I can think of no one more deserving of election to the Senate seat held by the giant, Dianne Feinstein, than Congressman Adam Schiff. Though Schiff’s competition are excellent congressional representatives, Adam’s twenty-two years in the House, his chairmanship of the House Intelligence Committee, his shepherding as Manager of the first Impeachment trial of the ex-President Donald Trump, and being a part of the January 6 House Investigation Committee puts him in a category of leadership that few can claim.

Speaking personally, I have known Adam Schiff for many years as my synagogue’s congressional representative and as a friend. When I retired from my position in 2019 after 30+ years as Senior Rabbi of Temple Israel of Hollywood in Los Angeles, Adam came to the celebration and stayed for the entire evening. He was introduced twice, once by the Master of Ceremonies, Marty Kaplan, and the second time by me after he spoke and presented me a citation from Congress. On each occasion, he received a sustained standing ovation from the nearly 500 people in the hall at the Skirball Cultural Center. My friend, Andy Hill, told me after the event that there are now two defining moments in Temple Israel of Hollywood’s almost 75-year history – the first was Dr. Martin Luther King’s appearance and sermon in February 1965 in our Sanctuary, and the second was Congressman Adam Schiff’s appearance at this Gala Celebration. Andy is right.

At the time Adam joined us, in April 2019, the first Impeachment Trial was not yet concluded. Adam would later, in February, 2020, speak before the Senate after the work of the Impeachment committee had finished about the conduct and corruption of the President of the United States vis a vis the then young relatively unknown Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

Trump had already put Adam in the cross-hairs of the MAGA crazies calling him all kinds of stupid names, but Adam did the work of Congress as he was elected to do and as he was charged to do by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi when chosen as the Impeachment Manager. Adam’s courage, diligence, clarity of purpose, intelligence, expertise in Constitutional law, eloquence, and service as a 20+ year veteran representative of his Burbank-Los Angeles district are second to none in the House of Representatives.

Who can ever forget Adam’s closing speech before the Senate in the first Impeachment Trial when he said:

“We must say enough — enough! He has betrayed our national security, and he will do so again…He has compromised our elections, and he will do so again. You will not change him. You cannot constrain him. He is who he is. Truth matters little to him. What’s right matters even less, and decency matters not at all…You are decent. He is not who you are.”

“Can we be confident that he will not continue to try to cheat in [this] very election? Can we be confident that Americans and not foreign powers will get to decide, and that the president will shun any further foreign interference in our Democratic affairs? The short, plain, sad, incontestable answer is no, you can’t. You can’t trust this president to do the right thing. Not for one minute, not for one election, not for the sake of our country. You just can’t. He will not change and you know it….What are the odds if left in office that he will continue trying to cheat? I will tell you: 100 percent. A man without character or ethical compass will never find his way.”

(I offer the link below to Adam’s complete closing statement as House Manager, which is worth listening to again)

As a liberal Democrat, Adam’s positions on all the issues that the Democratic Party and the vast majority of the American Jewish community supports (70% at least), his advocacy for the security of the State of Israel, the two-state solution, and democracy in Israel-Palestine and the United States, his support of the Ukrainians against a brutal and heartless Russian regime led by the war criminal Vladimir Putin, and for decency generally commends his aspirations to be our next California Senator.

The campaign is still young with lots of time before the 2024 election. But, I am happy to go on record now endorsing Adam Schiff despite the high quality of his two primary opponents. It is a shame that three outstanding congressional representatives will all give up their House seats in pursuit of the Senate seat being vacated by Senator Feinstein. That said – we have an opportunity to elect not only a great Congressional Representative to the Senate in Adam, but a great American and a great Jewish leader. As I said at the Gala honoring my service, Adam makes me proud to be an American and proud to be a Jew.

When it was reported that before Adam formally announced running for the Senate, he visited with Senator Feinstein and she told him that he should go forward and run, I thought to myself – there goes the mensch that I know.

I hope you will support his candidacy for the Senate. If elected, Adam will bring dignity, intelligence, focus, and menschlechkite to the work of that august body.

Adam Schiff’s closing statement in the First Impeachment Trial is here –

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/trump-impeachment-inquiry/closing-argument-democrats-say-not-removing-trump-would-render-him-n1128766

Leonard Cohen said as he passed his 70^th birthday that he was not yet in “old age.” He was in the “foothills of old age.” I like that especially now that I’m 73+ and still climbing that low-grade foothill with the old-age-mountain still off in the distance.

My friend, Marty Kaplan, sent this YouTube video (below) to a group of us that was made for young writers in Hollywood featuring older writers and actors talking, with palpable up-beat joy, about remaining creative and productive. It’s relevant to us all. It’s 3 minutes.

The message is a good counterpoint to all the disturbing news coming out of Ukraine and Russia, Israel-Palestine, Palestine-Ohio, the southern border, the harsh weather almost everywhere, and in the Republican-controlled Congress.

