Criticism and Civil Conversation

Learning from the Other, Living with Ambivalence

{ A Symposium {

ow many of us are of two minds when it comes to Israeli Hpolicy? How often do we experience a shift in our own views and language, depending on whom we are talking to? Many readers will surely identify with Deborah Lipstadt, the distinguished historian of the Holocaust and fearless foe of its deniers, who writes in our Symposium:

4 | Winter 2012 Criticism and Civil Conversation /// A Symposium

“If I am at a gathering where critics are from even when one’s assessment of the matsav – the left and they are unwilling to concede any the situation in and its place among the wrongdoing on the ’ side, I end up nations – is less than fully optimistic, it is sounding like I am to the right of Menachem essential to maintain hope and the motivation Begin. Conversely, when I am invited to a home to make things better. which believes ‘Israel is simply the victim here Fitzgerald, as readers of “The Great "The Right will not and has done nothing wrong,’ I end up sounding Gatsby” are well aware, was not exactly an silence me – Peace like a character who is left of Peace Now or its advocate for the Jewish People. Yet his well- Now." International contemporary incarnation.” turned comments on intelligence, hope and Human Rights March, , 2011. Photo by Lipstadt is in excellent company. It was F. determination are wholly in the spirit of our Oren Rozen. Scott Fitzgerald who wrote in 1936: "The test Engaging Israel project. As it is written in Pirke of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold Avot (4:1): “Who is wise? One who learns from two opposed ideas in the mind at the same every man.” time, and still retain the ability to function. The range of views represented in this One should, for example, be able to see that Symposium testifies to the possibility – and things are hopeless and yet be determined to necessity – of civil conversation on the thorniest make them otherwise.” aspects of Israeli and Jewish life. Havruta’s One may extend Fitzgerald’s observations to editors posed questions to our contributors, apply to the collective as well as the individual. who supplied their frank opinions in either A healthy Jewish community, to sustain its oral or written form. The results, we hope, will capacity to function, needs to accommodate lead readers to further discussion – and fertile the radically diverging opinions and emotions engagement with Israel. that Israel inevitably arouses. At the same time,

HAVRUTA | 5 Steven Bayme Judicious Dissent

Steven Bayme serves The Book of Numbers (11:26-29, 12:1-16) and future. Some dissent emanates from those as Director of the juxtaposes two strange incidents. In the first, who are most passionate in their concern for William Petschek two elders, Eldad and Medad, prophesy in the and engagement with Israel. Their dissent gives Contemporary Jewish Israelite camp without authority to do so. This voice only to how deeply they care about the Life Department of act provokes the ire of Joshua, who urges Moses future of Israel and the Jewish people. Dissent of the American Jewish to restrain them. Yet Moses rebukes Joshua, this nature, what the Mishnah deems a “dispute Committee and of the Koppelman Institute saying he wishes all of Israel could share in for the sake of heaven” (Pirke Avot 5:17), signals on American Jewish- the gift of divine prophecy. In the second shared commitment to the collective Jewish Israeli Relations. incident, Miriam and Aaron also speak out endeavor accompanied by disagreement as to He holds a PhD in against Moses and his leadership: "Has the Lord how best to realize common goals. Jewish history from indeed spoken only with Moses? Has He not Unfortunately, however, there is also dissent Columbia University, spoken also with us?" In this case, Miriam is which spills over into delegitimization of Israel and is a Visiting afflicted with leprosy, and compelled to leave as a Jewish state. Whether it is the late Tony Associate Professor of the campsite for seven days. Judt’s call for bi-nationalism, Stephen Walt History at the Jewish Let us first note that both narratives point and John Mearsheimer’s assault on American Theological Seminary. to how deeply dissent is rooted in Judaic Jewish pro-Israel activism, or President Jimmy He is the author heritage and tradition. The prophets, as the Carter’s admonitions about apartheid, this of Understanding German sociologist Max Weber put it, were dissent undermines Israel’s standing and Jewish History: Text and Commentaries, “political pamphleteers” who openly challenged legitimacy, and, by extension, her right to co-author of American state policy. In turn they often suffered the exist. Judt’s one-state solution, by his own Jewry’s Comfort wrath of both public opinion and governmental admission, “would not be easy . . . [and] is Level, and co-editor officialdom. an unpromising mix of realism and utopia.” of Continuity and Democratic societies protect the right to More importantly, given the bitter tensions, Change: A Festschrift dissent in order to ensure minority expression on the ground, between Arabs and Jews, Judt’s in Honor of Yitz and to serve as a check upon governmental binationalism likely would place at risk the lives Greenberg. excesses. To be effective, however, the right of of millions of Israelis while putting an end to dissent must be exercised judiciously, so that the Zionist enterprise. Walt and Mearsheimer the dissent may be heard rather than dismissed charge that American Jewry has hijacked as the rantings of disgruntled voices or the American foreign policy to serve Israel’s naïveté of well-meaning but inexperienced ends even as they concede that democracies idealists. at their finest provide considerable leeway for In this context, acknowledging the need the exercise of collective minority politics. for dissent and the caveat that it be exercised Moreover, they ignore the fact that 97% of wisely, guidelines for dissent within the Jewish pro-Israel support in this country comes not community are necessary. First, considerable from the Jewish community but from gentile distance exists between dissent emanating society, and that a tiny minority such as the from passionate and pro-Zionist voices and Jews can realize its agenda only to the extent dissent from those indifferent to Israel’s fate that its perspective is deemed compelling and

