Tag Archives: Israel/Zionism

“Racism and Gender in Israel” – Guilt and Accountability

10 Sunday May 2015

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

Now that the new Israeli government will be sworn into the Knesset this week, an issue that has festered unchecked for too long needs to be addressed more extensively – racist and gender-inspired incitement against Arab citizens of Israel. Though President Reuven Rivlin began his presidency by shining a light on this scourge in Israeli society and initiated a nationwide conversation and campaign to emphasize that anti-Arab racism has no place in the democratic state of Israel, bigotry continues against Arabs, and in a different way against Ethiopian Jews. The large presence of Eritrean and Sudanese asylum seekers has, at the very least, exacerbated the problem.

The Israel Religious Action Center (IRAC) and the Israel Movement for Progressive Judaism (IMPJ) have published a report called “Racism and Gender in Israel.” It includes introductory remarks by Rabbi David Saperstein, formerly the Director of the RAC in Washington, D.C. and now a Presidential appointee as United States Ambassador for Religious Freedom, and by Rabbi Rick Jacobs, President of the Union for Reform Judaism (URJ). Anat Hoffman, Executive Director of the IRAC, wrote the Preface (see below to obtain a copy).

This 66-page pamphlet was written by Israeli attorney Ruth Carmi who notes that though the assassinated MK Meir Kahana was condemned for his racist and extremist remarks in the 1980s when he charged that Arab men were threatening to steal “our” wives and daughters, such comments today by the most extreme Hareidi rabbis are “no longer confined to the margins but are becoming increasingly common in Israeli discourse, and have even found their way into official debates in the Knesset…. [these comments pray upon] emotions exploited with the goal of imposing complete segregation between Jews and Arabs in Israel, isolating and humiliating the Arab community in Israel, and depicting it as a dangerous enemy against which defense is essential… The goal is to marginalize Arab citizens in Israel, to prevent coexistence between Jews and Arabs, and to impose a misogynist perception of women as passive pawns in the conflict who lack any will of their own.”

Racial incitement is prohibited under Israeli law as a criminal and a disciplinary offense.

The “Gender and Racism” pamphlet describes how extremist orthodox religious organizations, associations and some ultra-Orthodox rabbis in Israel have devoted themselves to a campaign to “defend the honor of Jewish women.” The primary offending organizations are Yad L’Achim, Lev L’Achim, Lehava, Hemla, Derekh Chaim, and the website Hakol Hayehudi, and the chief rabbi of Safed, Rabbi Shmuel Eliyahu, is most identified with this racist campaign to mark Arabs as schemers, seducers and abusers.

Carmi notes that “throughout history national humiliation has been closely associated with the sexual humiliation of women…and that a Jewish woman who submits to wooing by a non-Jewish man brings dishonor on herself and shame on the entire nation.” (p. 52)

“The woman’s body is the nation, and accordingly the war over this body is the war of the entire nation and becomes the focus of the conflict. Jewish women who have relationships with the enemy – Arab men – are perceived as contributing to the defeat of the Jewish people and the State of Israel and as humiliating Jewish men. The bodies of Jewish women become the focus of the Arab-Jewish conflict and ownership over these bodies determines the balance of power in the conflict.” (pp. 53-54)

This growing movement in Israel is promoted by flyers in Safed warning about “Arab Seducers,” posters in Jewish neighborhoods of Jerusalem and Beitar Illit opposing employment of Arabs, flyers in the Pisgat Ze’ev neighborhood of Jerusalem calling for the expulsion of Arab residents, and letters given to IDF soldiers declaring “The War is at Home.” Statements by ultra-Orthodox rabbis warn against encounters and fraternization between Jewish women and Arab men and against Arab students and letters by some Rabbis’ wives are posted and distributed beseeching Jewish women not to date Arab men. In Ashkelon, there are efforts to exclude Arabs citizens from local places of entertainment, and kashrut certification is granted to businesses that follow this racist agenda. On the Lehava website there is a “Page of Shame” that lists names of Jewish women involved in intimate relationships with non-Jewish men. An Informers’ Hotline enables people to report incidents of Arab-Jewish fraternization.

Violent attacks against innocent Arabs whose sole “offense” was to be present in areas where there is a Jewish majority, have all created “an atmosphere of terror and intimidation that serves the agenda of those organizations and individuals that advocate for the total segregation of the two populations in the State of Israel.” (p. 13)

It remains to be seen whether this new government including two ultra-Orthodox parties, United Torah Judaism and Shas, will prosecute this moral scourge in segments of Israeli society.

The Talmud is clear when it says “One who is able to protest against a wrong that is done in his family, his city, his nation, or the world and doesn’t do so is held accountable for that wrong being done.” (Bavli, Shabbat 54b).

Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel echoes that reminder when he said, “We must continue to remind ourselves that in a free society all are involved in what some are doing. Some are guilty, all are responsible.”

