RAND: The Palestinians need an Arc

A team of crack analysts from the RAND Corporation have put their heads together and, after extensive research and consideration, determined what infrastructure the Palestinians most need in order to build a viable state:

A high-speed rail line.

More specifically, "a high-speed 140-mile interurban rail line, highway, aqueduct, energy network and fiber optic cable".

I kid you not.

Best of all, the proposed project - to be funded, naturally, by foreign development aid - would have a snazzy name: The Arc.

Seriously:

The primary function of such a project would be to provide the major transportation link for the West Bank. Its path and length - a 70-mile curve from Hebron to Jenin - arguably would connect the highest number of existing built-up areas in the shortest distance and at the least cost. The construction of the transportation line would invite the concurrent parallel construction of other needed lines for electricity, natural gas, telecommunications, and water. A national linear park could weave back and forth across the line as influenced by the landscape. The ensemble could have great symbolic power for the new nation. We propose to call it simply the Arc.

In the 106-page report, "The Arc: A Formal Structure for a Palestinian State", RAND addresses vital Palestinian economic and social problems such as urban sprawl, sustainable development, and automobile dependence. I'm not making this up.


To be fair to RAND, the report isn't meant to address matters of war and peace. They admit that much must be done in other realms before such infrastructure schemes can even be considered. Still, this scheme seems particularly far-fetched.

Experience shows that, as a collective, the Palestinians prefer fighting Israel to building their economy. When the latest assault against Israel was launched in autumn 2000, commercial ties were burgeoning, with joint factories, many Palestinians employed in Israel, and many Israelis shopping in Arab markets. The "second intifada" caused Palestinians severe economic suffering, but that didn't cause them to back off. They just added it to the list of their grievances against Israel.

Boatloads of economic development aid were poured into the Palestinian Authority since its founding in 1994. Some of it was channeled to corrupt officials, some of it was diverted for arms purchases, and the rest was used to build pointless "public works" which rarely benefited the public.


But assume for now that the Palestinians really are interested in peaceful development alongside Israel and transparency in government. This project still seems hallucinatory.

On the average, the Palestinians are poor. High-speed rail lines, fiberoptic cables and national parks do not address their real current needs. Their economy needs industry. It needs commercial investment. It needs international standards of quality. Most important, it needs the political, legal and economic stability which make business possible in any society.

To achieve that, they first need to reconcile themselves to living peacefully side by side with Israel for the long term. They need to disarm and disavow their terrorists and change the way they teach their children.

Until then, giving them a major transportation and communication network is like giving an unemployed street thug a car and a cellphone. They're nice to have, but they won't set him on the road to economic self-sufficiency. They might just make it easier for him to make trouble.

RAND describes itself as "a nonprofit research organization providing objective analysis and effective solutions that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors around the world". "Effective"? Or imaginary?


Meanwhile, I'll say it again: I don't believe there will be a Palestinian state. As students of logic know, once you presume the impossible, any conclusion is valid.

Hat tip: The Jerusalem Post

I've been reprinted

Jew Central has reprinted my recent post on cleaning your office computer. For some reason, they categorize it as Humor. Some people just have no respect for halacha!

Still, it's a pleasure to help them provide "informative, how-to and inspirational content to help Jewish professionals succeed". I wonder: Was the article informative, how-to or inspirational?

And I thought I was crazy!

Liberty and security - the Passover angle

It's not about a "slave mentality"
Shortly after their liberation from Egypt, the Children of Israel run into trouble. It starts immediately after they cross the Red Sea. They kvetch. What can we drink? You call this food? That's it, we're turning back to Egypt! At least there we got free food!

Contemporary rabbis with pop-psychology training (like most RIETS musmachim with their psych degrees) like to chalk this up to a residual "slave mentality" (see these, for example). You can take the Jews out of Egypt, but with a lifetime of slavery behind them they have no experience in taking responsibility for their lives and livelihoods. Ultimately, the generation of slaves must die to make way for a new one, raised as citizens of a free people, capable of fending for themselves in a new land.

Though there is some truth to this explanation, it doesn't satisfy me. Imagine the Israelites had never been slaves, but rather had voluntarily followed their leaders into the desert to make a new start as a nation. Had they then been confronted with a shortage of food and drink, would we not expect them to complain? Would they have been wrong to expect their leaders to have anticipated such circumstances? Would they have been wrong to turn to their leaders to solve the problem they themselves had led them into? Would they have been wrong to fear they had been poorly led and to reconsider their course?

Ah, you say, what's significant is not the complaining, but the willingness to return to lives of slavery in Egypt rather than suffer in the desert. But is this so shocking? How many people would prefer to die of thirst and starvation rather than subject themselves to enslavement?