A year ago, I saved from the site “Changing it up” this piece addressing the benefits of optimism:

“The benefits of optimism — and staying positive — are countless and include lower stress levels, improved coping skills, higher energy levels, increased resilience, increased creativity, improved well-being, reduced pain, decreased depression, reduced risk of heart attack, stroke and other cardiovascular diseases, increased health span and better quality of life to name a few.”

-Changing it Up – January 26, 2022

Cheers!

#RethinkAging with Hollywood, Health & Society

Let’s tell the stories of older people’s lives with the depth and complexity they deserve. Hollywood, Health & Society invites you to #RethinkAging with Norman Lear, Marla Gibbs, George Takei, Mimi Kennedy, George Wallace, and The SCAN Foundation.

Note: I am hearing the following sentiments by increasing numbers of Israeli leaders who believe that this current Israeli government led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is not only the most extremist nationalist and ultra-Orthodox right-wing government in the 75-year history of the State of Israel but is an existential threat to Israeli democracy itself. Yesterday, Rabbi Gilad Kariv (MK Labor Party and the former head of the Israeli Reform and Progressive Movement), in a conference call of international leadership of the Reform movement, called on the liberal American Jewish community in particular (given that we are the most important Diaspora community in the world) to stand publicly with the Israeli opposition by contacting the Biden Administration, our Congressional Representatives, Israeli Consuls General across the United States, and our Israeli friends to express our friendship and solidarity with Israeli opposition per what the two writers of the following op-ed in the Haaretz daily newspaper yesterday wrote.

A disclaimer – I am a national co-chair of the Rabbinic and Cantorial Cabinet of J Street (a pro-Israel, pro-peace, and pro-democracy American political organization based in Washington, D.C.) comprised of more than 1030 rabbis and cantors across America’s liberal streams. Etzion and Shek (note their bios at the conclusion) confirm the important place in American politics that J Street has assumed (as opposed to AIPAC). I am posting this op-ed in its entirety not only for the authors’ articulate expression of Israeli outrage at the anti-democratic agenda of this Israeli government, but because Haaretz is a subscription newspaper and the article is likely unavailable to many of you. As I have written before, it is worth it if you are a keen watcher of all things Israeli to subscribe to Haaretz, the equivalent of Israel’s New York Times.

Here is the op-ed:

“To call for American-Jewish ‘unity’ – either in favor of the anti-democratic coup or by adopting ‘neutrality’ – is to betray America’s and Israel’s core values

Op-ed by Eran Etzion and Daniel Shek – Haaretz – February 23, 2023

“Israel is undergoing a rapid, aggressive attempt at regime change. A seemingly legitimate, elected coalition is determined to use its slim, almost accidental majority to reframe Israel’s democratic foundations into an illiberal and hollowed-out state.

If Netanyahu’s co-conspirators achieve their goal, what was for 75 years the only Jewish and democratic state in history will no longer be democratic. Will it still be Jewish? That depends on your definition of Judaism, but for a majority of Israeli Jews, this is not an academic debate. Rather, it is an existential battle for their homeland’s soul, and for their children and grandchildren’s very possibility of a future life as proud and free Israelis, “to be a free nation in our land,” as the national anthem goes.

This is not your run-of-the-mill expression of “Israel’s vibrant democracy” or “lively debate,” as supporters of the coup d’état – and unfortunately some middle-of-the-road, well-intentioned but hopelessly naïve voices – are trying to argue. (See this misguided recent piece) This is a transformative point in the history of the Israeli nation and the Jewish people. At this moment, our entire nation-state is on the verge of a homemade catastrophe.

What is the role of Israel’s greatest ally in such a defining moment? And what position should America’s crucially important Jewish community, which is liberal to its core, take?

In recent years, the political spheres in both the United States and Israel deteriorated into chaos. A large chunk of the citizenry fell prey to nationalist, populist, and sometimes racist and conspiratorial narratives, propagated by toxic leaders and fueled by irresponsible social media moguls and cynical media figures.

In both countries, any talk of “unity” is detached from political and constitutional realities. There is no “united” America, there is no “united” Israel and there is no “united” American Jewish community. One needs to shut one’s eyes firmly, cover one’s ears hermetically and seal one’s nose completely in order to maintain the stale position of “let there only be one American Jewish voice on Israel.”

The argument that American Jews should represent a united front on Israel went bankrupt decades ago, when AIPAC refused to support the late Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin’s historic peace initiative, which was backed by the majority of the Israeli people. It was once again proven to be counter-productive when AIPAC supported Netanyahu’s destructive crusade against the Obama administration’s nuclear deal with Iran. These are core national security issues for all Israelis, but they were still played out within the bounds of democracy. Nowadays, the rules have been thrown out the window by a coalition of convicted felons, anti-democratic conspirators, religious fundamentalists and messianic zealots.