Note: Contact the Reform Movement’s Religious Action Center for a free copy of “Racism and Gender in Israel” – 2027 Massachusetts Ave NW, Washington, DC 20036 – Phone: (202) 387-2800 – http://www.rac.org/.

West Bank Settlement Policy Today – Questions and Answers

29 Sunday Mar 2015

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , ,

“Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s settlement policy resembles his predecessors’ in many ways, but it is a march toward permanence in a time when prospects for peace are few.”

So wrote Jodi Pudoren and Jeremy Ashkenas in a NY Times piece called “Netanyahu and The Settlements” (March 12, 2015). (See link below for full article).

In the spirit of Pesach, I pose a series of questions and answers:

• What is the current status of settlement construction beyond the Green Line? Lior Amichai, Deputy Director at Jerusalem’s Shalom Achshav Settlement Watch Project, reported to the J Street National Conference in Washington, D.C. last week that between 2009 and 2014 Israel began construction beyond the Green Line a total of 10,858 housing units. In that time Israel also proposed 5711 tenders for future building, promised to submit 13,077 plans for future projects and changed the status of 20 illegal “outposts” to “legal settlements.”

• Since the Oslo process began in 1993, what is the Jewish population growth in the west bank? In 1993, 110,300 settlers lived on land over the Green Line. Today, the Jewish population totals 356,500 settlers. 12% of Israeli settlers control 60% of west bank land and the Palestinian Authority controls the other 40%.

• How are Palestinian Arabs and Israelis who live beyond the Green Line treated by Israel? Palestinian Arabs who live beyond the Green Line enjoy none of the rights of Israeli citizenship because those territories, taken by Israel in the 1967 Six Day War, have never been formally annexed or incorporated into the State of Israel. The legal status of west bank Palestinian Arabs is therefore different than Israeli Arab citizens who enjoy all the rights and privileges that Israeli Jewish citizens enjoy. West bank Palestinian Arabs are subject to the Israeli Military Authority without the same democratic rights and protections enjoyed by Israeli Arab citizens living within Israel itself. Israeli confiscation of privately owned Palestinian land in the west bank is the most serious inequity. It is estimated by Israeli human rights organizations B’tzelem and Shalom Achshav that one third of all land held by Jewish settlements in the west bank is built on Palestinian deeded land. Israeli settlers in the west bank, however, enjoy all the same rights of citizenship as do those Israeli citizens (Jewish and Arab) who live within the Green Line.

• What is Israel’s budget for settlement construction beyond the Green Line? Labor MK Stav Shafrir is now conducting an investigation as a member of the Knesset Budget Committee to determine exactly how much money has been allocated for settlement construction in the past and on an annual basis. She reported to the J Street National Conference last week that, in truth, there are two Israeli budgets – one public and one she called “secret.” MK Shafrir estimates that at least 1 billion NIS has been allocated in the last couple of years to build settlements and infrastructure (e.g. roads, electricity, water) with money that shows up nowhere in Israel’s official budget and has not been approved by the Knesset.

• What are the policies of the different American Jewish Federations regarding funding projects beyond the Green Line? J Street U (J Street’s college division) is investigating the policies of America’s largest Jewish Federations about funding projects in Israel beyond the Green Line, if it is done at all. That report will be published once information has been collected and analyzed.

• What is the future of the large settlement blocs in a two-state agreement? Israeli and Palestinian negotiators last year reached a consensus that the large Israeli settlement blocs and neighborhoods surrounding Jerusalem will be part of the state of Israel in any two-state agreement, with corresponding land swaps given by Israel to the future state of Palestine. This means that 75% of all Jewish settlers living now in the west bank beyond the Green Line will be absorbed inside the borders of the state of Israel. The remaining small Jewish “outposts” and settlements not inside the settlement blocs in the west bank where approximately 90,000 Israeli settlers now live will either be vacated or will come under the authority of the state of Palestine. Despite this consensus amongst the negotiators, PM Netanyahu recently declared (see NYT below): “I do not intend to evacuate any settlements.”

• Will the Palestinians file charges against Israel in the UN International Criminal Court? Martin Indyk, the chief American negotiator in last year’s failed talks and once a leader of AIPAC, has charged that PM Netanyahu’s “rampant settlement activity” has a “dramatically damaging impact,” so much so that next month the Palestinians may file a case in the UN International Criminal Court charging that Israeli settlements are an ongoing war crime.

• What ought to be the role that liberal American Zionists play? Our role ought to be to support our Israeli brothers and sisters who protest against continuing settlement construction except, perhaps, in the large settlement blocs that likely will remain in Israel once a two-state agreement is attained, and to continue to support all efforts to bring about an end-of-conflict agreement of two states for two peoples.

This NY Times piece “Netanyahu and the Settlements” includes maps showing exactly where the settlements and outposts are located beyond the Green Line as well as the history of settlement activity since the Oslo period began in 1993.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/03/12/world/middleeast/netanyahu-west-bank-settlements-israel-election.html?_r=0

The World-Wide Media’s Mis-characterization of Israel’s Election Results

19 Thursday Mar 2015

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , ,

[The following is a letter I received from a friend, Glenn L. Krinsky, a long-time progressive Zionist, who I believe accurately, corrects the media’s mis-characterization of the 2015 Israeli election. I am posting Glenn’s letter by permission. Glenn L. Krinsky is a law partner in Jones Day – One Firm Worldwide in the Los Angeles office. I add some reflections following Glenn’s email.]

