|
Jewish
Institute for National Security Affairs
1717
K Street, NW Suite 800
Washington, D.C.
20006
23 January 2001 To the Conference
of Presidents: I have just returned from Israel
and am anxious that my thoughts about the Presidents
Conference's procedures in connection with the recent
rally for a United Jerusalem and Ronald Lauder's
participation in that rally be set down on paper for
all members of the Conference to see. But before
I begin, permit me to say at the outset that I was
and I remain proud and indebted to Ronald Lauder for
his courage and commitment to the Jewish people
which was again demonstrated by his appearance at
the Rally for Jerusalem. I am saddened knowing that
there are Jews who see every issue as political and
whose own political views obscure what ought to be
clear to every Jew everywhere - Jerusalem is what
we are about as a people. It cannot be politicized
except by small minds and small men whose politics
are more important to them than their heritage and
their pride as Jews. Fortunately, the Presidents
Conference has a Chairman who understands that and I
salute him not only for knowing it but for doing the
right thing despite the yapping at his heels of smaller,
less worthy people. My comments about the
Presidents Conference fall into two parts: 1) the manner
in which the Conference deals with dissent; and 2)
the appropriateness of American Jews - including
Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations and including
Chairmen of the Conference of Presidents of Major
American Jewish Organizations - participating in a
rally to reinforce the centrality of Jerusalem to all of
the Jewish people, those in Israel and those
outside. On the first, it has been clear for
some time that the Conference no longer represents
(if it ever did) the "consensus of the Jews." It has
become in essence the "Parliament of the Jews," and
this evolution requires both public acknowledgement
and an appropriate mechanism for dealing with dissent -
dissent being far more common these days than
consensus. Thus far, mechanisms for dealing
with conflicting opinions have included formally
adopting only the lowest common denominator position;
taking no position at all on issues where there is
known dissent; and trying to suppress individual
dissenters. None is tenable in the long term and all
diminish the impact of the Conference both in the Jewish
and the non-Jewish world. In the case of the
Jerusalem rally, all three coping mechanisms were called
into play, resulting in a total abdication of
responsibility on the single issue central to our
identity as Jews by those who claim to be the American
Jewish leadership. Israeli, American, Russian,
French, Orthodox, Conservative, Reform,
secular-humanist, Reconstructionist, religious-Zionist,
secular-Zionist, anti-Zionist, male, female,
left-of-center, right-of-center, center-of-center --
for all of us, Jerusalem has been the focal point of
Jewish identity and Jewish hopes for more than 2,000
years. Nevertheless, the Conference chose a posture
of supine weakness on our core issue for fear of
upsetting those who can't assert even a minimal demand
for respect for Jewish patrimony. It was certain
American Jewish organizations - siding with those
who would divide the eternal capital of the Jewish
people and thus divide our soul - who characterized
the rally as a political one, not those of us
who believe that to defend Jerusalem is a sacred
duty for all Jews rather than a political position.
If Ronald Lauder's participation in the rally was
understood by some to represent the Conference of
Presidents (although he did not), then it is only to
that extent that the Conference is saved from the
shame it brought on itself by failing to strongly
endorse his presence there on its behalf. Ronald should
be commended for acting on the strength of his
individual conscience when the Conference was unable
to find its communal voice. On the second point,
the role of American Jews in support of Israel is
often delicate. One of JINSA's fundamental positions
is that only the Government of Israel can make security
decisions affecting its people because only the Israeli
people face the consequences of those decisions. To
keep or cede the Golan Heights or to keep or cede
the Jordan Valley, for example, are decisions within
the purview of the Israeli government because
Israeli troops will defend what is there or what is
left. But it cannot be said that the Jewish people
elsewhere are unaffected by those decisions or have
no right to voice their concerns. On the
contrary - we will support Israel no matter what
decisions the government ultimately makes, but we
are compelled to speak out when we see a threat.
This is particularly true when Jerusalem is
threatened - because then, not only do individual
Israelis face bodily danger, but all Jews face
spiritual, cultural and historical danger. The sovereign
government of Israel is not necessarily any better
equipped to see those threats to broad Jewish interests
than any other group of Jews. Nor is it necessarily
better equipped to deal with the consequences.
David Steinmann, Chairman of JINSA's Board of
Advisors, wrote recently, "Israel represents Jews
everywhere. Jerusalem belongs to the Jewish people.
The outbreaks of anti-Semitism and Jew hatred taking
place all over the world now are not because
there is fighting between Arabs and Jews in Israel.
It's because the haters see what appears to be a
weakened and demoralized Israel and believe that, as
Israel is willing to endure attacks and killing, so
must be Jews in other places, also. This is not a burden
that many of the Israeli people want or are willing
to shoulder. But it's there anyway and they're stuck
with it." And Israelis and Diaspora Jews are
stuck with each other. It ill behooves the Conference to
"punish" an act of conscience on behalf of the
centrality of Jerusalem to the Jewish people in Israel
or elsewhere. It is an embarrassment to the Conference
that any of its member organizations can be so blinded
by domestic Israeli political considerations as to
be unable to remember what Jerusalem means to the Jewish
people. For the record, JINSA stands with Jews and
non-Jews everywhere who understand that sometimes a
people must rise above politics, or suffer the
consequences of being only political. If ever there
was an issue which surpasses the meanness of
partisanship politics, Jerusalem is that issue.
Sincerely, Thomas Neumann
Executive Director
Related Articles:
|
Printer friendly version
E-Mail this article
Subscribe to the Article Digest