6 | Winter 2012 Criticism and Civil Conversation /// A Symposium

persuasive by the majority society. Carter’s use expected as part of a vibrant democracy. Dissent of the term “apartheid”, even if meant only as in the U.S., by contrast, undermines the core a warning, blurs the sharp lines distinguishing message of American Jews that the Jewish Israel from pre-Mandela South Africa. At a time community advocates continued Washington when Israel’s legitimacy is under international support for Israel. For decades, American Jewry assault, these dissenters do Israel no favors by has labored to minimize the distance between Aaron and Miriam invoking discredited and false images of Israel Washington and and maintain criticizing Moses. and its American Jewish allies. the special relationship between those two Reproduction from The Second, differences abound between governments. In this context, publicly expressed Bible and Its Story Taught by One Thousand Picture dissent expressed within Israel and dissent criticism of Israeli policy may weaken Jewish Lessons, 1908. in the Diaspora. The obvious difference – lost political influence and attenuate the strategic upon such critics as Tony Judt who worry that triangle of the U.S., Israel, and American Jewry, Israel has become "bad for the Jews" – is that which has been so critical to Israel’s security Israeli lives are on the line and Israel faces real and survival. existential threats, unlike American Jewry. The Third, we must distinguish between less obvious and more profound difference is that individual dissent and institutional or communal American Jewish views, publicly expressed in dissent. That individuals will disagree and Washington, impact upon U.S.-Israel relations. express themselves on one or another aspect Dissent within Israel, as noted above, serves as of Israeli policy is both natural and healthy. a check upon governmental policy and is to be Leaders of Jewish institutions, however, are

HAVRUTA | 7 confronted with a somewhat different question costs.” The venues for dissent and the arenas – not how one feels about a particular policy, where dissent can be most useful need to be but what is the wisest thing to do given the identified carefully. Most importantly, all must complexity of relations between Washington consider the implications and consequences of and Jerusalem. When publicly expressed dissent their language and expressions in a world of from American Jews carries with it implications global communications in which Israel has so for the future of Washington’s Middle East few friends. Or, in the words of the rabbinic policy – for example, ads signed by prominent sages, “scholars, be careful with your words.” American Jews calling upon the U.S. to suspend aid for Israel unless Israel halts her settlement How dissent is expressed policy – the risks and the price to be paid by such expressions are enormous. Conversely, however, and the intentions of the when the dissent concerns issues internal to the dissenters may make all Jewish people and has few if any implications for U.S.-Israeli relations, dissent by American the difference in whether Jewish leaders may be quite constructive, as particular dissent will be evidenced, for example, in the “who is a Jew” debate that recurs on a fairly regular basis. The heard. very definition of Jewish peoplehood implies that all Jews have a stake in these issues of The twin narratives of Eldad and Medad identity and religious pluralism, and the more and Miriam and Aaron may suggest some seriously we take the concept of peoplehood guidelines. Why is Miriam punished while the more compelled we are to intervene in the Eldad and Medad are praised? The text of the debate about Israel’s future as a Jewish state. Torah offers a revealing clue. Eldad and Medad Put another way, dissent itself can be “remained in the camp” (11:26). Their dissent quite healthy, especially in a time when we are was expressed from within the body politic of encouraging greater engagement with Israel among the Jewish people. Miriam's dissent, expressed younger American Jews for whom memories of against Moses personally, flew in the face of the ‘67 and ‘73 have faded. Among that cohort we Jewish body politic and its legitimate leader. are witnessing a decline in both the quantity and Moses defends Eldad and Medad and indicates quality of Israel-oriented discussions. Dissenting that not only did they do nothing wrong but he voices should be encouraged internally, both as wishes all of Israel were “prophets” like them. an expression of peoplehood and as a vehicle In the case of Miriam, however, Moses prays to counter distancing from and indifference only for her physical recovery. toward Israel in favor of more personalist modes Put another way, the two narratives suggest of Jewish identity. that there are different models of dissent. How dissent is expressed and the intentions The arenas where dissent of the dissenters may make all the difference in whether particular dissent will be heard. can be most useful need to Revealingly, however, God enjoins that Miriam’s be identified carefully. exile be temporary, that after seven days, “let her be readmitted” (12:15). After all, she is a That said, dissent must be exercised with certified prophetess. Perhaps, in the end, the wisdom. Those who dissent should expect in text is suggesting that dissenters who care turn vigorous counter-arguments rather than about the Jewish people are always welcome, universal acclaim or polite assent under the even if we remain in disagreement with the rubric of “keep young people involved at all perspectives they articulate.