“It’s just amazing how the worldwide media, including the Israeli media, have so vastly mis-characterized the election results. 

In 2013, Bibi prostituted himself to Lieberman, and their combined Likud/Yisrael Beitenu slate won 31 seats. Naftali Bennett’s then-new party, Habayit HaYehudi, won 12 seats. So Bibi/Lieberman/Bennett won 43 seats.

This year, Bibi purposely shifted to the extreme right to cannibalize votes from Lieberman and Bennett to ensure that Likud was the largest single vote-getter and would be asked to form the coalition. The strategy succeeded in the sense that Bennett went from 12 to 8 and Lieberman was marginalized down to 6. But note, this year the Bibi/Lieberman/Bennett trio got 44 seats, only one more than 2 years ago.

What happened to the center/left? In 2013,Yesh Atid won 19 seats (but sold out and went into Bibi’s coalition). This year Yesh Atid got 11 (a decrease of 8). Labor went from 21 (15 for Labor plus 6 for Livni’s Hatnuah party) to 24, and Meretz went from 6 to 5. So, these parties won 46 seats in 2013 and only 40 in 2015.

Where did the other six seats go? Not to the right, since we saw that they went only from 43 to 44. Instead, they went to Kahlon (the former Likud-nik who moved from the right to the center) who got 10 seats, whereas in 2013, the former Likud-nik who moved from the right to the center–Shaul Mofaz–got only 2 seats. In other words, the ‘we want change but don’t want Labor or Livni’ vote stayed right at 21 seats (in 2013, 19 for Yesh Atid + 2 for Mofaz; in 2015, 11 for Yesh Atid + 10 for Kahlon).

The Arab parties went from 11 to 13 (because of the drawing power in 2015 of the 3 Arab parties consolidating into one joint list), and the ultra-Orthodox went from 18 to 13 (due to the split in Shas, which went from 11 to 7 seats since Yishai’s half of Shas barely missed the threshold which would have given it 4 seats, which would have matched exactly Shas’ 2013 results when added to Deri’s half of Shas in 2015). 

So, it’s clear that, with minor variations (the largest being Kahlon’s showing), the 2015 results are strikingly similar to the 2013 results.

The real story in 2015 was one of ‘expectations versus results.’ The opinion polls showed Herzog pulling away from Bibi in the last week, and everyone was conditioned for a Zionist Union victory. Instead, Bibi went so far to the right that far right-wingers didn’t feel the need to vote for Bennett or Lieberman. As set forth above, the right-wing trio merely went from 43 to 44. But Bibi took enough votes away from Bennett and Lieberman that Likud far outstripped Herzog/Livni as the largest party, which the media are characterizing as a ‘resounding’ or ‘striking’ win when it’s merely a reflection of Likud moving so far to the right that it cannibalized votes from Bennett and Lieberman.”

As I indicated, I believe Glenn has interpreted the election correctly. He alludes to the final weekend of the campaign in which PM Netanyahu appealed to the worst in the Israeli character. His racist and demagogic disenfranchisement of 20% of Israeli citizenry represented by the Arab population inside the Green Line has done serious damage not only to his credibility as the Prime Minister of all Israeli citizens, but his appeal to fear and hate is unbecoming to the nation state of the Jewish people.

Further, Bibi’s rejection this last weekend of a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict sadly conforms to what many of us knew to be the truth even after the Prime Minister’s speech in 2009 at Bar Ilan University in which he said that he supported a two-state solution.

Reports emerged following the break-down in the American sponsored Israeli-Palestinian negotiations that Tzipi Livni, who served as Israel’s chief negotiator, was constantly undermined and second-guessed by Bibi’s lawyer who sat in (on orders of the PM) on every negotiation session and made Livni’s work next to impossible. In truth, as Bibi revealed to settlers after his Bar Ilan speech, he never intended to make a deal with the Palestinians for a state of their own in west bank territories.

Now, the challenge will be for all of us who love Israel, to continue to love her and support her, even as we insist that Israel’s future as a democratic and Jewish state depends on a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. In truth, there is no other solution to this conflict, and we American ohavei m’dinat Yisrael have to join with half of Israel’s population in supporting them in advocating for an end to the conflict which will not only be in Israel’s best interest internally, but internationally as well.

The Morning After – Exchange with Jeremy Ben-Ami

18 Wednesday Mar 2015

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

,

As I went to sleep last evening, news was already reporting the six point spread between Likud and the Zionist Union, and that given the math, PM Netanyahu will be able to form a new government with all right-wing parties without needing to create a national unity government.

Yes – I am deeply disappointed, but I’m not down.

