Jaspar Johns’ Flags and American Aspirations

04 Sunday Mar 2018

Posted by rabbijohnrosove in American Politics and Life, Ethics, Social Justice, Women's Rights

My wife, friends and I visited the Los Angeles Broad Museum’s exhibit of Jaspar John’s work last evening and over dinner we considered what the flag means to us in this era of Trump. I’ll offer my own view in a moment, but I want to put Johns’ work in context.

He produced these variations of American flags in the early-mid 1950s in the midst of the Cold War, and a number of galleriers in those years were hesitant to show them out of fear of reprisal from hard-right cold war warriors who might accuse Johns and the galleries of anti-Americanism.

As my wife and friends are all baby-boomers, we grew up in our teens associating the American flag with the Vietnam War. We were never flag burners, but the flag held very negative associations in those years with the Law and Order crowd of Richard Nixon and Vietnam Hawks.

Today, Donald Trump’s tyrannical and chaotic regime and the damage he is doing to the “American brand” could also tarnish the image of the American flag as a symbol of the United States in this country and around the world.

Today, I regard the American flag as an aspirational symbol of American democracy, the US Constitution, Bill of Rights, and the freedoms it promises. I regard it as the embodiment of the long march towards equality and justice for those who have been excluded from America’s mainstream since the Revolutionary War politically, racially, religiously, and socio-economically. This includes all minorities, peoples of color, Muslims, women, LGBTQ, and yes – us Jews too.

Those who know me forgive my eternal optimism even though I am not blind to the damage Trump and company are doing to America, the environment, and the good image of our country around the world.

My hope is that in the 2018 mid-term elections, that the masses come out to vote and that the democrats take control of both houses of Congress, and then impeach, convict and remove this President from office. Though we would be then stuck with our current Vice-President whose extremist vision of America is dangerous too, a Democratic Congress can stop the descent of these United States into the darkness of pre-enlightenment years while getting ready for a new President in 2020 who can reverse much of the actions of Trump by executive order.

As I stood looking at all Jaspar Johns’ works, not only was I stimulated, provoked, and inspired by his artistry and vision, but thoughts about who we are as a people and nation came flooding through me.

I recommend visiting the exhibit. Before going, be sure to download the Broad podcast so you can follow the commentary as you move through the galleries. You will need tickets and reservations in advance.

Elevating Speech – D’var Torah Ki Tisa

01 Thursday Mar 2018

Posted by rabbijohnrosove in American Politics and Life, Divrei Torah, Ethics, Social Justice

≈ 1 Comment

This week I spent an hour with 225 ninth and tenth grade students at the Los Angeles County High School for the Arts talking specifically about why words matter. We discussed the ethics of speech, the dangers in social media, and how what we say privately and publicly have in the last several years coarsened to the detriment of civility our society.

I showed them a passage from the California Civil Code section 44 that defines “Defamation” as

“an act of communication that causes someone to be shamed, ridiculed, held in contempt, lowered in the estimation of the community, or to lose employment status or earnings or otherwise suffer a damaged reputation.”

We discussed the difference between someone who incessantly lies as opposed to calling out such a person publicly as “liar.” One young lady rightly explained that the first describes a bad behavior and the second attacks a person and fits the definition of “defamation.”

I began my talk with this elite group of young people (thousands applied to this school for 600 spots) by sharing with them language from a blog that followed an op-ed by David Brooks of the NY Times.

In his piece that he called “Respect First, Then Gun Control” (NY Times February 19) Brooks talked about the importance of civility as opposed to rudeness. In response, a blogger named Drew Magary went ballistic. I happened to agree with Magary’s position (which is not the purpose of me raising this matter here), but I found his piece offensive and defamatory (see “The Importance of Rudeness | GQ – https://www.gq.com/story/on-rudeness)

Here is some of what Magary wrote:

“So let’s talk about rudeness for a moment, because we live in rude times. The president is a pig. His underlings are nothing but a bunch of opportunists and enablers. And the rest of GOP is staffed by a wide range of scum, from camera-friendly establishment monsters like Paul Ryan to outright crackpots like this guy. When the president’s own little pukeson decides to endorse a conspiracy theorist truthering the motives of the Marjory Stoneman Douglas teenagers, I feel like that’s a much greater sign of the end of civilization than someone rightfully telling a lady at the Times that she should take the L.

None of these people deserve civility. In fact, civility only serves to enable them. The fact that Trump can go party at his f_ _ _ing country club on the same weekend 17 teenagers were slaughtered inside a school, and have NO ONE surrounding him say an unkind word to him, is damnable.”

Again – I happen to agree with Magary’s moral positions, but he went on using the vilest of language reflecting the vulgarization of this era in American life. His are angry words, and I understand that because I’m angry too, but uncontrolled rage can get us the opposite of what we really want besides an opportunity to vent.

This week’s Torah portion, Ki Tisa, highlights Moses’ anger at his people at the scene of the golden calf.

We learn that Moses had brought down the tablets from Mount Sinai after spending forty days and nights communing with God. As he was returning to the Israelite camp he heard the celebratory voices around a golden calf and then saw the revelry. Enraged by the idolatry, he smashed the tablets, burned the golden calf, ground it to powder, and force fed it to the guilty Israelites before he killed ten thousand Israelites who participated in this calumny. (Exodus 32:15-20).

In the next chapter we learn that Moses pitched his tent outside the camp (Exodus 33:7) “…because he was tired of the people’s constant complaining and criticism.” (Yerushalmi B’chorim 3:3)

God then approached Moses and said: “I want you to change your mind, go back to the camp, and deal with the people face to face.” (Midrash Rabbah (45:2) based on Exodus 33:11)

In other words, God was saying: ‘Moses – get it together and control your rage.’