8 | Winter 2012 Criticism and Civil Conversation /// A Symposium

J.J. Goldberg Criticize Away

In late 1993, shortly after Yitzhak Rabin and But there is a cost: for the layperson – public J.J. Goldberg, Yasser Arafat shook hands on the White House vilification, social rebuff; for the rabbi or editor-at-large of lawn, Rabin’s predecessor Yitzhak Shamir communal professional – perhaps even loss the Jewish Daily appeared in New York with a surprising of livelihood. Forward, has covered message that seemed to surprise no one in How, in a largely liberal community, can an the politics and his audience. Addressing a packed gathering individual suffer ostracism for expressing liberal culture of American of the Conference of Presidents of Major views? Why would the broader community at Jewry for a quarter American Jewish Organizations, Shamir said large take sides against the individual who century in a variety of American and (I’m paraphrasing only slightly): I have often broke ranks? Essentially, because most Jews Israeli publications. urged you to refrain from criticizing Israel’s pay only cursory attention to the community’s He has served as democratically elected government, because affairs, and so the most strident noise leaves editor-in- chief of Israelis alone bear the consequences of its the strongest impression. Wayward liberals the Forward and U.S. decisions. Now I’ve changed my mind. This are attacked on the Internet and in the Jewish bureau chief of the elected government is making bad decisions. weekly press as enemies of Israel and abettors Jerusalem Report, Please, criticize away. of anti-Semitism. The average reader goes no and is the author of The moment perfectly encapsulated the further than skimming the headlines, noting Jewish Power: Inside nonsensical dishonesty that characterizes the with passing concern that so-and-so has joined the American Jewish debate over whether and how Diaspora Jews forces with Israel’s enemies, and a reputation Establishment. may criticize Israel. In reality, there is not and is ruined. It happens over and over. never has been a taboo against Jews criticizing Given the price exacted on critics of Israeli Israel. There is a taboo against Jews urging action, those who are uncomfortable with what Israel to adopt more liberal policies toward they read tend simply to back away. The Jewish the Palestinians and the neighboring Arab community loses some of its most sensitive states. There is no taboo against urging more minds. Lately, growing numbers of young Jews hardline policies. are actually returning to the fray as foes of The unstated logic behind this one-sided Israel, advocates of boycotts and Palestinian stricture is readily apparent. Advocating a more solidarity. It’s hard to know whether to lament conciliatory policy can be depicted, fairly or the fact that they are attacking the Jewish not (usually not) as siding with the enemy. By state or rejoice that they care enough to get contrast, no one argues seriously that urging involved. greater inflexibility is meant to weaken Israel The acquiescence of the mainstream and strengthen its foes, even though that may community is particularly shocking when well be the practical result. one considers the frivolousness of the case In effect, those who urge Diaspora Jews for censorship. The main justification is that not to criticize Israeli policy are simply Israelis elect their own government and are demanding that liberals keep their misgivings entitled to make their own decisions. But this to themselves. Of course, liberals are free to goes without saying. Voicing criticism from ignore the demands and say what they wish. abroad doesn’t change that. Press releases

