Category Archives: American Politics and Life

Secretary Kerry’s Speech and J Street’s Open Letter to the American Jewish Community

06 Thursday Jun 2013

Posted by in American Jewish Life, American Politics and Life, Israel and Palestine, Israel/Zionism, Jewish History

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , ,

Earlier this week, Secretary of State John Kerry gave a powerful and important speech [watch] at the American Jewish Committee conference, calling on American Jews to make their voices heard in support for negotiation efforts and a two-state solution. The speech was not given much attention from Jewish groups, but I, as a co-chair of the J Street Rabbinic Cabinet, believe that it is important to elevate Kerry’s call and to make sure that our community is vocally supporting Kerry’s efforts in the Middle East.

In that vein, J Street has released an open letter to the American Jewish community, which I hope will be circulated and read by many in an effort to galvanize support for a reinvigorated peace effort. The text of the letter can be found here. [ http://jstreet.org/blog/post/an-open-letter-to-the-american-jewish-community_1 ]

The next few weeks provide a critical window of opportunity to do all that can be done to ensure that negotiations move ahead. I urge you to use this open letter as a jumping off point to encourage to your friends and communities to vocally and actively support Secretary Kerry’s efforts.

Why I Recommend Peter Beinart as a Synagogue and Jewish Community Speaker

26 Sunday May 2013

Posted by in American Jewish Life, American Politics and Life, Israel and Palestine, Israel/Zionism, Jewish History, Jewish Identity, Social Justice

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , ,

A column appeared in the May 20, 2013 Jerusalem Post by Rabbi Eric Yoffie entitled “Synagogues, Red Lines and Free Speech” that he wrote in response to the recent decisions of two synagogues in New York and outside Toronto to cancel appearances by Pamela Geller, an inflammatory anti-Islam activist, who Rabbi Yoffie characterized as a “a bigot and purveyor of hate.” http://blogs.jpost.com/content/synagogues-red-lines-and-free-speech

He used the incidents to revisit the theme of free speech in synagogue settings, and drew helpful “red lines” for rabbis and synagogue leadership when considering who to invite to speak.

Rabbi Yoffie writes first of the consequences of shutting down legitimate debate:

“A synagogue that shuts down discussion whenever a wealthy donor is offended may appease the donor but will ultimately drive away its own members and lose its standing in the community…”

He says, however, that some speech is inappropriate in synagogues:

“Synagogues must have red lines. A synagogue bima is not an open forum; it is a platform used by a Jewish religious institution to promote Jewish values and strengthen the Jewish people and the Jewish state. There are people who should never be invited to speak there and things that should not be said there.”

And he drew clear “red lines”:

“Invite those with a firm commitment to Israel as a Jewish and democratic  state; who, when criticisms are offered, will offer them with love and respect; and who are sensitive to Israel’s security needs and oppose terrorism against Israelis and Jews—indeed, who oppose terrorism in all forms and at all times.”  

Rabbi Yoffie noted that Peter Beinart has that “firm commitment” to Israel as a Jewish and democratic state. Truth to tell, Peter is among the most important speakers on Israel and the state of the American Jewish community that I have invited to my congregation in recent years.

Peter is the author of “Crisis of Zionism,” the senior political writer for The Daily Beast, editor of its blog “Open Zion,” and Associate Professor of Journalism and Political Science at the City University of New York.

Yes, his views are controversial. Nevertheless, as a modern orthodox Jew, his writings on Jewish values, the American Jewish community,  Zionism, the State of Israel, and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict comport with surveys that show that most American Jews agree with most of the positions he articulates.

I invited Peter a year ago to debate David Suissa, the President of the Los Angeles Jewish Journal, because despite the wide gap in their positions I wanted my community to hear two intelligent people argue respectfully the great issues facing Israel and the Jewish people, and they did not disappoint. (See http://www.jewishjournal.com/los_angeles/article/peter_beinart_and_david_suissa_debate_zionisms_crisis_20120517)

Given that Rabbi Yoffie mentioned Peter prominently this past week, I was curious to know what impact Peter’s writings have had and whether he had been invited to speak before congregations and communities despite the controversy his writings have stimulated.