Of course Moses was angry just as so many Americans are angry at Congress’ and this President’s inaction to curb gun violence in America.

I don’t at all blame Moses for his weariness and impatience with the people. He had dealt with their obstinacy since leaving Egypt. He’d had enough. God reminded him, however, that leading a community while angry is no way to lead.

I’ve learned that once leaders lose their temper they lose not just the argument they are advocating but the faith of the people in their leadership.

The worst thing a leader can do is to respond to others with whom we disagree intemperately, impatiently, angrily, and judgmentally. Inner calm is a virtue, and demeaning an opponent personally who we may dislike intensely is nevertheless from an ethical perspective the greatest sin.

I made this point loud and clear to these 225 students. ‘Use your words,’ I said, ‘but say what you say with calm and focused dignity, thoughtfully, and without demeaning the “other.”

Judaism ascribes Moses’ loss of the right to enter the Promised Land as a result of his hitting the rock from anger instead of speaking words to it as God had commanded him.

The Talmud says: “If a person loses his temper – If she is originally wise, she loses her wisdom, and if he is a prophet, he loses his prophecy.” (Babylonian Talmud, Pesachim 66b).

The coarsening of our society is a sign of our society’s demise, and I believe each of us should do everything we can to avoid being engulfed in that spirit. It’s bad for us and it’s bad for everyone.

Shabbat shalom.

Where is the Israeli Government’s Compassion for Refugees?

28 Wednesday Feb 2018

Posted by rabbijohnrosove in Ethics, Israel/Zionism, Jewish History, Jewish Identity, Social Justice

≈ Leave a comment

The following was written by Mattityahu Sperber, a leader in Israel’s Reform movement, and a resident at Kibbutz Yahel. He writes with passion and urgency.

A mitzvah repeated more times in the Torah than any other is “Do not mistreat or oppress a foreigner, for you were foreigners in Egypt.” [Exodus 22:20]

Today there are 38,000 refugee seekers from Eritrea and Sudan and another 7,000 of their children still in Israel. In what can only described as a Purimesque absurdity, the government has decided that even though the flow of refugee seekers into Israel has been reduced to zero, these foreigners must be expelled out of fear that the “Jewish State” will be destroyed if we were to accept an additional half a percent of non-Jewish blacks to our population. (Once they have been deported, we will bring in foreign workers from other countries to take their place in the workforce.) So, in a secret agreement with two African countries, Israel has begun to expel these refugee seekers.

Stage one of the process is to issue deportation notices to all men who have no children and who do not have an unanswered request to be recognized as refugees made before 31/12/17. Out of the 15,000 requests for refugee status that have been made to date, only 12 were granted. The government seems determined to ignore who these people are and what they have been through. The government position is that these people, who escaped from brutal dictatorships, and many from an unending army service that can only be described as a form of slavery, are only people seeking employment and a higher standard of living. The government says they are to leave “voluntarily” or to be imprisoned until they agree to volunteer. The fact that virtually none of the thousands who have so far “volunteered” to go to these “safe” African countries have found there a home that was open to absorb them and to provide them with the minimum of a legal opportunity to work and to support themselves and their families does not affect the government’s position. So what if virtually all continued on to country number two or three and from there tried to make it somehow to Europe, where refugees are still being accepted? Israel will continue to pay the secret countries to temporarily accept these deportees and to pretend that it has found a humane solution for their very real and personal problem.

Today, I met Yamane on the line to his deportation interview. He came to Israel from Eritrea, through Sudan and Egypt, in 2009. Yamane had received assistance from the Hotline for Refugees and Emigrants in preparing a document which presented his case for receiving an exemption from his slated deportation. As a representative of HIAS, I was allowed to accompany him in his deportation interview. Unfortunately, all of his arguments were rejected as not reaching the accepted criteria for such an exemption.

Yamane had made his refugee status request on 5/2/2018 after months of being unable to get into the office in southern Tel Aviv where hundreds of people waited on line daily. Too late – not before 31/12/2017.
Yamane married in Israel five years ago and his wife was with him today. They have no children and his wife is today unable to work and to support herself after having been hospitalized and operated on. No children – no exemption. Having to support an ill and recovering wife – not relevant.
Yamane himself has been ill with tuberculosis and is required to see the doctor for care at least every 6 months. Israeli medical care vs. African – not relevant.
Yamane has made a request for refugee status in Canada. His wife has family there and they are waiting for a response from them. No official Canadian document acknowledging that they are being processed for possible Refugee status there – not relevant.

Two weeks ago, Judge Elad Azar, sitting as the head of an immigration panel court, ruled against blanket denials of refugee status for Eritreans whose asylum requests were based on army desertion and their fears that the Eritrean authorities would persecute them if they returned. Yamane served in the Eritrean army for 7 years, until he was tortured and imprisoned after requesting the opportunity to visit his family. After 6 months in prison he managed to escape. Over a course of months, he managed to make his way to Ethiopia, Sudan and Egypt on his trek to Israel. It is difficult for me to imagine how his case might not be seen as that of a legitimate refugee.

When asked whether he accepted the government’s demand that he volunteer to be deported to a friendly African nation, Yamane said no. He explained that all of the information that he has received from friends and acquaintances who had gone to this country made clear to him that this would not be safe for him or for his ill wife. He would rather go to jail permanently in Israel.