HAVRUTA | 9 in New York have no enforcement power in Under their so-called Yariv-Shemtov Formula, Jerusalem. Israel would declare itself willing to negotiate A further justification is based on the special with any entity that was willing to settle the Jewish bond to Israel, which supposedly creates dispute via negotiations. Either the PLO a moral obligation to support Israel’s decisions would accept, or it would reveal itself to be without question. This is where illogic crosses the recalcitrant party. The formula was not into silliness. Jews have been urged continually adopted, but neither were the two dismissed to speak out and protest the policies of the from the cabinet. French, Soviet, Swedish, Sudanese and Iranian Not long after, a small group of American governments. The one country about which we Jews – mostly graduate students and young are expected to keep silent is the one to which rabbis –formed an organization called Breira, we have the deepest spiritual connection. It aiming to echo the Yariv-Shemtov formula. makes no sense. Only their phrasing was different: Israel The most pernicious argument is the claim should declare itself willing to negotiate with that Jews should not tell Israelis what to do the PLO on the basis of mutual recognition, because Israelis alone bear the consequences meaning on condition that the PLO recognize of their government’s decisions. In fact, the Israel. The response: a coordinated campaign ultimate price has also been exacted from by community leaders and Israeli diplomats Diaspora Jews – at the El Al desk at Los around the country, directed by Rabin’s Angeles International Airport, on the 86th floor Washington ambassador, Simcha Dinitz, to observation deck of the Empire State Building, break the organization. Federations ejected in the offices of the Seattle Jewish federation, Breira members from their boards. Rabbis on the Brooklyn Bridge, in synagogues in Turkey identified with Breira were fired. Within two and Morocco and, of course, in the AMIA Jewish years the organization disbanded, brought to community building in Buenos Aires. Nor its knees by an Israeli government whose own should this surprise us. Jewish communities members shared its views. have declared for decades that we and Israel What could Israel have gained from such are one, that we are Israel’s second line of perverse behavior? A lot. During the period defense. We can take deep pride in the role that Breira was active, Israel was involved in we have played. But we should not be shocked indirect negotiations with and Syria, that an enemy unscrupulous enough to attack via Henry Kissinger. The façade of American toddlers in a Jerusalem pizzeria or commuters Jewish unanimity put pressure on Congress, on a Haifa bus would strike as well against a and through Congress, on the administration synagogue in the Bronx. and Kissinger, giving Israel an extra edge in the talks. Through the 1980s, disciplined American The one country about Jewish pressure helped keep American support which we are expected to for Israel unshakeable. That, in turn, helped convince the Arab world that Israel could not keep silent is the one to be defeated. This led directly to the PLO vote which we have the deepest in Algiers in 1988 to accept, belatedly, the 1947 United Nations partition of Palestine spiritual connection. into Jewish and Arab states. The next step was the negotiation in Oslo in 1993 of what one In the mid-1970s, Yitzhak Rabin led a former deputy IDF chief of staff told me was the government that included two ministers, Palestinians’ “surrender.” As unpleasant as it Aharon Yariv and Victor Shemtov, who believed may sound to liberal Jewish ears, the censoring Israel should declare itself willing to negotiate of Jewish dissent helped bring about Palestinian with the Palestine Liberation Organization. and broader Arab recognition of Israel.

10 | Winter 2012 Criticism and Civil Conversation /// A Symposium

But like most effective weapons, Jewish self- Jews should never tell Israel what to do (unless censorship didn’t get mothballed after the job they’re telling it to be more hardline). The right was done. Instead, it was put to new uses. continued to make that argument – though, Oslo didn’t end the Israeli-Palestinian beginning with Shamir’s address, the one- conflict, but rather took it into new territory. sidedness of the stricture became more and One result was to sharpen a debate within Israel more blatant. over the future of the territories. In theory, The stifling of dissent was a deal with the once Israel had formally begun negotiating devil from the outset. It polluted Jewish public with the PLO, the taboo on liberal expression discourse and embittered some of the Jewish should have disappeared. But the taboo had community’s best and brightest thinkers. Once it never been justified for what it was, a device to served a Machiavellian purpose. Today it is merely Sheikh Jarrah, Jerusalem, bring about Arab compliance. It had been sold a pollutant that divides whole communities and 2010. Photo by Eman. and enforced as an intrinsic value: Diaspora weakens Diaspora-Israel ties.

HAVRUTA | 11 Sharon Cohen Anisfeld Embracing Paradox

Sharon Cohen I was raised from a young age to trust the As an educator – as well as a lover of poetry Anisfeld has messy over the messianic. This applied to – I find this tragic. Doubts and questions are been Dean of the both the private and public dimensions of a tremendous potential source of individual Rabbinical School life, to the personal as well as the political. and collective creativity and transformation. of Hebrew College People who were too polished were not to If, in fact, more American Jews are asking since 2006. She graduated from the be trusted; neither were utopian ideologies. profound questions about their relationship to Reconstructionist And so, what captured my imagination about the State of Israel – as I believe they are – then Rabbinical College Israel when I was a teenager – and has claimed our educational task is not to silence those in 1990, and my heart ever since – was not the promise questions, but to listen carefully to them, to subsequently spent of messianic fulfillment, but the drama of engage them, to see what new possibilities might 15 years working in human aspiration. It was not the perfection emerge from them. Criticizing our students for pluralistic settings as of heavenly Jerusalem that attracted me, their questions, red-lining their doubts, or a Hillel rabbi at Tufts, but the vitality of earthly Jerusalem, a dismissing their ethical and spiritual concerns Yale and Harvard. A place enshrined in the luminous poetry of will not yield the kind of growth that we seek fellow in the Shalom Yehuda Amichai. For that great poet, Israel to nurture both in them and in ourselves. Hartman Institute's Engaging Israel represents redemption only in a modest What might it take for us to create the project, Rabbi Cohen sense: a "whisper will be heard in the place conditions for a more fruitful conversation Anisfeld is co-editor where the ruined house once stood." Softly about contemporary Jewish life? There are two of two volumes of and honestly, we speak to each other about broad issues of concern to North American Jews women's writings on our “doubts and loves.” that I believe require significantly more nuanced Passover, The Women's Unfortunately, political discourse differs thought and attention, if we are to move beyond Seder Sourcebook and from literary or poetic discourse in that it the polarizing polemics that characterize much The Women's Passover generally favors certainty over doubt, self- of our communal conversation about Jewish Companion. righteousness over self-reflection. And so, peoplehood and Israeli politics. as conversations about Israel in the North Many young – and not so young – North American Jewish community have become American Jews are wrestling anew with increasingly strident and politicized, they the tension between the particular and the have also become less hospitable to those universal in Jewish life. This is not only a who would wrestle honestly with the nature response to the ongoing conflict in Israel and and meaning of their relationship to the the Middle East, though to be sure, that plays Jewish state. Doubts are too quickly recast as a part. It is also a response to living in North expressions of disloyalty; probing questions America, where thank God, Jews do not live are too easily dismissed as unwelcome with a daily sense of being part of a despised provocations. In all too many congregations and persecuted people. A great many North and communities, discussions about Israel American Jews not only live comfortably and are simply avoided, because they are seen as creatively in neighborhoods, communities so potentially threatening and divisive. and workplaces with non-Jews – they also