To call for American-Jewish “unity” – either in favor of the anti-democratic coup or by adopting “neutrality” – is to betray America’s and Israel’s core values. With AIPAC having veered rightward, both in American and Israeli terms, the liberal pro-Israel group J Street has not only earned its role as representative of the center and center-left of American Jewry, it now has to struggle alongside its Israeli liberal and progressive counterparts against the attack on the democratic foundations of the Jewish state.

Well over 100,000 people have taken to the streets in recent weeks for regular protests against the government’s so-called “judicial reform” and other parts of the right-wing agenda. Supreme Court President Esther Hayut has warned that “if the people who made up this plan have their way, Israel’s 75th year will be remembered as the year in which its democracy suffered a fatal blow.” From economists and tech companies to jurists and security leaders, so many corners of our society are more alarmed than ever before – and we are mobilizing.

These Israelis understand exactly what is at stake for our country – and we are saying so loudly and clearly. Now, we need our true friends in the United States and around the world to join us – exactly as J Street has.

This is the moment for the U.S. government, American Jews and all pro-Israel Americans – for all who have deep concerns about our government’s policies and Israel’s future as a secure, democratic homeland for the Jewish people – to speak out.

The far-right government falsely tells Israelis that its anti-democratic agenda will not harm Israel’s relationship with the United States, or its standing with the rest of the world. Even as it works to fundamentally transform Israel’s democratic character and its policies toward non-Orthodox Jews, LGBTQ people and Israeli Arabs, the government wants the U.S. government and Israel’s supporters in the American Jewish community to pretend that everything is business as usual, so that all those in the opposition will be left isolated and ignored.

Meanwhile, the right is happy to rely on its own vocal supporters and funders in the United States to help advance a shared illiberal agenda. When Republican billionaires anonymously give millions to the think tank that helped draft the government’s “judicial reform,” they are not told, as J Street is, to “stay out of Israel’s internal affairs.”

Apparently it is only concerned liberal democrats – in fact, the large majority of the American Jewish community – who are attacked and chastised for taking a strong interest in Israel’s future. This will not stand.

J Street ensures that U.S. elected officials receive a nuanced and honest picture of Israel’s reality from its security establishment, opposition leaders and civil society – not just from the government and its cheerleaders. They make clear that while we Israelis need American help to defend ourselves against rockets, terror attacks and other security threats, we also need help to end the cycle of endless conflict, and to achieve peace. They make clear that now, more than ever, we need help to preserve and defend our democracy.

President Joe Biden has already signaled his concerns regarding the future of Israel’s democracy and its “shared values” with the United States. American Jews who hold these values dear, and who value the strategic alliance between the United States and Israel, must stand up and fight shoulder-to-shoulder with us at this critical juncture. The stakes could not be higher. Join our fight for democracy, for freedom, for the Israel our forefathers and foremothers fought so hard to create, the true Israel of the Declaration of Independence. You have a place in this battle as well.”

Eran Etzion is the former deputy head of Israel’s National Security Council.

Ambassador Daniel Shek served as Israel’s ambassador to France and spokesman for the Israeli Foreign Ministry.

Introductory notes: In a J Street Leadership call last week, former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert was blunt – American Jews must speak out against the policies of the anti-democratic government of Israel. Echoing his call, J Street’s Israel Executive Director, a former Israeli Consul General to New England, and an aid to former Prime Minister Shimon Peres, Nadav Tamir, said: “Only America can save Israel from its own government.”

In all my years as a liberal Zionist activist I have never heard Israelis speak so candidly and with such worry about their own government’s direction and the future of Israeli democracy as I have heard in recent weeks since this most extreme right-wing-ultra-Orthodox-nationalist government in the history of the State of Israel assumed power.

Israelis have taken to the streets in huge numbers to protest this government’s threatened actions. On Monday, as the Knesset was meeting to pass (in the first round in committee) a radical re-visioning of Israel’s judicial system, estimates of between 80,000 and 300,000 Israelis came to Jerusalem by car, train, and bus from Haifa, Tel Aviv, and everywhere else (many taking their children with them and out of school for the day) because of the shock that the Knesset’s Constitution and Law Committee and Justice Department are having on the country as a whole. Polls indicate that a clear majority of Israelis oppose this legislation that would place all power in the hands of the ruling coalition government and, therefore, in the hands of the Prime Minister without any check or balance from the government’s judicial branch.