Today’s interview ended with my making a plea to see that the above arguments, even if each individually does not answer the government’s defined criteria, when taken together, form a strong case for making an exception. I requested that Yamane’s deportation be delayed, at least until he has received a response to his refugee asylum request. The interviewer asked to consult with his supervisor. When he returned, he presented himself as generously deciding to make no decision today. The decision will only be made on the 8/4/2018, when Yamane returns to renew his temporary visa. Perhaps by then Yamane will have a refugee asylum request interview or even receive an answer to his request. Perhaps by then, he will have an answer from Canada which can demonstrate that he is officially in their refugee asylum process. Or perhaps, as I heard from Laura that her “client” had received the exact same non-answer, they will use that opportunity to arrest him and send him to prison or to forcibly deport him.

I am known by friends and family as the eternal optimist. I think that tonight I will have to drink much wine to maintain that optimism and to believe there will be a solution for Yamane that is worthy of the Jewish State that I hope I live in.”

I signed onto an Amicus Brief on behalf of Faith Leaders for DACA Rights

26 Monday Feb 2018

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

≈ 1 Comment

I have agreed to sign onto the Amicus Brief in support of nationally-recognized immigrant rights leader Ravi Ragbir’s lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security, challenging the unlawful targeting of immigrant rights activists nationwide in violation of the First Amendment.

In the lawsuit Ragbir et al. v. Homan et al., nationally recognized immigrant rights leader Ravi Ragbir, along with the New Sanctuary Coalition, CASA de Maryland, Detention Watch Network, National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild, and the New York Immigration Coalition, are challenging the unlawful targeting of immigrant rights activists nationwide in violation of the First Amendment. Represented by attorneys at Arnold & Porter and the NYU Immigrant Rights Clinic, Plaintiffs have filed a motion for a preliminary injunction, which seeks an order (1) staying Mr. Ragbir’s removal pending adjudication of the case, and (2) restraining federal immigration officials from taking any adverse immigration enforcement action against any noncitizen on the basis of protected speech or expressive conduct, or, in the alternative, preliminarily enjoining federal immigration officials from opening an investigation into, surveilling, accelerating proceedings against, detaining, or altering the provisions of any order against any noncitizen on the basis of protected speech or expressive conduct.

The law firm of Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler, LLP, is drafting an amicus brief on behalf of faith leaders in support of the plaintiffs. The brief is tentatively due March 1, 2018. The brief will describe the sanctuary movement and argue that the targeting of immigrants, faith leaders, and places of worship affiliated with the sanctuary movement – through retaliation and surveillance – raises serious First Amendment concerns.

Amicus briefs from faith leaders are often filed in major litigation across the country, including in Gloucester Country School Board v. GG to oppose discrimination against transgender individuals, and in Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission to oppose discrimination against same-sex couples.

Why Judaism Matters – A review in the Jewish Press of Northern California

16 Friday Feb 2018

Posted by rabbijohnrosove in American Jewish Life, Book Recommendations, Divrei Torah, Ethics, Israel/Zionism, Jewish History, Jewish Identity, Musings about God/Faith/Religious life, Social Justice

≈ Leave a comment

This appeared this week – fyi

https://www.jweekly.com/2018/02/15/liberal-rabbi-tells-jewish-millennials-judaism-matter/

In Response to the Israeli Prime Minister’s Office Concerning Eritrean and Sudanese Refugees – Hot Line for Refugees

11 Sunday Feb 2018

Posted by rabbijohnrosove in Ethics, Israel/Zionism, Social Justice

≈ Leave a comment

Note: I have been a supporter of the Hotline for the past number of years. I post their letter in its entirety to correct the record and to give context to the impending Eritrean and Sudanese Refugee expulsion from Israel. The Hotline’s responses are in bold. Please read and express your views directly to the Israeli Consuls General in your community.

Dear All:

In recent days, following the wave of public protest, there have been many complaints from senior public officials and politicians who are trying to legalize the expulsion of asylum seekers. In response to the half-facts presented to the public, the following are some answers to a message issued from the Prime Minister’s Office to reporters from abroad.

For further details: Dror Sadot | Spokesperson, Hotline for Refugees and Migrants, +972-543177851 – hotline.org.il/en/main/

Safe Relocation of Migrants that Entered Israel Illegally – General Information

In recent years, the State of Israel, like many other developed countries, has experienced an influx of migrants entering its territory illegally.

Up until 2012, according to the MoI 64,000 Africans entered Israel. Since the building of the fence in Egypt border in 2012, up until 2016, only 300 people entered. During 2017 not even one person entered.

Since 2006, roughly 64,000 migrants entered Israel illegally through the Israeli-Egyptian border.

The term “illegally” is, of course, true but misleading – According to International laws, entry through a border crossing illegally does not prevent a person from being a refugee. On the contrary, it matches refugees’ migration patterns.

The sheer number and the range of issues raised by the entry of these migrants present significant socioeconomic challenge for Israel, whose population is about 8.5 million.

Right now there are only 34,000 Eritreans and Sudanese in Israel. It’s below 0.5 percent of the population. While the rest of the world deals with 65 millions of refugees and internally displaced people, Israel can take its part and absorb even the whole 34,000. In addition, Israel imports about 80,000 migrant workers every year and there are almost 100,000 undocumented migrants in Israel. The asylum seekers who face deportation or indefinite detention, on the other hand, are standing in line for days evert month to two months in only two offices around the country in order to preserve their legal status.

The Jewish people’s history makes Israel highly sensitive to humanitarian issues. This sensitivity, in addition to Israel’s obligations under international law and the Israeli government’s commitment to human rights, lead to considerable efforts by all government agencies to protect the rights of these migrants, while addressing the challenges they pose.