I am printing a letter below in its entirety from Jeremy Ben-Ami, the President of J Street, because my perspective matches his – though he and I debate personally whether or not there is a higher power. I believe there is, and he has his doubts.

After Jeremy’s letter, I will share an email I sent to him this morning appropriate for this moment, our J Street national convention beginning this motzei Shabbat in Washington, D.C., and our Pesach season that is fast approaching.

Here is Jeremy’s letter sent this morning to 200,000 supporters of J Street in the United States and Israel:

Benjamin Netanyahu’s victory is a deep disappointment to all who hoped that Israel might choose a new direction for the country in yesterday’s election.

The Prime Minister’s renunciation of the two-state solution and resort to a campaign grounded in fear and tinged with racism successfully moved 150,000 votes from other right-wing parties into the Likud column in the campaign’s final days. But we fear that the cost to Israel in the long-run will be steep in terms of support here in the United States and internationally.

The Prime Minister’s outrageous statements in the campaign’s final days may have pushed him from 19 percent in the polls before the election to 23 percent on election night and cemented his position as the leader of Israel’s right wing, but this was not a broad mandate in support of the direction in which the Prime Minister is leading. Seventy-two percent of Israelis on the eve of the election felt the country is headed in the wrong direction, and only one-third of Israel’s voters supported the hard-right represented by Likud, Naftali Bennett and Avigdor Lieberman, a number roughly comparable to last election. Even in the next Knesset, the blocs of the center-left and of the right wing will continue to be evenly balanced.

Without question, we respect Israel’s democracy and the outcome of the election. We celebrate the vibrancy of debate and dissent in Israel over essential matters that was on full display during the campaign. And – contrary to the Prime Minister’s panicked attack on the participation of Arab citizens in the election – we view their increased participation in this year’s election as a positive sign about the strength of Israeli democracy.

None of that can change our core belief, however, that the policies that the Prime Minister articulated in order to win – outright rejection of the two-state solution and territorial compromise – should and will be rejected by the international community, including the United States. Sadly, the results of this election will only deepen Israel’s growing isolation.

The manner in which the Prime Minister secured his victory – shredding the broad bipartisanship that underpins American political support for Israel and preying on fear and racism at home – also demonstrated that he willingly put his own political interests before his concern for Israel’s relationship with the United States and his commitment to Israel’s democratic character.

Moving forward, J Street will be unwavering in making the case that Israel’s security and survival as the democratic homeland of the Jewish people require a change in course, recognizing that the need for change is ultimately a matter for the citizens of Israel to debate in the years ahead.

Here, in the United States, J Street, however, has a clear role to play. We will stand up strongly and proudly in American political and Jewish communal debates for an end to occupation, for a two-state solution and for an Israel that is committed to its core democratic principles and Jewish values.

We will speak out on behalf of the majority of American supporters of Israel – Jewish and not – who support a two-state solution and oppose moves to limit the rights of any Israeli citizens or to deny the collective right of the Palestinian people to self-determination in a state of their own.

Faced with a return to power of a Prime Minister who has publicly demonstrated that he does not share those beliefs, we will advocate strongly that the American Jewish community must maintain and even more actively promote its commitment to the core principles and policies which have been bedrocks of the US-Israel relationship for decades.

We’re counting on your support as we continue that work.

– Jeremy Ben-Ami

My email to Jeremy:

Dear Jeremy:

Many express doubts about there being a higher power in light of this election – understandable, and I know many American Jews have altogether given up on there being a higher power.

Martin Buber would have said not that God doesn’t exist, but that God is “in eclipse” and has permitted the darker forces to run amok. Good people doing good work is evidence of God’s presence, I believe, and there is plenty of that around.

Remember the Midrash of Moses and the Israelites at the sea. While Moses prayed, Nachshon ben Aminidav jumped in the water and began to swim, essentially taking history into his own hands. The rabbis said that God was watching, and the combination of Moses’ prayer and Nachshon’s activism persuaded God to split the sea.

All metaphor, of course, but don’t give up on the existence of a higher force, just that too many people are disconnected from it and we need more  to transcend fear, which is a dark force that keeps us from higher vision, and carry on the good fight.

Ometz Lev (strength of heart),
John

In conclusion, Meirav Michaeli (Member of the K’nesset from the Zionist Union) said it well as quoted in the NY Times today taken from her tweeter feed:

“As difficult as it is, it’s just another round. We have to raise our heads, recover and start preparing for the next round. This is our country. This is our society. We are here to work for both.”

We in America that love Israel need to support those Israelis (Jewish and Arab citizens alike) with whom we share a common vision.

Kadimah!

The Final Week Before the Israeli Election – 3 Articles

13 Friday Mar 2015

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

Those interested in the Israeli election are no doubt following the news carefully in Haaretz, The Jerusalem Post, The Times of Israel , the LA Jewish Journal, The Jewish Daily Forward, and other news sources. The following three items encapsulate the dynamism of this election in Israel among Jews, Israeli Arabs and the American Jewish community.

