Subscribe Now »

Special Cyber Monday Deal

Give the Gift of the

Take advantage of our Cyber Monday deal and get the Washingtonian for just $12. That's 87% off our newsstand rate! Digital subscriptions are just $5.99!


I would like to receive the following free email newsletters:

Newsletter Signup
  1. Bridal Party
  2. Dining Out
  3. Kliman Online
  4. Photo Ops
  5. Shop Around
  6. Where & When
  7. Well+Being
  8. Learn more
Jeffrey Goldberg, Washington’s Most Pugnacious Journalist
Comments () | Published January 29, 2013

Bennet and Goldberg offer a contrast of type—Bennet is cool, reserved, and laconic, while Goldberg is excitable, disarmingly frank, and voluble—and the juxtaposition seems to amuse them both.

In Bennet’s corner office at the Watergate, we chat about Goldberg. “I can imagine he’s a lot to handle,” I say.

Bennet laughs: “You can, huh?” He offers no argument to the proposition that Goldberg sometimes falls short of the Atlantic’s standards of editorial fairness—such as when Goldberg dismissed Beinart’s book as “filled with errors and omissions” without listing any. Bennet agrees: “If you’re going to call somebody out, you should be able to back it up.”

At the same time, Bennet disputes the notion that Goldberg tries to police the discourse on Israel—as does Goldberg himself. All such commenters, including Leon Wieseltier, Bennet says, are only expressing their opinions. If Goldberg “has more credibility and more authority, it’s because he has more credibility and authority, and he’s earned that,” Bennet says. “The test is the body of work. I would put Jeff’s body of work on the subject of Israel, the broader Middle East, and Iran up against anybody, certainly in this country—actually anywhere.” Bennet, whose mother is a Holocaust survivor, can appreciate the intensity of Goldberg’s commitment to the survival of the Jewish people.

Bennet makes a good point about Goldberg’s having earned his authority. It’s fair to note, as Wieseltier acidly does, that Goldberg isn’t a scholar of Jewish history or of the Jewish spiritual and philosophical traditions. But it’s also true that Goldberg has personally immersed himself in the cauldron of the Middle East and has thus acquired a street-level knowledge of the region superior to Wieseltier’s—and for that matter Sullivan’s and possibly anyone else’s in Washington.

For a prescient piece for the New York Times Magazine, published a year before the 9/11 attacks, Goldberg managed to enroll himself in a Pakistani madrassah at which a next generation of jihadists was being groomed. “The only enemy Islam and Christianity have is the Jews,” the master of the religious school tells him in greeting, to which Goldberg responds, “I’m Jewish.” There is “a moment’s pause,” and the master says, “Well, you are most welcome here.” A pair of 11-year-old boys take to hiding behind trees and surprising him with shrieks of “Osama!”

Goldberg journeyed to the Kurdish lands of Saddam Hussein’s Iraq; he once was held hostage by gun-toting Palestinian militants in Gaza. He could have ended up a Daniel Pearl, the Wall Street Journal correspondent kidnapped in Karachi in 2002 and beheaded by Islamic fanatics who released a graphic video of the “slaughter” of a “Jew.”

“There is a kind of courageous exposure of self” in Goldberg’s insistence that he’s a Jewish journalist, says an old friend, Jonathan Rosen, an editor for whom Goldberg wrote back in the 1990s at the Forward, the New York City-based Jewish newspaper. “It can look like a natural path to prominence,” Rosen says. “But there are many Jewish journalists uncomfortable writing about these things. You have to be willing to brave that proclamation of identity. That’s as dangerous as walking around the madrassahs of Pakistan.”

Goldberg, who told me he erred in his treatment of Beinart’s book, takes criticisms offered by his friends to heart. “He’s right,” he says of Remnick’s point about how his time might be better spent on long-form articles. “Blogging is in many ways a disaster for journalists,” Goldberg says, noting that “it’s all glandular.” At the very least, he’d like to moderate his style. “I used to be hotter. Now I’m trying to be cooler,” he says, sounding as if he means it.

• • •

Goldberg is mischaracterized, probably willfully, by some of his fault-finders. A staple reproach is that he’s Benjamin Netanyahu’s “faithful stenographer,” as Roger Cohen asserted in a 2009 New York Times column. That perception is sufficiently ingrained in Washington that Barack Obama himself directed a jest of this sort at Goldberg at an off-the-record meeting in May at the White House with a crew of foreign-policy journalists.

When a question about a policy position of Netanyahu’s government was raised, Obama turned to Goldberg and said, according to a leaked version of events confirmed by several participants, “You should ask Jeff. He knows a lot more about this stuff than I do.” Goldberg played along. “I’m not authorized to talk about that,” he said, one-upping the President in the kidding-around department.

