On Feb. 7 The Jerusalem Post announced it had fired columnist Naomi Chazan after she and the New Israel Fund (NIF) threatened legal action against the paper for carrying an ad against her and the U.S.-based philanthropy of which she is president. After running the anti-Chazan ad, The Post subsequently published one that defended her and the NIF. But Chazan's lawyers said the initial ad constituted libel and incitement, and that the cancellation of her column was a form of speech infringement.

In the ad, Chazan, a former Knesset member, was depicted with a horn sprouting from her forehead. Im Tirtzu, the group that sponsored the ad, accused Chazan and the NIF of funding groups that provided "negative" comments for a U.N. probe of Israel's military operation in the Gaza Strip last year. The Goldstone Report determined that the Israeli offensive, launched in response to Palestinian rocket fire, killed approximately 1,400 Palestinians and 13 Israelis. It also found that both sides had committed war crimes, a charge that both Israelis and Palestinians have denied.

Chazan said there is no direct correlation between the NIF's political positions and those of the groups that have received grants from the NIF. "We really don't support every single thing these organizations say, but we support their right to say it," she told Ha'aretz last week. "The only thing that unites them is a demand for an independent investigation, and this is totally mainstream." But NIF, a progressive philanthropy "committed to democratic change in Israel," has inflamed some conservative Israelis who see it as a fifth column supported by American liberals.  

Many of these American liberals prefer not to publicly criticize Israel (not just about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict but also on issues of human and civil rights, economic justice, immigration and the environment). Instead they support NIF, which promotes on-the-ground change. But the attack by Im Tirtzu signals an end to business as usual.

Im Tirtzu calls itself a centrist organization that wants to strengthen political Zionism. But according to an investigative report by Ha'aretz, the movement is funded by right-wing groups and individuals, including John Hagee, the controversial Texas pastor who heads Christians United for Israel. (An ardent Zionist, Hagee has nevertheless alienated many Jews by blaming them for anti-Semitism.) Also on board with Im Tirtzu is the Central Fund for Israel, a New York-based non-profit that funds settler militias and security for West Bank settlements. Im Tirtzu's website calls for "a second Zionist revolution." That begs the question: Who and what will be overthrown?

At the very least, the flap over Chazan has trained a spotlight on a pair of American non-profits that are channeling millions of dollars to support two very different visions of Israel. Sounds like a story in the making.

But it's also interesting that Israel—long heralded as the only American-style democracy in the Middle East—may be entering a period that some of its citizens find reminiscent of the McCarthy era, a time when right-wing activists used government and the press to question the patriotism of Americans who may or may not have been Communist sympathizers. (McCarthy's Congressional hearings blurred differences among the truly subversive, loyal leftists and the unfairly accused.) 

The 1950s Red Scare was the beginning of the end for the American left. Ever since then, the center of American political life has moved farther to the right as mainstream politicians steer clear of causes, issues or ideas that would place them in the progressive (code name for "lefty-socialist") camp. In the meantime, the legacy media has muzzled itself, likewise fearful of the right's blanket criticism of the liberal press. (For more on this see David Domke's study of the post 9/11 press: God Willing? Political Fundamentalism in the White House, the "War on Terror" and the Echoing Press.)

Since its inception, Israel has had a wide diversity of opinions forcefully presented in the public sphere. Newspapers have reflected a spectrum of political views, cultivating free speech and lively debate. The Chazan affair chills anyone who believes that openness is necessary for peace and justice in the Middle East—and anywhere else in the world. Enforced conformity, conjured by right-wing political correctness, doesn't make for an informed citizenry or a vibrant press. Up to now, Israel has been lucky enough to have both. Maybe it's no accident that American journalists have missed the story thus far.

[USC Annenberg graduate student Len Ly contributed research for this piece.]