By S. R. Brown

Guest columnist

In a year in which numerous catastrophes have captured the headlines – both natural (the Haiti and Peru earthquakes) and distinctly un-so (Tiger Woods’ downward trajectory) – nothing has seized our country’s “opinionators” and induced them to produce quite like the May 30 Mavi Marmara flotilla disaster off the shores of Israel.

In short, Israel stands accused of murdering nine Gaza-bound Turkish humanitarian-activists, or, alternately; supported as rightfully defending its blockade of Gaza from covert munitions-running with some unfortunate collateral damage. Which is the truth?

As I write, it’s Day 6 and the verdict is in: Well, actually, there are a number of them. I can’t tell you how many columns I’ve read in the New York Times alone on this topic, much less in any other news resource. And they just keep a-comin’. With so many angles to consider, I may need to dig out the graph paper and see if I can plot a conclusion of any discernable shape.

That said, let me be straight with you: I have had a “love affair of the mind” with Israel since my mom first introduced me to Leon Uris’ books at age 12. My first read of his was “Exodus.” I was immediately captivated by the spirit of a people who overcame centuries of adversity in the Diaspora to come back to the Promised Land; rolling back malarial and rocky swamps, developing innovative irrigation systems, building and defending a land that could become a safe haven for all Jews – a plan that became especially urgent post-Holocaust.

While I continue to be under the spell of this pugnacious little nation, I tend to be a moderate thinker in general (spoiler alert!); therefore, my mental marching orders include careful consideration of the complexities of Israel’s relationships with its neighbors and residents. I’m no Middle East expert, but am now a read and impassioned amateur. Weak credentials established.

This situation, as with anything that has been reported from that land since 1948, has garnered the aforementioned attention from the media and from “watchers” like me. In the early days of its existence, Israel was admired as the underdog in the midst of ravening wolves determined to “drive the Jews into the Sea” – as famously uttered by Abdul Gamel Nassar of Egypt in 1957 (and iterated by countless others before and since). Its back against the wall, Israel operated in the spirit of en brera, which – as translated from the Hebrew – means “no alternative”.

“Exodus” was made into a movie starring Paul Newman and Eva Marie Saint in 1960. Leon Uris and Herman Wouk were all over the bestseller lists in the ‘60s and ‘70s, as Israel racked up win after win in the “unbelievable” category. To be an Israeli in those days was a badge of courage and canniness, and the world, by and large, ate it up.

What happened?

Nowadays, Israel is often seen as bloated and colonialist, based on its purported “occupation” of the West Bank, two-year blockade of the Gaza Strip territory (now under the operation of Hamas), refusal to stop building in East Jerusalem and perceived limitations on non-Jewish residents. Ironic, considering its break from the colonial power in 1948, Great Britain.

As such, this current development will not help its PR. In addition to tit for tat videos available widely on the Internet regarding “what really went down” May 30, here’s a sampling of thoughts that are circulating at the moment regarding how Israel should be handled both in this situation and in general:

• “Treat Israel Like Iran” by Stephen Kinser (The Daily Beast): Israel is compared unfavorably to Iran as the “pariah in the Middle East”, urging equal treatment of the two states regarding their nuclear programs.

• “Israeli Force, Adrift on the Sea” by Amos Oz (N.Y. Times): Hamas is referred to as “an idea” that can and should be negotiated with, as opposed to a “terrorist organization” that requires brute force to countermand.

• “Netanyahu Defends Military Raid on ‘Hate Boat’ Bound for Gaza” (FoxNews.com): Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin “Bibi” Netanyahu defends Israel’s actions by stating of the Mavi Marmara, “this wasn’t a love boat; it was a hate boat”.

And now, just in, the Iran Revolutionary Guard wants to escort another aid ship, the Rachel Corrie, into Gaza. (Hmm … Iran: Hamas suppliers. Holocaust deniers. Peace activists. Peace activists?)

In other surreal news, the U.S. is demanding answers, and Turkey – a hard-fought-for ally – is livid.

