Why Resettlement of Bedouin Arab Israeli Citizens is a Moral and Democratic Wrong – Israel Journal Part V

27 Sunday Oct 2013

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

Tags

Ethics, Israel/Zionism, Jewish History, Social Justice

I am one of 620 rabbis and cantors who signed a letter to Prime Minister Netanyahu (http://bit.y/BedouinRabbis – “Clergy United Against Bedouin Dispossession”, organized by T’ruah and Rabbis for Human Rights) asking the Israeli government to set aside the Begin-Prawer Bill as unjust.

The bill’s authors say that the bill will settle land ownership disputes between Israel’s Bedouin Negev citizens and the state, compensate the 30,000 to 40,000 Bedouin being moved from their homes to new recognized villages, and ensure their well-being by affording them regular access to water, electricity and other services.

However, there is far more here than meets the eye.

The 190,000 Bedouin Arabs of the Negev, among the poorest in the country (71% live below the poverty line), are full citizens of the State of Israel. 90,000 of these Bedouin live in 45 villages of which 35 have not been recognized by the government and are therefore not provided the most basic services. Only ten of the 45 villages are expected to receive formal government recognition.

The bill will forcibly move these Bedouin from villages in which they have lived for generations because the state does not recognize their property claims. Why?

First, the Bedouin who lived on their land under Ottoman and British Mandate control had “understandings” with the authorities about which lands belonged to them. The formal process of regulating land ownership under the British Mandate (1917-48), however, was never carried out in the Negev, though many landholders elsewhere in the country were officially registered.

Second, the Bedouin had their own traditional system of property acquisition that was acceptable under Ottoman and British rule, and so they were given the impression that registering their land in the government Land Registry was not necessary.

Third, Israel’s War of Independence dislocated thousands of Bedouin. Immediately after the 1948 War, Israel declared the lands temporarily evacuated by Bedouins to be “abandoned land.” The IDF confiscated that land and turned it into military training zones and built yishuvim (Jewish communities) on the land of abandoned villages.

Dr. Dan Gazit, an archaeologist who has spent decades living and working in the Negev, claims that an archive in the Beersheba Municipality that existed during the British mandate era documented all land ownership data for the Bedouins of the province, but was “lost” during its transfer to the State Archive. He has written:

“The State of Israel, which disappeared the Bedouin ownership date of their lands in the Negev, is now expelling them from their land, claiming that they have no official ownership documentation.”

This is a classic “Catch 22!”

“The Begin-Prawer Plan” will force the displacement and eviction of dozens of villages and tens of thousands of Bedouin residents, dispossess them of their ancestral property, and damage the social fabric of their communities thus putting thousands of families at risk of falling further into poverty, unemployment and crime.

What is recommended instead is for the Israeli government to recognize formally the unrecognized 45 villages, all of which have met the same criteria required of new Jewish communities to be registered, and thereby afford them adequate water, electricity, plumbing, health care, education, and employment.

The unfairness of this bill is stunning in another way. There are currently 100 Jewish villages in the Beer Sheva District of the Negev with an average population of only 300, far fewer than the Bedouin villages which have between 400 and 4800 residents. Jewish villages, however, have had no difficulty attaining land and formal recognition thus affording them the necessary infrastructure from the Israeli government including water, electricity, plumbing, health care, education, and employment.

The premise behind the Begin-Prawer Plan is that Bedouin Arabs are usurpers of the land upon which they live because they lack documentation, but that is a problem created by the state of Israel, not the Bedouin themselves who are victims of bureaucratic neglect.

The Prophet Micah (2:2) warns us: “And they covet fields, and seize them; and [they covet houses and] take them away; thus they oppress a man and his house, even a man and his heritage.”

What pans out at the end of the day is that this Begin-Prawer bill is a land grab by the state of Israel of property lived on and possessed by Israeli Bedouin Arab citizens.

Jewish tradition teaches that the highest moral duty is to treat strangers and the most vulnerable in our midst with kindness and justice. The irony in the case of the Bedouin is that as citizens of Israel they are NOT strangers at all, but part of the fabric of Israel’s democracy.

If Israel is to embody the best of Jewish ethical tradition (as it does in so many areas) and the highest democratic standards, then the Knesset must defeat this bill.

