Dr. King and the Rabbis |
It goes without saying that one of the most recognizable names in American history (of the last hundred years or so) is none other then Dr. Martin Luther King.
Dr. King, to many, represents the pinnacle of courage against adversary as he has become known for his courageous efforts on behalf of the US civil rights movement. The movement, pioneered by Dr. King, pressured the American government to end legalized segregation in the United States and bring about a truly free United States where all people were created equal on paper - but in practice as well
With such an outlook reflecting the dream of Dr. King, it would only make sense that Dr. King had been supportive of the Jewish cause and its fledgling Jewish State. This would be the case simply based on the reality that the State of Israel, since its inception, had been the one country in the middle east where all individuals were able to live (in Dr. Kings time as well as today) in a democratic society, with freedom of religion and without the concern for racism or oppression...
If the above video is of any indication, then the above presupposition was exactly what Dr. King felt regarding the State of Israel and its standing within the greater middle east community.
Yet despite of the video above, it would seem that when it comes to the legacy of Dr. King and State of Israel matters may not be as clear cut as we would like...
This is not only best illustrated in an interesting write up Times of Israel but further solidified in articles on the Electronic Intifada, where many anti Israel groups have been calling Dr. Kings perceived viewpoint into question and as pointed out by Lebovic in the Times of Israel, seems that the view point of Dr. King on Israel is stuck in a constant tug-a-war between the strong pro Israel voices in the black community. Voices such as those of Dumisani Washington of the Institute for Black Solidarity with Israel and those in support of the Black Lives Matter movement seem rather contentious on whether or not Dr. King was pro Israel or rather one of its vehement opponents.
This is not only best illustrated in an interesting write up Times of Israel but further solidified in articles on the Electronic Intifada, where many anti Israel groups have been calling Dr. Kings perceived viewpoint into question and as pointed out by Lebovic in the Times of Israel, seems that the view point of Dr. King on Israel is stuck in a constant tug-a-war between the strong pro Israel voices in the black community. Voices such as those of Dumisani Washington of the Institute for Black Solidarity with Israel and those in support of the Black Lives Matter movement seem rather contentious on whether or not Dr. King was pro Israel or rather one of its vehement opponents.
Intersectiontality at work |
Interestingly however, the oft-quoted statements attributed to King on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict come from a Q&A session in which Dr. King participated during the annual convention of the Conservative movement’s Rabbinical Assembly in 1968. As alleged by Lebovic, "Dr. King was to consider the questions ahead of the event, and it is clear King had carefully considered both sides of the ongoing conflict." thus making his statements in this session the most accurate portrayal of his outlook and views...
With that said, Dr. Kings statements take a rather politically correct prose and in some ways even reflect to some extent his pacifist nature - Dr. King's comments at the assembly where as follows:
With that said, Dr. Kings statements take a rather politically correct prose and in some ways even reflect to some extent his pacifist nature - Dr. King's comments at the assembly where as follows:
“I think it is necessary to say that what is basic and what is needed in the Middle East is peace. Peace for Israel is one thing. Peace for the Arab side of that world is another thing,”
“Peace for Israel means security, and we must stand with all of our might to protect its right to exist, its territorial integrity. I see Israel, and never mind saying it, as one of the great outposts of democracy in the world, and a marvelous example of what can be done, how desert land almost can be transformed into an oasis of brotherhood and democracy. Peace for Israel means security and that security must be a reality.”
“On the other hand, we must see what peace for the Arabs means in a real sense of security on another level. Peace for the Arabs means the kind of economic security that they so desperately need. These nations, as you know, are part of that third world of hunger, of disease, of illiteracy. I think that as long as these conditions exist there will be tensions, there will be the endless quest to find scapegoats. So there is a need for a Marshall Plan for the Middle East, where we lift those who are at the bottom of the economic ladder and bring them into the mainstream of economic security.”It would seem that Dr. King viewed Israel, "as one of the great outposts of democracy in the world" but nonetheless, somewhat naively I might add, viewed the Arab world as a third world population, which desperately needed the assistance on the international community htrough the implementation of some kind of iteration of the Marshall plan.
In other words, it is a safe bet to speculate that Dr. King held of the viewpoint that the Arab community and the Palestinians specifically, we're not only an oppressed people, but a people which - with the intervention of the global community - are able to rehabilitate themselves as a people with the right to self determination. This outlook of Dr. King is rather utopian as history has proven time and time again. Namely the Palestinian people have no interest in living side by side with their Israeli cousins in spite of the many efforts and offers to improve and rehabilitate their lives.
Interestingly, Dr. Kings pacifist and apolitical outlook on the matter can be solidified from excerpts of a phone call to confidants in 1967 where Dr. King was rather skeptic of the possibility of visit to Israel after the six day war. In the conversation he was quoted to say as such:
"I'd run into the situation where I'm damned if I say this and I'm damned if I say that no matter what I'd say, and I've already faced enough criticism including pro-Arab. I just think that if I go, the Arab world, and of course Africa and Asia for that matter, would interpret this as endorsing everything that Israel has done, and I do have questions of doubt... Most of it [the pilgrimage] would be Jerusalem and they [the Israelis] have annexed Jerusalem, and any way you say it they don't plan to give it up...In other words, Dr. King did not want to get stuck between a rock and a hard place feeling that either side would not be placated by his actions. However, this does beget the questions whether Dr. King understood the historic significance of the six day victory or the true unjust that was undone as a result of the young states miraculous survival. Seemingly, this is simply because of the perception that not only does Dr. King seem to express his reservations about the actions of the Israelis during the six day war but was apparently opposed, or at least held strong reservations, to the annexation of Jerusalem and its reunification as the capital of the Jewish state and people. In essence, it would seem that Dr. King - due to his reportedly pacifist nature - was not willing to recognize the Jewish people's (and by proxy the state of Israel) aboriginal rights to the land, despite of the totally justified circumstances, as such an action - allegedly - was done in spite of the rights of the so called Palestinian people.
Sadly Dr. King is not the only one, with such a perception, many both gentile and Jew, choose to ignore the historical truth that the land of Israel (in its post 1967 expanded borders) and have thus not not accepted the universal truth that the the territory of the historic kingdom of Israel is not only in the land of Israel but its political capital was and always will be in Jerusalem. Viewing the reality in any other way is not only a blatant disregard for the historic truth but emboldens the oppression those who live in Gaza and Judea and Samaria by Hamas and the Palestinian Authority.
This brings us back to Dr. King. as the questions remains on where he would stand in present times on the issue of our day, namely would Dr. King support the State of Israel or the Palestinian people and the BDS movement.
With some reflection, and due to the lack of evidence it is indeed hard to tell but one thing is certain Dr. King viewed criticism of Israel as Anti Semitism and perhaps that can give us, although a not definitive, hint in the proper direction.