I called Peter and learned that, indeed, he has spoken on a number of occasions to Reform, Conservative and Orthodox synagogue communities including my own at Temple Israel of Hollywood in Los Angeles (Reform), as well as at Temple Israel of Boston (Reform), the Washington Hebrew Congregation in D.C. (Reform), Park Avenue Synagogue in Manhattan (Conservative), the Hebrew Institute of Riverdale (Orthodox), Lincoln Square Synagogue in Manhattan (Orthodox), Manhattan Jewish Center (Orthodox), and to other Jewish organizations including the 92nd Street Y, the American Jewish Committee, the Union for Reform Judaism’s Board of Trustees, the Manhattan, Boston and San Francisco JCCs, the Jewish Funders Network, and the Israeli Presidents’ Conference.

I know that there are those who remain uneasy about Peter’s views while many others who are unfamiliar with them. Both groups would find interest not only in his book, but in three articles he penned in The Daily Beast.

The first explains why he does not support BDS against Israel proper; http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/02/12/why-liberal-zionists-won-t-join-bds.html

The second explains why he believes Israel is not an apartheid state: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/03/22/why-israel-is-not-an-apartheid-state.html

And the third is harshly critical of the American political left for ignoring Hamas’ abuse and brutality against Palestinians living in Gaza: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/03/08/the-pro-palestinian-left-s-hamas-blindspot.html

In short, I encourage my colleagues, congregations and Jewish organizations to invite Peter Beinart to their communities to address the great issues confronting American Jews and Israel. His thinking is often different from what we hear from others. His approach, however, is a welcome alternative especially given that so many American Jews feel alienated from Israeli politics and policies, and uncomfortable with positions taken by much of the organized American Jewish community.

“You Shall Not Stand Idly By?” The Syrian Civil War – What to Do?

05 Sunday May 2013

Posted by in American Politics and Life, Ethics

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

,

It should be clear that the last thing the Obama Administration wants is to get caught in another Middle Eastern war, with no “good guys” and no viable exit strategy. What else can explain American passivity in the face of 70,000 Syrian dead and 1 million refugees in two years? What else can explain the President’s hedging on his pledge to act if Syria crossed the “red line” of introducing chemical weapons, now that indeed Syria has crossed that “red line?”

So much for the Biblical command, “Thou shalt not stand idly by while your neighbor bleeds.” (Leviticus 19:16)

Bill Clinton confessed that his greatest regret was not acting to stop the genocide in Rwanda. Will Barack Obama make the same confession about Syria one day?

Yes, Syria is embroiled in a nasty civil war. Yes, the Syrian rebels, increasingly radicalized Islamists, are a mixed bag. Yes, Al Qaida is involved. Who should the US support?

In an interview with Terry Gross on “Fresh Air” (April 30, 2014 – “On the Ground in Syria”) the New York Times correspondent C.J. Chivers, who has covered the wars in Libya and Afghanistan and spent time on the ground with Syrian rebels, understands Obama’s resistance to get involved in Syria.

Chivers says that though the rebels distrust and hate the west, they want the west to get involved because they cannot match the Syrian government’s superior fire power. The west, ironically, is their only hope. They do not want American troops in Syria, but they do want weapons, and, a no-fly zone to protect the people from the air.

“Put yourselves in the shoes of the Syrian people,” Chivers said. Your village has been occupied by the Syrian army and then shelled. Everyone has lost someone. Obama says that the “red line” that will provoke American action against the Syrian government is its introduction of chemical weapons, and the Syrian people think:

“My life isn’t what you care about. It’s the nature of my death. So if I die by high explosives, if I die by a bullet, if I die by disappearance because I’m rolled up at the checkpoint, never seen again, that’s OK. That’s a green line? And a SCUD missile’s OK? An airstrike’s OK? But chemical weapons, that’s not OK. I mean there are more than 70,000 killed in this conflict. And to the Syrians, they say those don’t count? But if someone takes the cork off chemical weapons, that’s different. They feel they’ve been abandoned by the world. “

Chivers is a distinguished journalist and observer of this kind of warfare. He is also a former marine who has seen his share of death. He confesses that he has no good recommendation to offer the President were he asked.

