I stand corrected on the specifics of Israel... [updated]

...but as a result am more worried than ever about its long-term prospects

Thanks to commenters' inputs on a previous post concerning the details of citizenship in Israel, I withdraw much of my criticism--both implied and explicit--regarding the current state of formal laws discriminating against non-Jews living within Israel proper (the most recent post). The situation seems more defined by informal means than "ones on the books," so the comparisons (interally, at least) are more contemporary when it comes to U.S. history (like civil rights for African-Americans over the past several decades, which is why Israel's supreme court is such a crucial player).

This new knowledge makes me more understanding of why Israel is so nervous about the long-term demographics (the enlightenment of laws created decades earlier didn't foresee the demographic shift--save the specifically crafted Law of Return).

Internally, I would expect the pervasive informal discrimination to get worse over time, to include--as we see here in the States with Hispanics and other immigrants--increasing attempts to formalize into law new mechanisms (beyond the Law of Return) whose aim is to preserve clear majority status for Jews over the long term.

I know a lot of observers argue that Israel's policies in the West Bank and Gaza are heavily colored by this long-term fear (the focus of Carter's book), and I would expect those strategies to get more explicit and obvious over time as well--although it's hard to beat the security fence for explicitness (as we are soon to find out ourselves).

Thomas Friedman (among others) pushes the interesting historical analogy that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is to the Long War (actually, I think he's still running with the "world war-something" crowd) what the Spanish Civil War was to WWII: a proving ground.

To the extent this proves true, Israel's attempts to stave off the unfavorable demographic trends may well presage Europe's, where I believe scale factors and assimilation capacity are far more favorably arrayed--for Europe.

In that way, whatever perversion of Israel's democratic tradition unfolds (e.g., recent rough talk from a senior official about loyalty oaths and deportations) may well serve to dissuade Europe from similarly desperate measures, thus elevating the utility of political co-optation through the accepted rise of Muslim immigrant-focused parties that are progressively mainstreamed (in Israel, such a progression would need to occur within an overarching one-state solution that seems fantastic from today's vantage point).

In short, not every "proof" need presage similar bad choices or tactics or outcomes elsewhere. We've seen Israel educate us positively in the past on many related security issues. Maybe it can do the same negatively regarding what should and should not be tried in pursuit of perserving a nation's perceived cultural birthright/identity.

Conversely, it's no surprise that a demographically rich Core country like China has the easiest time arguing (and to a lesser extent, practicing) policies of cultural "noninterference" abroad (even as it can be rather ruthless about such matters in its internal "frontier" areas). When you've got surplus bodies and spend most of your time trying to control population growth, you look at the world differently--i.e., you naturally think of an expanding frontier and not a fenced-off gated community.

This is why I argue for turning the immigration "threat" on its head--as in, why not get back into the business of adding more states and keeping America open for new members?

Suffice it to say, that the Gap's frequently frightening demonstrations of civilization's thin veneer in their own countries typically scares the hell of us in the Core, convincing many--in the manner of Mark Steyn--that the West is "doomed " unless we systematically mirror-image the perceived threat instead of remaining true to what got us strong in the first place and retaining more faith in the resilience of our political, social and economic cultures.

Hmm, looking over this post I find even more interesting things to think about regarding the film "Children of Men," which is an extreme depiction of such fears (no babies presages end times for civilization). I'm definitely going to have to read P.D. James' original novel.

Further thoughts:

Of course, I stand ready to instantly recant any portion of this post that's patently "untrue!" As I learned long ago on the subject of Israel-v-Palestinians, "insurmountable facts" can be amassed for all conceivable positions!

And if my flip style offends, then please move along, because this is a blog, not a press release. I know a lot of people take their (and others') blogs very seriously (and I welcome their patient lecturing), but I--unfortunately--do not.

I write this blog only for myself, because that's what works best for me. So I'm more than happy to offend, screw up, misstate, or just plain get it wrong, because this is the space where I do that.

When I want to be more careful, I write a column, or beyond that an article, or beyond that books. The blog sits at the bottom of that foodchain, where richness is held supreme and reach is--quite frankly--ignored.

And yes, by such statements I am rehashing old, touchstone arguments that I've employed here many times in the past. Why? The assumption that Hewitt's interviews are triggering any influx of new blog readers.

Strange sort of welcome, I know,but better to be straightforward from the start, no?

Comments

[stuart abrams]

Many years ago I went to a lecture by H. Bruce Franklin, back in his Maoist/Stalinist days, in which he expressed the view that all dystopian science fiction is fundamentally reactionary because it reflects the fears of the bourgeoisie about the inevitable rule of the proletariat. In the lecture, he was discussing Zamyatin's novel "We", from which Orwell probably cribbed a lot of "1984". Whatever one may think of Franklin's ideology (I think Franklin himself has abandoned it), I think he is right that science fiction says a lot about the ideology of the present. I haven't seen (or read) "Children of Men", but it seems interesting to speculate that it is a reflection of the fears starting to spring up all over Europe that European culture is at risk of being swamped by the forces of globalization, as represented by the perceived "invasion" of Muslim immigrants. Interesting to see these fears operating in reverse.

[jtc]

"This is why I argue for turning the immigration "threat" on its head--as in, why not get back into the business of adding more states and keeping America open for new members?"

Exactly! Where is it written that we are maxed out at 50? As soon as Castro dies, we need to invade that country with the Peace Corps and FDI, build another Gateway Arch down there and invite the rest of the states in the Americas to join our Union just like we did when we expanded across the Mississippi.

It has been half a century since we expanded, it is past due!

