Let us discuss this passage, if you will

"“Unless and until the Arab states are democratic and progressive, they will have a bad image. Israel for all of its colonial policies, for all the racism that is part of the structure of governance within Israel itself, has a positive image because there are positive aspects to Israel. It is a democracy for at least the Jewish and Arab citizens of the state. It’s a discriminatory democracy, but it’s a democracy.”" Well, first of all, Arab states deserve the worst image. They have earned it. Secondly, Arabs--as people--have a bad image because of Western prejudices and religious bigotry. And that, no democracy can change. Much of Latin America is democratic, and yet there are horrible stereotypes of Latinos right here in land stolen from Latinos. Thirdly, image is not relevant here. Israel, contrary to what Rashid is implying, has a bad image around the world, except here in the US (and Marshall Islands and Micronesia). Image does not account for Israeli victories and occupation: war crimes do. No matter what images Arabs have, Israel conquer by force of arms. And American support for Israel has nothing to do with images. And Taiwan and Shah's Iran had great images here in the US, simply because they were allies of the US. Image is not always based on actual record. If Israel is tomorrow taken over by religious nuts (who do inhabit the government), Israel's image would not change. Lastly, Rashid's characterization of Israeli democracy is way too charitable. Israel is a democracy for its Jewish citizens (especially those from European countries) full stop.