The Cauldron that is Hebron Today – Israel Journal Part IV

24 Thursday Oct 2013

Posted by rabbijohnrosove in Israel and Palestine, Israel/Zionism, Jewish History, Jewish Identity, Social Justice, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Israel and Palestine, Israel/Zionism, Jewish History, Social Justice

I had not visited Hebron for forty years ago until my synagogue group did earlier this month. In this time so much yet so little has changed.

In 1973 the city and surroundings had 40,000 Arab Muslim residents and 150 Jews. Today, there are 250,000 Palestinians and 8500 Jews.

A holy city to both religions because of the patriarchs’ and matriarchs’ burial caves (Genesis 23 – in this week’s Torah portion Chayei Sarah) and it being located along an ancient trading route, Hebron has been vulnerable to multiple conquests and violence since the time of Abraham.

Israel has controlled the area since 1967, and as part of the Oslo process, Israel and the Palestinians signed the “Hebron Agreement” in which the city was split into two sectors: H1, controlled by the Palestinian Authority and H2 controlled by Israel.

Our group visited H2 with David Wilder, the spokesmen for the Hebron Jewish community.

Wilder is a religious settler who packs a pistol on his hip over which is draped his tzitzit. He is a passionate defender of the religious right of Jews to Hebron. He says there is no such thing as the Palestinian people, that the Arabs there have no distinct identity separate from Arabs in the Middle East, and that they have contributed nothing of lasting value to the advancement of civilization, in contrast to Judaism and the Jewish people.

While denying Palestinians their national identity he demands that they recognize our Jewish religious and national rights. He is resentful that Arabs have access to 97% of the city under the Hebron Agreement while Jews have access to 3%.

Wilder denies that he is an “extremist!” Palestinians and most Israelis don’t agree.

He opposes a two-state solution, and when challenged by evidence of settler and Israeli mistreatment of Palestinians, he said these are lies disseminated by anti-Israel and anti-Semitic groups.

Here are some of those “lies.”

In 2013 Palestinians were barred from using Shuhada Street, their principal commercial thoroughfare in H2. In recent years due to settler violence, half the Arab shops in H2 have gone out of business.

The Israeli human rights organization B’tzelem says that “grave violations” of Palestinian human rights have occurred in Hebron because of the “presence of the settlers within the city” and that there has been less than an adequate response from Israeli security forces in stopping the violations. B’tzelem cites regular incidents of “almost daily physical violence and property damage by settlers in the city.”

In 1994 the Israeli Shamgar Commission of Inquiry concluded that Israeli authorities consistently failed to investigate or prosecute crimes committed by settlers against Palestinians.

Though much of Hebron’s Arab community is thriving in business, education and commerce, still the violations continue as is clear by the testimony of many Israeli soldiers who have been stationed there, one of whom said (courtesy of “Breaking the Silence”):

My main difficulty … was the … Jewish community… The feeling was that we were protecting the Arabs from the Jews, … [and] … the Jews really did whatever they pleased and no one would care…I was standing guard duty … and I see a six-year Palestinian girl [whose] whole head was an open wound….Th[is] extremely cute [Jewish] child … would regularly visit our position decided that he didn’t like Palestinians walking right under his home, so he took a brick and threw it at [this little girl’s] head. Kids do whatever they please there. No one does anything about it. No one cares. Afterwards, his parents only praised him. The parents there encourage their children to behave this way. I had many such cases. 11-12 year old Jewish children beat up Palestinians and their parents come to help them along, set their dogs on them; a thousand and one stories.”

The violence, of course, goes both ways over a long period. The most egregious attack on Jews occurred in 1929 when Arab rioters murdered and butchered 70 Jewish men, women and children, and wounded 60. At the same time, 455 Jews survived because their Arab neighbors protected them.

As a delayed payback, in 1994 Baruch Goldstein, a resident of Kiryat Arba, entered the Mosque and machine-gunned 29 Muslim worshipers dead and wounded 130 before being killed.

Just last month, an Israeli soldier was murdered in Hebron.

I asked Wilder what he and his community would do in the event of a two-state solution in which Hebron becomes part of the State of Palestine. He said that it won’t ever happen!