We agree that the Jewish people’s history should make Israel highly sensitive to humanitarian issues. And therefore it must absorb as many people as possible asking for protection under international standards

Israel was among the first countries to adopt and ratify the 1951 Refugee Convention. Israel strictly applies the convention, including the basic idea that no person is to be returned to a country where he/she faces serious threats to life or freedom. Since 1970, despite its small size, Israel has saved non-Jewish people in distress and those seeking refuge from countries such as Lebanon, Egypt, Iran, Vietnam, Bosnia, Kosovo, Eritrea and Sudan.

Israel has granted refugee status to only 11 people from Eritrea and Sudan throughout the last decade (And something like 200 from other countries) That’s less than a 0.5 percent. And it obviously does not meet international standards. Israel incites against Eritreans and Sudanese who come here, refer to them as “work infiltrators” and a minister in the government called them publicly “cancer in our body”

Based upon regular consultations with the UNHCR and the understanding of the current events in Eastern Africa, Israel granted temporary protection to approximately 50,000 migrants from Sudan and Eritrea without requiring prima facie proof that they qualify for refugee status under international law or that they have an individual claim to stay in Israel.

Inside Israel, the authorities do not refer the status they grant Eritrean and Sudanese “Temporary protection” and insist on “refraining from removal”. That is exactly what it is: Life without any rights – no work permit, no social rights, no health insurance and no certainty, for more than a decade! In addition, the government is deducting 20% of the net salary of all Eritrean and Sudanese to a special deposit that they can receive only when leaving the country. That in addition to 16% that their employer must deposit and to 20% pole tax. All this makes their employment extremely expensive and force them to work around the clock in order to make a living.

There are currently around 37,000 migrants from Sudan and Eritrea in Israel who entered the country illegally. (34,000 according the last MoI report).
20,000 Sudanese and Eritrean migrants that entered Israel illegally have left the country voluntarily, including 4,000 in 2017.

According to Israel’s Population and Immigration, after going through the Refugee Status Determination process, the overwhelming majority of applicants have been found to be ineligible for asylum. Over the years, 1000 asylum seekers from Darfur have been afforded temporary residence status.

And why didn’t they get refugee status? Why did only one Sudanese get refugee status in Israel? And why thousands of Darfuris are still waiting for an answer to their asylum request, already more than 4 years? And how does it make sense that only in Israel Eritreans and Sudanese are not refugees? As in 2016 and UNHCR data, the percentage of recognition of Israel stands at 0.056% However, in the Western world the percentage of recognition in 2016 in Eritreans or the provision of permanent complementary protection stands on 90% The world recognition rate of Sudanese or the provision of permanent complementary protection is 57.4%. How can one explain the gap?

Migrants that enter Israel illegally must apply for asylum within one year. This rule was waived for all migrants from Sudan and Eritrea, who were notified that they were allowed to apply for asylum regardless of when they entered the country up until the end of 2017.

No official message was given to the communities. The authorities just assumed that they will find out somehow or that the aid organizations will inform them. According to our knowledge as well as the State Comptroller report, up until 2013 Eritreans and Sudanese had no access to the asylum system. As of 2015, application were rejected out of hand precisely because of the regulation demanding that applications for asylum will be made within the first year of arrival. Since 2016, about 20,000 Ukrainians and Georgians were bought by manpower agencies and blocked the RSD system.

The terms “refugee” and “asylum seeker” are being employed in a misleading way. According to the United Nations, approximately 50% of the world’s refugee population are women and children. The demographic makeup of Sudanese and Eritrean migrants in Israel suggests that the overwhelming majority are not refugees, but rather, economic migrants who have come to Israel in search of work. Data from Israel’s Population and Immigration Authority show that as of 2017, over two thirds of the migrants from Sudan and Eritrean are males between the ages of 18-40.

Anyone who understands something about immigration knows that this is incorrect. “Demographics of refugees” varies according to the region in the world and according to the circumstances from which they flee. African refugees out of refugee camps are mostly men. The main reason is the high risk of sexual violence and trafficking of women and children in refugee journeys in many parts of Africa. Most women don’t dare leaving the refugee camps in Sudan, Chad and Ethiopia despite the hard life conditions. From the small percentage who dare taking the journey to Israel or Europe, many women don’t survive the journey. That is why there are only 20% refugee women in Israel.

Israel reserves the right to relocate migrants that enter illegally, including those who applied for asylum and were found ineligible. In 2017, alone, for example, 4,000 migrants that entered illegally from Georgia and Ukraine were returned to their home countries.
Israel does not deport Eritrean and Sudanese asylum seekers back to their countries of origin, even if they were found in Israel’s asylum policy as “non-refugees.” This is because Israel knows that Eritrea and Sudan are places where their lives might be in danger. Unlike Georgia and Ukraine, which are defined as “safe countries”.
Every country in the world has the right and the obligation to protect its borders and to determine its migration policy. Israel will continue to seek the proper balance between protecting the basic human rights of migrants that enter illegally and the government’s primary obligation to protect the welfare of Israeli citizens.

Israel’s Refugee Determination Process

In accordance with the 1951 Refugee Convention, Israel, like all other signatories has its own national asylum system to determine which asylum-seekers qualify for international protection.
The domestic framework for the processing of asylum requests in Israel was first established in 2002, as a coordinated effort of the UNHCR and Israel’s Ministries of the Interior and Justice.
An Advisory Committee to the Minister of the Interior examines requests for asylum and makes recommendations regarding refugee status. This Committee is headed by an independent jurist and includes representatives from the Ministry of Interior, the Ministry of Justice and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
The Refugee Status Determination (RSD) unit interviews migrants applying for asylum to determine whether the migrant fulfills the criteria set by the 1951 Refugee Convention. A migrant whose request to be recognized as refugee is denied may appeal to the court; or, in the case of alleged changed circumstances, may resubmit his or her case to the RSD unit for the purpose of reassessment.
Migrants granted refugee status receive renewable temporary residency permits. The government reserves the right to re-examine the situation in a refugee’s country of origin and to determine that the refugee no longer faces danger if the situation in his/her country of origin changes.
The Government of Israel recently directed more funds and allocated additional staff positions at the Population and Immigration Authority in order to streamline and expedite the process of examining asylum requests. Currently, priority is being given to asylum seekers from Eritrea and Sudan.