Israeli President Isaac Herzog has asked the Netanyahu government to pause its legislation and come together with the opposition, leading jurists, and academics to reach a reasonable compromise in which some legitimate reform can be instituted that would gain widespread approval from the Israeli public. The two leading figures in the government, however, Justice Minister Yariv Levin (from the Likud Party) and Knesset Constitution, Law and Justice Committee chairman MK Simcha Rothman (from the extreme nationalist Religious Zionist Party) are doggedly pushing these so-called “reforms” (but really a radical restructuring of Israel’s judiciary system) forward and refuse to compromise. Yair Lapid, the former Prime Minister and opposition leader, said he was willing to meet immediately according to the terms of President Herzog’s invitation and 5-point plan, but only if the reforms are put on pause.

Israel is in crisis, and adding these domestic issues to what the government is doing in the West Bank – preparing the ground in Area C to be annexed de facto against international law – Israel needs the United States and American Jewry to at once continue our support of the Jewish state and its security but also demand that this government cease its radical policies. What Israel does affects us here, our pride in being Jews, our security against antisemitism, and our future as integrated American-Jewish citizens. Polls suggest that young American Jews, in particular, are turning away from Israel in increasingly large numbers. (If you have not read Tom Friedman’s opinion piece that I posted yesterday, I urge you to do so now.)

U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken, in Israel’s daily newspaper Ha’aretz (Israel’s newspaper of record much like the NYT in America) on Monday harshly condemned the Israeli security cabinet’s steps to legalize nine West Bank outposts, construct thousands of new settlement housing units, and connect outposts to water and electricity – all despite previous explicit opposition from the Biden administration.

In the last several weeks, at least two letters signed by hundreds of American Jewish leaders were sent to the leadership of Israel and the United States urging the Israeli government to step back from the brink. We are making our views known, but in the end, the decisions of the Israeli government are in the hands of the Knesset and Israelis – and Israelis by a clear majority are opposed to what this government is doing.

What follows is a J STREET ACTION MEMO for the Biden Administration and United States Congress concerning West Bank policies and the increasing violence between Jewish settlers, the Israeli West Bank military administration and Palestinians living under occupation as well as the above mentioned judicial “reforms.” It was written by Dylan Williams, J Street’s Senior Vice President for Policy and Strategy, and Dr. Debra Shushan, J Street’s Director of Policy, yesterday (February 13, 2023):

“Amid an escalation in deadly violence in the West Bank and East Jerusalem — including recent terror attacks that killed Israeli civilians, including two young children, as well as Israeli raids against militants that killed Palestinian civilians — Israel’s new ultra-right-wing government decided this week to move forward with a series of provocative and consequential steps toward West Bank annexation and removal of judicial restraints on its executive power.

The government decided to take the following major steps toward annexation, which intentionally preempt prospects for a peaceful two-state outcome to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict by converting significant West Bank land into territory functionally attached to Israel, while further shrinking and isolating the small pockets of disjointed land left for Palestinians living under military occupation:

● “Regularizing” or “legalizing” nine outposts in the occupied West Bank that are illegal under both Israeli and international law, turning them into new, authorized settlements;

● Connecting dozens of other still-illegal outposts to Israeli state-provided infrastructure like water and electricity; and

● Convening the planning and zoning committees of Israel’s Civil Administration in the occupied West Bank to approve the planning and building of thousands of new housing units in existing settlements — possibly the largest ever single approval of such units.

The government also moved to neutralize the judiciary and eliminate checks on its power by advancing through Knesset two bills that are integral parts of the Netanyahu government’s plan to subvert Israel’s judicial system, serving Netanyahu’s personal interest in evading conviction on corruption charges and his government’s goal of removing the Supreme Court as an obstacle to the radical reforms contained in its coalition agreements, including those regarding annexation:

● Moving a bill to functionally terminate the Supreme Court’s power of judicial review on foundational issues by preventing the Court from considering the validity of Israel’s Basic Laws – which stipulate civil rights and the powers and functions of Israel’s governing bodies, in the absence of a formal Constitution – or amendments to them; and

● Advancing a second bill that would allow the governing coalition to pack the judiciary with judges of its own choosing, in contrast to the current system which requires judges and politicians to achieve a consensus upon the appointments of new judges to Israel’s Supreme Court and all other civil courts. According to the proposed law, five of nine members of the selection committee would be members of the coalition government, and a bare majority of five votes would be required to appoint judges.

Taking Action: Recommendations for the Biden Administration and Congress

The Biden Administration has reportedly been weighing in privately against such moves with top Israeli officials for several weeks. In response to the Israeli government’s decision to move forward with the West Bank steps this week, Secretary of State Antony Blinken said the United States was “deeply troubled” and “strongly oppose[s] such unilateral measures, which exacerbate tensions and undermine the prospects for a negotiated two-state solution.”

Just days before, President Biden himself cautioned against the moves to undermine Israel’s judiciary with a measured 46-word warning that: “The genius of American democracy and Israeli democracy is that they are both built on strong institutions, on checks and balances, on an independent judiciary. Building consensus for fundamental changes is really important to ensure that the people buy into them so they can be sustained.”