Likewise, one might take them to task for a lack of faith in God to save them, especially after all the miracles they had witnessed until then. Yet how many of us would pass the same test?


A fundamental political truth
No, their behavior was fully to be expected. A fundamental political truth was at work: Given the choice, most people, most of the time, prefer security to liberty. They prefer comfort and stability, even at the expense of serfdom. New Hampshire notwithstanding, few of us are willing to "Live Free or Die".

Yet, this is precisely what was demanded of them on leaving Egypt. Arguably, the first principle of the Torah is its opposition to slavery. Our national story starts with the liberation from Egypt. We are enjoined to worship God alone, and to reject the legitimacy of any other power over us, human or otherwise. We are all equally created in God's image, and He alone is to be our master.

The civil laws governing Torah society are structured to establish individual liberty and the decentralization of power - the direct opposite of Pharaonic Egypt. The Torah regulates slavery to the point that it becomes more a state of temporary indentured servitude. All citizens are granted property, and, by implication, a degree of economic independence, in the form of a permanent plot of land. No authority is above the law of the Torah, not even the priests or the king. Rather than institute a system of public welfare, individuals are all enjoined to support the poor and disadvantaged themselves.


The authority of the family
Perhaps most important, the source of legitimacy for authority is not the state or the prophet, but the family. This is most evident on Passover night, when the nation's founding story is told in the context of a family dinner. It is the father's job to impart the tradition to his sons. Responsibility for education is his, not the state's or the priesthood's. Each family has its own, equally legitimate, chain of tradition tracing back to the Exodus from Egypt. No one can claim greater authority, greater authenticity of his connection to God, than anyone else.

This contrasts with Egypt, indeed with every tyrannical society in history. The first priority of an ideological society, be it Plato's Republic, communist Europe, Nazi Germany, or kibbutz Israel, is to destroy the family. The family is a threat, an alternative source of power to the collective. Collective societies sanctify the central regime, which controls everything from sustenance to - perhaps most importantly - education. The Torah does the reverse, granting each family an independent source of sustenance and sanctifying the respect and honor for one's father and mother, the source of education.

Furthermore, the only citizens without economic independence, whose sustenance is deliberately dependent on the gracious support of their fellow citizens, are those of the priestly class. The Levites have no territory of their own; they are scattered throughout society and are supported by charity. Far from holding power over their compatriots, they are dependent on them, serving them and God. Their power is moral and intellectual, not economic. And never until the Hasmonean dynasty do the priests capture political power.


Balance of power
Such a society, with political liberty, economic independence, and democratic dispersion of authority, may be far less secure than a centralized regime such Egypt with a powerful cradle-to-grave bureacracy. At times it will be too weak even to defend itself from external attack. It will be prone to internal instability and constant dissension. But only in such a system is the average citizen fully responsible for his economic welfare and that of his family and neighbors. Only thus can he be free of oppression by his fellow man. Only thus can he worship God freely, can he fully realize the individual potential given him by God.

Every society, every form of government, entails a balance between liberty and security. The Torah firmly shifts that balance in favor of liberty, calling on individuals to take responsibility to live in freedom, while trusting in God for their security. Organizing a society in accordance with such principles is a constant challenge, but it is a clear corollary to the Passover story.

---

Note: I've posted the solution to last week's Passover riddle - see the comments.

Reading for the festival of national liberation

David Ignatius identifies a resurgence of nationalism in recent world events. I'm not convinced there is anything new or surprising about this. I don't think nationalism ever disappeared in the first place. There is little new about most of Ignatius's examples.

It also doesn't worry me. Nationalism in the context of democracy is not (generally) dangerous. It certainly is not irrational. On the contrary, nationalism - meaning the assertion of the right to self-government and cultural autonomy by the people of a nation - is often the most sensible way for a free society to run its affairs. The main alternatives are usually empire or anarchy.

Interestingly, the subject of national sovereignty versus other models of sovereignty is a major theme throughout the Hebrew Bible, with nations contending with each other as well as with multinational empires and sovereign city-states. Generally, the Bible prefers a nation-state model for the Jewish people, though other models are also experienced. All yield mixed results; none produce long-term stability or security.

Passover marks the Jewish nation's first steps towards national soveriegnty, and is thus an appropriate time to study the question.

Over the years, Azure has run a number of articles in support of the nation-state and critical of "post-nationalist" supranational and subnational models. Recommended reading for Pesach:

• On the National State - Part 1: Empire and Anarchy by Yoram Hazony (Winter 5762 / 2002).
  