In 2009, after a few years of increase in the number of asylum-seekers entering the country, the Ministry of Interior took responsibility for examining asylum applications.

‏The asylum requests are submitted to the RSD Unit, staffed by clerks with questionable training for identifying refugees, based on the quality of their interviews. Those whose claims are rejected, if they are not from Sudan, Eritrea or Congo, are immediately detained and deported, thus making it almost impossible for them to appeal the decision in the court system. The MoI refrain from deporting Sudanese, Eritreans and Congolese. Sudanese cannot be forcibly deported since Israel has no relation with Sudan. Eritreans are not deported due to the severe human rights violations in their homelands and Congolese are not being deported due to the war in their country.

‏At this instance, all asylum-seekers from Sudan, Eritrean and Congo who entered Israel before the Anti-Infiltration Law came into force in June 2012, were given the “Conditional Release Papers” and barred until 2013 from having their case examined by the RSD unit.

The way the RSD Unit interviews asylum-seekers shows that Israel categorically refuses to recognize people as refugees, in a gross violation of the Refugee Convention, which Israel is a signatory of. Instead, Israel’s efforts are focused on deporting people, without differentiating between those deserving a refugee status and those that do not.

‏Asylum-seekers and lawyers who accompanied them testify that the questioning clerks present themselves as “interrogators” and perform the interview as a police interrogation. The “interrogators” have often been heard telling the asylum-seekers, even before the interview, that they are liars. Some demand the asylum-seekers to “confess” their “lies”, and the interviewees are often obligated to respond with only “yes” or “no”. The “interrogators” yell and speak rudely to the asylum-seekers during the “interrogation”. Minute details are examined to find contradictions in the asylum-seekers’ stories. This behavior is a blatant violation of the guidelines issued by the UNHCR on how to question asylum-seekers. The UNHCR guidelines call on interviewers to take into consideration the mental state of the asylum-seekers, who are often victims of persecution, arrest and torture, and also mention the inherent challenges of the human memory, especially in such difficult circumstances.

‏Instead of dealing with asylum-seekers in fair and logical manner by having fair experts examine asylum requests in a reasonable timeframe to determine who is a refugee and who can be deported, Israel adopted the policy of not examining most asylum requests are rejecting 99.85% of cases it does examine to deter new refugees from arriving and to get rid of those already in Israel.

Further reading:
Until Our Hearts Are Completely Hardened: Asylum Procedures in Israel (March 2012 report by the Hotline)

No Safe Haven: Israeli Asylum Policy as Applied to Eritrean and Sudanese Citizens(December 2014 report by the Hotline)

Status of Migrants and Asylum Seekers in Israel

In August 2017, the Israeli High Court of Justice unanimously rejected a petition by human rights groups requesting to stop the relocation of migrants that entered Israel illegally to third countries. After conducting an in-depth investigation, the Court found the third country Rwanda, to which the legal proceedings refered, and that with which Israel has reached an agreement, to be safe, and that all procedural conditions for relocation arrangements met international standards.

Israel argues that there are agreements for forced deportation to third countries. At the moment both Rwanda and Uganda deny. The Rwandese government has announced several times in recent weeks that it will accept only those who come of its own free will and “feel comfortable” in reaching Rwanda. These denials stand in stark contrast to the “Third Country Exclusion Procedure” that was published in January.

Voluntary Deportation Agreement – It is known that there are voluntary transfer agreements with Rwanda that were presented to the Supreme Court (no such agreement has ever been examined with Uganda or any other country).

Non-implementation of agreements that exist – Israel claims that anyone who moves to Rwanda receives a legal status, a work permit, protection. There is no follow-up by Israel after the people – the state cannot tell a thing about those who passed, how many remained, what their situation is (The deputy foreign minister said this explicitly a few days ago in recordings that were revealed in the Israeli media). And when human rights organizations bring evidence that the agreements are not being met in hundreds of cases, they claim that these are tendentious evidence. Israel should not be able to claim that the deportation process provides a “safe horizon of stay” and protection for refugees in Rwanda without any proof of it. (The report with the testimonies of those leaving to Rwanda and Uganda – “It is better to be imprisoned in Israel than to die on the way”).

In November 2017, the government approved a bill to close the Holot open facility. The operations budget for this facility is now being used to facilitate the voluntary departure of migrants who had entered Israel illegally.

These Supreme Court rulings and government decisions are yet another example of the Israeli justice system’s commitment to universally uphold and defend human rights.

Israel claims that the High Court approved the expulsion –

The Supreme Court has never examined the final agreement with Rwanda, only the old “voluntary expulsion” agreement

The High Court of Justice did not review agreements with countries other than Rwanda.

The High Court of Justice argued that incarceration is coercion and that it is forbidden to apply pressure on a person to agree to be “voluntarily deported.”

The High Court of Justice claimed that if there is an agreement with a third country that will allow forced deportation, it will be possible to deport non-refugees – the clear denials of Rwanda and Uganda during the past few weeks suggest that there might not be such an agreement.

High Court approves transfer of non-refugees to a safe country only

The HCJ expressed its inconvenience from the fact that part of the agreement with Rwanda is an oral agreement that might be difficult to uphold in the future, as a result of that.