The magnitude of the Israeli government’s provocative moves toward annexation and against the democratic rule of law at this volatile moment merit an urgent and more forceful US government response. At a minimum, the Biden administration and US lawmakers should take the following steps:

● Publicly and consistently make clear that there is a distinction in international law and US policy between the State of Israel and the territory it controls in the West Bank, and that the United States does not regard West Bank settlements as consistent with international law or as part of Israel;

● Reinforce US and international differentiation between Israel and the West Bank through steps like restoring the longstanding bipartisan customs guidance on accurate labeling of West Bank goods;

● Indicate that use of US-origin military equipment or aid in connection with acts toward annexation like evictions, demolitions, forced relocations and the construction of civilian infrastructure designed to benefit settlers could trigger investigations into whether such use constituted a violation of existing US arms export control or aid law;

● Make clear to Israeli officials that the United States will not block accurate, appropriate criticism of acts toward annexation like evictions, demolitions and forced relocations in international fora, including in the United Nations Security Council;

● State that the shared values upon which a strong, crucial US-Israel relationship rests are premised upon democratic systems underpinned by an independent judiciary that acts as a check upon executive power and protects civil liberties — and that an erosion in Israeli democracy would negatively impact the bilateral relationship; and

● Remind Israeli officials that compromising judicial independence can impact the decisions of international bodies like the International Criminal Court as to the adequacy of domestic remedies, making review of Israeli actions by such bodies more likely.”

I woke up on Saturday morning, read the news from Israel that at least 50,000 Israelis had just demonstrated once more against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s plans to strip the Israeli Supreme Court of its independence and put it instead under Netanyahu’s thumb — at a time when Netanyahu himself is facing corruption charges — and I asked myself a simple question: “What does President Biden think of this?”

Biden is as pro-Israel in his gut as any president I have ever covered. He has also had a long and mutually respectful relationship with Netanyahu. So I can tell you that whatever Biden has to say about Israel comes from a place of real concern. It’s a concern that the radical transformation of Israel’s judicial system that Netanyahu’s ultranationalist, ultrareligious coalition is trying to slam through the Knesset could seriously damage Israel’s democracy and therefore its close ties to America and democracies everywhere.

Here is the statement that Biden sent me on Saturday afternoon when I asked for comment: “The genius of American democracy and Israeli democracy is that they are both built on strong institutions, on checks and balances, on an independent judiciary. Building consensus for fundamental changes is really important to ensure that the people buy into them so they can be sustained.”

This is the first time I can recall a U.S. president has ever weighed in on an internal Israeli debate about the very character of the country’s democracy. And although it’s only 46 words, Biden’s statement comes at a crucial time in this wrenching Israeli internal discussion and could well energize and expand the already significant opposition to what Netanyahu’s opponents are calling a legal coup that would move Israel into the camp of countries that have been drifting away from democracy, like Turkey, Hungary and Poland.

Here’s why Biden’s 46 words are so important: First, it puts him squarely behind the compromise approach called for by President Isaac Herzog of Israel — and behind keeping Israel’s widely respected judiciary independent. Although Israel’s presidency is largely a symbolic job, the office carries moral weight. Herzog is a good man who has been trying to head off what he fears could be the most serious civil strife ever within Israeli society if such a big change in the judicial system, inspired in part by a far-right Israeli think tank, is rammed through.

Herzog has pleaded with Netanyahu and his coalition to step back and organize some kind of bipartisan, national dialogue that can patiently study what kind of judicial changes might be healthy for Israel but do it with legal experts, in a nonpartisan fashion and in a way that preserves the integrity of the judicial system that has existed since Israel’s founding.

Unfortunately, Netanyahu rebuffed the Israeli president, which prompted Herzog to declare on Jan. 24 about the so-called judicial reform: “The democratic foundations of Israel, including the justice system, and human rights and freedoms, are sacred, and we must protect them and the values expressed in the Declaration of Independence. The dramatic reform, when done quickly without negotiation, rouses opposition and deep concerns among the public.” He added, “The absence of dialogue is tearing us apart from within, and I’m telling you loud and clear: This powder keg is about to explode. This is an emergency.”

With Biden’s 46 words, Netanyahu now finds himself in a situation where, if he just keeps plowing ahead, he won’t just be snubbing the Israeli president; he will be snubbing the American president as well. That’s no small deal. I also suspect that Biden taking a stand on this issue in this measured but unmistakable fashion will encourage other Western democratic leaders, business leaders and U.S. senators and representatives to do so, too, which will also energize the opposition.

The second reason Biden’s words matter is their timing — it could not be more important. As The Times of Israel reported Saturday, the first reading for some of the most controversial aspects of Netanyahu’s judicial overhaul “is set for Monday; a bill must pass three readings to become law, and the coalition has indicated it seeks to blitz the legislation through the Knesset by April.”

