Haaretz: Why I'm Not a Zionist - and Why You're Not, Either

I’m not going to dwell here on the dual ironies of the government claiming Israel is a functioning democracy while denying entry to its critics, and the wailing from those who want to boycott an entire country and visit it at the same time. I’ve scant expectations of either side making any logical or moral sense. But the by-now-standard reaction from the opponents of every latest wheeze by the government still mystifies me. [...]

Their problem is with the latest racist law going through the Knesset, deportation of African asylum-seekers, discrimination against non-Jewish citizens and non-Orthodox Jews, the killing or arrest of a Palestinian teenager in the West Bank, the ongoing iniquities of the occupation and the gradual erosion of Israeli democracy. [...]

Many of those on the left who are now denying they are Zionists would probably approve wholeheartedly of the intellectuals of Brit Shalom who, in the 1920s, called for a bi-national Jewish-Arab state in Mandatory Palestine and accused the rest of the Zionist establishment of perverting Herzl's vision. The enlightened German-born professors who founded both Brit Shalom and the Hebrew University in Jerusalem claimed to be the "true Zionists." [...]

I'm Jewish and Israeli and believe we can fix Israel’s massive problems and injustices, but I’m not a Zionist, in the same way I'm not a Pharisee, a Roundhead or an Abolitionist. I may have been had I lived in the relevant period in history, but I can't belong to, or leave, a movement whose purpose ended long before I was born. 

read the article

Haaretz: What the 'One-state Solution' Really Means: Israeli-sanctioned Apartheid or Eternal, Bloody Civil War

The Likud Central Committee and the Jewish Voice for Peace have joined the same team, along with other extremist forces on the right and the left. Both are intent on establishing a bi-national state in place of the Jewish state of Israel. Both are committed to a one-state solution that will put an end to Israel as a Jewish and democratic commonwealth. Both constitute a mortal danger to mainstream Zionism. [...]

Contrary to widespread press reports, the awkwardly worded resolution adopted that evening did not actually call for the formal annexation of territories. Its intention was to encourage the application of Israeli law in the West Bank to Jews - and Jews alone.

In fact, this is already the case; but the current legal situation is temporary, at least in theory, and is dependent on the approval of the military governor of the territories, who has ultimate legal authority. But if the resolution were to be passed into law, as Likud now demands, the legal discrimination would become official Israeli policy. [...]

And if adopted by the Knesset, the decision would put in place some form of apartheid - a word that most of us in the mainstream Jewish community have carefully avoided until now. But since the Likud resolution intends to apply two different sets of legal rules to different populations occupying the same territory, there is simply no word other than "apartheid" that fits.

read the article

openDemocracy: Has rape become a weapon to silence atheists in Bangladesh?

This amendment aimed to curb free speech and targeted bloggers and writers who were trying to promote secular values in a civilised and peaceful way. Atheists were brutally attacked and several were killed in subsequent bloodbaths in 2015 and 2016. [...]

The organised persecution of atheists in Bangladesh began in 2013, following the Shahbag movement during which secular activists called for the hanging of Islamist politicians accused of war crimes during the 1971 war of independence, and the murder of atheist blogger Rajib Haider. [...]

The prime minister has herself publicly criticised those who speak out against religious belief. In 2015 she told Time magazine: “If anybody thinks they have no religion, OK, it’s their personal view... But they have no right to write or speak against any religion."

read the article

Vox:Study suggests Trump’s “Muslim ban” actually improved attitudes toward Muslims

When President Donald Trump announced his “Muslim ban” barring visitors and would-be refugees alike from six majority-Muslim countries early last year, critics worried it might prompt an additional wave of Islamophobia across the United States, intensifying the anti-Islamic sentiments that had been a cornerstone of Trump’s campaign. [...]

The authors found that the national discourse about the Muslim ban — and a general sense from liberal and mainstream media that the policy was at odds with “American values” — prompted some respondents to shift their attitudes, ultimately causing many Americans who had previously supported or been neutral on the issue of Trump’s Muslim ban to come down against it. [...]

This is striking in part because, according to the study’s authors, sudden significant shifts in public opinion tend to be rare. Second, those whose views shifted most radically were those who cited their identity as Americans as a major part of their self-conception overall. This suggests that public debate that centered on the Muslim ban being “un-American,” or otherwise counter to American values of openness and hospitality toward foreigners, had contributed to this shift. Write the study’s authors:

read the article

Politico: Beginnings of a Turkish-German bromance

The meeting might have drawn little notice were German-Turkish relations not at their lowest point in decades. Berlin has led criticism of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s turn toward authoritarianism, which has included the arrest of a number of German citizens on what Berlin considers bogus grounds.

The Turkish leader has responded with a string of ad hominem attacks, accusing German companies of supporting “terror” in his country and drawing comparisons between German Chancellor Angela Merkel and the Nazis. Erdoğan has also lashed out at several other European countries and the U.S., suggesting they were trying to undermine Turkey in various ways.

The breakdown of the relationship with Germany has not been without cost. Tensions with Turkey’s most important trading partner and long a key ally in Europe has left Ankara particularly isolated. And with millions of Turks living in Germany, the collapse in the bilateral relationship worries many in Berlin, as well. [...]

The new tune suggests the Turkish leader is starting to take the economic impact of Turkey’s growing isolation seriously. Since the 2016 failed coup against Erdoğan, Turkey’s currency has taken a nosedive.

While the cheap lira has boosted exports and fueled growth, it has also led to a spike in inflation, which is near a 15-year high. Government interference in the economy has added to foreign investors’ concerns about Turkey’s course, and they are turning away from the country.  

read the article