Israeli soldiers out in force during an anti-Bush demonstration in West Jerusalem in front of the US Consulate
On the
surface, there is no apparent political reason for the arrival of the US President to Israel and his extended stay in the
country. Apart from photo opportunities with Ehud Olmert and Mahmoud Abbas, the
President did not and could not contribute to any real political process. No
one takes George Bush seriously, including the citizens of his own country or
the majority within his own political party, where those ‘close’ to him are
anxiously counting the days they must yet suffer him in power.
Perhaps
this is the sole reason for his visit to Israel:
only in Israel
is George Bush treated with dignity and respect. Only here are people willing
to crawl before him. Not only government officials, such as Olmert, Livni or
Netanyahu, but also the average citizen. Apart from taxi drivers who complained
bitterly—and justifiably—about the partial closure imposed on the city,
Jerusalemites accepted with love the numerous harassments caused by our
visitor. Bursting with pride that the leader of the free world honored them
with his presence, the people of Israel
closely followed every step and declaration of the US President, excited by every bit
of nonsense he uttered.
For once I
agree totally with the rightwing commentator of the Haaretz newspaper,
Israel Harel, who writes “Bush is a naive statesman, and not
only in our arena. He is an old-style American idealist; when he feels a sense
of justice and mission, he can behave in a not particularly gentle way even
toward friends. But he is not behaving toward us like a feudal lord and it is
not his fault that some of us behave like the Jews in the shtetl when the lord
comes for a visit. Dozens of broadcasts emanating meaningless verbiage,
embarrassing quarrels over invitations to events attended by the guest, the
shutting down of Jerusalem…”(Haaretz,
10 January).
Embarrassing indeed. To what is this similar? To a boy completely
dependent on his rich uncle from America. In the meantime, the boy
grew up, became wealthy and strong, but has difficulties in cutting off his
dependence on the uncle: it is only in the uncle’s company that he feels secure.
He is incapable of weaning himself of this emotional dependency, even when his neighbors
express a willingness to begin relations of friendship and normalization.
The biblical Book of Exodus mentions the story of the indentured slave,
the same slave meant to be freed from his owners but who refuses to leave, saying
“I loved my Master.” The Bible refers negatively to one who chooses slavery
over freedom, subjugation over redemption. However, it appears that despite the
aspirations of the original Zionism, the “new Jew” is unable to overcome his
need to cling to the lord. And concerning the lord, the majority of his subjects
and supporters have long abandoned him, and he clings to the indentured slave
as a final testament to a past glory.
|
Blogs 