Though anything can happen, as past Israeli elections have shown, I believe that this election may truly represent a sea-change. Polls indicate that in the closing week, Israeli opinion is solidifying. Here are two edited articles and a link to a third that reflects that dynamism and what this election means to Israelis, Arabs and American Jews.

[1] From a Letter of Rabbi Dow Marmur from Jerusalem. March 15, 2015. (edited)
Ari Shavit, whom the world reads nowadays more than ever thanks to the deserved success of his book, “My Promised Land,” suggested in his Ha’aretz column earlier in the week that the very possibility of a Herzog government has restored hope to many Israelis. They’re hoping, it seems, that:

*he’ll restore normal relations with the United States instead of siding with Republican extremists in Congress;

*he’ll see Israel’s security problems in the larger context than just Iran, something many experts in the field believe to be necessary;

*he’ll tackle the economic issues of the day, particularly the cost of housing which has soared because, according to one report, a third of all new homes have been bought by investors, not owner-tenants;

*he’ll stem the massive flow of funds and subsidies to the settlements;

*he’ll restart negotiations with the Palestinians and release the tax revenues which rightfully belong to the Palestinian Authority but that Israel is currently holding as retaliations for the Authority turning to the International Criminal Court.

[2] “Why I’m voting Meretz and not for the Arab ticket.” Salman Masalha. Haaretz. March 12, 2015. (edited)

The actions of the Joint List of Arab parties for the Knesset over the question of a surplus votes agreement with Meretz was the straw that broke the camel’s back for me. Meretz was willing to cancel its surplus votes agreement with the Zionist Union to sign such an agreement with the Joint List, just to prevent tens of thousands of votes from going to waste – but the Joint List refused….

I admit that I boycotted recent elections, and that I recently used this platform to call for boycotting the present election too. I had many reasons in favor of a boycott. The reasons have not changed. The circumstances have.

When Islamist imams declare in the Arab media that a vote for the Joint List will bring down the rule of the right, yet the Joint List includes an Islamic Movement whose candidates live a polygamous life, I wonder which right they are talking about. Do they themselves not represent the very same thing just in a different costume, the sheitel or the hijab?

We must say clearly that the Joint List includes not only the equivalent of Yisrael Beiteinu of the Arab street, in the form of the Arab nationalism of Balad; but also the racist parallel of Habayit Hayehudi in the shape of the Islamic Movement.

…Here it turns out that the nationalists of Balad, who are fighting with all they have to enter the Knesset and swear loyalty to the “Jewish and democratic” State of Israel, are not willing to sign an agreement with Meretz based on the claim that it is a Zionist party, but when the time comes they embrace the racists from the “Habayit Haislami” (“Islamic Home”) of the Arab street.

Therefore, this is the time to disperse the fog and put everything on the table. I confess that I have never voted for Meretz. I always gave my vote to Hadash. But the time has come to voice a clear and pronounced civil Arab call: If the choice is between a vote that will give Meretz a Knesset seat or a vote that will give another seat to the Arabs from the Joint List who are the counterparts of Habayit Hayehudi or Yisrael Beiteinu, then the proper choice of every responsible citizen is clearly Meretz.

Every vote for Meretz is a sure vote for separating religion and state, for civil equality and equality between the sexes. Every vote for Meretz is a sure vote for social justice, cultural and national justice, freedom of expression and freedom of thought. And above all, every vote for Meretz is a certain vote for the peace we all aspire to. It is impossible to say all these things with certainty about any other party.

That is why, for a sane country and equal citizenship for everyone, I have decided to vote for Meretz.

[3] “Israel’s Debates Creep (Back) Into Our Bloodstream – American Jews Realize They Are Part of Election Drama.” JJ Goldberg. Jewish Daily Forward. March 13, 2015.

http://forward.com/articles/216514/israels-debates-creep-back-into-our-bloodstream/#ixzz3UHJ19DA4

Shabbat shalom!

The PA Needs Its “Altalena” Moment – Now!

30 Monday Jun 2014

Posted by in Israel and Palestine, Israel/Zionism, Jewish History

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, ,

L’havdil – I make a distinction up front. Let no one say that I am comparing the morality of Hamas with Menachem Begin’s Irgun. Begin, despite running a violent underground movement against the British and Arab fighters before the establishment of the state of Israel, did not deliberately attack civilians. Deir Yassir is an exception, and it is unclear in light of how Begin described this tragic massacre in his autobiography “The Revolt” what actually happened.

That aside, Menachem Begin was at one time a menace to the nascent state of Israel. On June 20, 1948, a month after the declaration of the state of Israel and during a time when the para-military units that fought the British and Arabs in the pre-state period were being absorbed into the Israel Defense Forces, the Irgun, under Menachem Begin’s command, brought to Israel from France a ship named the “Altalena” that was filled with 4500 tons of armaments and 800-900 men. Negotiations between Begin and Ben Gurion’s official representatives of the government of the state of Israel took place concerning the disposition of the contents of the ship and under whose ultimate command the ship and the Irgun would come.