If it does, and I hope that it will, both Israeli and Palestinian security forces are going to have their hands full dealing with these fanatic religious settlers.

I pray that there will be no loss of life on either side when a two-state agreement is reached, hopefully this year. However, the history of Hebron suggests that such prayers are pipe dreams.

Israel Journal – Part I

20 Sunday Oct 2013

Posted by rabbijohnrosove in American Jewish Life, American Politics and Life, Israel and Palestine, Israel/Zionism, Jewish History, Social Justice, Uncategorized, Women's Rights

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

American Jewish Life, Israel and Palestine, Israel/Zionism, Jewish History, Social Justice, Women's Rights

I have just returned from two weeks of meetings in Washington, D.C., Israel and the West Bank.

Immediately before embarking for Israel, I attended the national conference of J Street in Washington, D.C. J Street is a pro-Israel pro-peace political and educational organization that has for the last five years been a consistent and strong advocate for a two-states for two people’s resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It is the fasting growing political action committee in Washington and though many Jews are supporters, it is has garnered the support of Americans of many religious, ethnic and racial communities who understand the critical importance of a peace resolution of the conflict.

Leading Israeli and American government officials spoke to the nearly 3000 delegates (which included 900 college and university students), along with Palestinian leadership about the challenges and opportunities for a two-state solution. Included among the speakers were Vice President Joe Biden, Rep. Nancy Pelosi, Rep. John Lewis, US Chief Negotiator Martin Indyk, Israeli Chief Negotiator Tzipi Livni, Likud MK Tzachbi Hanegbi, Israeli Labor opposition leader Shelly Yachimovich, members of the Knesset from the Avodah, Meretz, Likud, Yesh Atid, Shas, and Tenua parties, Israeli human rights activists, and journalists.

Then my wife and I took off for Israel to lead a mission of members of my synagogue community to meet with Israelis on the left and right, settlers, human rights activists, journalists, and members of the Knesset, as well as with Palestinian Authority officials in Ramallah and Palestinian business and community leaders in Rawabi. We did not nor would we meet with anyone from Hamas.

Our purpose was to gain deeper understanding of the current attitudes of Israelis and Palestinians towards each other, and to express our American Jewish support for a two-states for two peoples resolution of the conflict.

In the next two or three weeks I will post blog entries on many of the themes that J Street and our mission addressed including:

· Israeli and Palestinian hopes and fears

· West Bank Settlements, militant and not-so-militant settlers, and the consequences of Israeli west-bank development

· The BDS (Boycott, Divestment, Sanction) Movement and American Jews

· Palestinian business development in the West Bank and its role in securing a future peace agreement

· Political asylum seekers in Israel from Sudan and Eretria

· “Solidarity Sheik Jarrah” and Sara Beninga’s activism in East Jerusalem

· The struggle for Judaism in the Jewish State

· The problem in defining a “Jewish State”

· “Women of the Wall,” the ultra-orthodox and the Sharansky Compromise

All of these issues are complex. The challenge is to make sense of the numerous ideologies, truths and strong emotions on all sides.

One overriding truth is that Israel, the Palestinians and the peoples and nations of the Middle East are inextricably intertwined with each other and that Israel’s destiny as a Jewish democratic state depends on how it resolves the conflict with the Palestinians.

I do not claim to have answers. What I will attempt to do is shine a light on some of these issues we confronted.

More to come!

J Street’s Unfair Exclusion From Denver JCRC

26 Monday Aug 2013

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

American Jewish Life, American Politics and Life, Ethics, Israel and Palestine, Israel/Zionism, Jewish History

I am a member of a closed list-serve called RAVKAV that includes all Reform Rabbis. There everything under the sun is discussed on a daily basis. The agreement is that all communications are confidential.

That being said, there has been some confusion of late about J Street and JStreetPAC that I and several other colleagues cleared up, and since we rabbis were confused I must assume that many in the Jewish community beyond rabbinic circles are likewise confused. Hence, the purpose of this blog-post.

The matter was raised concerning the Denver JCRC’s exclusion of J Street as a member organization in May of this year. One of my colleagues pointed to JStreetPAC’s endorsement of candidates for national political office (i.e. the House and Senate) as justification for the Denver JCRC excluding J Street from membership.

