HAPI reacts to Israeli election with events

The Hopkins community was exposed to two different informational events following the reelection of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The Hopkins American Partnership for Israel (HAPI) hosted a discussion on Monday night, featuring three Hopkins professors with expertise in Israeli history and politics. Additionally, Lev Lewis Grinberg of Ben Gurion University in Beersheba, Israel, addressed the historical context of the election results in a March 26 lecture.

HAPI hosted professors Steven David of the political science department, Yitzhak Melamed of the philosophy department and Robert Freedman of the political science department. The club sponsored the event with the aim of furthering its mission of student education.

Each speaker at Monday’s discussion had extensive knowledge of Israel and Israeli politics, according to senior Evan Brooker, HAPI’s co-president.

“Melamed is someone who is very well-versed in Jewish thought and has a background with Israel,” Brooker said, “Freedman... was present for some high-level talks with Ministers Rabin and Sharon and has a lot of experience in Israeli foreign policy. David is a very well-known political science professor and has published a great deal on the subject of Israeli foreign relations.”

He explained HAPI’s reasoning for hosting these particular speakers.

“We have a lot of great resources here at Hopkins and a lot of great professors who have studied a lot of great issues and who I think will facilitate a great discussion,” Brooker said.

Linda Maizels, the moderator of the panel, began with a brief description of her work as the head of the Jewish Council for Public Affairs and discussed the importance of Israel to the United States due to the close relations between the two nations and the ongoing negotiations focusing on halting the progress of Iran’s burgeoning nuclear programs.

Freedman found benefits for the Arab population of Israel in the results of the recent election.

“My impressions of the election: two positives,” Freedman said. “First, Yachad was a genuinely racist party... no votes; and second, the Arab parties unified and — I want to emphasize this — prior to unification... they were trying to outdo each other... over who could be more anti-Israel. Now perhaps that they’ve unified they will worry more about their constituents’ needs... This could lead to the better integration of the Arab citizens of Israel.”

David expressed concern that the reelection of Netanyahu may cause many Americans to become more distant from Israel despite the two countries’ historically close alignment.

“My impression of the election has a lot to do with Israeli-American relations and I’m very concerned... when you think of why Israel and America have been so closely aligned, why America has been such a strong ally of Israel, a central ally of Israel,” David said.

Senior Joanna Wexler thought the event helped to demonstrate the importance of the US-Israeli relationship.

“I think that this panel showed that even if we as Americans have our own personal beliefs about who is in political power in Israel, it is still of the utmost importance for the U.S. and Israel to remain strong allies,” Wexler wrote in an email to The News-Letter.

David cited Israel’s military prowess as a reason for the American-Israeli partnership.

“Israel is by far the strongest military power in the region, it’s a reliable ally and its government can’t change overnight,” David said. “I don’t think the strategic value of Israel is as significant, certainly, as it was during the Cold War... I don’t think the strategic significance is enough to sustain this relationship.”

David said the cultural ties between the two countries could maintain their alliance.

“I think what it really comes down to is common values... I think most Americans see Israel as a country like us, a country of immigrants — a country that is a democracy with a vibrant press, an independent judiciary, freedom for the individual — and they see Israel as a country like us struggling to survive in a tough world,” David said. “If this common value aspect is undermined, then I think America’s support for Israel will be undermined.”

Melamed expressed his beliefs that the immediate projections and possibilities for internal stability are low.

“There are going to be bad things that will happen,” Melamed said. “It’s not going to be a stable coalition... In terms of the prospects for the next five, 10 years, I don’t expect many great things or good news.”

According to Melamed, the slim possibility of the development of a coalition between the liberal parties and the Arab parties could benefit the Middle East.

“There is nothing better than the development of a kind of moderate liberal leftist Islam,” Melamed said. “The Middle East would look much better than it does right now.”

The panelists discussed the merits of a one-state versus a two-state solution to the Palestinian question. Melamed contended that a one-state solution is possible while Freedman and David promoted a two-state solution as the only way to achieve peace in the region, arguing that Jews could never be safe unless they had their own state and held political power.

Senior Spencer Perl was particularly drawn to the one-state versus two-state solution discussion.

“I happen to have agreed with a lot of what professor Freedman said and found it difficult to follow professor Melamed’s reasoning behind a one-state solution,” Perl wrote in an email to The News-Letter.

Brooker was pleased with the event and thought it furthered HAPI’s mission.

“The goal of our organization is to promote a strong relationship between the U.S. and Israel, and the best way we see that we can do that is to create events where faculty and students can come together and better learn about the facts and make more informed opinions,” Brooker said.

Sophomore Dan Friedman, co-president of HAPI, also thought the event was valuable.

“It’s always important in these sorts of discussions to understand that while dialogue may get heated and closely held personal beliefs may be challenged, the discomfort that comes with hearing differing viewpoints on heated issues is precisely how progress is made and we grow as individuals,” Friedman wrote in an email to The News-Letter.

Grinberg’s March 26 lecture, which was referenced by the speakers at HAPI’s panel, was an attempt to provide context for the election results and predictions for the future.

Grinberg argued that imbalances between social groups prevented Israel from achieving true democracy.

“Some balance of power is necessary if you want to have democracy,” he said. “If one group has power and the other group doesn’t have power, it’s very difficult to have democracy... In Israel, the question of the balance of power was very problematic from the beginning.”