After some negotiating, the new Prime Minister and Minister of Defense, David ben Gurion, gave an ultimatum to Begin and the Irgun that the ship “Altalena” must be surrendered to the Israel Defense Forces. Begin refused the ultimatum. Ben Gurion ordered the ship to be sunk.

This was a key moment of truth for the young state, whether all military groups would come under one command, or whether there would continue to be paramilitary and rogue units operating independently of the government of Israel. Ben Gurion understood what was at stake, and he acted. The result was the unification of all soldiers and armaments under the command of Tzahal.

Hamas, of course, is an organization of a different kind from the Irgun. It regards every Israeli man, woman and child as an enemy and as such, Hamas makes no distinction between soldiers and civilians. Hamas has sent thousands of missiles from Gaza into Israel indiscriminately aimed where Israelis live. Hamas is a massive human rights violator and is guilty of multiple war crimes.

That being said, we have seen historically how terrorist and criminal organizations can evolve into political movements that operate according to international norm.

Can Hamas do so? It would mean changing its mission to destroy the state of Israel, its very essence and raison de etre? Can it accept the existence of the state of Israel, agree to abide by all signed past agreements between the PA and Israel, and stop its terrorist activities?

Hamas and the PA have an opportunity to decide right now.

Based on a report published on June 29 in Al Monitor, written by Shlomo Eldar, both Israel and the Palestinian Authority have positively identified the rogue Hamas clan that kidnapped Israeli teenagers Eyal Yifrach, Gil’ad Sha’ar and Naftali Frenkel two weeks ago. This clan of 10,000 Hebron residents has consistently ignored Hamas’s own policies over many years and acted violently against Israelis, though it associates itself with Hamas.

The kidnapping suspects are Marwan Qawasmeh and Amar Abu Aisha.

It is time for the Palestinian Authority (including Hamas) to demonstrate whether it is unified or not. The PA needs to cut off the head of the Qawasmeh snake, arrest all its leaders, and make it clear to all Palestinians who is in command.

Indeed, this is a Palestinian “Altalena Moment!”

There will come a time for Israel to have a second “Altalena” moment – when the Israeli government effectively challenges its right-wing extremist rogue settlers and lets them know that there can be no independent operations that challenge the authority of the government of the state of Israel. The problem for Israel, at the moment, is that the current government coalition is supporting those rogue settlers. As the following article suggests, if the Labor leader Isaac Herzog becomes Israel’s next Prime Minister as a result of Yair Lapid’s and Tzipi Livni’s resignation from the government and the calling of new elections, the second Israeli Altalena incident may come sooner than we might think.

See “Herzog calls on Lapid, Livni to form new gov’t”, The Times of Israel – http://www.timesofisrael.com/herzog-calls-on-lapid-livni-to-form-new-govt/#ixzz368NVKpLc

“Accused kidnappers are rogue Hamas branch,” by Shlomo Eldar, Al-Monitor – http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2014/06/qawasmeh-clan-hebron-hamas-leadership-mahmoud-abbas.html#

 

 

J Street’s Response to Presbyterian Church (USA) Divestment, Kidnapping of 3 Israeli Teens and Middle East Tensions

23 Monday Jun 2014

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , ,

Those who understand the Middle East know that to approach events there aggressively and in a black-white, good-evil context alone will likely result in an escalation of conflict. Though good people differ about what recent events mean (i.e. the unification of Fatah with Hamas, the collapse of the Israeli-Palestinian Peace talks, the Presbyterian Church (USA) Divestment vote, the Kidnapping of 3 Israeli Teens, and the escalation of violence in Iraq and Syria), those who care deeply about maintaining Israeli security, its democracy and Jewish character, must consider all elements of these conflicts before reacting defensively and aggressively.

The two following articles express J Street’s position on much of what is transpiring. As a co-chair of J Street’s national Rabbinic Cabinet including 800 rabbis and cantors, I agree with the sentiments expressed in both.

J Street is a pro-Israel, pro-peace political organization in Washington, D.C. and is the largest pro-Israel PAC in the United States. It continues to affirm that a two-states for two peoples resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict through negotiations is the only alternative that can preserve both Israel’s identity as a democratic society and as the homeland of the Jewish people. A one-state solution will destroy Israel as we know it.