The Denver JCRC is a coalition of nearly 40 organizations, synagogues and at-large members in the Denver area and acts as a service provided to the community by the Allied Jewish Federation of Colorado. The purpose of this JCRC is to convene the ‘common table’ around which member organizations can engage in civil discourse through open dialogue to address issues and design strategies on issues of concern to the Jewish community. Included in the list is the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). The nearly 40 member organizations can be found here http://www.jewishcolorado.org/page.aspx?id=241337

If this is an inclusive organization, why did the Denver’s JCRC exclude J Street? I do not have an answer, but I do believe it is important to clear up confusions about what J Street is.

J Street’s mission is simple – “We believe in the right of the Jewish people to a national homeland in Israel, in the Jewish and democratic values on which Israel was founded, and in the necessity of a two-state solution.” www.jstreet.org

J Street includes an Educational Fund and has a division within it called JStreetPAC. My colleagues confused the two divisions of J Street, their functions and the legal distinctions, and on that basis one stated that the Denver JCRC’s position vis a vis J Street is correct and appropriate.

The J Street Education Fund is a 501c3 entity and is legally independent of the JStreetPAC that does the political work.

For the record, J Street is a member of other JCRCs including in Boston, Westchester, Atlanta, and Baltimore that all recognize that J Street’s community based work is done by the J Street Educational Fund.

With regards to the Denver JCRC, an overwhelming majority of those voting yay and nay on J Street’s application voted in favor. The final vote was 18 in favor, 12 opposed, and 8 abstentions. J Street did not attain the needed votes because of arcane rules for JCRC membership that require a two-thirds majority (a super-majority!).

For the record, the litmus test is not whether a candidate is Republican, Democrat or Independent for an endorsement by JStreetPAC. The litmus test is whether said candidate supports a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and advocates an activist American involvement in mediating between the parties, as the United States is currently doing.

JStreetPAC has supported two Republicans in the past on this basis. The fact that all 71 candidates that JStreetPAC endorsed in the last election cycle, of whom 70 won their elections in the House and Senate, were Democrats is a reflection not of JStreetPAC’s partisan orientation at all (it is not partisan in the sense of supporting one American political party over another), but rather because the two state issue was not embraced according to J Street’s principles openly by Republicans, nor did Republicans welcome JStreetPAC’s endorsement in the last cycle.

JStreetPAC would be delighted to work with any Republican or Independent that embraces openly the principle of the two-state solution.

One colleague justified excluding J Street from the JCRC based on the fact that the JCRC then would have to include the Republican Jewish Coalition. But would the RJC be open to Democratic candidates for office? Obviously not, as it is purely partisan whereas JStreetPAC endorses candidates based on a clear policy position not party affiliation. This is a distinction with a clear difference.

I suspect that as time progresses Republicans may be open to JStreetPAC endorsements given that even the Israeli ruling coalition (or that part of it that is not against a two state solution) and a significant majority of members of the Knesset are in favor of an end-of-conflict two-state solution with a state of Israel sitting securely side by side with a state of Palestine.

Join Me at This Year’s Annual J Street National Conference in Washington, D.C. – September 28 to October 1

09 Friday Aug 2013

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

American Jewish Life, American Politics and Life, Israel and Palestine, Israel/Zionism, Jewish History

I have attended many conferences in my life, and none is quite like the annual national conference of J Street in Washington, D.C. for thought-provoking, inspiring and informative sessions with a wide diversity of views on the issue for which J Street was created five years ago, resolving through American mediation the Israeli-Palestinian conflict once and for all.

J Street’s principles are clear and simple, though the conflict is not: “We believe in the right of the Jewish people to a national homeland in Israel, in the Jewish and democratic values on which Israel was founded, and in the necessity of a two-state solution.”

The core of J Street’s argument is that a secure democratic Jewish state of Israel living side-by-side with an independent Palestinian state through a two-state solution is the only way Israel can remain both Jewish and democratic.

J Street represents 180,000 individuals in 50 community chapters and a college division (J Street U) that is active on more than 50 campuses.

J Street’s political action committee (JStreetPAC) is the largest pro-Israel PAC in Washington, D.C. and raised $1.8 million in the last election cycle (2012) to support 71 congressional and senatorial candidates, of which 70 won their elections.

