Banner
Habonim responds to Seeff letter on 242
Raphael Chaskalson, S’gan Mazkir Klali (Deputy Secretary General) of Habonim Dror Southern Africa, responds to a letter published by SAJR Online written by Laurence Seeff attacking the former’s first ever community campaign – Project 242 (‘Two States for Two Nations’). Neither of the men pull any punches, ether. Read on…
RAPHAEL CHASKALSON
A response to Laurence Seeff’s “Habonim’s 242 Campaign Exposed”
Between May 12 and 22, Habonim Dror Southern Africa, ran its first-ever community campaign – Project 242 (‘Two States for Two Nations’). The campaign aimed to educate the wider community on the necessity of a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and what compromises are required to get there.
The campaign included a number of well-attended open community events, various activities in the Jewish day schools, as well as a wealth of online media material, including infographics and an animated video.
CLICK TO SEE SEEFF’S ORIGINAL LETTER & PRESENTATION
Throughout the campaign, HDSA made it explicitly clear that the two-state solution is, first and foremost, in Israel’s interest. In fact, we argued, a failure to reach a two-state solution in the near future will place Israel’s future as a secure, Jewish democracy in grave danger. Supporting the two-state solution is an unequivocally Zionist position. HDSA, like most of the world, believe in a secure Jewish state coexisting peacefully with an independent Palestinian state alongside it.
We’re forced to respond to vitriolic attack
Speaking out in favour of the two-state solution is not a controversial position at all – it is one held by almost every significant international player on this issue, including Israel, the United States, the EU and the UN. It is therefore highly regrettable that we are forced to respond to a vitriolic attack on our campaign from Laurence Seeff, entitled “Habonim’s 242 Campaign Exposed”. Mr Seeff, without any basis whatsoever, labels Project 242 “deceptive and dishonest at best, and anti-Semitic at worst’.
He then goes on to cite a number of problems with the sources we used for our first infographic of the campaign, which sought to show that the two-state solution is the global consensus. Mr Seeff has promised to address our other visual material in due course. We will respond to this, if necessary, at the appropriate time.
At this point, it is worth taking a step back and clarifying what the first infographic sought to show. The graphic was made to show that the two-state solution is a widely agreed idea – nothing more. All it does is offer a visual representation of countries, important stakeholders and local organisations who support this idea.
It is unclear how Mr Seeff infers from this that HDSA sought to “blame the absence of a viable solution entirely on Israel”, nor that we represent some form of malicious anti-Zionist agenda. At best, this comes from an accidental misreading of our visual material. At worst, this is indicative of a common trend in our community of vilifying and victimising HDSA and its sympathisers, as a result of its proudly progressive political positions.
Nevertheless, for the sake of transparency, it is worth dealing with some of the individual points made by Mr Seeff in his response. There are several claims that Mr Seeff makes which are simply untrue. Take, for instance, the claim that the Palestinian Authority does not necessarily support the two-state solution.
At its conference in 1988, the PLO agreed to accept the creation of a Palestinian state on 22 per cent of the land between the Mediterranean and the Jordan and explicitly called for a two-state solution. Even Israel’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs unambiguously acknowledges this proclamation (see here). More recently, Mahmoud Abbas has unequivocally spoken out in support of the two-state solution and has even gone so far as to renounce his right to return to Safed, his birthplace, because he “understand [s] that the Jewish character of Israel cannot be compromised” (see here and here). There is simply no ambiguity about the PA’s support for the two-state solution.
Mr Seeff also makes the bizarre claim that we have “disregarded Israel’s viewpoint” in our infographic on the question of the two-state solution. The two-state solution has been the stated position of the Israeli government for decades, including the current one (see here). It also should be noted that the infographic did not seek to suggest a particular framework for an eventual solution, but merely to show the international consensus.
It was therefore neither an act of omission nor dishonesty that the infographic failed to include the conditions and provisos demanded by either side. Inferring that HDSA sought to disregard Israeli considerations in an eventual peace agreement is yet another example of Mr Seeff seeking to paint a particular picture of us and our motivations, with no evidence whatsoever.
Our visual representation of international support for the two-state solution deserves further explanation. Let us, firstly, clarify our criteria: we included countries that have publicly stated support for this idea, be it in UN resolutions, draft resolutions or public statements.
In spite of Mr Seeff’s tirade against the credibility of the UN, we are confident that official support from a sovereign state for a UN resolution calling for two states for two peoples, is sufficient for inclusion on our graphic – how else are we to find the viewpoints of every country in the world on this issue?
As leaders of a youth movement engaged in the everyday requirements of running HDSA, we did not have the time to find public statements made by every country in the world on this issue and are confident in our approach’s integrity.