Women, children, families and those whose asylum applications are pending are not a part of the relocation plan and will continue to receive a special temporary permit. The government has allowed migrants with these permits to work.
Children, women and parents – the procedure expressly states that women, children and parents of minors are protected only “at this stage” (section 3.2 of the procedure). At the next stage these population groups might also be candidates for deportation.
Young people aged 18+ will be torn from their families and deported – they came to Israel as children, grew up and were educated here, and they have parents and younger siblings who are not currently candidates for deportation. A first such older brother, who is also supporting his sick parents, was recently summonsed to sign an agreement to leave to Rwanda.
Young people aged 18+ who arrived in Israel as unaccompanied minors – some who lost their parents on the way or were abducted to the torture camps in Sinai – these youngsters were integrated into boarding schools throughout the country, received an Israeli education and integrated in an amazing manner. These young people are destined for deportation!
Victims of torture camps in Sinai are candidates for deportation – there are about 4000 asylum seekers in Israel who are victims of torture from camps in Sinai, including rape and brutal violence. On the one hand, the state recently recognized that this is a particularly vulnerable group and declared its intention to open a special project led by the Ministry of Justice to map and study the needs of this group. On the other hand, the state does not spare the victims of torture and intends to issue them with deportation orders in the coming months. How can the state with one hand recognize the vulnerability of this group and with the other hand expel it?
Deportation of people with disabilities and chronic patients – not excluded from the expulsion procedure. How do they intend to ensure proper care and protection in a third country?

All migrants and asylum seekers receive access to healthcare services and their children all receive access to the education system.

Only migrant children are covered by health insurance and only if their parents register them and pay for the insurance. Grownups are supposed to be insured in private health insurances by their employers if they work in a regular work. Yet, the private insurance is very expensive and many employers are refrained from paying it. The Ministry of Health has failed to formulate a comprehensive policy to regulate their access to health services. Partial and sporadic services offered by the Ministry of Health are in adequate, and leave many without proper medical care. Many are forced to wait until their situation deteriorated to such a degree to make them eligible to receive treatment under the Patient Right Act (emergency only). See PHR report here.

Safe Relocation of Migrants that Entered Israel Illegally

Israel has concluded arrangements with two countries with regard to the safe relocation of migrants from Sudan and Eritrea that entered Israel illegally.

Israel is not the only democracy in the world that sends unwanted migrants to a third country. Yet, Israel is the only country in the world that sends refugees under secret agreements to another unknown country. Why do not they reveal the agreements? Why do Rwanda and Uganda continue to deny? Why not expose the agreements to public and judicial review?

Migrants who entered Israel illegally and choose to leave the country voluntarily by the end of March 2018 will receive a monetary grant of $3,500.

In addition to the grant that Israel is providing migrants upon departure, the third countries have committed to providing economic migrants residence permits that allow them to work and to open businesses.

As we wrote above – even if these conditions are specified in the agreements, they are not met in reality, based on hundreds of testimonies . Israel claims that anyone who moves to Rwanda receives “status”, work permit, protection. There is no follow-up by Israel after the people – the state cannot tell a thing about those who passed, how many remained, what their situation is (The deputy foreign minister said this explicitly a few days ago in recordings that were revealed in the Israeli media). When human rights organizations bring affidavits claiming that the agreement with Rwanda is not being met, they claim that these are tendentious evidence. Israel should not be able to claim that the deportation process provides a safe horizon of stay and protection for refugees in Rwanda without any proof of it. (The report with the testimonies of those leaving to Rwanda and Uganda – “It is better to be imprisoned in Israel than to die on the way”).

The State of Israel will continue to invest resources to ensure that all migrants that entered illegally are safe upon relocation.

The Israeli Attorney General conditioned his approval of the safe relocation policy on the following criteria:
There are no wars or general disturbances taking place in the destination countries;
No UNHCR recommendations exist against relocation to the destination countries;

UNHCR issued a rare announcement expressing deep concern of the plan. “Official statements that the plans may eventually target families and those with pending asylum claims, or that asylum seekers might be taken to the airport in handcuffs, are particularly alarming.”

The life and freedom of the individual are not at risk in the third countries based on race, religion, nationality or membership in a particular social or political group;

Life is not at risk in Rwanda or Uganda, but the people’s freedom is definitely at risk since they remain there without legal status, exposed to repeating arrests and demands for ransoms for release.

Relocated individuals in the destination countries will have access to the asylum procedure or enjoy temporary protection, or, at a minimum, these countries are obligated to abide by the non-refoulement principle;

From the 144 testimonies already collected by NGOs and academics, both Rwanda and Uganda refuse to grant refugee status to Eritreans and Sudanese who arrived from Israel. Only those who managed to lie well about the years they spent in Israel, received status.

Torture or cruel and degrading treatment are prohibited in the destination countries;

The U.S. State Department’s latest human rights report indicates that human rights violations are widespread in Uganda, including extra-judiciary killings, torture of suspects and detainees, limitations on civil liberties such as the right to protest, freedom of expression, and freedom of assembly, as well as violence against minorities. The report also lists harsh conditions of detention, arbitrary arrest for political reasons, extended administrative detention, and imprisonment in isolation.

According to the latest U.S. State Department’s Human Rights Report, Rwanda is a country in which there were “arbitrary or unlawful killings […] disappearances, torture, harsh conditions in prisons and detention centers, arbitrary arrest, prolonged pretrial detention” and “restricted freedoms of speech, press, assembly, and association.”

