In France, this is called an evening visitor: an advisor without a post or partisan ties, but not without influence. Micah Goodman is a respected intellectual of the new Israeli power. His “Friend”, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Yaïr Lapid, sees in him “The ideologue of [son] left “, Blue White, even though he is not a member. Prime Minister Naftali Bennett has read his books and received him several times, says Goodman, since taking office in June.
In the absence of a policy, which remains to be determined, these officials have found a slogan with this prolific philosopher of 47 years. They hear “Reduce conflict” Israeli-Palestinian. This means that they do not wish to resolve it in any way. They just hope “Reduce friction” military in the territory that Israel has controlled since the 1967 war, and prevent the collapse of a Palestinian Authority (PA) at the end of the line. The Democratic administration in Washington does not ask them more. Without quite taking it on her own, she has been slipping into this argument since May.
Already, the Israeli government is using it to evacuate a cumbersome subject. During his first speech to the United Nations General Assembly on September 27, Mr. Bennett did not even mention the word “Palestinians”. As early as June, he had made it known that he would not open substantive political negotiations with President Mahmoud Abbas during his term of office.
Often awkward
However, Mr. Goodman wants to believe that the fragility of this government, a coalition of eight parties from all sides, including one Arab and Islamo-conservative, offers him an opportunity. Unable to withdraw from the territories such as annexing Judea and Samaria, he can at least apply “An invisible consensus” that the philosopher detects at the center of this society as diverse as its representatives.
“This government can act because 70% of Israelis agree: most do not want to control the lives of Palestinians and most do not want Israel to be threatened by terrorism. They want to both leave and stay in the West Bank. This false dichotomy pushes the majority to indifference. They stop thinking about the conflict and stop talking about it ”, he laments.
Mr. Goodman is often awkward when he talks about the Palestinians. It is because he speaks little to them. Their right to self-determination is none of their business. He dismisses it as an obstacle to reflection, a subject that divides Israel. His book on conflict, Catch-67 (2017, English translation in 2018), is an analysis of the end of Israeli ideologies. It followed a series of popular works on the canonical texts of the Jewish religion. For his critics, such as leftist political scientist Dahlia Scheindlin, Mr. Goodman’s displayed pragmatism is basically an Israeli retreat. “It is true that negotiations cannot open today, she notes. But his proposal is a way of accepting that there will be no final resolution of the status of the Palestinians, that there is nothing to be done on the plan that matters most. “
You have 56.65% of this article to read. The rest is for subscribers only.