Unfortunately, Israel’s problems are not given to objective solutions. Much is contingent on whether you think the State of Israel, as it stands, has a legitimate claim to both the state and Palestinian territories, and therefore the right to blockade anyone who may supply armaments to insurgents. While few could argue against the nobility of its original establishment and purpose (Ahmadinijad and his cadre notwithstanding), there’s an elephant cloaked in righteousness in the corner: More than a few people out there agitate that “elements” in our nation have given Israel a free pass in policy and security matters due to its role in Christian “End Times” eschatology, or – at the very least – as our Manifest Destiny foothold in the Middle East. And, they think, this has marginalized the Palestinian people accordingly.

Whether you view either of these perceptions (realities?) as reasons to support Israel or not, the notion of Israel-as-puppet has probably frustrated the average Israeli who would likely prefer not to be yoked to an agenda that doesn’t reflect the day-to-day concerns of security and livelihood. After all, the legacy of the Holocaust is enough of an ideological engine to maintain. The legacy of Israel’s feats of daring is pretty heavy too, especially after a string of mishaps in the past 20 years (Lebanon in 2006 comes to mind).

But, back to the situation at hand. What can or should be done?

As I firmly think that anti-Semitism will always be with us, I believe in Israel’s right to exist for its original purpose and defend itself from a local, institutional interest in its demise. However, I think that all “life” must be accountable to and for other “life” on an individual basis. Whether it’s the biblical injunction to “love thy neighbor” (and/or enemies) or the reason why any of us may support international aid drives during a natural disaster, I believe that awareness creates responsibility at a very fundamental level, ideological differences or no. I also believe that nations should consider the defenseless when defending oneself, minimizing so-called collateral damage as they can.

In this vein, Les Gelb, president emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations, has a short-term solution to the current problem:

“There is a reasonable solution to this terrible dilemma: The Gazan people are in need of food and medicine, and Israel must protect itself against Gazan terrorists. President Obama should propose this simple arrangement: First, those wishing to bring humanitarian aid to Gaza agree to land aircraft, dock ships, and use land checkpoints all reasonably designated by Israel for inspection of contents. Second, Israel agrees to inspect cargoes within two to three days, and allow all humanitarian goods to proceed to Gaza immediately.”

Mr. Gelb’s proposal is very sensible, in my view, as the fallout from this necessary blockade has created a well-documented humanitarian crisis.

Why is the blockade necessary? I personally do not believe that Hamas will ever be satisfied with a two-state solution, as they alternately deny the existence of or wish to destroy Israel (as any psychologist will tell you, and as succinctly stated by Maya Angelou, “The first time someone shows you who they are, believe them.”).

While I’m very sympathetic to the activists in spirit (trying to address the basic needs of the defenseless) and in a measure of deed (though not the uninformed, flotilla-boarding kind), this very role often allows ideals to crowd out reality. Even if Hamas is merely an idea, as one writer I mentioned stated, it’s a Molotov cocktail of an idea, in my view. Activists in this environment would do well to heed Smokey Bear’s admonition, “Don’t play with matches”.

My plea for the long-term: Israel, please remember why you were established, but also where you are now. You’re fighting more in the court of public opinion nowadays than on the battlefield. I agree with the writer Michael Chabon when he says in a June 4 N.Y. Times article, “Chosen But Not Special”:

“The past two decades in particular have illustrated to Jews and to the world a painful premise, but one that was implicit in the Zionist idea from the beginning: If, in the words of the 1948 Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel, the Jewish people have a natural right ‘to be masters of their own fate, like all other nations, in their own sovereign state,’ then the inescapable codicil of this natural inheritance is that the Jewish people, ‘like all other nations,’ are every bit as capable of barbarism and stupidity.”

Blunt, but hey: Take your hits, apologize for the losses, get some perspective and re-examine your rapprochement and defensive policies. While the danger’s always present, this isn’t 1948, or even 1967. Choose your weapons accordingly.

Maybe all that’s required now is a little less ideological en brera and a little more la chaim. I’d toast to that.

S.R. Brown lives in Pflugerville and is a marketing consultant.