Despite American claims to the contrary, there has been a covert airlift of weapons to the rebel forces, probably orchestrated by the CIA, which creates a long-term problem. These weapons have a long life, and one can never know into whose hands they will end up. Maybe they will be used against the US and Israel.

An American response to chemical weapons is meant to deter other countries in the future from using them, but again, to the Syrian people that “red line” was set pretty far out to the right. The chemical weapons have come so late that the west has already tolerated great cost in human life.

The quandary of the Obama Administration is that people are suffering and there are reasons to arm them and reasons not to arm them.

Chivers notes that the Syrian leaders have played perfectly and with cunning calibration (as opposed to Qaddafi in Libya) the tactics of the war to what they thought the West could tolerate. The Syrian government began the battle with arrests, and with each step of the way introduced more violent actions; first came batons and then bullets; then came the army, mortars, and 107 millimeter rockets; then the artillery and air force, helicopters followed later by jets, and then ballistic missiles and chemical weapons.

It’s been like dropping a frog in water and bringing the water to a boil slowly, pushing the “red” line step-by-step forward until so many people have become desensitized by the violence.

“Thou shalt not stand idly by!”

But, what to do? A no-fly zone? Bomb Syrian government positions? Give more weapons to the rebels?

And then what?

Be Not Afraid

28 Sunday Apr 2013

Posted by in American Jewish Life, American Politics and Life, Health and Well-Being, Israel and Palestine, Israel/Zionism, Jewish History, Jewish Identity

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , ,

When I was 9 years old my father died, and my world suddenly changed. Overwhelmed by loss and grief, only the support of family and friends helped me move through that dark period.

What was clear was that I had no control over the ultimate questions of life and death. In the years that followed I compensated by studying and working hard. I thought about God, studied Jewish history, theology, and tradition, became a progressive Zionist, and learned to speak Hebrew, all in the interests of finding safety in something greater than myself.

Indeed, the fear of death and the loss of control are powerful human motivators for both good and bad. Many of us, from fear, turn inward in self-protection against the “other.” We narrow our vision, constrict our hearts, minds and politics, and we focus on our self-interests assuming we have no choice because the “other” guy is a threat.

However, building our lives on fear has consequences. Yoda famously said, “Fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, [and] hate leads to suffering.” (Star Wars: Episode 1 – The Phantom Menace)

John Steinbeck opined along the same lines saying, “Power does not corrupt. Fear corrupts…perhaps the fear of a loss of power.”

Both are right. Though fear is a natural response alerting us to imminent danger, many of us are so plagued by historically embedded fears that we imagine hostile phantoms when none exist.

The challenge is for us to be able to distinguish real and present danger from phantoms, and then be able to evaluate the true measure of the threat and respond appropriately.

Two emails came to me this past week that have drawn me to this consideration of fear. The first was a report circulating on the Internet that all the Jews of Norway had decided en masse (some 1300 souls, according to 2012 population surveys) to leave that country, saying:

“It seems what Hitler failed to achieve the Muslims have accomplished. In a few weeks Norway will be ‘Judenfrei.’ The last 819 Jews are leaving the country due to its rise in anti-Semitism…”

The implication, of course, is that the world wants the Jews dead, or to vanish. The problem with this Internet “report” is that it is a complete fabrication, according to the Norwegian Jewish Community and the ADL.

The second email came from a Israel advocacy organization that began:

“In a hostile and uncertain world, it is reassuring to know that two great democracies—the United States and Israel—continue to find security in their support of one another.”

Yes, of course, the United States and Israel are great democratic societies and strategic partners, but why is it necessary to start from a place of fear to motivate Jews to support Israel financially and otherwise in its legitimate needs?

