Three explanations for Thomas Friedman’s war on Bibi Netanyahu
With Israel fighting for survival, an influential politically liberal Jew is waging a verbal war on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
In a blistering New York Times op-ed, Thomas Friedman launched an all-out assault on Mr. Netanyahu. While offering standard tepid criticisms of Hamas, Friedman saved his toughest punches for Bibi and his war.
“But no fair-minded person can look at the Israeli campaign to destroy Hamas that has killed more than 30,000 Palestinians in Gaza and not conclude that something has gone terribly wrong there.”
What has gone terribly wrong is too many liberal Jews parroting the Gaza Ministry of Health, which Hamas controls. The 30,000 figure is unverified and unverifiable. The GMH does not distinguish terrorist deaths from civilian deaths. The GMH does not categorize deaths by gender or age. Children and adult deaths are lumped together. Most importantly, the GMH does not separate Gazans killed by the Israeli Defense Forces from Gaza deaths inflicted by Hamas.
Statistician Abraham Wyner brilliantly shows “How the Gaza Ministry of Health Fakes Casualty Numbers.” https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/how-gaza-health-ministry-fakes-casualty-numbers
The IDF claims to have killed 13,000 Hamas terrorists. A staggeringly low percentage of civilian deaths proves exceptional IDF restraint and compassion. Far from terribly wrong, Netanyahu and the IDF got much right.
Friedman doggedly casts Netanyahu as darkly as possible, empowering Hamas by trusting their numbers over IDF numbers. Friedman is not a Jihadist sympathizer. In certain circles his words carry significant weight.
There are three explanations for why a grown liberal Jewish man like Friedman would cite Hamas death tolls to attack the Israeli leader.
Friedman may believe what he says. Conservatives may dismiss this explanation, but Friedman could be genuine. Lazy investigative journalism and a misguided world view are not contra to sincerity. Lenin referred to Western liberals as “useful idiots.” Friedman’s argument is emotional, not logical. A statistical analysis exposed Hamas’s numbers as preposterous. Friedman offered them anyway, perhaps due to ideological blindness.
Friedman could fear losing liberal friends. The American left is trying to implement a Chinese-style social credit score system on Americans. Companies are judged less on profitability than on Environmental Social Governance (ESG) and Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI). Keeping up appearances and spouting supposed morally correct platitudes supersedes taking tough but correct positions. Political correctness and cancel culture ruined plenty of people who strayed from liberal orthodoxy. Lifelong liberal Democrat Professor Alan Dershowitz’s social credit score plummeted when he defended former President Donald Trump against impeachment. Dershowitz is now persona non grata at many Martha’s Vineyard social events. Friedman is a New York liberal. Planning for the Hamptons Summer party season is already underway. Friedman could be offering Grade D intellectual analysis in a desperate attempt to remain an elite A-Lister. Many liberal Jews who defended Israel were suddenly ostracized by leftists who they thought were their friends. Supporting Netanyahu or the IDF, would remove Friedman from the elite liberal social circuit. For some upper class liberals, that is death. They need People Magazine to find them beautiful and fellow elites to label them caring.
Friedman could be terrified of a conservative being proven right. The late Dr. Charles Krauthammer in 2003 coined the term “Bush Derangement Syndrome” to describe “the acute onset of paranoia in otherwise normal people in reaction to the policies, the presidency—nay—the very existence of George W. Bush.” Some liberals opposed the Iraq War on principle, but others could not accept the possibility that Bush was right. Reflexive opposition to anything a conservative says, does or breathes puts ideology over rationality. Friedman is a liberal. He prefers soft power diplomacy worshiped by Barack Obama, John Kerry, and others among the liberal intelligentsia. Bibi is a conservative. He is fine with the hard power approach embodied by Dick Cheney and Neoconservatives. Bibi being proven right would shatter Friedman’s entire world view. It is a shock to the system to discover that everything you believe is wrong.
Whatever the reason, Friedman and his fellow liberals obsess over appearances and global approval. This puts their options in a straitjacket. It may seem counter-intuitive, but conservatives being hated no matter what we say or do is liberating. We might as well kill all the bad guys and win the war. In war, it is often better to ask for forgiveness than seek permission. Police prefer to be judged by 12 than carried out by six.
Netanyahu’s war approach is legally, morally and ethically right. The IDF must finish the job, even if this means losing the approval of those who never approve of Jews anyway. Liberal Jews prostrating themselves in front of anti-Jewish critics need their come to Moses moment. Hamas is the enemy, not Bibi. Attacking Bibi during wartime harms Israel, especially since Netanyahu and not his critics occupy the military and moral high ground.
Eric Golub is a retired stockbrokerage and oil professional living in Los Angeles.