Indeed, Kristof chides those who point out that in the absence of Israeli sovereignty, Jews would (as was the situation prior to June 1967) be unable to even visit holy places in Jerusalem or Hebron. For him, Jews and even Christians have no such right. The only thing that appears to be sacred in his view is the 1949 armistice line, which Abba Eban famously dismissed as “Auschwitz” borders because they placed Arab armies and terrorists in position to destroy the state.
Kristof acknowledges Israel’s security barrier has stopped the flow of suicide bombers. But despite the lives it has clearly saved, he thinks it does more harm than good because it inconveniences Palestinians.
The columnist’s preferred policy would be for Israel to negotiate “more enthusiastically” with Syria (the current pace of talks to give back the Golan Heights being too slow for his taste); talk with the Saudis on the basis of their peace proposal, which is predicated on a so-called Palestinian right of return (which means the end of a Jewish state); expel Jews from those places that were Judenrein prior to June 1967; and do away with anti-terror security checkpoints. And what he wants is an American president who will try to force Israel – for its own good – to do exactly that.
For the “tough love” crowd, only Israel has the ability to engender peace. Palestinian intentions, their culture of terror and hatred for Israel and Jews, are mere details to be ignored.
It’s far from clear exactly what an Obama or McCain administration would mean for Israel in the next four years. But the one thing that friends of Israel should not hope for is a president who thinks he understands things better than Israelis themselves.
Unlike those who intervene with addicts to give them “tough love,” it is Kristof, and those Jewish groups that mimic his position, who are the ones with a tenuous grip on reality.