Kalman Liebskind is an Israeli journalist who deserves to be better known outside Israel than he is. Several decades ago, he was one of the founding journalists at the Makor Rishon newspaper, to which we often point here in IFTI. Later, he worked at Ma’ariv. He is now the Editor-in-Chief of Makor Rishon.
Liebskind has had a storied career; among many other accomplishments, he is the author of several critical exposés which have shaken up Israeli society. In 1999, he exposed Ehud Barak’s non-profit organizations that funded Barak’s election campaign, in violation of Israel’s political parties funding law. A decade later, in 2008, he wrote about how general Yoav Gallant had taken over public lands in Moshav Amikam. This revelation eventually led to the cancellation of Gallant’s appointment as Chief of General Staff of the IDF.
What I like most about smart opinion pieces in the press is when they get me to think all over again. I know that many people prefer the opposite — they like to read what they already agree with; I hardly see the point.
In recent months, as I’ve heard from many friends in the US and elsewhere that they plan to come back to Israel for a few days at the end of October specifically to vote, I’ve been pleased. “They’re still connected,” I say to myself; and, of course, if they vote the way that I hope that they will, every vote counts.
But a couple of weeks ago, Liebskind wrote a piece in Makor Rishon that stopped me in my tracks. The people coming back to vote, he opined, are doing something profoundly immoral. They don’t live here, they didn’t fight in the war, they’ve chosen not to be part of this society — so they have no right to decide who will govern us.
I might or might not agree, but it was was a very thoughtful piece, so we’re sharing parts of it here.
You can read the entire thing online by going to this article in Makor Rishon.
Just copy the whole thing and paste it into your AI engine of choice, and you should be able to get a reasonable translation of the whole thing.
For today, we’re highlighting just a few clips of a much longer and very thoughtful piece.
Here are a few segments of the article by Kalman Liebskind for Makor Rishon:
…The news site ynet does not have a big problem with leaving the country—at least that is the impression from an understanding, empathetic, and accepting article published there this week under the headline: “The Israelis who left for abroad and do not apologize: We chose to emigrate, to live without fear.”
… we read in the article about those who left due to “a sense of despair and loss of faith in the country,” because of “the security situation,” because of “economic hardship,” because of “prices at the supermarket,” because of “the pleasant culture of Europeans,” because of “missiles and sirens,” because of “the longing for a peaceful life,” and more.
…
“… The complete indifference to injured children in Gaza was unbearable for us,” shared Anna (42), one of the interviewees who emigrated with her family to Portugal. She added: “We fulfilled the dream and established a boutique hotel for dogs and cats with an enormous area, something we could never have done in Israel.” The girls, she said, “are growing up in an atmosphere of kindness, tranquility, mutual aid, and personal security. In Israel, it simply doesn’t exist. Everything is green everywhere, and you can start the morning with a swim in a lake.”
Is there any chance she will ever return to Israel? Unequivocally, no. “We didn’t relocate—we chose to emigrate,” she clarifies. “We are entirely at peace with the decision, and I hope that in a decade, when someone asks my daughter ‘Where are you from?’, she will answer that she is Portuguese. For us, it’s already too late, but for my daughters, I wish for them to assimilate into the culture and community here, and feel a true sense of belonging to this wonderful country.”
…
Tell me, does it seem reasonable to anyone that [someone] who declares she has no intention of returning to us, and wishes for her children to assimilate into Portugal—should decide what happens here, who will be the Prime Minister here, what we will do with the Palestinian Authority, and whether my son will continue to serve in the reserves in Bint Jbeil? …
… it is clear from media reports that the motivation to come to Israel to vote comes primarily from the left, yet I swear I would write the exact same words in the opposite reality. I do not care who comes—right-wing or left-wing—or which slip they put in the ballot box. The thought that someone who has lived in Manhattan for 25 years will arrive here, stay for one day before returning home, and during that day decide for us what the next Knesset will look like, what Israel’s diplomatic approach will be, how we will relate to Abu Mazen, what will happen to the cost of living, and whether Bezalel Smotrich will sit in the coalition or Yair Golan will sit in the coalition—should drive every Israeli citizen out of their mind. I prefer to live in a country where Yair Golan is Prime Minister if that is what Israelis want, rather than a country where Bezalel Smotrich is Prime Minister if that is what the Jews of Miami want. I have a million disagreements with Yair Golan, but he lives here with me. His child fights at the front with my child. When prices rise here, he feels it in his wallet like me. When the enemy fires missiles at us, he runs to the bomb shelter with his wife while I run to the bomb shelter with my wife, and together we will pay the price of our vote for the Knesset.
…
Next, in his piece, Liebeskind discusses the profile of the couple leaving Israel that we focused on a few days ago. Here is what he had to say about the couple and about Channel 11’s profile of them.
He continues …
… Hagai Agmon-Snir and his wife Iris Meiri-Snir left the country a few days ago and received a nice opportunity to lay out their ideology, both in an interview with Nir Hasson in Haaretz and in a television report by Moav Vardi on Kan 11’s Friday news. Hagai and Iris have no plans to return. “It’s hard for me to imagine there being something here I’d want to return to,” Iris explained, and Hagai reasoned why: “I am leaving for an entirely ideological reason, a moral reason… The thing that bothers me most in Israeli society is that the fascist stream has become very central… There are two million people in Gaza that no one is willing to think for a moment about how to reduce their future suffering. There are people in the West Bank being beaten, harmed, and dispossessed today, and it is terrible, absolutely terrible.”
The two do not intend to settle for their own departure. They plan to work from abroad to disassemble things for us, even after they leave. To Kan 11, Hagai explained that he intends to labor to convince others to leave as well. To Haaretz, he said: “If I could, I would establish the movement for ideological emigration from Israel.”
….And above all, the headline attached by editors to the story with these two emigrants stood out: “The pair of patriots leaving Israel.” Well, a patriot is not someone who leaves Israel. A patriot is someone who sticks with it. Tens of thousands of Jews who made Aliyah after October 7th—despite the difficulty, despite the anxiety, despite the fear, despite the ongoing war—they are patriots. 6,850 reservists who are lone soldiers—they are patriots. A hundred new immigrants who gave their lives in this war for all of us—they are patriots. Sergeant Nathaniel Young, who made Aliyah from London, enlisted in Golani, and fell near the Gaza envelope—he is a patriot. His parents who made Aliyah after him—they are patriots as well. The 140 new immigrants who arrived here this week from France—from four-month-old Mia to 85-year-old Annie—those are the real patriots. Patriots exist on the right and on the left, among voters of Otzma Yehudit and voters of The Democrats. Patriots stay here. Patriots do not leave the country. Patriots do not sit by the water in San Francisco, make a quick trip to the humid Middle East to decide for the citizens of the State of Israel how their future will look, and fly back home.
NOTE THIS ELSEWHERE….
Liebeskind clearly got under some people’s skin with his piece. Ha’aretz posted a silly retort, making a claim that Liebeskind already refuted in his column. But the mere fact that Ha’aretz chose to respond shows how much Liebeskind has gotten people’s attention.
A REMINDER: what we’ve quoted above is but a brief selection of the full opinion piece, which is very well worth reading in its entirety. Using the link above and your AI translator, take a look — it merits your time.