For years many Jewish organizations have fed on Jewish fear, the Holocaust, Israel’s wars and defense against terrorism, to appeal for money rather than on the blessings of Zionism, our people’s historic and successful building of a modern state based on the prophetic principles of justice and peace as written in Israel’s Declaration of Independence.

It is not surprising, of course, how successful these organizations are because there is in the Jewish heart a deep reservoir of fear. Our history is long and hard, even as it is remarkable and enriched. I believe it is time to stop the fear-mongering. (See my blog from April 15, 2013 – “Israel on Her 65th Birthday – Taking Pride in Her Accomplishments”)

Fear-mongering is not only unnecessary, it is counter-productive because it blinds our people’s vision, focuses us on the short-term tactics rather than long-term strategy, divides Jewish community, alienates many of us and our young people, separates us from our allies and true friends, provokes inappropriate speech and action, and satisfies only the most extreme self-fulfilling prophecies of doom.

I take seriously the teaching of Rabbi Nachman of Bratzlav: “The whole world is a very narrow bridge; the important thing is not to be afraid.”

In the coming weeks and months due to the important efforts of the Obama Administration to bring Israelis and Palestinians back into negotiations to settle their conflict once and for all, Israelis, the Jewish people and the Palestinians, along with moderate Arab states, will be tested perhaps as never before. Will we continue to build fortresses against each other, or will we build palaces of peace side by side?

I know that either choice carries risk. The greater risk, however, is to do nothing because the status quo is unsustainable, and the longer it continues Israel’s democracy and Jewish character will be compromised. As long as both Israel’s and Palestine’s security needs are assured, the risks of making peace, I believe, will be worth it.

When Saying Nothing is Worse Than Saying “No!”

11 Thursday Apr 2013

Posted by in American Jewish Life, American Politics and Life, Ethics, Health and Well-Being, Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, ,

I try and return every phone call and email that comes to me within 24 hours. Sometimes it takes a bit longer if my schedule is tight or I have not checked messages. Sometimes, I confess, I deliberately do not return a call or email when I suspect that the incoming message is so nasty that to engage the sender would be pointless and toxic to my well-being. I receive such objectionable messages from time to time, usually in response to public positions I take in my writings. Other than these, I believe that each phone call, email and letter deserves a personal response as soon as I am able to do so.

It astonishes me that so frequently the individual is surprised that I call back so quickly, or even at all. Though most people I know do as I do, there are lots who clearly do not, and this is why I am writing today.

If you know people who habitually and/or selectively ignore calls and emails, please feel free to send them this blog, as it is meant for them.

I was taught from early childhood that when someone calls, you return the call. When someone gives you a gift, you write a thank you note. When someone does something nice for you, you express gratitude. This is simple derech eretz (lit. “the way of the land,” a Hebrew expression connoting common courtesy and mentchlechkite).

I believe that not to answer someone’s email, phone call or letter is rude, insulting and unacceptable, even when I am certain that something will be asked of me (e.g. to accept an invitation, to do someone a favor, to give to a charity or good cause, or to arrange a time to talk or meet). I also believe that saying “No” respectfully is always better than saying nothing at all.

There is an ethical principle involved. Judaism holds that if, for example, a beggar says hello and we ignore him we bear the guilt of inflicting upon him shame (bushah). It may be that the beggar offered us the only thing he has to give – a greeting. To deliberately ignore him is, in effect, an insult because such silence denies his dignity (kavod) and diminishes him as a fellow human being.

A story is told of the Chassidic sage Rabbi Meshulam Zusha of Hanipol (1718–1800) that one night he was staying at an inn. A wealthy guest mistook him for a beggar and treated him disrespectfully. The guest later learned about Zusha’s true identity and asked Zusha for forgiveness.

Zusha said, “Why do you ask me to forgive you? You haven’t done anything to Zusha. You didn’t insult Zusha. You insulted a poor beggar. I suggest you go out and ask beggars everywhere to forgive you.”

