Defending the indefensible settlements

To counter US opposition to Israel's settlements, Israel's American supporters are adopting a new, defensive strategy

<snip>

"A former insider at Aipac has spilled the beans on a major secret initiative by The Israel Project (TIP) designed to counter opposition in the US to Israeli settlements in the occupied territories. Douglas Bloomfield, former chief lobbyist for Aipac, writes that TIP, a group dedicated to promoting Israel's positive image among the US media and policymakers, has circulated a 140-page primer designed to prompt supporters in their exchanges with US journalists and key decision-makers when they are arguing in favour of the settlements:



You read the full document posted on Newsweek's site* (PDF), and includes a preface by its author, the Republican pollster and spin doctor Frank Luntz. What is especially instructive about the document is that it concedes that Israel is on the defensive here in the US. It conveys a recognition that the new Obama administration policy on Israel has caused a sea change for the pro-Israel community. Instead of being on the offensive, always pressing its case, the lobby, perhaps for the first time, is in crisis mode. Bloomfield continues:



Groups like TIP are not known for paying very close attention to truth or facts, and they don't disappoint here, according to Bloomfield:



more


*The Israel Project's 2009 Global Language Dictionary

http://www.newsweek.com/id/206021

Spin doctors tend to overvalue their own product by a mile.

Though it's said that, on another front, Luntz and his spin-doctoring did help Cameron to become the Tory leader in the UK.

Ugh to him, on all counts.

This 'defense' does a lot to convince me that Luntz knows what Israeli settlers are doing is wrong. And he's helping them do it anyway.

It's actually a little more moderate than I had supposed it would be.

the playbook in the PDF seemed so oddly familiar somehow

<snip>

"America's best Jewish minds are wracking their brains, trying to find a magic formula that will put the settlements close to the hearts of Israel's supporters, not to mention its critics. A new guide to the perplexed, disseminated by the leadership of the Israel Project, the organization spearheading Israel's public relations efforts in the United States, offers a glimpse into its very own internal confusion.

The informative document recommends discontinuing the usage of three traditional arguments, frequently used by Israeli and Jewish advocates in conversations with journalists and public opinion shapers: It cautions against religious arguments based on quotes from the Bible, which even put off a Jewish audience; it warns that the argument that the land of the settlements "belongs" (the quotation marks were used in the original) to Israel is unconvincing because, officially, Israel itself defines the territories as "disputed" (and not occupied); and explains that the argument that the Arabs use the settlements to their own advantage fails to justify Israel's policy.

The Israel Project's leadership recognizes that public opinion, even among Israel supporters, is ambiguous about the settlements. Despairing Israel advocates still embrace the delusional security argument, from which even retired general Moshe Ya'alon has distanced himself: They argue that the settlements are necessary for Israel's security and suggest telling audiences that the settlements were not created randomly. They were put on mountaintops and in militarily sensitive areas to create a security buffer between Israel and its Arab neighbors (Jordan?). If that does not do the job, remind the audience that the settlements constitute an effective early warning system (does this include their well-baby clinics?). And if that is still not enough, point to the Qassams as convincing proof of what happens when Israel evacuates settlements (kindergarten children in Gush Katif protected their friends in Sderot, or was it the soldiers who protected them?).

But the joker is undoubtedly the term "ethnic cleansing." A weak defense calls for an offensive. The guide for Israel warmly recommends that advocates complain bitterly about the idea that a given area will be cleared of Jews (did someone say Judenrein?). Why can Israel accommodate and even grant equal rights to its Arab minority (the Or Report is just a rumor?), whereas the Palestinian territories must be cleansed of Jews? Unfortunately, the guide does not suggest a response to anyone who heard and/or read the opinions of Palestinian Prime Minister Salaam Fayad, or of Ahmed Qureia, the head of the negotiating team, who invited the residents of Ariel and Ma'aleh Adumim to remain in their homes and live in peace and equality as a Jewish minority in Palestine. Qureia even said he broached this subject with former U.S. secretary of state Condoleezza Rice.

Too bad none of the prime minister's many advisers directed his attention to this generous Palestinian offer. Had he been aware, he might have refrained from making cheap usage of the ethnic cleansing argument in a conversation he had last week with Germany's foreign minister, Frank Walter Steinmeier.

Many American Jews will not heed the Israel Project's many suggestions. The leadership of the Reform community in the U.S. and Canada, which encompasses more than one million Jews, decided last month to adopt U.S. President Barack Obama's call for an end to construction in the settlements and for an immediate dismantling of the outposts. An official announcement released by the Reform community's leadership voiced concern over Israel's failure to meet its obligations in this regard. They are even demanding that the government take firm action against fringe settler groups that resort to violence against Palestinians."

more