Issue link: https://viewer.e-digitaledition.com/i/911869
T he Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) has given the idiom "politics makes strange bedfellows" an entirely new meaning — but it is hardly a favorable one. Wearing political blinders, the ZOA has aligned itself with political factions which, at best, have stoked anti-Semi- tism and been a magnet for the alt-right and white suprema- cists. At the ZOA's annual gala Nov. 12 in New York, a principal guest was none other than Stephen K. Bannon, the former chief strategist to President Donald Trump and now the chairman of Breitbart News, whose audience attracts anti- Semites and white suprema- cists. Bannon was to introduce Sheldon Adelson, the casino mogul who may be the larg- est donor to the ZOA, but, guess what? An irony : Adelson boycotted the gala, issuing a statement that, "The Adelsons will not be supporting Steve Bannon's efforts." Adelson was probably referring to Bannon's declaration of war on establishment Republicans. Another irony : Bannon had asked to be invited so he could introduce Adelson. This is the same Bannon who advised Trump in a campaign which: • Distributed a caricature of Hillary Clinton that had anti-Semitic over- tones (the Star of David surrounded by $100 bills). • Produced a TV ad that warned against "global special interests con- trolling the world," and, during the voice over, paraded prominent Jews across the screen. • Was inundated with some 3 million anti-Semitic messages in its chatroom during the GOP convention, many coming while the former governor of Hawaii, Linda Lingle, a Jew, was speak- ing. Overall, the campaign incited anti- Semitism to a degree not experienced since the days of the pilot Charles Lindbergh and, locally, the Catholic priest Fr. Charles Coughlin of Royal Oak's Shrine of the Little Flower in the 1930s. But Bannon was not the only "star" at the gala. Another featured "attrac- tion" was Sebastian Gorka, whom Bannon brought to the White House and whom The Forward exposed as having ties to "a violent racist and anti-Semitic paramilitary militia [in Hungary] that was later banned as a threat to minorities by multiple court rulings." The paper also reported that offi- cers of Vitézi Rend, an anti-Semitic, M aybe expectations are too high when it comes to the Israeli- Palestinian peace process. Maybe a peace accord, were one to somehow emerge from the swampland of failed negotiations, would be a start to something better. It wouldn't have to be the long-sought end to decades of conflict. Maybe regional sta- bility and a sense of security, fragile as they might be, are more real- istic initial expectations than resolution of such white-hot issues as bor- ders, settlements, refu- gees, Jerusalem, water rights, holy sites and mutual recognition. Lasting peace won't arise through yet another round of talks given today's regional climate, but the timbers for a framework for a more secure region cer- tainly could. That should be the target. In a perfect world, Israeli and Palestinian leaders would understand the danger of continuing a course strewn with cultural and political land mines as well as war zones. But new negotiations aren't in the offing. Even if they were, a Palestinian leadership in utter disarray and an Israeli government with no consensus wouldn't likely be the kind of negotiating partners required to solve a struggle predating Israel's statehood in 1948. It's as if the 1990s Oslo Accords gave the prospect for real peace unrealistic promise. STEP BY STEP In a Nov. 3 essay in the Jerusalem Post, Israel Policy Forum strate- gist Adam Basciano caught my attention by reminding that any peace treaty Israel negotiates with the Palestinians and, by extension, with the Arab world, may represent an end to official conflict, but would not bring "an immediate kumbaya paradise in which all tribes and peoples of the Middle East join together in embracing one another and their differ- ent narratives." Basciano is coordinator of strategic partnerships and initiatives for the New York City-based Israel Policy Forum. IPF advances "the goal of a two-state solu- tion to the Israel-Palestinian conflict, consistent with Israel's security needs," to ensure "Israel's long-term future as a Jewish and democratic state." "Even under the ideal package," Basciano writes in his JPost essay, "one that grants Arab-Israeli normalization and regional security coordination in return for Palestinian sovereignty, there will not be scores of Israelis eager to vaca- tion in Qatar or Jordanians professing their deep appreciation for the Jewish people." That's a thoughtful take that breaks from an idealistic vision of peace and instead sees peace emanating layer by layer toward two states, one Jewish and one Arab, coexisting side by side, secure and in peace. Under the right condi- tions, the latter view is the one to embrace. Conditions today are anything but favorable. The Palestinians are led by Fatah, a perceived political moderate with a ter- rorist wing, and by Hamas, an outright terrorist organization. Sadly, ordinary Palestinians who seek a better way are taught to despise Israel and belittle Jews. Meanwhile, some in Israel's gov- ernment want no part of two states, pre- ferring unilateral settlement expansion and land annexation. Israel attracts plenty of international criticism for tightly regulating Palestinian border passage, but checkpoint controls are vital to protecting Israelis from terror, whether fomented by Hamas or con- doned by Fatah. A NEW MINDSET A return to active peace talks hinges on both sides realizing the other side's cultural, historical and political narra- tive will never change completely. The best hope: The narratives will moderate enough to rekindle talks. As Basciano puts it: "If Menachem Begin and Yitzhak Rabin had waited for the Egyptians and Jordanians to embrace Zionism before signing their respective peace treaties, Israel's borders would be even more contested and less secure than they are today." Hard as it is to imagine opposing nar- ratives comingling "in an atmosphere of stability and under the political aus- pices of a future agreement," as Basciano posited, there's merit in considering the notion. Nothing else has worked. THE WAY FORWARD Basciano's path toward peace is long and winding — but also redemptive. He believes "an end-to-all-claims, perma- nent-status agreement (and its precondi- tions) should not purport to solve the many facets of the conflict, but what we should expect it to do is provide the political foundation to further enable these larger social transformations to get the peoples there." Yes, it's a leap to think along those lines when Hamas continues to build terror tunnels from the Gaza Strip into Israel and Fatah continues to glorify terrorists and indoctrinate West Bank youth. Still, with Palestinian leadership in both the West Bank and Gaza Strip on the precipice of a unity government under the rubric of Mahmoud Abbas' Palestinian Authority, and the Palestinian people eager for better times, it may well be time to once more test the negotiating waters and their ripple effect — this time with layered expectations. • 8 November 30 • 2017 jn continued on page 10 views Robert Sklar Contributing Editor essay Mideast Sight Lines View a peace pact only as a start point to ending Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Berl Falbaum Adam Basciano commentary ZOA May Rue Far-Right Alliance