How Liberal Is Peter Beinart's Zionism?

David Gerstman on Beinart:

I have three questions for Beinart.

If Beinart believes that the acquisition of territory by force is wrong, how does he feel about the Jewish presence in Hebron (driven out by force in 1929) or the Etzion Bloc or the Old City of Jerusalem? [actually, how did he feel about the Arab presence there after the violent expulsion of Jews - YM]

Since he postulates that "settlements" render Zionism immoral, in his opinion what would render Palestinian nationalism immoral? Terrorism? Refusal to accept the legitimacy of a Jewish state? Refusal to make a deal that would end up creating a Palestinian state? [and let us recall that up until the Mandate period there were Jewish residency locations in Judea, Samaria and Gaza, see above. it is not as if all of a sudden, "settlements" appeared there. - YM]

Finally, Beinart protests the illegitimacy of Zionism on account settlements which somehow deprive Palestinians of their rights. Yet his solution is to force more Jews from their homes, which would seem to be a deprivation of Jewish rights. Either Beinart has principles that he applies universally, or his arguments are simply thinly disguised justifications for his opposition to Israel and Zionism.

I guess liberalism can be quite "liberal".

^