Zusha’s story raises the issue of how we should properly treat people we perceive as being “other” than ourselves (i.e. the stranger, or someone of a different socio-economic station, nationality, ethnicity, race, or religion).

It is possible to learn much about a person’s character based solely on the way he or she treats someone who is different. Is such a person’s behavior respectful and kind, open-hearted and generous, or is he/she dismissive, rude, condescending, and withholding?

The Baal Shem Tov taught his disciples to imagine that inscribed on the forehead of every man, woman and child is the sign of the image in which God creates the human being – B’tzelem Elohim (lit. “In the Divine image”).

In practical terms, seeing the divine image in “others” means at the very least acknowledging their presence, and returning phone calls and emails promptly regardless of what we imagine to be the reason for the call. Again, my only exception is when I know that the caller will be abusive and disrespectful.

Not responding is common particularly in Washington, D.C. and Hollywood, places where power and politics define many relationships, and what you do is more important than who you are. It seems to me that this bad habit has become increasingly more common over the years.

Going forward, those of us who are guilty of this kind of behavior might change it, and that all of us should be teaching our children, grandchildren, and students by example that when we receive a communication from another person, the decent thing to do is answer it, even if our answer is respectfully “No!”

The Organized American Jewish Community’s Response to President Obama’s Jerusalem Speech

31 Sunday Mar 2013

Posted by in American Jewish Life, American Politics and Life, Israel and Palestine, Israel/Zionism, Jewish History, Social Justice

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , ,

President Obama’s Jerusalem speech has been praised by most American Jewish Organizations for his eloquent support of Israel, its security, his respect for the historic Jewish attachment to the land of Israel, his tough stand against the Iranian nuclear threat, and his desire to help the parties resolve the Arab-Israeli conflict.

I should be happy with this praise, but I am instead worried, not for what most of these organizations said in their press releases following Obama’s Middle East visit, but by what they did not say.

In reading the statements of the American Jewish Committee (AJC), the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism (RAC), the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the Zionist Organization of America (ZOA), and J Street, in all but the RAC and J Street statements something important was missing.

The AJC quoted Obama as “reaffirming the US supported goal of a negotiated two state-solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict” and calling “on the Palestinians to return to direct talks with Israel…” noting that the President praised “Abbas as a partner for peace.”

The ADL said that “The President conveyed a deep understanding of important challenges facing Israel, including the peace process…” and “that the peace process can only be achieved through negotiations without preconditions…”

AIPAC noted that both Obama and Netanyahu “share the view that direct talks should resume between the Israelis and Palestinians without preconditions, with the objective of two states for two peoples.”

The ZOA made no mention of a two-state solution because it does not support a two-state solution.

Here are the relevant remarks in the RAC and J Street statements that are missing from all the others:

The RAC, quoting Obama, repeated: “Israelis must recognize that continued settlement activity is counterproductive to the cause of peace and that an independent Palestine must be viable, with real borders that have to be drawn. I’ve suggested principles on territory and security that I believe can be the basis for these talks.”

J Street said: “[Obama] also laid out the moral case for peace with the Palestinians, based on full recognition of their national right to self-determination and their right to build their lives free of the daily humiliations of military occupation. The President also made it clear that peace is possible and that Israel does have partners in …Abbas and…Fayyad…who are committed to negotiations and to a peaceful solution.”

It seems to me that in their press statements the organized American Jewish community ignored most of the 20 minutes of the President’s 49 minute address that spoke directly and compassionately to the Israeli people about the plight of the Palestinians under occupation and their legitimate rights to a national home of their own side by side with Israel.

Here are a few of the most important lines of Obama’s speech that were not eluded to except by the RAC and J Street:

“[T]he Palestinian people’s right to self-determination and justice must also be recognized. Put yourself in their shoes – look at the world through their eyes.

Neither occupation nor expulsion is the answer. Just as Israelis built a state in their homeland, Palestinians have a right to be a free people in their own land.