Those leading the opposition have called for a nationwide workers’ strike on Monday and a mass rally outside the Knesset to coincide with the first rounds of voting on the legislation. You can bet more than a few Israeli protesters will be quoting Biden’s words as they take to the streets.

Third, Biden has put himself and America squarely on the side of the Israeli majority opposing Netanyahu’s just shoving his “reform” through — in what increasingly looks like a judicial putsch.

A poll published Friday “indicated that over 60 percent of the public wants the government to halt or delay its legislative efforts to dramatically weaken the High Court of Justice and secure political control over judicial appointments,” The Times of Israel reported.

It also puts America squarely behind Netanyahu’s own attorney general from his last time in office, Avichai Mandelblit — the man who indicted Netanyahu in 2020 on charges of fraud, bribery and breach of trust and who has denounced Netanyahu’s judicial changes as just a disguised effort to quash his own trial and avoid jail.

Speaking to the Israeli TV program “Uvda,” Mandelblit said Netanyahu’s sweeping proposed changes to the judiciary are “not a reform” but rather “regime change.”

Because Israel does not have a constitution and the executive branch always controls the Knesset, Mandelblit explained, the only separation of powers — the only check on the executive branch — is the independent Israeli judiciary and Supreme Court. And what Netanyahu is proposing is that a bare majority of the Knesset — 61 out of 120 seats — become empowered to override any Supreme Court decision. With the narrowest of majorities, the government could put through any laws it likes.

Netanyahu’s plan also would give the government control over the selection of judges, which has long been in the hands of an independent selection panel, and it would also remove the independent legal advisers — the internal legal watchdogs — in each ministry. Currently, they are appointed by the Civil Service Commission and can be removed only by the attorney general. Netanyahu wants them instead appointed by and loyal to each minister.

Put it all together, and you would have a government that won by 30,000 votes out of 4.7 million having total control over the Supreme Court, judicial selection and each ministry’s legal advisers.

“I can’t be silent,” Mandelblit concluded. “If there is no independent judiciary, it’s over. It’s a different system of government.” The ruler “will decide,” he added. “He’ll have prosecutors of his own, legal counsels of his own, judges of his own. And if these people have personal loyalty to him, there is no supremacy of the law. This is a sinkhole. We’ll all be swallowed up by this.”

Finally, what Biden has done will add credibility to America’s voice in support of democracy globally. It says that America speaks up not just when China crushes democracy in Hong Kong. We speak up when we see democracy threatened anywhere. America has often taken issue with Israeli human rights abuses in its treatment of Palestinians in the occupied West Bank. But no American president in my memory had ever spoken out against proposed changes in the democratic character of the Israeli state — because, up until a few weeks ago, none ever had to.

If Biden’s message is not clear to the Netanyahu coalition, let me try to put it as simply as I can: America has supported Israel militarily and diplomatically and with billions of dollars in aid since its foundation, but not because it shares our interests. It does not always. Israel has stayed neutral between Ukraine and Russia, it is indifferent to human rights abuses in Egypt and Saudi Arabia, and Israeli businesses sometimes sell defense technologies to China that are very worrying to the Pentagon. We have given Israel so much support since its founding because we believe Israel shares our values.

And even when Israel behaves in ways in the West Bank or Gaza that are not consistent with our values, Israelis often fall back on them anyway. They tell us: “Hey, cut us some, slack. We live in a constant, violent struggle with the Palestinians. We live in a crazy neighborhood. And yet we’ve still managed to maintain judicial oversight of our armed forces, robust democratic institutions, as well as an independent judiciary and a free press.”

That argument is seriously threatened by what Netanyahu is pushing. And without it, what’s left? Shared interests won’t be enough, because they come and go.

That’s why Biden’s 46 words are so crucial. With those 46 words, Biden is telling Israel our relationship has never truly rested on shared interests. It’s always been built up from our shared values. That is why it has endured so long — even when we disagree on interests. With his simple statement, Biden is signaling that whatever Israel does, it must not fundamentally depart from those shared values. Otherwise, we are in a totally new world.

“At the outset of the founding of the state, the triumphant Zionists understood what they were doing as building a liberal political movement. Liberalism was baked into the political Zionism that ultimately led to the building of the state. Liberalism was not a loose or discrete set of ideas meant to live alongside the project of Jewish self-determination; it was part of a theory—shared by other liberal nationalists in other parts of the world—that it was only through national self-determination that a state could guarantee the values and ends of liberal society.  The state was an expression of political liberalism, and thus, should continue to be guided by the tenets of liberalism.”