Nevertheless, to prove that our response is grounded in good faith, HDSA will unreservedly apologise for two errors in the infographic. The first concerns the resolution cited as a source: the main source used for our calculations was UN Resolution A/68/235 which was adopted on December 20 2013 (not A/68/225) as indicated. This error is nothing more than a typo and is certainly not indicative of a devious agenda on our part. The second error for which we apologise concerns the actual numbers.
168 voted in favour of the two-state solution
According to the resolution cited, which called for a “permanent two-state solution to the Israeli Palestinian Conflict” (see here, pg 3), 168 members voted in favour of the solution, 6 voted no, 9 abstained and 10 did not vote.
We mistakenly counted absent voters in our calculation, a sloppy error for which we apologise. The remaining 7 countries in favour of the two-state solution that we used to make up the number 185 (over and above the 10 that did not vote) were Australia, Canada, Israel, the United States, Cameroon, Paraguay and Liberia. An amended graphic is posted on our website with these adjusted numbers.
In spite of all of this, however, Mr Seeff’s criticism of our numbers errs on the side of petty and does not invalidate our core claim: namely, that the two-state solution is a widely accepted idea around the world. As our newly posted graphic shows, 175 UN members support the idea by our sources – 90,6 per cent of voting members (so as not to raise Mr Seeff’s ire, we have rounded this figure down to 90 per cent). How can it be reasonably argued, with these numbers in mind, that this idea is not the global consensus.
A similar point can be made in response to Mr Seeff’s criticisms of the Jewish organisations that endorse the idea. Why is the fact that Ameinu SA is small in membership relevant in any way whatsoever to its statement of support for the two-state solution?
Criticisms of this petty nature do not detract from our initial claim and – more importantly – obfuscate the real issue. The fact of the matter is that Israel needs a two-state solution from the point of view of its own international legitimacy, security, moral conduct and future as a Jewish State.
Achieving this solution is now urgent. This is a view taken by those with the most authority on Jewish security in the Middle East – namely, all 6 surviving former heads of the Shin Bet (see here for an example).
Control of people does not lend itself to that goal
It is further worth asking precisely what Mr Seeff is trying to achieve with this “exposé” of HDSA’s real aims. Is he trying to show that the two-state solution is not the global consensus?
Given all our available information, HDSA is confident that it is. Is he trying to show that Zionists around the world should not be pushing for a two-state solution, and instead support an Israel that continues its military control of the West Bank? HDSA envisions a Jewish State founded upon ideals of morality and social justice. Military control over another people does not lend itself to that goal.
In closing, we find it regrettable that such a simple, neutral message has been distorted to paint us as anti-Semitic or anti-Zionist. HDSA, like all responsible Zionists around the world, cares very deeply about Israel’s security and future. Our calls for peace with the Palestinians and two states for two peoples, are made with that aim in mind. We call on Mr Seeff to kindly refrain from alarmist distortions of our political agenda in the future. We are proud of what we stand for and have nothing to hide.
CLICK TO SEE SEEFF’S ORIGINAL LETTER & PRESENTATION
Choni
July 9, 2014 at 6:00 pm
‘Of course Israel should not control another people (Ishmaelites). It should rather follow the commandment of the Torah to drive out all the (hostile) inhabitants of the land it settles and possesses. (See Num. 33, 50-55).
If it does not do this those that remain will be thorns in its sides and pins in its eyes.
The Arab people will never forgive the Israeli nation from \” stealing\” their land, and will bear an eternal hatred, They do not want a two state solution. They want total destruction of the Jewish people, and all the land of Israel. (In my opinion the rest of the world would side with the Arabs in their goal)’
Zionist
July 9, 2014 at 7:12 pm
‘The criticism of HDSA is nothing more than a scurrilous attack on an organisation that holds different views.
It is a shame that the critic is unable to entertain the fact that HDSA’s views are held by many living in the Galut as well as by many living in Israel like myself . In fact his response is puerile and lacking in substance.’
adam levy
July 10, 2014 at 8:20 am
‘What Choni is calling for is ethnic cleansing of all arabs from the land of israel and palestine in order to achive a greater israel.
\n
\nWow!’
Steve
July 10, 2014 at 10:05 am
‘What about mentioning the Israeli embassy as a local Jewish organization. That was a bit misleading, no?’
Laurence Seeff
July 10, 2014 at 10:27 am
‘Thank you for your reply. The response has been noted and will be addressed in the full final document which includes all the other info-graphics.
