a prize from the establishment. "As a filmmaker, I
never shook hands with the government. So upon receiving this prize
as well, my hand is trembling slightly," he said. He added that his
films are meant to open viewers' eyes to Israel's political reality,
because the military here trains young men to "abandon their bodies
for the sake of the state."
The new prize-winner is not an ordinary anti-Zionist leftist. In addition
to his support for the so called Palestinian 'right of return',
meaning their right to flood Israel with Arab migrants and destroy
it, he expressed in the past solidarity for the Palestinian "armed
struggle," meaning terrorism. On one occasion he declared this
explicitly on the podium of Van Leer Institute in Jerusalem.
Ne'eman formed his opinion of the conflict from an early age, before
1948, as a child in the Jewish southern settlement of Mazkeret
Batya. He recalls playing with Arab children who lived across
the valley in the village of Aqir. When he made his first visit to
the village after the war, he could only find empty houses and that
left a mark on him. Yet, he joined the IDF as a combat medic,
participated in what he termed as ''ethnic cleansing" on the Golan
Heights during Six Day War and lived to tell the tale…
He has actually never studied film making, but was twice able to head the
film department at TAU. That says a lot about hiring standards
there. His films were seen mostly by his personal friends and
students, and hardly reached a wide audience. He himself admitted
that his films were all failures, and at one point in his career he
refused to make any more of them. "My works do not interest
anybody," he once complained. That pathetic track record was lost
upon the ''judges'' that awarded the prize to him. They regarded him
as "subversive and full of vision…an artist, researcher, teacher and
leader of artists, he has left his mark on crucial junctures in the
history of Israeli film since the 1960s." They meant subversive as a
compliment.
Let's challenge Prof. Ne'eman: Be true to your convictions and
refuse the prize!! You still have a few months to change your mind.
However, if you do go ahead and accept it, try to be brave for a
change. In your acceptance speech, voice your opinion about the
country you love to hate, call for the 'right of return' for
Palestinians seeking a second Holocaust, make your South Africa
analogies and denounce Israel's war crimes! Put your mouth where
the prize money is!
========================================
Op-Ed articles appearing on IsraCampus.Org.il are those of the writer and
do not necessarily represent the opinion of IsraCampus.Org.il
|