Peace is possible. It is possible. I’m not saying it’s guaranteed. I can’t even say that it is more likely than not, but it is possible.

Let me say this as a politician, I can promise you this: political leaders will never take risks if the people do not push them to take some risks. You must create the change that you want to see. Ordinary people can accomplish extraordinary things.

Today, as we face the twilight of Israel’s founding generation, you – the young people of Israel – must now claim its future. It falls to you to write the next chapter in the great story of this great nation.

What concerns me is the potentially obstructionist role that some in the organized American Jewish community might take (as has happened in the past) when President Obama and Secretary Kerry put concrete proposals on the table about borders, settlements, security, Jerusalem, and refugees. I hope that what is missing in their press statements are merely oversights. I hope as well that the organized American Jewish community will support President Obama fully in his efforts without second guessing him and without partisan rancor in order to help the Israelis and Palestinians find an end of conflict two-state solution without getting in his way.

If this occurs in this next year, come Pesach 2014 we will truly be able to say – Dayeinu!

Nachshon Ben Aminadav – A Hero For All Times

22 Friday Mar 2013

Posted by in American Jewish Life, American Politics and Life, Divrei Torah, Holidays, Israel and Palestine, Israel/Zionism, Jewish History, Jewish Identity, Musings about God/Faith/Religious life, Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

Nothing in the Seder is as it appears. Each symbol, midrash, vignette, poem, and song evokes layers of meaning that help fashion the Jewish heart, mind and soul. The Seder carries such deep religious, cultural, moral, historical, and political significance that Passover is among the richest and most observed rites in Judaism today.

A little known figure in the Haggadah is worth mention especially in light of the President’s journey to the Middle East this week. His name is Nachshon, the son of Aminadav.

Nachshon is not mentioned in the Biblical exodus story per se (he is cited in Numbers 1:7 as the chief in the Tribe of Judah), yet he looms large in rabbinic literature as a critically important figure in the narrative at the Sea of Reeds.

It is written that as the Israelites fled Egypt they faced before them the impassable Sea and behind them in the pursuing Egyptian army. Terrified, they turned on Moses and cried, “Why did you bring us here to perish?”

“Rabbi Judah says: ‘When the Israelites stood at the sea one said: ‘I don’t want to go down to the sea first.’ Another said: ‘I don’t want to go down first either.’ While they were standing there, and while Moses was praying to God to save them, Nachshon the son of Aminadav jumped up, went down and fell into the waves.’”  Talmud (Bavli, Sota 36a), Mechilta (Parashat B’shalach)

What is the meaning?

First, that Moses’ prayers were insufficient to convince God to split the sea. Only when Nachshon took the initiative and jumped into the waters did God respond.

Second, at a very early stage in Israel’s history there was a basic understanding about the mutual relationship between God and humankind, that though the people might have felt alone and abandoned, God was with them all along.

Nachshon’s “leap” was a significant turning point in the Jewish experience. His willingness to take history into his own hands became a fundamental tenet of Jewish religious activism and a defining element in the character of the Jewish hero.

This past week, J Street, a pro Israel pro peace Political Action Committee in Washington, D.C., published an insert on the symbolism of the Karpas. It was written by my teacher, Rabbi Richard Levy, and intended for family Seders this year. What follows is a portion of Rabbi Levy’s moving text:

“On the nights of Passover we celebrate Israel crossing the …Sea from slavery to freedom. In this light, karpas has other overtones: we remember the heroic example of Nachshon ben Aminadav, who was the first to step into the salty sea. As the Israelites faced the raging waters, Nachshon alone plunged in. Because of his courage, the Midrash tells us, God divided the sea in two so that all the people of Israel could walk across. When our karpas represents Nachshon, …the salt water no longer suggests tears, but the grit of heroes.

Nachshon represents those willing to stand up against the raging waters of intimidation, to state what is right and just and reasonable. In our time Nachshon might say: Israel can be freed of her occupying status and survive as a just, peaceful, and secure state only alongside a just, peaceful and secure Palestinian state… if enough people, ordinary citizens like Nachshon, speak enough to the leaders who represent them, they too will understand that the waters can part, that the just and practical solution – a two-state solution – can emerge out of the depths, and the freedom and peace of two peoples can be assured.”

