Israel Losing Key Battle by Ignoring Non-Jewish Supporters, Says Attorney
Translated & summarized from Maariv by baba
Attorney Kaleb Meyers asserts that Israel is losing a critical non-military battle by neglecting its non-Jewish supporters. He criticizes the "few against many" narrative, urging Israel to actively embrace and support non-Jewish allies. Meyers highlights the need to distinguish between religious identity and extremism, advocating for a broader, more resilient partnership to secure Israel's legitimacy.
The story in 5 lines · by baba
- Attorney Kaleb Meyers argues Israel is losing a crucial non-military battle by ignoring non-Jewish supporters.
- He criticizes the "few against many" narrative as a self-defeating approach.
- Meyers urges Israel to actively embrace, support, and understand the needs of its non-Jewish allies.
- He stresses the importance of distinguishing between religious identity and support for terrorism.
- The attorney advocates for a broader, more resilient partnership to secure Israel's legitimacy.
Attorney Kaleb Meyers argues that Israel is losing a crucial battle by failing to actively engage and support its non-Jewish allies. He contends that the common Israeli narrative of being "few against many" is a self-defeating formula that wrongly equates all Muslims with Islamists and all non-Jews with passive observers. Meyers emphasizes the need to distinguish between religious identity and support for terrorism, stating that blurring these lines plays into the hands of those who oppose Israel.
He recounts the establishment of the Christian-Jewish Zionist Congress to rally non-Jewish Zionist leadership, defending the use of the term "Zionist" despite its controversial connotations in parts of the US and Europe. Meyers insists that Israel must not allow its opponents to define its terms and that the nation should not apologize for its right to exist.
Instead, Meyers advocates for Israel to prominently feature and embrace non-Jewish voices that support it. This includes understanding their needs and offering them support, arguing that allies do not need to agree with every Israeli government decision. He believes that a partnership not requiring uniformity can be broader, more credible, and more resilient.
Meyers draws a parallel to military strategy, where alliances are understood as vital, but suggests Israel acts as if it must fight the ideological battle alone. He concludes by questioning whether Israel will open its doors to the emerging global Zionism or continue to believe it has no chance of success.