The evidence of the Zionist commitment to this idea is easily found in the preamble of Israel’s Declaration of Independence:

THE STATE OF ISRAEL will be open for Jewish immigration and for the Ingathering of the Exiles; it will foster the development of the country for the benefit of all its inhabitants; it will be based on freedom, justice and peace as envisaged by the prophets of Israel; it will ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex; it will guarantee freedom of religion, conscience, language, education and culture; it will safeguard the Holy Places of all religions; and it will be faithful to the principles of the Charter of the United Nations. “

So writes Yehuda Kurtzer, president of the Shalom Hartman Institute of North America. His essay, called “Liberal Zionism & the Idea of the Idea – Why Israel Now?,” is a sweepingly compelling argument that explains why our reclaiming the dream of political Zionism is so important for those who hope to understand why it is still relevant today despite Israel’s imperfections.

I recommend reading this 5000-word essay if you wish to gain more clarity about why progressive and liberal Zionists remain committed to the idea of Israel as a liberal, democratic, and Jewish state.

READ >

I have written about Pearl Berg several times over the years. She is a long-time member of my congregation, Temple Israel of Hollywood in Los Angeles. She was born on October 1, 1909 and is now, at 113 years, according to all information available, the 15^th oldest living person in the world and the oldest living Jewish person in the world. Pearl was born in the state of Indiana to Archie Synenberg and Anna Gerson Synenberg.

I first met Pearl 35 years ago when she was a spry 79 years-old. Pearl is still sharp, though “slowing down a bit,” according to her son Dr. Robert Berg of Washington, D.C. Either Robert (age 83) or his older brother, Dr. Allan Berg of Philadelphia (age 86), come to visit their mother regularly.

Pearl is a marvel not only because of her age, but because she remains a positive clear-thinking kind woman whose wit and sense of humor are constant, who welcomes graciously all visitors, who reads every day, and plays gin rummy remembering the cards her opponent picks up – most of the time.

My connection with Pearl and her family precedes my birth. Pearl’s husband Mark (z’l) employed my mother in the early 1940s as an office worker in his Los Angeles scrap metal business when my mother was 25 years-old. When Mark died 35 years ago and I prepared my eulogy, my mother told me that Mark was the kindest of bosses. When she departed from his business to volunteer at an army base in San Luis Obispo, California during World War II, Mark gave her a going-away office party. She never forgot it. My mother died 8 years ago at age of 98, and I thought she was old – a youngster compared with Pearl.

See https://www.grg-supercentenarians.org/world-supercentenarian-ranking-list/ for the list of the oldest people in the world according to the Gerontology Research Group.

This blog is also posted at The Times of Israel – https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/pearl-berg-oldest-living-jewish-person-in-the-world-born-october-1-1909/ .

Those who care about Israel are hearing a great deal about the new most extreme nationalistic and ultra-Orthodox right-wing government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Israel’s 75-year history, its efforts to gut the powers of the Supreme Court, and to promote its agenda in the Occupied territories to claim land de facto (leading to de jure) annexation in Area C (at least) while denying Palestinians civil and human rights.

Hundreds of thousands of Israelis have been demonstrating in the streets (many for the first time) on successive Saturday nights in Tel Aviv, Jerusalem, and Haifa, and in Diaspora communities there have been several letters addressed to Netanyahu and to the Biden Administration calling upon them to stop this march towards anti-democratic authoritarianism.

The issues involved are complicated, as are the politics. Micah Goodman, a leading Israeli public intellectual and a senior fellow at the Shalom Hartman Institute in Jerusalem, this past week joined with host Amanda Borschel-Dan on the inaugural episode of the Times of Israel’s new podcast called What Matters Now to talk about the Israeli government’s challenges and why Israelis are pouring out into the streets in protest.

The Podcast is 40 minutes long, but well worth listening as Micah Goodman unpacks the issues and concludes with a degree of optimism that something new and better might emerge from the current crisis. He argues for a national commission led by the President of Israel Isaac Herzog to cope with the reality that Israel has no Constitution (only a series of Basic Laws) and that this crisis affords Israelis the chance to address a serious weakness in its democracy that need not continue.

LISTEN >

Introductory note: A total of 169 Jewish leaders – including 89 rabbis – signed the statement below. We represent a broad swath of Jewish American leaders, coming from synagogues, organizations, and universities in over 70 cities across the country. The following remarks are necessary to clarify where we stand:

1. The statement lays out parameters for respectful and principled debate about Israeli policies – especially as they apply to Palestinians within Israel and in the occupied territories – and delineates guidelines for determining when debate involves legitimate policy-based criticism versus when it crosses the line into antisemitism.

2. We don’t take lightly the responsibility of making this statement at a time of escalating violence.
   • We stand in solidarity with Israelis grieving their loved ones after the deadliest terror attack Israel has seen in years and mourn all innocent Israeli and Palestinian victims of the conflict.
   • At the same time, we share the concerns of tens of thousands of Israelis determined to protect their democracy and the prospects of Israeli-Palestinian peace.