The third countries are obligated to allow the relocated individuals the means to live in a dignified manner (or at least the possibility to stay and to work for a living).
Israel supervises and ensures that the process of relocation is conducted according to the arrangements and the law. Israel verifies that the migrants are accorded all relevant rights, including receiving the appropriate permits and documentation in the countries they are relocated to.
Between 2010 and 2015, 12,300 migrants that entered Israel illegally exited Israel to safe countries or to their country of origin voluntarily. Based on the information available to us, there have been no known cases of injury or harm to any of the relocated migrants in the destination countries, and they receive all the rights laid out in the arrangements.

Reports consistently show otherwise:

The report with the testimonies of those leaving to Rwanda and Uganda – “It is better to be imprisoned in Israel than to die on the way”. (January 2018)

Deported to the Unknown (December 2015)

Where there is no free will (April 2015)

Flags on the Bimah – Do they belong?

01 Thursday Feb 2018

Posted by rabbijohnrosove in American Jewish Life, American Politics and Life, Israel/Zionism, Musings about God/Faith/Religious life, Social Justice

≈ Leave a comment

I was sitting in front of the ark this past Shabbat and ruminating during a few moments of quiet prayer about the two flags that have framed my synagogue’s ark for as long as I can remember – the American flag on one side and the Israeli flag on the other. I love them both, but I asked myself, ‘Do they belong here in our Sanctuary, in our house of prayer?’ After all, they are national symbols and not religious ones.

I took a look at what has been written in Reform Responsa literature over the past 50 years since the question first was asked of the Central Conference of American Rabbis Responsa Committee about the appropriateness of placing flags in the sanctuary of our synagogues.

Essentially, the following is what I gleaned from a number of Responsa (links below):

“Though the flags are not religious symbols, they are symbols of our spiritual and emotional attachment to our country and to the State of Israel.”

“As citizens of the United States, the American flag represents some of our most sacred American ideals, our acceptance of the responsibilities and privileges of citizenship, and our devotion to the prophetic ideals of social justice and freedom.”

“The State of Israel is the political embodiment of the age-old Jewish dream of national redemption, a dream that Jews have expressed in our prayers for two millennia, and the Israeli flag represents the prayers of the Jewish people for a return to the land of Israel and the re-establishment there of our Jewish national life.”

So, yes! They do belong, in my opinion, and as a consequence of my ruminations last week, I feel that these flags in fact add something to the iconography of symbols that characterize our holy spaces.

Sources – Central Conference of American Rabbis Responsa

Hatikvah and The Star-Spangled Banner – https://web.archive.org/web/20170824182820/http://ccarnet.org/responsa/rr21-no-5758-10/

Israeli flag on a synagogue pulpit – https://web.archive.org/web/20170824183123/http://ccarnet.org/responsa/arr-66-68/

National flags at religious services LXIV(1954) 79-80 – https://web.archive.org/web/20170824183218/http://ccarnet.org/responsa/arr-64-66/

Flags on the bimah – https://web.archive.org/web/20170824182928/http://ccarnet.org/responsa/tfn-no-5753-8-29-32/

Reform Jewish Movement Statement on Expulsion of Asylum Seekers from Israel

26 Friday Jan 2018

Posted by rabbijohnrosove in Ethics, Israel/Zionism, Jewish History, Jewish Identity, Social Justice

≈ 1 Comment

1/26/2018

You shall not wrong nor oppress a stranger, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt. (Exodus 22:20)

January 26, 2018 – The statement below is issued by the following organizations of the Reform Jewish Movement, the largest movement in Jewish life:

We strongly urge the Israeli government to reverse its decision and recognize the legitimate status of the 37,885* asylum seekers in the country.

These asylum seekers, including men, women, and children—primarily from Eritrea and Sudan—are likely to face imprisonment, indefinite military conscription, additional expulsion, physical harm or even death if they are deported. The plight of Jewish refugees inspired the nascent State of Israel to ratify the 1951 United Nations Refugee Convention, a commitment that is being ignored today. A State founded by refugees should feel a special responsibility to provide safe haven to those facing persecution and violence.

We are equally disheartened by the rhetoric used to incite the public against asylum seekers. Prime Minister Netanyahu’s blanket rejection of the status of “refugees” for those who have fled to Israel (calling them all “infiltrators”) and his assertion that granting refugee status to these asylum seekers endangers the Jewish character of the State belie the facts.

We recognize that there are many in the world in need of assistance, and it is unreasonable to expect Israel to accept an indefinite number of newcomers. Still, Israel has the ability to assist and absorb the 37,885 asylum seekers already in the country. The real threat to its Jewish character is the refusal to provide shelter to the persecuted.

*According to the Israeli Population and Immigration Authority

American Conference of Cantors
Arzenu – International Federation of Reform and Progressive Religious Zionists
Association of Reform Jewish Educators
Association of Reform Zionists in Canada
Association of Reform Zionists of America
Central Conference of American Rabbis
Early Childhood Educators of Reform Judaism
Men of Reform Judaism
North American Federation of Temple Youth
Reform Pension Board
Union for Reform Judaism
Women of Reform Judaism
World Union for Progressive Judaism

Why Judaism Matters – Letters of a Liberal Rabbi to His Children and the Millennial Generation

16 Tuesday Jan 2018

Posted by rabbijohnrosove in American Jewish Life, Ethics, Israel and Palestine, Israel/Zionism, Jewish History, Jewish Identity, Jewish-Christian Relations, Jewish-Islamic Relations, Life Cycle, Musings about God/Faith/Religious life, Social Justice, Stories, Uncategorized, Women's Rights

≈ Leave a comment

My book by the above title was first published in October, I wanted to offer it again. Here are the endorsements for the book on the book jacket. You can also check out what readers have said at amazon.com. This is not only for millennials, but for their parents and grandparents.