  1. J Street repudiates Presbyterian divestment decision, sees no victory for BDS Movement – J Street said that it does not believe that boycotts or divestment will bring Israelis and Palestinians closer to a two-state solution to their conflict, nor are they appropriate tools in pushing toward resolution of the conflict. We do not support the decision of the Presbyterian Church (USA) to divest from three North American companies doing business in the Palestinian territory. http://jstreet.org/blog/post/j-street-repudiates-presbyterian-divestment-decision-sees-no-victory-for-bds-movement_1
  1. Kidnapping of 3 Israeli teens could trigger more violence, Houston Chronicle –  Warning that “the Kerry effort’s failure has left a dangerous vacuum,” J Street President Jeremy Ben-Ami argued that “the Obama administration must not step away and leave the parties to their own devices, which will only allow the situation to deteriorate. On the contrary, the time has come for some plain speaking and more forceful leadership.”  http://www.houstonchronicle.com/opinion/outlook/article/Ben-Ami-Kidnapping-of-3-Israeli-teens-could-5568239.php

 

 

The Presbyterian Church (USA) Is At It Again In Its Unfair Criticism of Israel

17 Tuesday Jun 2014

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

Rachel Lerner is the Senior Vice President for Community Relations at J Street and a friend. She attended this week the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (USA) in Detroit in which she spoke on a panel where she urged Presbyterian commissioners to vote against an anti-Israel resolution supporting divestment of church funds from companies doing business in the West Bank (BDS) and called upon the Church to reconsider its support of a two-states for two-peoples resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Her letter appears here with links to all relevant documents. http://jstreet.org/blog/post/my-speech-to-the-presbyterians_1

I wrote about the Presbyterian Church (USA) in July 2012 after a terrorist attack against Jews in Bulgaria. My primary thrust then was to harshly criticize the Church’s insensitivity to Jews and to characterize the Church’s support of BDS as “anti-Israel.”

The following is part of what I wrote then:

“Israel is not a perfect society. No democracy is. Thus, being a critic of Israeli policies does not mean one is automatically anti-Israel. Indeed, Israelis themselves are among the most self-critical citizens of any nation in the world.

However, when individuals and groups consistently criticize one nation and one nation alone, one has to question such people’s deeper motivations and agenda.

After watching for several years the Presbyterian Church USA’s efforts on behalf of the BDS movement, those advocating for it I believe are unfair criticizers and part of the “anti-Israel camp.”

By “anti-Israel camp” I refer to those individuals and organizations whose criticism of Israel goes far beyond what is factual, reasonable and fair. These people rarely if ever voice criticism against Hamas’ or Fatah’s documented human rights violations against their own populations. They rarely if ever criticize human rights violations in other countries against which Israeli policies vis a vis Palestinians in the West Bank (as bad as they can be) pale by comparison. And they ignore the history of this conflict which gives context for current events.”

You can read the entire piece here https://rabbijohnrosove.wordpress.com/2012/07/22/jaccuse-the-presbyterian-church-statement-following-the-massacre-of-israelis-jews-in-bulgaria/

I would hope that good people who are members of that Church and who are not anti-Israel will vote against the aggressive group of anti-Israel Church members who have consistently shown their animus towards the state of Israel and the Jewish people by unfairly attacking her and her alone among all nations in the world.

I conclude by saying in my role as a national co-chair of the Rabbinic Cabinet of J Street that includes 800 rabbis and cantors from all America’s religious streams that I am grateful to Rachel for walking into this den of lions and standing up for the dignity of the Jewish people and best interests of the state of Israel. She deserves the thanks of the American Jewish community and Israel for doing so.

 

 

My Cousin – Israel’s New President

10 Tuesday Jun 2014

Posted by in Israel and Palestine, Israel/Zionism, Jewish History, Jewish Identity, Tributes

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

I do not know my 3rd cousin, Ruby Rivlin, very well. We corresponded 14 years ago when the “Who is a Jew” issue came before the Knesset. He was an advocate for a change in the law that, had it passed, would have defined for purposes of aliyah under the Law of Return that a Jew is someone born of a Jewish mother or who converts “k’fi ha-halacha” (according to traditional Jewish law as interpreted by Israel’s Chief Rabbinate) which would exclude many conversions conducted by many American Orthodox rabbis, and all Conservative, Reform, Reconstructionist, and Renewal Rabbis.

Ruby’s response to me was warm and familial, but direct. As an elected member of the Knesset he was obligated to preserve the integrity of the Jewish people. He believed that this law would accomplish that goal.

The bill did not pass due to the international outrage expressed by Diaspora Jewish leadership.

I knew Ruby’s beloved mother, Rae Rivlin, better than I knew Ruby. I spent a number of Shabbatot in her Rehavia Jerusalem home when I was a first-year rabbinic student at the Hebrew Union College–Jewish Institute of Religion in Jerusalem in 1973 to 1974. She was an extraordinary woman, deemed the grand hostess of Jerusalem in “O Jerusalem.” Family and guests were there every Shabbat for dinner, and I was included. Ruby was a regular. I learned that between 5 PM and 6 PM daily never to visit or call because Rae was watching Peyton Place, a huge American TV soap opera.

I never met Ruby’s father, the late and beloved Professor of Islamic Literature at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Dr. Yosef Rivlin, who died in 1968 just after the Six- Days War. Yosef translated the Koran and the Arabic classic A Thousand and One Nights into Hebrew. The latter is a series of volumes of which I am a proud owner of a signed first edition printing.