3. As this government’s policies unfold, conditions in Israel and the territories are bound to worsen.
   • There will almost certainly be settlement expansion, land expropriations, settler violence, police/army action against Palestinian protesters, etc.  Gaza may explode. 
   • Indeed, Netanyahu has already announced that decisions will be made said “to strengthen settlement in Judea and Samaria in order to make it clear to the terrorists who seek to uproot us from our land that we are here to stay.”

4. Criticism of Israel is bound to intensify.
   • Defenders of Israeli policies will use false accusations of antisemitism to tarnish Israel’s critics and create political divisions.
   • This will hurt Israel by stifling the inevitable debate about critical issues.
   • It will detract from addressing real instances of antisemitism and bigotry.
   • We have seen this before – when politicians respond to criticisms with false accusations of antisemitism.  Critics are accused of applying a double standard or making overly harsh accusations about Israeli policies.

5. By identifying parameters for when criticism is legitimate and when it crosses the line into antisemitism, our statement proactively frames the debate and serves as a tool for preventing the use of antisemitism as a political wedge issue.

6. As the statement concludes: There is no contradiction between combating antisemitism and criticizing the deeply troubling policies of the new Israeli government. Those who employ accusations of antisemitism as a political weapon poison the debate, and they weaken our ability to fight real antisemitism and effectively advocate for a strong U.S.-Israel relationship.

Here is the statement that was released:

“It Is Profoundly Irresponsible to Conflate Charges of Antisemitism With Criticism of Israeli Policies”

February 1, 2023

Since the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, Israel has had no greater ally than the United States, and the two countries have formed enduring unbreakable ties based on deeply held shared values.

At this pivotal moment in Israel’s history — and with the beginning of a new Congress — we take this opportunity, as leaders in the American Jewish community, to affirm the importance of maintaining those bonds and upholding the strength of the U.S.-Israel relationship.

As the 118th Congress begins its work, we believe it is important to state our concerns — which are widely shared by supporters of Israel here and around the world and by a significant number of Israelis — regarding some of the policies proposed by members of Israel’s new government.

Our criticisms emanate from a love for Israel and a steadfast support for its security and well-being. Some will try to dismiss their validity by labeling them antisemitic. We want to be clear that, whether or not one agrees with a particular criticism, such critiques of Israeli policy are not antisemitic. Indeed, they reflect a real concern that the new government’s direction mirrors anti-democratic trends that we see arising elsewhere—in other nations and here in the U.S., rather than reinforcing the shared democratic values that are foundational to the U.S.-Israel relationship.

We are, for example, concerned about the Israeli Justice Minister’s plan to limit the Supreme Court’s power, proposed modifications to the Law of Return to change the status quo on conversions to Judaism, and calls by ultra-Orthodox coalition members to outlaw non-Orthodox prayer at the Western Wall. We are also concerned about provocative actions that seek to open the Temple Mount to Jewish prayer in defiance of long-standing international norms and coalition agreements, legitimize settlement outposts retroactively, and expand Israeli sovereignty in the West Bank.

Let us be clear: when antisemitism shows up in debates about the situation in Israel and the occupied territories, it must be called out. It is antisemitic to advocate the destruction of Israel or to deny the right of the Jewish people to self-determination. It is antisemitic to condemn Israel by using antisemitic tropes or singling out Israel because of its Jewish character. It is antisemitic to use Israel or Zionism as a surrogate for Jews, to hold Jews collectively responsible for Israel’s policies or conduct, or to suggest that American Jews are more loyal to Israel than to the U.S.

Accusations of antisemitism, however, must not be abused or misused. Indeed, it is profoundly irresponsible to conflate charges of antisemitism with criticism of Israeli policies, especially when antisemitism is on the rise in our country and elsewhere around the world.

Promoting equal rights and justice for all peoples, including Palestinians within Israel and in the occupied territories, is neither anti-Israel nor antisemitic. Indeed, the two-state solution, which is critical for Israel’s survival, provides both Israelis and Palestinians with national rights, individual human rights, safety, and security. It is not antisemitic to hold Israel to the standards that guide the U.S. commitment to human rights across the globe and reflect our commitment to democracy. And while we do not support the BDS movement, we recognize that non-violent actions that press for changes in Israeli policies are not ipso facto antisemitic.

Turning political disputes about the policies of the Israeli government into an argument about antisemitism interferes with the critical and necessary debate about these policies. It also makes it harder to fight antisemitism by diverting attention away from genuine occurrences of anti-Jewish bigotry and hate.

The bottom line is this: There is no contradiction between combating antisemitism and criticizing the deeply troubling policies of the new Israeli government. Those who employ accusations of antisemitism as a political weapon poison the debate, and they weaken our ability to fight real antisemitism and effectively advocate for a strong U.S.-Israel relationship.

View The Signatories