[Ian]

To see the future of Israel in (say) thirty to fifty years time, perhaps one should look to the Lebanon. In the 1960s Lebanon had a Christian majority, a world-renowned American University and was a summer playground for Middle East and European tourists who enjoyed its California-like climate.However, during the 1970s and subsequently, the Muslim population engaged in a program to outbreed the Christians, with encouragement from the more militant Imams. There is now a Muslim majority, which is naturally seeking to control power in government.It's hard to see how Israel can avoid the same fate of internal "swamping" regardless of how strong its armed forces are. And parts of Europe are similarly "threatened" -- depending on one's cultural perspective.

[Nan]

Possibly relevant piece in today's Ha'aretz:

Jan 8 article on family reunification law

[Javaid Akhtar]

How can an assertion that the muslim community decided to have extra children just to 'swamp' Lebanon be made .Where's the evidence that is not just a kind of lame bigotry of the kind that helped justify the draining of a 'jewish' swamp in WW11.We muslims are not a swamp.I am a person, like you .I want a job, a life, children .I don't want to be drained!.Ian is playing out his prejudices with his remarks and how you posted them , without comment , is beyond me.

[Ian]

Javaid -- To answer your question. . .

One of the earliest statements of the aggressive demographic policy that I previously mentioned was made by the President of Algeria in the General Assembly of the United Nations in 1974, where he concluded: " Victory will come to us from the wombs of our women." More recently is has been reiterated by Mullah Krekar: "We cannot conquer these people by tanks and troops, so we have got to overcome them by force of numbers." (The Harvard Salient, Dec 6th, 2006.)

If there is not now a Muslim majority in the Lebanon, why the call for increased Muslim representation in government?

By the way, "swamping" just means overcoming by weight of numbers; it has nothing to do with swampy land, or the draining thereof.

Peace.

[Dave Goldberg]

I found a good article in Wikipedia on Arab-Israeli citizens at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_citizens_of_Israel that discusses history, legal status, as well as prominent members of the government, which include two Major Generals in the IDF and permanent justices on the Israeli Supreme Court. There is also discussion on discrimination and extreme positions that propose deportation.

As chilling as that sounds, I take comfort that the only political party ever outlawed in Israel is the fringe party, Kach, on the basis of its racist platform that wished to expel all Arabs from its lands.

I think its important to note that the Law of Return was first established to provide shelter for Jewish refugees of the Holocaust, many of whom were turned away from their former homes after the war. The Law was later instrumental for the acceptance of Soviet Jews in the 1970s and for Ethiopian Jews who were airlifted out in the 1990s.

I understand Dr. Barnett's view, but personnally, I believe that the attitudes are driven by Israel's security posture. Given a genuine chance for peace, most Israelis will jump at the opportunity for an equitable solution.

Just my opinion...

Great series of posts!

[Javaid Akhtar]

Throughout history,political leaders from all backgrounds , have called for ,for want of an better phrase.. "more breeding".(Germany ,France today for example) .Security and prosperity,through numbers.So what have you discovered Ian, that Algerians might have similar strategies regarding their birth rate( and that a mullah somewhere used some cranky language).Muslims,you declare, need just to be told ,advised , by militant members of the religious or political fraternity , to procreate for strictly political/military ends and that they have willingly and obediently obliged. Commom sense would dictate that the muslim population growth rate is related to their relative poverty.If the poorest sections of Lebanese society are breeding faster than the wealthier ones, it becomes quite a stretch to dress this up as a political ploy rather than a condition of their poverty.Don't you find the idea of families in Lebanon bearing more children just to achieve a greater share of political power ludicrous.The evidence you must have collated to have come to this conclusion must extend to beyond a handful of quotes from another country ( Algeria).

[Dan in B-more, hon.]

Tom, I appreciate your willingness to explore Israel in the context of your overall Gap-Core analysis. It's a tough nut to crack, to be sure.

I agree 100% that the status quo cannot survive in Israel, and my reading of current Israeli politics is that the extremists gain clout whenever Palestinian and/or anti-Zionist attacks take place -- requiring concessions such as more settlements or stronger language toward Palestinians. This only perpetuates the problem.

I'm hopeful that Olmert's and Abbas' bold moves in recent weeks will bear long-term fruit -- it's been a significant scale-down of tensions, from Olmert's release of PA funds and plan to take down checkpoints to Abbas' strong stance towards Hamas.

Of course, as is typical in many of the conflicts today, the extremes are dictating the debate. Without a strong force to come in and give some tough love to both sides, it will continue to be an ongoing interventionist nightmare, dictated by Washington's strongarm tactics, the EU's tepid and ambiguous approach, and the Arab League's deafening silence. (The Arab League loves to keep the Palestinians as an Israeli problem, because they want no part of that problem in their own territory. See the Jordanian Civil War in the 1970s.)

Resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is no panacea, but at least it would no longer be a worldwide proxy conflict. I suspect some portion of that resolution would involve dispensing with some of Israel's more arcane mistreatment of Palestinians and other Arabs in its midst. The larger question is whether the Israelis (and the Palestinians) can stomach whatever that solution ends up being.

[stuart abrams]

Lebanon has not had a reliable census taken since, well probably never. I think it is very unlikely that Christians were a majority as recently as the '70s. The notion of a "breeding conspiracy" being perpetrated by Muslims is far-fetched, to be charitable. Lebanese Muslims may have higher birth rates than Christians but that is likely attributable to the fact that the Christian population is much more urbanized. As Barnett accurately points out in his writings, lower birth rates invariably result when a population makes the transition from gap to core.Another point about Lebanon -- it is another example of the catastrophic legacy of colonialism in the Middle East. Lebanon is not a country that has any historical reality. It was largely gerry-mandered by the French in order to give a country to their Christian friends.

[Chap]

I actually wrote a paper about this and was hesistantly thinking about sending this to y'all asking how to socialize the idea. So I guess I should link the thing. Hope you like it; it came out in EuroJournal.