In an otherwise disdainful and painfully partisan profile of Norman Finkelstein written by Jewish Week reporter Stewart Ain, Norman Finkelstein reveals that he plans to meet with Israeli consular officials in September to get an undertaking from them that he will be allowed to enter Israel should he attempt to do so (he was recently deported by Israel due to his outspoken criticism of its policies):
Finkelstein is preparing for what may be his biggest fight, albeit one he doesn’t relish. He plans to go to the Israeli Consulate in New York in September to seek an assurance that he will be admitted in December. Such assurance, he said, would allow all concerned to “avoid the spectacle of me applying under the Law of Return [which gives every Jew the automatic right to acquire Israeli citizenship]. … It’s hard to see which side will find that more ridiculous.
“I don’t incite riots,” he continued. “I’m just going to see a friend in the occupied Palestinian territories. I’m not there to see Israel. I do not need for every facet of my life to be politicized. If Israeli authorities would just grant me a visa, I’ll move on.”
Finkelstein said he hopes to visit a Palestinian, Musa Abu Hashhash, who lives with his wife and children near Hebron. They first met in 1988 when Finkelstein went to Israel with a delegation from the Arab-American Anti-Discrimination Committee and Finkelstein dedicated one of his books to the man, who works for B’Tselem, an Israeli human rights group. He stressed that his visit to Israel would be a “private” affair and that he had “no interest in turning this into a political issue. … I don’t think they can deny me, and I don’t want to turn it into a test case for the Israeli High Court.”
If they refuse, and Finkelstein invokes the Law of Return and takes Israeli citizenship, it would no longer be possible to prevent him from visiting the country. I just wonder whether the IDF, in a fit of pique, will call him up for miluim (reserve duty). Then you’d have the added spectacle of the Israel critic refusing to serve and then being jailed as a seruvnik (refuser). Of course, all of this is doubtful since I don’t believe the army calls you for duty unless you’re physically in the country; and as someone who never served in any army I can’t see that he’d be much use to the IDF, even as a mere reservist. But I’d never underestimate the willingness of the IDF and intelligence establishment to punish its critics.
There would be a delicious irony here: the Shin Bet attempts to make Finkelstein persona non grata in punishment for his outspokenness against Israeli policy toward the Arabs. Finkelstein then one-ups them by becoming an Israeli citizen, a prospect that’s got to fill them with revulsion. So which is worse: allowing Finkelstein to visit his friend in the West Bank unfettered? Or standing on sordid principle and forcing your worst nightmare to become one of you?
Returning to the issue of Ain’s antagonism for his subject. Let’s take but a single sentence out of an entire diatribe concealed as a piece of journalism:
No more loyal students, no more lectures to prepare, no more radio debates with his arch-enemy, Alan Dershowitz, no more national spotlight; Finkelstein is the man no one wants, and perhaps for good reason.
Just because Finkelstein doesn’t currently teach doesn’t mean he has no “loyal students.” In fact, he has thousands of students he has taught who feel tremendous loyalty to him. And while he may have no more college lectures to prepare, Finkelstein continues to lecture around the country. In fact, he just spoke here in Seattle at the University of Washington Hillel.
It is yet another presumptuous statement to claim Finkelstein “has no more national spotlight” since his books are as relevant and as quoted as ever. He continues to be an important part of the Jewish discourse on all the subjects about which he’s written including the Holocaust and Israel.
If Finkelstein is the “man no one wants,” then why did Ain want to interview him? Why did a documentary filmmaker spend several years making American Radical about the former college professor; a film which promises to make a big splash when it is released. The very statement is ludicrous.
I find it demeaning that Ain would ask Finkelstein whether, in his inability to secure college teaching work, he considered becoming a high school teacher; and it is unconscionable that Ain repeated the scurrilous Dershowitz charge that Finkelstein’s mother, an Auschwitz survivor, was a kapo. How can Ain or his editors countenance such calumnies? Did the reporter not research the collaboration charge by visiting Finkelstein’s website to see the powerful rebuttal he wrote? And if he had, how could he possibly have found asking such a question to be in good taste?
Reading the profile I felt deeply embarrassed for Finkelstein that he should be treated so shabbily by the Jewish press. This is yet another example of the parochialism and partisan nature of Jewish communal journalism in the face of controversial subjects related to Israel.