12 | Winter 2012 Criticism and Civil Conversation /// A Symposium

live in families and homes with non-Jews. In collective consciousness. What place should the addition, North American Jews are well aware memory of Jewish suffering have in our lives? that the most urgent ethical issues of our time Has Holocaust consciousness played too central – including, perhaps most significantly, the a role in Jewish life in both Israel and North environmental crisis – threaten the entire America – has it, in fact, been manipulated for planet and remind us of how deeply our fate both educational and political purposes? Have Independence Day 2010, as a people is intertwined with the fate of all we become dangerously addicted to the image Jerusalem. Photo by humanity. of ourselves as victims? How can we seriously Tomer Appelbaum. engage the history of anti-Semitism – as well as It is no longer at all clear the persistent reality of anti-Semitism in many parts of the world – while also being honest for many North American and responsible about our power and privilege Jews what role the sense in Israel and North America today? To respond to sensitive questions by of shared victimhood bludgeoning young North American Jews should play in our with rhetoric about family loyalty is both educationally unproductive and morally collective consciousness. repugnant. Instead, we have to invite them into the ancient Jewish dialectic between the Accordingly, it is no longer at all clear for two poles of universalism and particularism – a many North American Jews what role the dialectic, of course, that goes all the way back sense of shared victimhood should play in our to our origins as a people. The moment that

HAVRUTA | 13 Abraham enters into a covenantal relationship within the chorus of communal commitment with God, he is reminded to turn his gaze and concern. outward, to widen his circle of concern: These dialectics – between the particular "Through you, all the families of the earth and the universal, between the individual and shall be blessed" (Genesis 12:3). The particular the collective – have been with us throughout relationship between Abraham and God is Jewish history. But we must encounter them precious – and it must transcend itself in order in each generation through the prism of our to fulfill its true purpose. The moment the own experiences and aspirations. If we fail to people enter into a covenantal relationship do so, we will drain Judaism and Jewish life with God at Sinai, they are commanded to of its vitality and depth, and undermine its translate their experience of shared suffering capacity to speak to the complexities of our into empathy for the “other.” "You shall not condition as Jews and as human beings at the wrong a stranger . . . for you were strangers in beginning of the 21st century. the land of Egypt" (Exodus 22:20). The collective If we seek to reimagine peoplehood as an memory of persecution and oppression is indeed essential element of North American Jewish part of what defines us as a people. And through identity in our generation, we will need to step the covenantal relationship, that particular away from the polemics that dominate the memory is transformed into a universal moral current discourse and cultivate our capacity imperative. We need to restore each side of to embrace paradox. If we seek to foster a this dialectic, and cultivate our capacity to meaningful relationship between North embrace both the particular and the universal American and Israeli Jews, we will need to mine in Jewish life. our dialectical tradition for its rich wisdom about what it means to be part of a covenantal We will need to mine our community. How do we participate in the precious and particular drama of the Jewish dialectical tradition for its people – and at the same time widen our circle rich wisdom about what of compassion and concern to include all those with whom we inhabit this fragile and war-torn it means to be part of a planet? How do we invite individuals into a life covenantal community. of communal loyalty and commitment – and at the same time insist that the collective we create together is one that honors diversity and At the same time, we should introduce the creative potential of the personal voice? people to the complex and creative relationship between the individual and the collective in Jewish life. Abraham begins his journey as an Abraham is both individual seeker. It is from him that we learn iconoclast and creator the importance of the personal religious quest. But Abraham, ultimately, does not travel alone. of community, one who He creates a community of seekers. Abraham is "stitches worlds together." both iconoclast and creator of community; he is known in the midrash as one who smashes idols and one who “stitches worlds together.” These are the questions with which we must We are inheritors of a dialectical tradition wrestle, strenuously and lovingly, if we hope that teaches us to live a life of questions to renew our covenantal relationship to one within the context of a life of commitment another as a global Jewish community in ways – to preserve and protect the individual voice that will continue to obligate and inspire.

