Israel is enthusiastic about promoting its democratic ideals to the world, yet any Israeli who dares criticise the nation's policies towards Palestinians can testify to some undemocratic treatment from Israeli authority figures. Such voices of dissent have been systematically discredited by people in positions of power. The most recent case is an opinion article published by Dr Neve Gordon in the Los Angeles Times last month, arguing for the pressing need for foreign governments, institutions and donors to boycott Israel to pressure the country to renounce its apartheid policies.
Gordon's piece stimulated a heated debate in Israel, not least because Professor Carmi, the president of the Ben-Gurion University to which Gordon belongs, wrote a stern letter addressed to all university staff. In it, she stressed the disastrous effects that opinion pieces such as these have on the university, which relies on donations from the Jewish diaspora. She further suggested that such views published abroad would have serious ramifications for the university's capacity to sustain itself in the future. This was a veiled threat.
Recently I had the chance to ask a senior Israeli official in Australia about this issue, and he responded by noting, appropriately, that everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But he then added that he awaits the day when Palestinians will be able to criticise their own regime a day that he believes will signal their readiness for peace. For him, the ability to express such views is a mark of Israel's strong commitment to democratic values.
The official then continued to detail his reservations about the piece, surprisingly not about its content and arguments but rather its style: suggesting that the Op Ed was written and published under suspect circumstances. He further opined that despite the range of views held by Jews in LA, the fact that the LA Times published it is indicative of its agenda. He then continued to emphasise that Gordon's own motives were dubious. What followed was an attack that focused on the reasons Gordon chose to publish the piece in English (not in Hebrew) and for signing off on it as an academic teaching at Ben-Gurion University.
I am familiar with such arguments; I experienced them not long ago following an Op Ed I wrote for a national newspaper during the Gaza assault. In my case, it would be difficult to accuse the Australian of anti-Israel/Semitic bias, as during the same week, both the Israeli Ambassador wrote a piece in favour of the Gaza war, and another Australian-based Israeli academic followed up my Op Ed with a strong rebuke. Both signed off their essays with their professional designations.
Speaking about Israel for an outside audience in English was precisely Gordon's intention; for him, Israel ''had to be saved from itself'', which as I understand is a call for help. The piece was intended for the international community and the diaspora to pressure Israel and awaken it, for it has become increasingly numb to the daily sufferings of others.
This does not mean that in Israel there is no debate, indeed, there is often vigorous debate, but unfortunately, as a friend observed, there are few who will listen, or perhaps can listen. Gordon's opinion piece drew much of its currency and power from the fact that he was courageously willing to air ''our dirty laundry'' in public something we (Israelis) are most reluctant to do for fear that our enemies will use it against us: a point which was reiterated to me when meeting a Jewish Labor MP in the Australian federal parliament recently.
But such ''caution'' that we are ''encouraged'' to exercise from an early age has an insidious side to it. It means as Jews and Israelis we keep putting up a wall around us and that those daring to puncture the wall of silence are systematically discredited by people in positions of authority and subjected to ad-hominem attacks and derogatory terms such as traitors and cowards: a fifth-column in the heart of the nation.
The senior Israeli official's castigation of Dr Gordon's use of his title and designation also belies his earlier celebration of Israel's democratic ideals. For he does not genuinely seek a plurality of opinion, rather such castigation is a testimony to the culture of self-censorship among Israelis, enforced by those in positions of authority.
Dr Gordon's capacity to identify the cruel effects of Israeli policies should be encouraged in the diaspora for it is a product of his own personal history and experience, which is inseparable from his academic training, and offers a valuable contribution to debates outside Israel. No doubt following his essay, Dr Gordon and his family have had to brace themselves against the well oiled, state supported propaganda machine of the Jewish/Israeli media. Unfortunately, Rivka Carmi's (un)veiled threats will have long-lasting effects, and as one of Gordon's colleagues confided to me recently, despite sharing Gordons views, he is yet to secure tenure and would think hard before risking his family's welfare to voice his opinion. A luxury, that I would remind the senior official, unemployed Palestinians living under siege can hardly afford.
Assa Doron is a researcher in the Australian National University and a member of the The Ein Bustan project and kindergarten promoting an intercultural dialogue between Arabs and Jews in Israel (ein-bustan.org/11308/About-Ein-B ustan).