But Goldberg does pan Netanyahu at times. BIBI: THE MIDDLE EAST’S WILE E. COYOTE was the headline on Goldblog for a post about Netanyahu’s speech in September at the United Nations, when Israel’s prime minister displayed a “cartoonish drawing,” as Goldberg called it, of an Iranian nuclear bomb. “He insulted the intelligence of his audience” and “people are laughing at him,” Goldberg declared.

From pro-Israel voices to the right of Goldberg comes the complaint of “diligent cheerleading” for Obama, as made by Jonathan Tobin in Commentary. Goldberg does seem to have a soft spot for Obama, who is reviled by conservative opponents in the US for a supposedly anti-Israel bias and isn’t especially well liked in Israel itself. Citing Obama’s “many Jewish mentors, colleagues, and friends,” Goldberg has praised him on his blog as “the most Jewish president we’ve ever had (except for Rutherford B. Hayes).”

But Goldberg isn’t a cheerleader. “Obama’s record in the Middle East suggests that missed opportunities are becoming a White House specialty,” he wrote in an October Bloomberg View column. “Perhaps Obama isn’t quite the brilliant foreign-policy strategist his campaign tells us he is.”

Nor is Goldberg a “neocon,” as he’s been called by Andrew Sullivan and others. He did support George W. Bush’s war in Iraq—but not for the standard neocon reason of spreading democracy. Goldberg’s perspective on the Middle East tends to emphasize its tragic elements. “Saddam Hussein is uniquely evil, the only ruler in power today—and the first one since Hitler—to commit chemical genocide,” against the Kurds, Goldberg wrote in Slate in 2002, before the war. “Is that enough of a reason to remove him from power? I would say yes, if ‘never again’ is in fact actually to mean ‘never again.’ ”

Never again. No other phrase packs more power in the modern Jewish lexicon. Six million Jews died in the Holocaust, and that was only 70 years ago—not long at all in historical time. Goldberg is perhaps best understood as a “never again” journalist. IS IT POSSIBLE TO THINK TOO MUCH ABOUT THE HOLOCAUST?, a Goldblog headline asked. His reply: “No, the answer is no—it is not possible to think about the Holocaust too much.”


Media & Politics People & Politics
Subscribe to Washingtonian

Discuss this story

Feel free to leave a comment or ask a question. The Washingtonian reserves the right to remove or edit content once posted.
  • redwood509

    Lost his honorary spot in Bibi's Rolodex! This former IDF detention guard, is off the island, his reporting is mainly from assorted disgruntled Israeli lefties, habitual losers, discredited opinonators and lots of gossip peddlers from the Obama wrecking crew. Even when he has something truthful to peddle it frequently become insignificant and marginal in the long run because events measure bigger than his Alte Zachen gossip!

  • shaunn

    Mr. Goldberg appears to be a tribalist, first and foremost. He also appears to be a hired gun - his vicious attack on Walt and Mearsheimer is the work of a man dedicated to protecting illusions, not critical and honest thought. The problem here is that Mr. Goldberg and the people around him are responsible for distorting the discussion of the Middle East in the US, thereby creating an environment that is destructive to the US, Israel, Palestinians and the larger region.

  • Brian Cohen

    VIcious attack? Walt and Mearsheimer deserved to be raked over the coals for their biased and stilted piece of pseudo-academic trash. You sound like you're the type who wants to "distort" the discussion so that for some bizarre reasons US policy should embrace both brutal Arab dictators and brutal Islamic theocracies and let them snuff out Israel. America does not share values with the Palestinians (whose leaders, for example, refuse to take action against honor killings) or any single country in the region - other than Israel.

  • sidjames

    He's a funny guy alright, laughing at the dumb country he has pretended to be a citizen of, while he kisses on the cheek and stabs in the back the very people who generously allowed his refugee people to live amongst them. 4000 of our boys got killed and 10 times that number gruesomely injured due to amusing snakes like him betraying the trust of telling the American public the truth (in his roll as a journalist) about Iraq's WMD, instead tricking us into war solely to serve his real country Israel. There is no statute of limitations on treason, and it's a capital offence, keep laughing sunny boy...keep laughing.

  • Mitchell S. Gilbert

    The man lost all credibility with me when he suggested that Maureen Dowd was anti-Semitic. How sophisticated can someone be if they have the same old-world radar for anti-Semites that over the top, semi-literate bubbies & zaides applied to every Gentile 60 years ago?

blog comments powered by Disqus

Posted at 12:15 PM/ET, 01/29/2013 RSS | Print | Permalink | Comments () | Articles