Kudos to you for a splendid article : Norman Finkelstein in his rigorous scholarship , uncompromising humanity and wonderful sense of humour symbolises everything that is beautiful about the jewish religion and tradition. Unlike his corrupt, smearing and manipulating zionist critics in Israel and particularly in the US.
Good for you, Richard. Your Finkelstein article is a good antidote to the stupid article by Paul Bogdanor which I forwarded to you earlier today. I hope you were able to open it this time. Also, I totally agree with the above comment.
I honestly didn’t know that you were such a big fan of the “Fink”.
And how do you know that his mother was a holocaust survivor. Because he said so. What’s the evidence. And even if she was she gave birth to a guy who cheers for Hezbollah and gets the warm fuzies when Jews get knocked off. And again, please give me a one column of yours that blames the Arabs for anything. Anything at all.
@Bill Pearlman:
I suppose if morons like you didn’t exist in the world, God would have to invent them. As for proof of his mother being a survivor…oh, I don’t know…perhaps it’s the tatoo on her arm. But that’s just a guess. Unless you wish to claim that it was fake…& his dad’s too.
I invite you to prove his mother a liar. That would be a splendid thing.
As an Israeli citizen, Finkelstein would be violating Israeli law by entering areas administered by the Palestine Authority. Depending on where exactly Musa Abu Hashhash, Finkelstein would risk arrest if he were to go visit him. Finkelstein would also definitely be barred from traveling to Lebanon or Syria or Gaza for that matter. It was a nice idea, good for publicity purposes, but it wouldn’t work.
Nice piece.
Compare Ain’s article to Ben Harris’ earlier hatchet job of Finkelstein in New York magazine. Enough similarities in style (I use the word…roughly) and content (also roughly) to make you realize Ain is not just contemptuous and partisan, but lazy, too.
Finkelstein’s mom was called as a chief witness in the US and Germany against Nazi guards in a few trials. But Bill will probably come up with something stupid to say about that too.
@mia:
I think it would be delightful to have Israel arrest Finkelstein for visiting his friend in the West Bank. Also, you seem to be forgetting the fact that Finkelstein would not live in Israel and so it could not prevent him from visiting any country he wished. And if it arrested him for visiting “forbidden” countries when he DID return to Israel, that would also make a great human rights case.
Many Israeli citizens visit the forbidden countries (Israeli Arabs & Jewish journalists). None have been arrested that I know of. Are you saying that Finkelstein should be treated differently than them?
The Law of Return does not grant an absolute right to immigrate, and the following paragraph 2 (b) could be invoked against Finkelstein were he to apply under the Law of Return.
Law of Return 5710-1950
Right of aliyah** 1. Every Jew has the right to come to this country as an oleh**.
Oleh’s visa 2. (a) Aliyah shall be by oleh’s visa.
(b) An oleh’s visa shall be granted to every Jew who has expressed his desire to settle in Israel, unless the Minister of Immigration is satisfied that the applicant
(1) is engaged in an activity directed against the Jewish people; or
(2) is likely to endanger public health or the security of the State.
Richard, all I said was that if Finkelstein entered areas administered by the PA as an Israeli citizen (regardless of where his residence is) he would be subject to arrest and the imposition of fines. Every entrance to these areas has a sign that states that Israelis are not allowed to enter. There are exceptions, like Israeli accredited journalists. Non-Israelis are free to come and go as they please. There are nonetheless many Israelis who venture into these areas illegally. They can do so if they have foreign passports and were not born in Israel, or in the case of Ramallah for instance, enter through Kallandiyah where no one checks you going in and exit via the settler road where you can pretend you were visiting a settlement.
Notice, I said SUBJECT. I didn’t say it would necessarily happen. The point is that if Finkelstein wants to visit the West Bank areas administered by the PA, claiming the right of return would still not be the way to go.
@paul:
Aw, c’mon. A “danger to the State?” You’ve got to be kidding. The gov’t would be laughed out of the box if they tried that. I’d like to see them invoke that as a pretext.
I find it delisciously ironic that the forces who sought to silence Dr. Finkelstein by helping to make sure he did not receive tenure have apparently provided him with greater visibility.
Though frequently couched in these terms, Dr. Finkelstein is no more a “failed academic” than Alan Dershowitz is a “respected academic.”