I find it regretful that HDSA has found this crucial hour to respond. Unlike HDSA which has found time for internal debate, I unfortunately have zero time to address HDSA questions at this very moment. I am saddened too that 3 days into a crucial operation in Israel, HDSA found time to respond to HDSA only issues instead of, at least posting one small post of support for Israel on HDSA social media sites. The absence of the likes is telling and will be addressed accordingly in conjunction with publication of the full document. ‘
Joshua
July 10, 2014 at 10:51 am
‘I commend Laurence for his presnetation. He was factually correct in all that he wrote, and HDSA have failed in their response to confornt him on any of these issues, but rather resorted to attacking his persoanlity and motives. HDSA have not been able to disprove anything that he wrote. In fact they have tried to hide behind the fact that they support a 2 State solution, and have neglected to deal with any of the issues that Laurence has raised. I am sure Laurence supports a 2 state solution, i think his issue is that HDSA depict Israel as the villain, when the real problem is Israel does not have a credible peace partner.
We want HDSA to support the 2 state solution by supporting Israel and its image, and not against Israel!’
Theo Kopenhager
July 10, 2014 at 10:36 pm
‘Laurence Seeff, are you not ashamed of yourself. I am intimately aware of your facebook tactics from our efforts on behalf of Cyril Karabus. Habonim was sending chaverim to Israel long before you were out of nappies. The only thing I do not understand is your motive in this vitriolic invective. Are you too thick to realise that one can intensely love the country and just as intensely disagree with its government. Expanding settlements on the West Bank, good for Israel future?, don’t tell me you believe that. Your desire to have all Zionists march to the same beat is nothing short of pathetic. The last group that said my country right or wrong murdered six million Jews. I am for Habonim Dror that desires a democratic and
Jewish State and not what you desire …..a settler run fascist entity. God help Israel from the likes of those like you. ‘
Choni
July 11, 2014 at 11:14 am
‘They are not settlements, and they are not the West bank.
They are Jewish communities built in Judea and Samaria the historical and biblical heartland of our only God given country. Doctor, you are very good at your medical practise, but a true Zionist you certainly are not.
It has taken 2000 years of exile, and miraculous war victories to re-establish our Jewish Homeland, and people like you and Habonim Dror now wish to banish 650000Jews from their homes, shuls, schools, kindergardens, and businesses, (and professions), and hand their land over to an implacable enemy.
I’m sure the \”old traditional Habonim would never agree to this suicidal 2 state solution.
Apparently you do love Eretz Yisrael, but only that part which suits you. You are a Zionist, but the \”settlers\” are not.
I , too, love in Israel intensely, but I love all of Israel including the \”west bank\”. I, too, criticize the government. My criticism, however, is diametrically opposed to yours. You, apparently wish the government to create another Arab (terror) state, while I wish the government would follow the commandment given in our Torah to banish all hostile Ishmaelites from the Land of Israel.
(But the again you apparently do not believe the words of our Torah)’
David Blend
July 12, 2014 at 4:42 am
‘in reply to Theo Kopenhager’s comments I need to say one thing \” well done on playing the man rather than the ball \” You obviously are too weak at debating the facts. We are all entitled to an opinion, but you obviously don’t believe that.’
Choni
July 12, 2014 at 4:07 pm
‘Dr. Kopenhager makes two very disturbing statements.
He makes an indirect comparison of a \”right wing\” Israel with Nazi Germany. I find this terribly upsetting for the pure emotions of an Israeli.
Secondly he asks if we want Israel to be run by a ‘fascist settler entity”.
As compared to what Doctor? A two-state solution with Arabs who slither into a ‘settlement’ and slit the throat of a six month old baby and sibling, and shoot the sleeping parents. Similar barbaric acts have occurred dozens of times in the settlements, and on the roads.
While the ‘fascist settlers’ mourn their dead, neighbouring Arabs name streets and parks after their ‘heroes\”.
So Doctor, Who are the fascists? There is place for only one nation in the God-given Land of Israel. Arabs have 22 states of their own.
‘
Choni
July 13, 2014 at 9:26 am
‘P.S. I have just watched a group of \”fascist settlers\” with Talit an Tefillin, reciting morning prayers next to a tank on the Gaza border.
Doctor Kopenhager, I really think you owe our Israeli settlers an apology for your remarks.
Hundreds of them have sacrificed their lives defending the state you intensely love.’
Miriam
July 13, 2014 at 3:08 pm
‘I was 16years old or thereabouts when I belonged to Habonim. We donned our \”uniforms\” religiously every Sunday morning and took off for Jewish Govt School in Doornforntien for our meetings. Our madrich and madricha were wonderful young South Africans and
together we sang \”We are marching to Jerusalem……..
with fervour and with more unimaginable joy we sang praise for the IDF in the miracle of the 6 Day War. I am now an old lady of 78 and made Aliya to try at last to be part of the big picture of Eretz Israel. Our Aliya had to be postponed for a while, but I had a chance to visit and come to know the picture of tnhe settlement enterprise through Nadia Matar and her wonderful energy. No two state is necessary. The love of the land can be shared under the umbrella of sane Jewish people, settlers in the forefront, and if the Arabs wan to become part of OUR homeland they can do so under our rules. No time for nonsense like the Habonim of to-day want to dictate. You are either for a united Jewish Israel or you are a traitor ….. I think!!!!’
