While the NY Times has run many op-eds from those adept at portraying the expression of Jewish dignity as denial of dignity to the Palestinian Arabs. For the most part, the columns that the Times has allowed in defense of Israel have emphasized Israel's efforts to dissociate from Jordan's 1949-conquest, the West Bank in the language the media use, thus feeding the narrative that there is no contest to the notion that Israel's presence in Jordan's 1949-conquest is illegitimate. On Monday, the Times ran a column that breaks this mold.
The column, written by former Yesha Council chairman Dani Dayan, calls for immediately taking steps, without prejudicing the final outcome, to alleviate the plight of the Palestinians, with Dayan's specific action items delivering the most benefit to the Palestinian people for the least cost to Israeli Jews. All too often, pundits decry the Palestinians' suffering and then refuse to countenance doing anything to alleviate that suffering that does not involve Israel recognizing that Jewish rights end at Jordan's 1949-line of conquest, creating a false choice between recognizing Arab rights based on Jordan's conquest or perpetuating Palestinian suffering.
For all the positive notes conveyed in Dayan's column, one column does not negate a pattern of one-sided coverage of the other side of the armistice line. However, we should appreciate the opportunities we do get to present our view.