14 | Winter 2012 Criticism and Civil Conversation /// A Symposium

Chaim Gans Criticism and Practical Politics

The question regarding the boundaries of I don't believe that today there are any better Chaim Gans criticism is ultimately a practical one. How means for changing the current situation. is Professor of can we assess the acceptability of actions that Nevertheless, I do feel uneasy about calls from Jurisprudence various critics of Israeli policy employ to change the Israeli left to boycott Israel culturally or in the Faculty of what they disapprove of? One obvious criterion economically, because I resent such acts on Law at Tel Aviv is whether or not such actions are legal. But emotional grounds, and because I seriously University, and is breaking the law permitted when the law doubt that they are effective. a fellow at the is perceived to be in the wrong? I believe it is Beginning in 1977, when the rightist Shalom Hartman Institute. His impossible to offer a general answer about "the first took power, the nationalist right books include limits of criticism" – the question can only be wing has been consistent in presenting a Philosophical answered on a case-to-case basis. simplistic, and therefore easily digested, Anarchism Within this framework, the following version of Zionism, which large portions of and Political picture emerges: the Israeli right is successful the Israeli public have been accepting as its Disobedience (1992), pragmatically, though many of its members only authentic interpretation. Unfortunately, A Just Zionism: On condone (either in principle or merely in history has taught us that once radical ideology the Morality of the practice) reckless disregard for the law. The becomes official policy, only catastrophes drive Jewish State (2008), Israeli left suffers from pragmatic weakness, the public to recognize that it has endorsed and Three Zionisms from lack of resoluteness, but maintains an oversimplified version of reality, whose and Post-Zionism: A an obligation to abide by the principles of consequences are horrendous. Political Theory for democracy. These two political camps surely Immediately after the Six-Day War of 1967, the Jewish People (2012), which was share a commitment to the greater good of the right began struggling against the Israeli awarded Israel's Israel, but they hold opposite views of what that government's official policy of prohibiting prestigious Bahat means. How each camp seeks to attain its vision Jewish settlement in the Palestinian territories Prize. depends on the means it chooses to employ, of the and the . After and on the degree of urgency and necessity a modest beginning with a handful of with which the strategy is pursued. communities, whose construction the state Since I believe that Israel has deviated approved retroactively (in Kiryat Arba, Kfar considerably from the road to a better future, Etzion and ), the Gush Emunim and as the odds of getting back on the right movement (established in 1974) openly track via conventional methods of persuasion promoted Jewish settlement of the territories are quite meager, I think that means more in defiance of the law. By the late 1970s, radical than rational argumentation must, however, Israeli governments (of both the left alas, come into play. In the 1980s, I already and the right) had established the practice believed that refusing to do military service of reinterpreting and revising the law to the in the territories was a necessary act, and I benefit of Jewish settlement efforts. All too wish my opinion had been more widespread, often, the army and civilian authorities turn a and had greater resonance and impact. Sadly, blind eye to lawless activities by even the most

HAVRUTA | 15 radical and destructive settlers. All in all, the its successor, Israel's Labor party – were more resourcefulness of the right in pursuing its concerned with internal politics than with illegal policies has been successful. caring for the future of the country. Today, Failing to follow the example of its resilient that legacy is manifested in the reluctance political rival, the left has been displaying of prominent leaders on the left to support a less and less determination, and has therefore zero-tolerance policy for the right's actions. Pugnacious lawmakers Tommy Lapid () scored fewer points on the ground. For example, Under 's hospitable and Rehavam Ze'evi greater resolve in backing the movement of administration, the radical right wing has (Moledet) at the , soldiers who refused to serve in the Occupied recently begun spawning new legislation 2000. Photo by Amos Ben Gershom, GPO. Territories in the 1980s would have made aimed to outlaw activities that it finds a significant impact on the growth of the objectionable. It seeks to muzzle critics on the settlement movement, possibly preventing left by intimidating journalists, undermining many of the problems that we are facing human rights organizations, and challenging today. the independence of the Supreme Court. The In my article of 2004 in Israel Law Review, strategy it employs to silence the left uses the "Right and Left: Ideological Disobedience in tools of parliamentary democracy to contradict Israel," I point out that even doves such as Yossi the basic values of democracy. But since those Sarid, former leader of the leftist Meretz party, who seek such legislation do not embrace and the political scientist Shlomo Avineri, did those values, they don't consider this to be not endorse the refusal of soldiers to serve a problem. in the territories. The lethargy of the left, The two camps speak different languages, as I argued there, has everything to do with making dialogue between them impossible. leadership. Israel's founding prime minister, Someone who believes in ruling over another David Ben-Gurion, head of the ruling Mapai nation and in the moral inferiority of the Arabs party and strongman of the political left, cannot, at the same time, uphold democratic effectively suppressed his rivals on the right values. If the anti-democratic values of the when this was required. But after he exited the right prevail, then its policy is consistent, but political stage, the leaders of Mapai – and of it is diametrically opposed to justice.