J Street expects to bring to its conference between 2500 and 3000 participants, including 650 college students.

The Conference this year will include MK Shelly Yachimovich, leader of the opposition Labor party, and other Members of the Knesset from Labor, Meretz, Yesh Atid, Hat’nuah, Likud and Shas. The list of conference speakers also includes other Israeli and Palestinian leaders, American officials, journalists, and heads of Israeli and Palestinian NGOs.

Among the featured sessions are:

→ A View from the Hill: Is Congress Changing?
→ How Israel Emerged as a Partisan Wedge Issue in US Politics
→ Friends from Afar? The Impact of the Pro-Israel Establishment on Achieving Two States
→ The Future of State 194: Palestinian Politics Today
→ West Bank Settlements and the Two-State Solution: Not Too Late
→ How the Israel Conversation is Shut Down and Opened Up
→ Good Neighbors: Israel’s Role in a Transitioning Middle East

Whether you live in my city, Los Angeles, or anywhere else, J Street welcomes you to attend. See details on the conference here http://conference.jstreet.org/ and J Street’s website here www.jstreet.org.

Minimum Wage, “Fox News”, John Oliver, the Farm Bill & Food Stamps

04 Sunday Aug 2013

Posted by rabbijohnrosove in American Politics and Life, Ethics, Health and Well-Being, Quote of the Day, Social Justice, Uncategorized, Women's Rights

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

American Politics and Life, Health and Well-Being, Quote of the Day, Social Justice, Women's Rights

Right-wing extremists in the media and Congress are waging a full-scale assault on millions of poor people by refusing to raise the minimum wage (currently at $7.25/hour = $15,000 annually for full-time work) and include funds for food stamps on the Farm Bill now before Congress.

Watch John Oliver’s brilliant piece on “The Daily Show” focusing humorously – though it is no laughing matter – on the arrogance, ignorance and heartlessness of the “Fox News” crowd! http://americablog.com/2013/08/john-oliver-fast-food-workers-striking-video.html

For more information on the minimum wage, see http://action.ourfuture.org/p/dia/action3/common/public/index.sjs?action_KEY=204

It is the same people on “Fox News” and in the extremist wing of the Republican Party who want to slash billions of dollars out of the Farm Bill that would hurt 47 million food insecure Americans who depend on food stamps to feed themselves and their families. The vast majority these 47 million people are the working poor, children, seniors on fixed income, and people with disabilities.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/02/us/politics/gop-push-to-slash-food-stamps-puts-farm-bill-in-jeopardy.html?_r=0

Hubert Humphrey put it exactly right 45 years ago:

“The moral test of government is how that government treats those who are in the dawn of life, the children; those who are in the twilight of life, the elderly; and those who are in the shadows of life, the sick, the needy, and the handicapped.”

“The Third Narrative: Progressive Answers To The Far Left’s Critiques of Israel” – A Pamphlet Published by Ameinu

26 Friday Jul 2013

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

American Jewish Life, Israel and Palestine, Israel/Zionism, Jewish History, Social Justice

Ameinu (Heb. “Our People”) is a national, multi-generation community of progressive Zionist North American Jews that believes that “a secure peace between Israel and its neighbors is essential to the survival of the democratic Jewish state.” Ameinu is committed to a “negotiated two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.”

Thankfully, this is no longer the position solely of progressive Zionists. PM Netanyahu and a majority of Israel’s Knesset members support this proposition today, as do a majority of Israelis and Palestinians polled in recent surveys.

Yet, cynicism from the right, distortions from the left and distrust between our two peoples make negotiations complicated and difficult going forward.

I have always believed that the more one understands what are the truths on all sides of the conflict, the better prepared one is to support reasonable options that guarantee security for both the Palestinians and Israelis in an end-of-conflict two-state peace agreement.

To this purpose has Ameinu produced a readable and helpful 25-page pamphlet called “The Third Narrative: Progressive Answers To The Far Left’s Critiques of Israel.”