At this critically important moment when hope flickers still that peace can be achieved, I offer my prayers for the success of American efforts to assist Israel and the Palestinians in arriving at a two-state solution leading to an end of conflict peace agreement.

I pray that President Obama and Secretary Kerry will utilize all their wisdom, resources, strength, and stamina to do what must be done.

And I pray that the Israeli Government and the Palestinian Authority may seize this opportunity together to achieve what should have been done years ago to end this bloody and demoralizing conflict once and for all, thereby allowing two states to flower and thrive side by side in security and peace in a new Middle East.

Ken yehi ratzon – May it be God’s will and ours.

Shabbat shalom and Chag Pesach sameach.

“I’m not interested in nuance!” So said a Member of the House of Representatives regarding the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

21 Thursday Mar 2013

Posted by in American Jewish Life, American Politics and Life, Israel and Palestine, Israel/Zionism, Jewish History, Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , ,

This week I joined with 250 leaders of J Street in Washington, D.C. for a leadership summit. J Street is the largest pro-Israel Political Action Committee in the nation’s capital that gave 50% of all pro-Israel contributions to Senate and Congressional candidates in the 2012 election. (See www.jstreet.org.)

On Tuesday of this week J Street activists held 101 meetings with members of the Senate and House of Representatives. Each delegation made three points:

[1] We asked support from the House/Senate member for President Obama’s efforts to help the Israelis and Palestinians achieve a two-state solution through negotiation;

[2] Despite aggressive efforts by the Republican party to portray President Obama during the campaign as anti-Israel, 70% of the American Jewish community voted for him just as American Jews have voted for Democratic presidential candidates since World War II, that 80% of the American Jewish community supports a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and 76% support the President bringing a plan on which the parties may negotiate. These statistics suggest that it is politically popular to support American efforts to assist the parties in negotiating a two-state solution;

[3] We urged House members to sign Rep. Barbara Lee’s bill (HR 783) that would make it Congressionally-recognized US policy to use all diplomatic tools, including targeted sanctions and the appointment of a high-level envoy, to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.

I personally visited, along with other J Street activists, six House members. All except one were gracious, open hearted and curious about J Street’s understanding of the nuances of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and what it would take to achieve a peace agreement.

One member we visited, however, was impatient and hostile to our group from the very beginning even before we sat down, despite the fact that several of us, including me, are his constituents. He interrupted us constantly leading me, as the leader of that delegation of eight, to say to him, “Congressman, you have limited time as do we – I ask you to be quiet and give us a chance to explain why we are here.” He demurred and we were then able to articulate our three talking points.

This meeting was disturbing not because of his lack of civility, though his behavior was rude. Rather, we were shocked by what he said to us.

It is important to acknowledge that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is considered to be among the most complicated, intractable, potentially explosive and destructive, and difficult international problems the United States faces in the world. In order to bring about a two-state resolution, both sides will require extraordinary efforts to listen to each other, grasp the other’s narrative, and appreciate and respect the legitimate fear, distrust and hatred that the other holds (Israeli to Palestinian and Palestinian to Israeli). The nuances of this conflict must be studied and understood by everyone in order to reach a successful resolution of the conflict.

This House member, who sits on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, and should know better, said, “I’m not interested in nuance. Tell me only the facts I need to know so I can vote. I care what 98% of the population wants and they could care less about nuance. Nuance is a waste of time.”

I was shocked because his attitude is so clearly the opposite of what is needed at this critical time in Israel’s history, and especially from a House member who sits on the very committee that is responsible for foreign relations.

Thankfully, the other five representatives we visited, as well as dozens of other House members and Senators, were very different indeed. They appreciated complexity and wanted very much to do the right thing on behalf of the United States, Israel and the Palestinians.

