Israel deprives Central Europeans of moral cover
By James M. Dorsey
When Israeli Foreign Minister Yair Lapid recently
sparked a war of words
with Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki he was doing more than resisting
Central European attempts at rewriting the history and legacy of the Holocaust
and right-wing nationalistic flirting with anti-Semitic tropes.
The war centred on a bill debated in the Polish
parliament that makes it essentially impossible for Jews to claim property they
owned before the Holocaust. Mr. Lapid denounced the law as “immoral” and warned
that “it will seriously harm relations between (our) countries.”
The foreign minister went on to say that “on Polish soil, millions of Jews
were murdered and no law will erase their memory. We
are not interested in Polish money and the very hint is antisemitic. We are
fighting for the memory of Holocaust victims, for our national pride, and we
will not let any parliament pass laws that aim to deny the Holocaust.”
Defence of the legacy of the Holocaust was certain to
earn Mr. Lapid brownie points among Israeli and Diaspora Jews as he manoeuvres
to either replace Naftali Bennett as prime minister in 2023 as part of their
coalition agreement or emerge as the head of government from an early election
if the coalition collapses prematurely.
Mr. Lapid’s harsh criticism marked a reversal of
former Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s willingness to give far-right,
authoritarian nationalists in the Visegrad countries – Poland, Hungary, the
Czech Republic and Slovakia -, political and moral cover in their efforts to
whitewash their World War Two histories and their varying degrees of collaboration
with the Nazis in the extermination of their Jewish communities.
Mr. Netanyahu appeared to empathize with the
authoritarian instincts of the leaders of the Visegrad states even if that put
the Jewish state at times in the awkward position of looking the other way, if
not defending the fomenting of anti-Semitic sentiment. That was most evident
with Hungarian Prime Minister Victor Orban’s attacks on
Hungarian-born liberal philanthropist George Soros.
Mr. Netanyahu also seemed to sympathize with the Central
Europeans’ anti-migrant (read anti-Muslim, frequently Christian nationalist)
beliefs as well as their willingness to hollow out their democracies and
curtail the rights of minorities.
Perhaps, most importantly, Mr. Netanyahu saw the
Visegrad states as a bulwark against European criticism of his hardline policy
towards the Palestinians. Mr. Lapid appears to believe that greater engagement
with the European Union is likely to be more productive.
The timing of Mr. Lapid’s move adds significance to
his policy reversal against the backdrop of Joe Biden’s defeat of Donald J.
Trump in last November’s US election, a poor performance of far-right
candidates in recent regional elections in France and Germany, and stagnating
support for Italian populists as well as Central European leaders like Messrs.
Orban and Morawiecki.
By confronting Central European revisionism, Mr. Lapid
is not only restoring a degree of integrity to Israel’s claim to be the Jews’
safe haven even if that status is called into question by its unresolved
conflict with the Palestinians.
He is also piling on the pressure on the Central
Europeans as Mr. Biden insists that democratic alliances a cornerstone of his
foreign policy and some West European leaders
are telling their Central European colleagues to live up to European Union
standards such as independence of the judiciary and the media as well as
minority rights, particularly concerning gender and sexuality or leave the
union.
Mr. Lapid’s distancing from Mr. Netanyahu’s erstwhile
allies strokes with his simultaneous declaration that Israel would break with the former prime
minister’s partisan alignment with Republicans
in the United States that threatened to weaken Democratic and bipartisan support
for the Jewish state.
Mr. Netanyahu broke with the traditional Israeli
policy of ensuring that the Jewish state had bipartisan support in Washington.
Instead, he identified Israel with Mr. Trump’s Republicans because of their uncritical
support of hardline Israeli policies.
Mr. Trump recognized Jerusalem as the capital of the
Jewish state and Israeli annexation of the Golan Heights captured from Syria
during the 1967 Middle East war. He also put forward a plan to end the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict that wholly supported Mr. Netanyahu’s policies at
the expense of the Palestinians.
“In the past few years, mistakes were made. Israel’s
bipartisan standing was hurt. We will fix those mistakes together,” Mr. Lapid
told US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken during a meeting in Rome.
Mr. Lapid’s bipartisanship does not imply a more
moderate approach towards peace with the Palestinians with Mr. Bennett, an
opponent of an independent Palestinian state and proponent of Jewish settlement
policy, as a coalition partner.
It does, however, seem to mean a policy that is less
openly provocative and in the face of a US administration that maintains
support for a two-state solution even if it does not invest political capital,
time, and energy in achieving that goal.
In the meantime, it may be far too early to write off
populists and nationalists in either the United States or Europe. Nonetheless,
Mr. Biden’s electoral victory coupled with setbacks in Europe and the loss of
Israeli cover for Central European revisionists makes civilizationalist leaders
in Asia like Chinese President Xi Jinping and Indian Prime Minister Narendra
Modi appear firmer in their saddles than their Western counterparts.
A podcast
version of this story is available on Soundcloud, Itunes, Spotify, Stitcher, TuneIn, Spreaker, Pocket Casts, Tumblr, Podbean, Audecibel, Castbox, and
Patreon.
Dr. James M. Dorsey is an award-winning
journalist and a senior fellow at Nanyang Technological University’s S.
Rajaratnam School of International Studies in Singapore and the National
University of Singapore’s Middle East Institute as well as an Honorary Senior
Non-Resident Fellow at Eye on ISIS.
Comments
Post a Comment