16 | Winter 2012 Criticism and Civil Conversation /// A Symposium

Larry Derfner A Letter to Liberal Zionists

Dear Diaspora Comrades, audiences that include Israelis. A mainstream Larry Derfner blogs It really is a tragedy – a tragedy for you and Diaspora Jewish audience will listen to muted for +972 Magazine Israel both – that you can’t say what you’d criticism of Israeli leaders, policies or public and contributes to the genuinely like to say about what’s going on opinion, but no way on earth will they sit still Forward and the Los in this country. Even worse, you can’t even for anyone looking at Israel as unblinkingly as, Angeles Jewish Journal. Born in New York, think what you want to think. You can’t allow say, liberal American critics look at America or raised in Los Angeles, yourself to judge Israel by the same standards liberal British critics look at Britain. You can he moved to Israel on which you judge your own or other foreign make light, loving fun of Israel and Israelis, in 1985 and lives in countries, because the judgment would be too but real, rough satire, the kind most Diaspora Modi'in with his family. harsh, and you don’t want to think or speak Jews just eat up when it’s aimed at their own harsh, painful truths about this other, special countries? A Jon Stewart demolition job on country of yours. Israeli leaders for a general Diaspora Jewish How do I know, or why do I think I know, that audience? Unthinkable. But over here, we’ve you’re censoring yourselves, liberal Diaspora got Jon Stewarts by the score. Zionists? Because I am a liberal Zionist and it The tragedy for liberal Zionists in the took me many years after I moved to Israel, Diaspora is that there’s this country that they even after I paid my dues by serving in the care about as much and possibly even more army and sitting through Saddam’s Scuds than the one they’re living in, and there’s this in Tel Aviv, to feel as free about criticizing cause – the cause of a Jewish, democratic state Israel and Israelis as I did about criticizing – that they care about as much or more than America and Americans. No, I have to amend any other public cause in their lives. Yet it’s that statement – I’m still not there; I still feel the one subject on which they have to blunt the need to find good things to say about my their critical faculties, to constrict their very new Jewish country like I never did about my thinking. By both necessity and choice, liberal old American one. So I can imagine what it’s Diaspora Zionists do their least critical, least like for you. independent, i.e., worst thinking on the subject Actually, I don’t have to imagine it – I read of Israel. the op-eds and essays of liberal Diaspora By necessity, because Diaspora Jewish Zionists and their reticence comes through communities couldn’t handle the kind of so clearly. As I’m sure you know, the op-eds free-swinging internal debate on Israel that and essays of the "loyal opposition" in Israel Israel thrives on. Being voluntary communities are much more stinging and in-your-face; that depend on enthusiasm for the cause, the the stronger ones could never be printed in Diaspora in-crowd would either expel the Jon a general-circulation U.S. newspaper. When Stewarts criticizing the cause so savagely, or the I write for American Jewish papers, I tone Jon Stewarts would end up asking themselves, down the ridicule that often comes into my “Is this cause really for me?” and simply walk writing for newspapers and websites read by away, stowing their Zionism in the attic. (How

HAVRUTA | 17 many Diaspora Jews have done this in the last will be allowed by their Jewish communities, to 10 years, the last 25 years?) explore the hard questions about this country They also censor themselves by choice with the same free, open, let-the-chips-fall- because they don’t want to seem to be bolstering where-they-may attitude that they can bring the words of those who aren’t Israel’s critics but to any other subject, such as the morality of the truly her enemies, and because they’re afraid wars fought by the country they live in. And of the community’s insiders and right-wingers because of how meaningful Israel is to these President Barack Obama at AIPAC Policy glaring at them and calling them names. I could liberal Jews, this lack of freedom of thought Conference, 2011. argue that Diaspora liberals can and should get and expression is a tragedy for them. Photo courtesy of over these fears, but it wouldn’t help: Jews living It’s a tragedy for Israel, too, more than AIPAC. abroad who have an emotional attachment to ever before, because, comrades, I know you’ve Israel will never allow themselves, nor will they noticed that this country has been moving in

