John Podhoretz, Commentary and Israel

The other day I stopped by the Harvard Club for a lunchtime panel discussion organized by Commentary on the future of conservative magazines. The panelists were Commentary editor John Podhortez, Weekly Standard editor William Kristol and National Review Online founder Jonah Goldberg.

During his opening remarks, Podhoretz listed the defense of Israel and Zionism as one of the four pillars of Commentary’s mission, so when it came to the Q & A, I asked him to elaborate on how the magazine planned to treat Israel-related issues. What exactly are the parameters of debate in a conservative magazine after Ariel Sharon and George W. Bush have endorsed the creation of a Palestinian state, with the former moving to dismantle Jewish settlements?

Listen to the exchange.

The short version: Podhoretz thinks Commentary’s role is to keep the State Department and likeminded peace processors off of Jerusalem’s back — and leave Israel to the Israelis.

Case in point… Noah Pollak’s lengthy report in the April issued titled "They’re Doing the J Street Jive." Though Pollak directs a few paragraphs of criticism toward "Beilinism" and "Beilinites," the article is not a polemic against Israeli concessions, taking aim instead at J Street and its efforts to produce U.S. pressure on Israel.

This would seem to mark a change of sorts, from the 1990s, when former editor (and John’s dad) Norman Podhoretz used the magazine’s pages to criticize the Labor government — starting even before the Rabin-Arafat handshake in September 1993. Here’s a selection from one such article (sorry, subscription required for archived Commentary stories) that appeared in the June 2003 issue:

Let me emphasize as strongly as I possibly can that I am not accusing these people of bad faith, let alone of indifference to the security of their country. God forbid. I am, however, expressing the suspicion that in their war-weariness after so many years of living under siege, and in their mounting anxiety over the future, they are deluding themselves about the chances of achieving the peace for which they so powerfully yearn.

Their anxiety, at any rate, is all too palpable. Desperate enough before, they seem to have been made even more frantic by the new dangers Israel now has to face. These dangers are succinctly and accurately described by the embassy. … So desperate, indeed, are the spokesmen for the Rabin government to find a way of defusing these new dangers that they confuse the desirability of doing so with the existence of an opportunity.

Father and son ended up supporting the Gaza pullout, but that was with Bush and Sharon in the driver’s seat. If Bibi and Obama end up wrestling for control of the wheel, you can expect Commentary to come down on Netanyahu’s side. But, if the younger Podhoretz sticks by what he says at the lunch a few week ago, don’t expect the magazine to be playing a lead role in challenging Israeli peace moves.

Stay tuned.