• Who's Afraid of the Nation State? by Ofir Haivry (Autumn 5759 / 1998).
  
• Global Pillage by Jason Elbaum (Autumn 5759 / 1998).

Hag Herut Sameah!

A Passover riddle

Shamelessly stealing an idea from Gil, here's a last-minute riddle for Passover. I heard it from someone who heard it from an academic (whose name I forget) who lectured about the history of the Passover Haggadah. (If anyone else heard the lecture, please let me know who it was so I can credit him.)

The question: Of today's standard (Orthodox) text of the Haggadah, what part was added most recently? When and why?

My own followup question: What other part of the Hagaddah should have been changed for the same reason, but wasn't?

Mystics and rationalists

When I spend too long among happy-clappy Breslovers who dance in the streets and commune with nature, hoppy-hippy Carlebachers who sing more than they daven, pseudokabbalistic Sephardim who are in awe of superstition, it brings out the rationalist intellectual in me. Judaism is about learning and fulfilling the mitzvot, not mystical significances, amorphous "spiritual experiences", emotional highs and rebbe worship.

When I spend too long among hyperintellectual Briskers, analytical hairsplitters from RIETS and Gush, Soloveitchikian "halachic men" who view the world exclusively through a priori religio-legal categories, religious professors who pray dispassionately in pure fulfillment of obligation, yeshiva bachurim who view zemiros as bitul Torah, it brings out the chassid in me. There is more to Judaism - and life - than is dreamed of in your philosophy.

Talmudic Man is a merger of Halachic Man and Aggadic Man.

Interesting that at the seder we carefully carry out precisely-defined mitzvot, but the text of the haggadah focuses on storytelling. We fulfill halacha, but discuss aggada.

How not to burn chametz

(The latest in a series of recent posts which, oddly, are actually related to the title of this blog. This time, I even discuss biur chametz!)


Take a walk through a religious neighborhood of Israel on Passover Eve, just before the start of the festival. Chances are you'll come face to face with substantial quantities of chametz. Bread, rolls, pitot, breakfast cereal, right in the middle of the street.

I'm referring to the smoldering remains of the morning's biur chametz, or burning of the chametz. In better organized locales it will be contained in barrels; elsewhere, it may lie in the middle of a vacant lot.

Let me clarify that no Jewish law is being violated. These remains of leaven have been abandoned ownerless (hefker) in a public area; chances are they have also been doused with lighter fluid to render them inedible. The halachic requirements have been satisfied. Yet still there is something unseemly about walking to shul for Pesach and passing piles of chametz along the way.

The problem arises because chametz is, perhaps surprisingly, difficult to burn.

Try setting fire to a challah roll and you'll see what I mean. The flame, assuming it catches, licks around the edges of the roll, charring the surface. Then, having consumed the available fuel, it goes out. The remainder of the roll is left intact and entirely edible. We might call it toast. Yum!

Fire requires both fuel and oxygen. Thus, it can survive only at the interface between the two - that is, the surface of the chametz. The interior can't burn due to the shortage of oxygen, and the fire can't penetrate to the interior because the charred exterior is no longer viable as fuel.

That's what usually happens when you throw a roll, or pita, or loaf of bread, into the fire for biur chametz. The outside will char, even throughly. But poke it with a poker and you'll find a tasty chametz interior.

A typical solution is to increase the surface area, for example by crumbling the chametz before burning it. Surprisingly, though, this doesn't necessariliy help. A pile of crumbs can be as impenetrable to fire as a solid roll. The outer layer of crumbs is burnt, and the rest remains untouched. Typically, also, many of the crumbs fall beyond the reach of the fire.

To thoroughly burn a pile of crumbs, you generally have to sprinkle the crumbs over a strong fire gradually, allowing each layer to be burnt before adding the next. This can take time, which is usually short on Erev Pesach.


In closing, some practical tips for burning your chametz. Make sure you leave enough time (and kindling) to prepare a strong fire and to gradually crumble your chametz into it. Equip yourself with a poker for tending the fire, and a supply of water for dousing it. You may need lighter fluid for preparing the fire and for drenching the chametz to render it both more flammable and thoroughly inedible.

Most important, take all appropriate safety precautions. Don't start a fire near a lawn or underbrush, or on asphalt. Contain it in a metal barrel if possible. Keep plastic out of the fire; it releases toxic fumes when burnt. Never leave a fire to smolder unattended. Always keep young children at a safe distance.

Have a happy, kosher and safe Passover!

Haveil Havalim #18 - The Pesach Edition

Have you tried living on a boat?

It can be cheaper than real estate!