Editorial (February 19, 2010)

Sharing our experiences

JEWISH Australians should be heartened by the words of Aboriginal rights advocate Noel Pearson, who stated this week that Jews are “at the top of the list” of peoples who have contributed to civilisation, and that indigenous Australians could learn from our communal model.

Writing in The Australian, he lauded the Jewish commitment to education, as well as skills in defending ourselves from racism, without internalising the predator’s message and morphing it into victimhood.

Pearson especially emphasised the nuanced way he sees us maintaining our identity, while linking up with the world at “the cutting edge” of whatever’s on offer, culturally and scientifically.

Pearson acknowledged deep bonds between our two ancient civilisations — and we can add to that by looking back at a shared history that has intensified down the decades. From the time William Cooper’s Aboriginal Advancement League courageously protested to the German consul in Melbourne over Kristallnacht in 1938, to jurist Ron Castan’s brilliant career defending Aboriginal land rights culminating in the fight for Mabo before the High Court in 1982, to Mark Leibler’s pivotal role in Reconciliation Australia and the work of the Yachad Accelerated Learning Project ¬≠— which brings Israeli teachers to regional and rural Australia’s Aboriginal pupils ¬≠— the relationship has been a warm one.

Over the centuries, both our peoples have been hit by overwhelming adversities, and while it serves no purpose to compare the very different details of our two histories, it is fair to say we are two civilisations schooled in suffering. But how to bounce back when things look grimmest?

Perhaps that is the most abiding lesson, which by our own example as a dynamic, self-sustaining community — proudly different, yet integrated into Australia’s multicultural society — we can impart to indigenous Australians.

If, as Pearson maintains, we are a role model for Australia’s indigenous peoples, it is a responsibility we should treat with great care, sensitivity and humility. Let us make 2010 the year that we, as a Jewish community — from our national and state roof bodies, right down to synagogue groups dedicated to tikkun olam (repairing the world around us) — resolve to try even harder to extend our friendly ties with the first Australians.

Is that thing loaded?

THERE is, in language, such a thing as a loaded question ¬≠— that is, a question that presupposes the validity of an allegation that has not been proven. An often-cited example of this would be the question: “Are you still beating your wife?” Of course, whether the respondent answers yes or no, he will admit guilt for being a wife-beater.

September’s Goldstone report on the Gaza war was born out of another loaded question, one that presupposed that Israel had perpetrated war crimes even before a single piece of evidence had been gathered.

On January 12, 2009, during‚ÄàOperation Cast Lead, the United Nations Human Rights Council (HCR) adopted Resolution S-9/1, resolving, among other things, “to dispatch an urgent, independent international fact-finding mission … to investigate all violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law by the occupying power, Israel, against the Palestinian people throughout the Occupied Palestinian Territory, particularly in the occupied Gaza Strip, due to the current aggression, and calls upon Israel not to obstruct the process of investigation and to fully cooperate with the mission”.

Given the undisguised biased origins of the inquiry, Israel might be forgiven for feeling less than confident that it would be given fair treatment. Fast-forward to last week’s report in The Jerusalem Post that the Israeli government had shelved plans to create an independent body of inquiry into the actions of the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) in the Gaza war, as had been called for in Goldstone’s damning report.

Many legal analysts have expressed concern that if the Israeli government fails to open such a probe — beyond the internal review the IDF has already embarked upon — it could have long-term negative effects on Israel’s effort to combat the “lawfare” phenomenon, which seeks to delegitimise Israel through criminal petitions filed in European courts.

It is an unenviable situation, but one that will continue to concern Israelis and their supporters. Israel’s feelings of humiliation at being coerced into answering the HCR’s loaded question should not be dismissed lightly, but the consequences of not properly doing so can also not be ignored.

Here in Australia, our role is no less important: to give Jerusalem our assurance that whatever course of action it chooses, it will continue to find our dependable support.