The pamphlet was written by Dan Fleshler, a media and public affairs strategist and author of Transforming America’s Israel Lobby – The Limits Of Its Power and the Potential For Change (Potomac Books, 2009). Fleshler is a frequent contributor of Op-eds and features in the New York Times Opinionator, Jerusalem Report, Forward, New York Jewish Week, Ha’Aretz, Reform Judaism magazine and other publications. He serves as a board member of Ameinu and American’s for Peace Now and on the Advisory Council of J Street.

This booklet addresses most of the accusations against Israel that one might find on the Web, on college and university campuses and in other settings. As Fleshler notes in the introduction:

“Some of these attacks come from the far left, from activists trying to appeal to Jews and non-Jews who are committed to human rights and social justice. Often, these critics are not just attacking specific, objectionable Israeli policies and behavior. They treat Israel as the epitome of evil. They portray the entire Zionist enterprise…as nothing more than a racist, colonialist and immoral land theft.”

The booklet head-on addresses the following assertions:

Is Israel An “Apartheid State?”
Is One, Binational State A Solution To the Israel-Palestinian Conflict?
Is Pro-Israel And Progressive An Oxymoron?
Should Palestinian Refugees And Their Descendants Be Granted the “Right of Return?”
Should Boycotts, Divestment And Sanctions (BDS) Against Israel Be Encouraged?
Does Zionism = Racism?
Is “Ethnic Cleansing” Inherent To Zionism? Does The Pro-Israel Lobby Have A Stranglehold On The U.S. Government?

As Israel and the Palestinians prepare to enter into negotiations, many of these canards will be raised by the left and by the Palestinians themselves. It is important that the Jewish public possesses informed responses. To that end, Fleshler and Ameinu write that the history of Zionism, Israel and the rise of Palestinian nationalism are complex, and that there are multiple truths that must be acknowledged by Jews on the left and right, and by Palestinians themselves.

The following appeared in the Times of Israel about Ameinu’s progressive Zionist approach.
http://www.timesofisrael.com/how-to-be-supportive-of-palestinians-and-a-zionist/

You can also learn more about the Third Narrative at http://thirdnarrative.org/

Those interested in acquiring a copy of the pamphlet, call Ameinu at (212) 366 1194 or refer to its website – www.ameinu.net.

Religious Pluralism High on Israelis’ Agenda

09 Sunday Jun 2013

Posted by rabbijohnrosove in Israel/Zionism, Jewish Identity, Social Justice, Women's Rights

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Israel/Zionism, Social Justice, Women's Rights

According to all surveys, a majority of Israelis favor religious options other than what the Orthodox religious authorities are offering. They favor civil marriage (see http://www.hiddush.org/), the equal rights of women and the equal treatment of all religious streams including Reform and Conservative synagogue centers and rabbis.

The following offer greater understanding of the politics at play as well as the vitality of non-orthodox Judaism in the state of Israel.

Today’s News – It seems that the Rosh Hodesh prayer at the Kotel by Women of the Wall (WOW) this morning on Rosh Hodesh Tammuz went forward without incident. I have found nothing in the Israeli press today to suggest otherwise, and it would have been reported had there been an altercation.

The video by WOW reveals the numbers of Hareidim who turned out to either protest or gawk behind police lines at the strange site of women actually praying with full hearts out in the open! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUmxZT9PWY0

The op-ed in Haaretz in recent days written by Rabbi Gilad Kariv, the head of the Israel Movement for Progressive Judaism (i.e. Israeli Reform) and a former Knesset Candidate with Labor (he was #27 on the list), pulls the veil from off the face of the National Religious Party movement’s denial of what Israelis really want relative to religious pluralism, civil marriage, and the rights of non-orthodox Jews, rabbis and Judaism in the State of Israel. http://www.reform.org.il/eng/About/NewsItem.asp?ContentID=1408

In the New York Jewish Week, IMPJ Executive Director, Rabbi Gilad Kariv dismissed Minister Naftali Bennet’s “revolutionary” proposals in their insightful article “Chipping Away at the Orthodox Monopoly.” But he also added “We can celebrate the fact that the new government will probably not push forward a new conversion bill and try to overrule old court decisions dealing with religion and state.” (from “What’s New” from the Israel Movement for Progressive Judaism)

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

26 Sunday May 2013

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

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

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

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 92^nd 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.