Miryam Shomrat, the ambassador to Norway, was upset about the shooting at the synagogue in Oslo and recently violated diplomatic protocol by wondering out loud why the Norwegian royal family didn't do more to visibly support its Jewish subjects. After all, she pointed out, the congregation in Oslo makes a point of every week offering its prayers on behalf of the King, Queen and their household during Shabbat services.
Oh boy. Not wasting any time, the president of the Oslo synagogue got on the phone with the newspapers, characterizing Shomrat's points as "very, very unwise," pointing out that she is "not our ambassador." The Norwegian foreign minister Jonas Gahr Støre gave strong voice to his view that Shomrat was "inappropriate."
Shomrat herself expressed her regrets over the whole thing, making it clear she never meant to criticize the royal family.
Now, let's stipulate that Shomrat overstepped diplomatic boundaries by commenting on internal Norwegian issues, and that she, as Aftenposten said, should know better than to criticize the Norwegian royal family.
(Having said that, Norwegian politicians never hesitate to criticize Israeli internal affairs, and Norwegian newspapers, including Aftenposten, have no moral standing to lecture anyone on how to treat the royal family. But neither politicians nor editors are known to avoid rank hypocricy if it suits them).
Having said this, let us also point out that:
- Her comment was perfectly reasonable. It would not have been out of order for a member of the royal family to visit the synagogue, or at least send a happy new year card. I happen to think very highly of the people who happen to be royalty in Norway, and I am sure they never meant to slight or overlook anyone. But it's a perfectly reasonable question.
- It was frightening to see how Anne Sender had to so emphatically disassociate herself from the ambassador. It was as if she felt compelled to jump up and down, crying at the top of her lungs: "We're Norwegian! We're Norwegian!" There is no doubt in my mind that she, like many other Norwegian Jews, have a great deal of anxiety about proving just how Norwegian they are.
- Of all imaginable diplomatic gaffes, this was pretty mild and should be easily forgiven in light of its context. And to be sure, the Norwegian ministry of foreign affairs, has declared the matter closed as far as they are concerned.
But as if to prove the point, Aftenposten's editor can't let this opportunity go by.
On its editorial pages, he writes that he doubts that Shomrat's apology is sincere, wonders whether she realizes what a disservice she has done to Norwegian Jews, and questions whether she can serve her country's interests when she doesn't understand how public speech is interpreted by Norwegians.
This from an editor that printed Jostein Gaarder's antisemitic rant and a long series of even more offensive pieces, who gladly gives Kåre Willoch all the column-space he wants to propagate misleading and hateful screeds against Israel, and who never once has taken any responsibility for creating an anti-Israel mindset.
- What kind of country, what kind of public opinion, would actually use a careless slip by an ambassador to punish an entire minority? If Shomrat's comments had negative repercussions on Norwegian Jews, it is not her fault, but the fault of those who found in the comments a pretext to lash out.
- With what basis and for what reason does this editor dispute Shomrat's apology? How much groveling does he want? Does he want Shomrat to concede that she has no right to an opinion? Compare this with the endless talk that Hamas's "signals" can only be construed as an olive branch, never mind the Kassam rockets.
To further prove its point, Aftenposten interviews Norway's ambassador to Israel, who says that as far as he's concerned, things are just fine between Israel and Norway. This contrasted with the conventional wisdom that Shomrat's assignment is considered particularly challenging, given the toxic public opinion against Israel in Norway.
So if you're to give equal credence to both ambassadors, Israelis have nothing against Norwegians, but Norwegians have a lot against Israelis.
Aftenposten's editors have long suffered from a moral superiority complex. They seem to think that their ascension to the pinnacles of the Norwegian media sandbox automatically confers upon them the right to pass judgment based on the feeling in their guts.
Norwegian media daily insult Israel, its government, and its people. But its editors can't tolerate a Jew who talks back.
Comments