An Israeli Pundit Scorecard
Jude Wanniski
April 2, 2002

 

Memo To: Washington Press Secretaries
From: Jude Wanniski
Re: Eric Alterman subdivides

Eric Alterman, a pundit for the Nation, has as many friends in the national press corps as I do (very few). I suppose this is why he had little to lose in drawing up a scorecard of the Washington pundit class on how they divide on matters relating to Israel. There is a long list of knee-jerk supporters, who would not blanch if Ariel Sharon used daisy cutters on Yasir Arafat's compound in Ramallah, and other lists of various biases. Alterman counts himself among the few "critical" supporters of Israel and lists only five gentlemen of the press who are "reflexively" anti-Israel. His stated reason for writing the list for MSNBC.com is to ask for help among his fellow pundits in asking Israel to STOP its escalation -- which was more or less my advice to Prime Minister Ariel Sharon yesterday. There are a few names on the list where I disagree with Eric, but I do agree with him that it is time for his best friends in the American press corps to tell Sharon that he has bad breath.

* * * * *

Intractable foes, warring narratives
While much of the world sees Mideast conflict through Palestinian eyes, in America, Israel’s view prevails

By Eric Alterman

STEPPING BACK FROM the horrific headlines of the day, it is clear that the conflict over Israel/Palestine is all about competing narratives. Both sides inflict inhuman cruelties on one another. Both sides blame the other for forcing them to do so. The Israelis kill far more Palestinians than vice-versa, with far more deadly and effective weapons; but the Palestinians, unlike the Israelis, deliberately target innocents for murder. The Israelis say the conflict will end when the Palestinians renounce their commitment to terrorism and accept Israel’s “right to existence.” The Palestinians claim it will end when Israel ends its illegal occupation of Palestinian lands and compensates the millions of refugees it created, either by returning them to their homes or giving them the funds necessary to build new ones.

TALE OF TWO STORIES

In most of the world, it is the Palestinian narrative of a dispossessed people that dominates. In the United States, however, the narrative that dominates is Israel’s: a democracy under constant siege. Europeans and other Palestinian partisans point to the fact that the Israel lobby in America is one of the strongest anywhere, and Jewish individuals and organizations give millions of dollars to political candidates in order to reward pro-Israel policies and punish those who support the Palestinians. Another reason, however, is the near-complete domination by pro-Israel partisans of the punditocracy discourse.

Some Jewish groups in America like to harass news organizations like The Washington Post or National Public Radio for what they believe to be coverage insufficiently sympathetic to Israel’s plight. But even Ariel Sharon and Benjamin Netanyahu would not be able to complain about the level of support their actions typically receive from the members of the punditocracy.

For reasons of religion, politics, history and genuine conviction, the punditocracy debate of the Middle East in America is dominated by people who cannot imagine criticizing Israel. The value of this legion to the Jewish state is, for better or worse, literally incalculable, particularly when push -- as it inevitably does in the Middle East -- comes to shove. Here’s a list I made in trying to measure the immeasurable.

COLUMNISTS AND COMMENTATORS WHO CAN BE COUNTED UPON TO SUPPORT ISRAEL REFLEXIVELY AND WITHOUT QUALIFICATION:

PUBLICATIONS THAT, FOR REASONS OF OWNER OR EDITORSHIP CAN BE COUNTED UPON TO SUPPORT ISRAEL REFLEXIVELY AND WITHOUT QUALIFICATION:

COLUMNISTS LIKELY TO CRITICIZE BOTH ISRAEL AND THE PALESTINIANS, BUT VIEW THEMSELVES TO BE CRITICALLY SUPPORTERS OF ISRAEL, AND ULTIMATELY, WOULD SUPPORT ISRAELI SECURITY OVER PALESTINIAN RIGHTS:

COLUMNISTS LIKELY TO BE REFLEXIVELY ANTI-ISRAEL AND/OR PRO-PALESTINIAN REGARDLESS OF CIRCUMSTANCE:

HOW FRIENDS CAN BEST HELP

As can be seen from this list of lists, the entire anti-Israel contingent of the punditocracy does not add up to a single George Will or William Safire, much less a Wall Street Journal or US News. It remains to be seen whether unqualified support for all of Israel’s actions is really in that tortured nation’s best interest in the long run. Sometimes the bravest and most valuable advice a trusted friend can give is: “STOP.” Someone is going to have to stop first if this unending catastrophe is ever to end.

Eric Alterman is a columnist for The Nation and a regular contributor to MSNBC.com.

* * * * *

P.S. A few quibbles. Peter Kann is not the editor of the WSJ but the publisher of Dow Jones, and he reflexively keeps his hands off the editorial page. Paul Gigot is the editor of the editpage and has inherited his knee-jerk from Bob Bartley. Tony Snow of FoxNews is thoughtful and balanced, especially compared to Brit Hume, a true "daisy cutter." Pat Buchanan is a critic, to be sure, but still considers himself a "lifelong Zionist." Missing from the knee-jerk list is Jeffrey Goldberg of the New Yorker, who has dual citizenship with Israel and has served in the Israeli army. His recent tract against Iraq was pure propaganda. Editor David Remnick does belong on the "good list" of critical supporters of Israel, but he let the Goldberg piece slip past him. For the most part though, it is a very accurate list of people who, as Alterman says, could never even imagine themselves criticizing Israel. In that sense, Bob Novak is the best friend the people of Israel have in our press corps.