If Not Peter Beinart

In Peter Beinart's hyperbolic piece Birthright Will Fail..., he makes the claim that unless the Israel trips include the Palestinian perspective, liberal Jews will stop going.

While the criticism that Birthright should include the Palestinian narrative is a fair one, the conclusions he draws are ill informed or wrong.

He claims the coming demise of Birthright can be seen with the 22 participants who walked off or were kicked off the trip since last summer. This number really isn't that significant. We are literally talking less than 1/2 a percent. I wouldn't call that a movement but a blip.

This isn't Birthright's problem to solve. 

Also, the participants walking off the trip aren't protesting Birthright; they are protesting "the occupation." They do not care about how fair the program is. I would guess that they would still protest even if Birthright spent half their time in the West Bank -- if there was still an occupation. If Not Now and the British group he mentions have political agendas, right or wrong. Hijacking a Birthright trip is their best way to get publicity. They know that the walk offs will be dramatic, selfied, and covered by the Jewish and some of the Israeli press. Their gripes have nothing to do with Birthright itself, nor can Birthright solve the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.

As for his suggestion that all trips meet with young Palestinians, that may prove to be difficult. While it would definitely possible to meet with Israeli Arabs (who identify as Palestinian) many young Palestinians from the West Bank would be shunned or worse for speaking to a group of Jews. I attended one of the programs that he mentioned in his article. We couldn't publicize the names of at least two of our young Palestinian speakers because it would put their lives in jeopardy.

If Birthright is not colluding with the Israeli government to subjugate Palestinians, then why isn't the conflict addressed properly on the trips?  Beinart mentions the funders. He's not totally wrong. Many funders don't love when a speaker disparages Israel. However, the biggest issue is that the guides are not equipped to facilitate this complicated conversation. They are tour guides. Some of them are great educators. However, many are also nationalistic (that's why they became guides of Israel) and not that familiar with the Palestinian narrative themselves (It's not taught here just like the Jewish narrative is not taught there.) They aren't trained to talk about the conflict in a meaningful manner or to deal with hot button issues. I will use his America approach. Imagine going on a trip to America and a liberal guide being asked to talk about the positive attributes of the NRA and why the Pro Life movement has a point. How many self-defined liberal could actually do that?

Logistically, it is also problematic. It can be very difficult, if not impossible, to get permission to go into Area A of the Palestinian Authority for an Israeli. Even if a person has never lived in Israel, but is an Israeli citizen, he/she can be refused entry to Area A.  Many Birthright participants are Israeli even though they have never lived in Israel.

So, sorry Peter Beinart, Birthright isn't and shouldn't be the address for learning about this complicated issue. There are other addresses, and participants should be encouraged to seek them out. If a the funders of Birthright decided to prioritize this, it would require a lot of funding, training, and 10 more days.