Adam
July 15, 2014 at 10:19 am
‘I find it despicable that the Jewish report could post Seeff’s letter which insinuated Habonim as antisemetic. Not only is this shamefully untrue as it’s current members are the proudest Jews I know but it also shows that to him Jews are meant to have one opinion. This goes against everything I have learned about Judaism which encourages debate. Well done to HDSA for doing the same. It is a pity this community has so much hatred for an organisation that has always prided itself on being a peaceful Jewish voice.’
Raphael Chaskalson
July 18, 2014 at 12:37 pm
‘Dear all
I am the author of this piece on behalf of Habonim Dror Southern Africa (HDSA) and would like thank you all for taking the time to read it and respond. As we have always been, HDSA remains a proponent of open and constructive debate, and willingly engages with those who disagree with us on a regular basis. We request, however, that we do in an environment premised on respectful, fair discourse.
Let me first offer sincere thanks on behalf of HDSA to @Zionist09, @Adam and @Theo Kopenhager. It is heartening that there are prominent members of this community who defend us against the baseless charge of antisemitism and, more importantly, defend our right to hold our own opinions. We have received a similarly respectful response from most of the wider community, including the leadership of the SAZF, many of whom will not agree with all of our political positions. We thank you all for that.
In response to some of the other comments, let me first address the notion that we have personally attacked Mr Seeff and not addressed his points. I encourage @Joshua and others who hold this view to read our piece again. You’ll notice that we address a number of the points he makes including (but not limited to):
– the PA’s support for two states
– our alleged support for an anti-Israel agenda
– the international consensus
– some of our own errors, for which we apologised.
In fact, given Mr Seeff’s somewhat bewildering attack on us, where we are labelled ‘antisemitic at worst’, I consider this response to have been a measured one that steers clear of similar, unfounded ad hominem attacks. In this spirit, I would encourage you all to engage Habonim on its principal arguments and steer clear of similar attacks.
Finally, I find it regrettable that some posts in response have descended into racist discourse, making sweeping generalisations about ‘Arabs’ as if they are a monolithic mass. Although HDSA has consistently maintained (as our infographic on the matter clearly showed) that Palestinian terror is a significant obstacle to peace, it is never justified to apply such sweeping generalisations to an entire group or class of people. The leadership of Hamas does not represent the entire Palestinian people, many of whom want nothing more than to live the rest of their lives in peace with their Jewish neighbours. By the same token, there are some pockets of Israeli society who are both Jewish and extremist, even if the majority is not (we need only think of the recent murder of Abu Khdeir to emphasise this point). Let us steer clear of such harmful generalisations in the future.
Project 242 sought to draw attention to what compromises are needed to secure a viable two-state solution. HDSA cares deeply about Israel’s long-term future and security. Israel NEEDS an independent Palestinian state alongside it to maintain its character as a secure, Jewish democracy. This point was reinforced by the content of our other infographics. Supporting the two-state solution is a proudly Zionist position, one taken by almost every significant international player on this issue. The necessity of reaching this solution quickly, particularly in the context of recent hostilities in the region, is not something that can be simply wished away.
I have much more to say but believe I have addressed several of the core issues on this comment thread. I thank you all for reading. ‘
Choni
July 19, 2014 at 5:32 pm
‘\”supporting a two state solution is a proudly Zionist position\” So removing 650000 Jews from their homes, schools, businesses, shuls and even graves, and surrendering the land to the arabs is proudly Zionistic? Is it not a type of ethnic cleansing of Jews from their own Land.? It would be far better to remove all hostile arabs from our Land to any one of 22 arab states. Besides this would be in line with the commandment to \”drive out the inhabitants from the land, so that you may possess it. If you do not drive them out they will be thorns in your sides, and pins in your eyes\” (Num 32, 50-55). Our Torah also forbids any form of negotiation (including a two-state solution) with the Arabs. (Ex 34, 11-12).
Our Torah too, has much more to say about arabs living in our Land. That is authentic Zionism not this counterfeit Zionism promoted by Habonim Dror and other such groups.
The only solution for eternal peace for the nation of ISrael will come from Tanach. Our history from the time of the first conquest until the present day, proves that only by military means based on Torah will Israel be secure.
‘
Choni
July 19, 2014 at 5:35 pm
‘Ant, All words in my previous comment are based on Torah, so please do not censor.’