“John Rosove does what so many of us have struggled to do, and does it brilliantly: He makes the case for liberal Judaism to his children. As Rosove shows, liberal Judaism is choice-driven, messy, and always evolving, “traditional” in some ways and “radical” in others. It is also optimistic, spiritual, and progressive in both personal and political ethics. Without avoiding the hard stuff, such as intermarriage and Israel, Rabbi Rosove weaves all of these strands together to show the deep satisfactions of living and believing as a liberal Jew. All serious Jews, liberal or otherwise, should read this book.” —- Rabbi Eric H. Yoffie is President Emeritus of the Union for Reform Judaism and a regular columnist for the Israeli daily newspaper Haaretz.

“Rabbi John Rosove addresses his intellectual and well-reasoned investigation of faith to his own sons, which sets this book apart for its candor and its ability to penetrate not only the mind but also the heart.” — Matthew Weiner is a writer, director, producer, and the creator of the AMC television drama series Mad Men and he is noted for his work as a writer and producer on the HBO drama series The Sopranos and earned nine Primetime Emmy Awards Matthew has received nine Primetime Emmy Awards.

“Rabbi John Rosove gets it. Here is a religious leader not afraid to tell it like it is, encapsulating for his audience the profound disaffection so many young Jews feel towards their heritage. But instead of letting them walk away, he makes a powerful case for the relevance of tradition in creating meaningful lives. In our technology-saturated, attention-absorbing age, Rosove offers religion-as-reprieve, his fresh vision of a thoroughly modern, politically-engaged and inclusive Judaism.” —-Danielle Berrin is a columnist and cover-story journalist for the Los Angeles Jewish Journal. She is known for her Hollywood Jew blog, has appeared as a commentator on CNN and MSNBC, and published work for The Guardian, British Esquire, and The Atlantic.

“Rabbi Rosove has written a wonderful book, a love letter to his children, and through them, to all our children. Prodigiously knowledgeable, exceedingly wise, and refreshingly honest, Rabbi Rosove has described why Judaism matters. It should serve as a touching testament of faith, spanning the generations for generations to come.” —-Rabbi Ammiel Hirsch is Senior Rabbi of Stephen Wise Free Synagogue, New York City and is the co-author of One People, Two Worlds: A Reform rabbi and an Orthodox rabbi explore the issues that divide them with Rabbi Yaakov Yosef Reinman.

“Rabbi Rosove’s letters to his sons are full of Talmudic tales and practical parables, ancient wisdom with modern relevance, spiritual comfort, and intellectual provocation. Whether his subject is faith, love, intermarriage, success, Jewish continuity or the creation of a meaningful legacy, you’ll find yourself quoting lines from this beautiful book long after you’ve reached its final blessing.” —- Letty Cottin Pogrebin is a writer, speaker, social justice activist, and author of eleven books including Deborah, Golda, and Me: Being Female & Jewish in America and Single Jewish Male Seeking Soul Mate. She is also a founding editor of Ms. Magazine, is a regular columnist for Moment Magazine.

“Rabbi John Rosove has given a gift to all of us who care about engaging the next generation in Jewish life. The letters to his sons are really love-letters from countless voices of Jewish wisdom across history to all those young people who are seeking purpose in their lives. From wrestling with God, to advocating for peace and justice in Israel and at home, and living a life of purpose, this book is a compelling case for the joy of being Jewish.” —Rabbi Jonah Pesner, is the Director of the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism in Washington, D.C and is Senior Vice President of the Union for Reform Judaism.

“If you’re a fellow Reform millennial, give yourself the gift of John’s insights. This book is written in a breezy, gentle, readable style that is welcoming without losing sharp insight. It makes an even better case for Judaism than challah. It was so enjoyable and refreshing to read and persuasive without ever being pushy. Rosove managed to do what only a truly worthy slice of kugel or chance viewing of Fiddler has done for me: reactivate my sense of wonder and gratitude about being Jewish. I am a huge WJM fan.” —-Jen Spyra is a staff comedy writer on The Late Show with Stephen Colbert (CBS) and formerly was a senior writer for The Onion.

“John Rosove’s letters to his sons based on his life, philosophy, and rabbinic work address what it means to be a liberal and ethical Jew and a lover of Israel in an era when none are automatic. He writes in an unassuming personal style steeped in traditional texts as he confronts conflicts of faith and objectivity, Zionist pride and loving criticism of the Jewish state, traditional observance and religious innovation. He is never gratuitous and invites his readers into his family conversation because what he says is applicable to us all.” —-Susan Freudenheim is the Executive Director of Jewish World Watch, was formerly the Managing Editor of the Los Angeles Jewish Journal and an editor at the Los Angeles Times.

“Rabbi John Rosove has written a book of the utmost importance for our time. It is an imperative read for all those who struggle with the changing and evolving attitudes towards belonging, behavior and belief. His analysis, stemming from deeply personal contemplation and decades of rabbinic experience, offers clear yet sophisticated approaches to tackling the challenges facing this generation and those to come. This book offers a treasure of wisdom through the lens of Jewish texts – both ancient and modern – which help to frame life’s major issues taking the reader from the particular to the universal. Israel is one of the most complicated of issues tackled in this volume and his chapter on Israel bridges the divide between Israel’s critics and staunch supporters offering a comforting approach to those who are deeply at odds with Israel and offers and important opportunity for a shift in our basic narrative. Moving beyond the conversation of crisis is critical for the millennial generation.” —-Rabbi Josh Weinberg is President of the Association of Reform Zionists of America and is a leading young voice in world-wide Zionist politics and affairs.