Ruby’s family came to Israel in the early 19th century. His father’s namesake – also Yosef Rivlin (a street in downtown Jerusalem near Hillel Street is named for him) was the first Jew to move out of the Old City of Jerusalem and establish the neighborhood of Mea Shearim, now a hareidi stronghold, only steps from the Old City walls. The elder Yosef was a brave man, as Mark Twain described the land in those years being plagued by bandits and marauders. He moved out of the Old City because there was a dearth of habitable apartment space available for increasing numbers of Jews making aliyah before the modern Zionist movement really took hold.

At the time that I knew Ruby, he was a young politician close to the leader of Herut, Menachem Begin, before Likud came to power in 1977. Ruby was (and still is) broad shouldered, bullish, but kind. Indeed, people love him personally. He is part of Likud’s old guard, a hard-liner when it comes to the unity of Jerusalem and the two-state solution. He was among those who supported Gush Emunim after the 1967 War that came to be known as Yisrael Shleima (i.e. the Greater Israel movement).

Ruby does not believe in a two-state solution to the Israel-Palestinian conflict. He also believes that Reform Judaism is tantamount to idolatry. I expect that he will modify his public denunciation of the American and Israeli Reform movements now that he is President of the State, but I doubt that he will modify his beliefs that there can be a Palestinian state alongside Israel and west of the Jordan River and in Gaza.

When Ari Shavit spoke in Los Angeles last week, in a small conversation with a few of my colleagues and me, he worried (and he repeated this in a subsequent Haaretz column) that a President Rivlin will go far beyond the traditional non-political role that Presidents of the State traditionally have taken, and that specifically he will be an adversary to an eventual two-state solution to the conflict.

That being said, within the context of Israel, Ruby believes in equal civil rights for Israeli Arabs. For that reason, so many in the Arab-Israeli community also love him personally.

Ruby has a big heart and he has served the state of Israel with love, integrity and honesty his entire life.

Yet, his views on both the 2-state solution and religious pluralism run counter to the vast majority of Israelis and Diaspora Jewry. As President, he must expand his thinking and represent all the Jewish people in the state, not the segmented extremist fringe, and by extension be inclusive of the Jewish people around the world who regard with love and loyalty the state of Israel as the homeland of all the Jewish people.

Though politically, I hold very different views from Ruby, I wish him mazal tov and prayers for long-life and distinguished service to the State of Israel and the Jewish people.

The Unification of Fatah with Hamas Shows Hamas as the Big Loser

06 Friday Jun 2014

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , ,

The Israeli journalist Bernard Avishai explains what the “unification” deal between Fatah and Hamas means in the current political reality of Palestinian and Middle East politics, why the deal itself is a reflection of the weakness and unpopularity of Hamas among Palestinians (Hamas has a 25% approval rating in the West Bank and Gaza), why this deal is not only a victory for Mahmoud Abbas over Hamas, but why it offers the Palestinians and Israelis an opportunity to move forward in negotiations for a two states for two peoples resolution of the conflict.

Of course, this presumes that both sides are really interested in a two-state solution and willing to make the hard choices and sacrifices necessary to get a deal.

Despite PM Netanyahu’s speech at Bar Ilan University in 2009 calling for two-states, 40 members of his ruling government coalition are adamantly opposed to that very principle though the majority of Israeli citizens are in favor as is the majority of the American Jewish community.

Israel’s strong negative reaction to the PA unification agreement contrasts sharply not only with the United States and the Quartet, but with India, China, and Russia thereby isolating Israel internationally even further than it already was.

It may be that we will have to wait until the next Israeli election in two years when a new Israeli government coalition is formed and led by someone other than PM Netanyahu and his current extremist coalition partners. Such an Israeli government that is supportive of a two-state solution will then be in a position to work in conjunction with a unified Palestinian Authority in negotiating an end-of-conflict agreement.

It remains to be seen, as well, that given unification and assuming that negotiations would begin again in two years, whether the Palestinians are capable of accepting less than their current maximum demands which include an agreement on a limited number of refugees returning to Israel, and whether Israel would not only remove settlements but accept a division of Jerusalem using some formula that assures security and that the holy city can be both the capital of Israel and the Palestinian state.

In the meantime while we wait, I would hope that Israel stops building any settlements beyond the Green Line, the US Congress continues to provide funding to the Palestinian Authority so that it can survive, business and development opportunities in the Palestinian areas grow, and the security arrangement between Israel and the PA remains strong. It is in everyone’s interests that this happens except, of course, Israel’s right-wing settler movement and Hamas.

Bernard Avishai’s New Yorker article, “Mahmoud Abbas Winning on Points,” is a must-read piece of journalism – http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2014/06/mahmoud-abbas-winning-on-points.html

After reading it, despite the distrust and animus that Israel, the west and so many of us have towards Hamas, its cruelty and its vicious terrorist past, I hope you will come to the same conclusion that I have, that the decision taken by the United States, the Quartet and other countries to support the unified Palestinian Authority (which still professes acceptance of the state of Israel, rejection of violence and support for all past signed treaties) while watching and evaluating what Hamas does, makes rational sense and is worthy of our support.