As we parted each representative we presented an article published in the NY Times by Allen S. Weiner (February 23, 2013) entitled “Why the Middle East Needs America.” http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/01/opinion/global/why-the-middle-east-needs-america.html?_r=0

Professor Weiner is the Director of the Stanford Program in International and Comparative Law and co-director of the Stanford Center on International conflict and Negotiation. He is a pre-eminent American expert in conflict resolution. His article is an important read for what will be needed to reach a successful two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

700+ Rabbis, Cantors Oppose Israel’s E1 Building Plans

18 Tuesday Dec 2012

Posted by in American Jewish Life, American Politics and Life, Israel and Palestine, Israel/Zionism, Jewish History, Social Justice

≈ 1 Comment

The following press release was distributed today by J Street, Rabbis for Human Rights – North America and Americans for Peace Now who organized this letter signing campaign:

More than four hundred US rabbis, cantors, rabbinical students and cantorial students signed an open letter to Prime Minister Netanyahu expressing grave concern about Israel’s plans to advance the construction of settlements in the controversial E1 area of the West Bank and authorizing thousands of new housing units in East Jerusalem.

In an open letter to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the rabbis, cantors, and students warn that the move undermines the territorial contiguity of the future Palestinian state and the prospects for reaching a two-state solution, while damaging US-Israel relations.

“We fear that building settlements in E1 would be the final blow to a peaceful solution,” the letter warns.

The letter also expresses concern that “the current situation in the occupied territories violates Palestinian human rights and undercuts the very values on which Israel was founded – democracy, liberty, justice, and peace.”

The full text and list of signers to date can be found here – http://org2.democracyinaction.org/o/5149/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=12297&source=jstreet.

The letter responds to Israeli government decisions announced the day after the United Nations General Assembly voted to upgrade the status of Palestine to that of non-voting state.

Construction in E1 would violate repeated commitments that Israeli governments have made to the United States since 1994 not to build there.

Thus far, the letter has been signed by more than 400 rabbis from 38 states and the District of Columbia. The majority of the signers are congregational leaders.

Americans for Peace Now, J Street and Rabbis for Human Rights-North America coordinated the appeal.

More details on the planned construction in the E1 area and its implications for the two-state resolution can be found at http://goo.gl/gPV5u.

Support Sensible Gun Control – RAC

18 Tuesday Dec 2012

Posted by in American Jewish Life, American Politics and Life, Ethics, Social Justice

≈ 1 Comment

I am passing along an appeal from the Religious Action Center (RAC)of Reform Judaism in Washington, DC. The RAC is the lobbying arm of the Union for Reform Judaism and is the preeminent progressive religious advocate for more than 50 years in the nation’s capital. Please follow the links and send your name to your Senators and Congressional representatives supporting gun control legislation now. Many thanks.

Support Sensible Gun Control

The recent tragedy in Newtown, CT is a devastating reminder that over 30,000 Americans die each year as a result of gun violence. The number and severity of violent shootings in recent years can only be described as an epidemic. We are inspired by a Jewish tradition that emphasizes the sanctity of human life, and commands us to turn weapons of destruction into tools for the greater good of society. It is imperative that President Obama and Congress take action to advance sensible gun control laws, including taking assault weapons off of our streets and improving our system of background checks.

Take Action: Ask President Obama, your Members of Congress to advance sensible gun laws. For more information, please contact Eisendrath Legislative Assistant Mikey Pasek at 202.387.2800.

The Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism is the Washington office of the Union for Reform Judaism, whose more than 900 congregations across North America encompass 1.5 million Reform Jews, and the Central Conference of American Rabbis, whose membership includes more than 1800 Reform rabbis.

SPREAD THE WORD – Forward to your friends, family, and members of your congregation!

Did you received this as a forward and want to join?

To edit your profile or to learn about other lists, click here.

You are receiving this email because you are registered for Weekly Legislative Updates. Click here to unsubscribe.

2027 Massachusetts Ave NW, Washington, DC, 20036 | 202.387.2800 | @therac

RAC logo