18 | Winter 2012 Criticism and Civil Conversation /// A Symposium

weakened into a false even-handedness, an approach of “both sides are to blame,” which is no longer the case at all. The present Israeli mood regarding peace is as black and cynical as it’s ever been – yet the Palestinians are belng led, at least in the West Bank, by the most cooperative, conciliatory and above all terror- fighting leadership they’ve ever had and ever will have. We liberal Zionists finally have the Palestinian partner we’ve been waiting for, and this deeply illiberal Israeli government, backed by public opinion, is flicking it away. In such times, it would be encouraging to hear more than one or two voices in the wilderness of Diaspora Jewish opinion joining ours at home in naming who's the obstacle to peace, and who isn't. Don’t get me wrong – I’m not saying it would be decisive, that it would turn the tide of Israeli public opinion or even get Obama to say out loud what he, too, is thinking but is too cautious to say. We have become a minority camp that no longer threatens the majority’s power, while the majority in Israel and America, which is what determines Israel’s course, is not liberal on the subject of Israel and the Palestinians, or Israel and the Muslims. The majority in both countries is very, very conservative, right-wing, on this subject. We liberal Zionists in Israel have the freedom to say what we want, which is very exciting and good for the country – but we’re not winning, we’re losing miserably. And if all the liberal Zionists in the Diaspora raised their voices fearlessly and joined us, we’d still be losing. We are so far from taking power or, a determinedly illiberal direction over the last failing that, from seeing the right-wingers decade, especially in the last nearly three years in power change course on their own, that of the Netanyahu government – and we could even the liberation of liberal Diaspora Zionists use some help from liberal Zionists abroad. The wouldn’t be much help for our cause, the cause situation has become so polarized, and yours of a Jewish, democratic state, which nearly 45 is the voice from outside that’s missing. All we years of occupation has all but killed. hear is the shouts of the Zionist Right telling `So I have to amend my opening statement: us to trample everyone in our path, and those the shushing of liberal Diaspora Zionism is a of the pro-Palestinian Left telling us that our tragedy for liberal Diaspora Zionists, not for country is devil’s spawn. As far as I’m concerned, Israel. For Israel, it’s just another loss along yours and ours is the only voice that offers both the way that isn’t noticed, isn’t felt, and makes justice and security, and it’s being shushed or little difference.

HAVRUTA | 19 Deborah Lipstadt In Praise of Nuance

Deborah E. Lipstadt When the topic at Shabbat dinner turns to an organization called Breira – "alternative" – is Dorot Professor of Israel and its foreign policy, I sometimes feel espousing an alternative way to make peace in the Modern Jewish and as if I am on the Teacup Ride at Disney World. Middle East. In what then sounded like a radical Holocaust Studies at Individuals sit in “teacups” which spin in one proposal, its members proposed that Israel adopt Emory University. Her direction even as the base on which the cup a different policy vis-à-vis the Palestinians. It most recent book is is perched spins in the other. called upon Israel to make territorial concessions The Eichmann Trial. If I am at a gathering where critics are from and to recognize the Palestinian people’s national the left and they are unwilling to concede any aspirations as legitimate. There was intense wrongdoing on the Palestinians’ side, I end up criticism about the contents of their proposal sounding like I am to the right of Menachem and, even more so, about the fact that their Begin. Conversely, when I am invited to a home criticism was made publicly. which believes “Israel is simply the victim here The controversy generated by the creation and has done nothing wrong,” I end up sounding of the organization paled in comparison to the like a character who is left of Peace Now or its hell that broke loose when some Breira members contemporary incarnation. went to meet with Yasser Arafat. Though they Do I argue simply for sport and in order protested that they went as individuals – one still to be a contrarian? Not at all. The absolutism wonders why Arafat would have been interested of either side – right or left – makes dialogue in meeting with this particular group if they impossible. Having worked in the academy for were “just individuals” – their actions were many decades, I reject almost any argument depicted by the mainstream Jewish community which obliterates nuance or, to put it more as a deep-seated betrayal of Israeli and American bluntly, insists that its side is 100% correct. Jewish communal policy. This was, of course, In addressing the issue of criticism of Israel, well before the Oslo Accords, and Arafat was then some historical context would be valuable. There considered to be a man with an unambiguous was a time, not so long ago, when external record of supporting – if not initiating – terrorist criticism of Israel’s policies was absolutely activities. (For many people, that perception of verboten in the Diaspora. The position among Arafat never changed.) virtually all American Jews who took any Over subsequent decades, Israelis, interest in Israel was that as long as we do particularly those from the more left/liberal not make our homes there, we do not have the side of the political spectrum who, after 1977, right to publicly tell Israelis that what they found themselves in the political wasteland are doing is wrong. Theirs is a democratically for the first time in the history of the State of elected government. Our role is to support the Israel, began to push American Jews to speak democratically elected government of Israel. out when they disagreed with the established Then, in the wake of the Yom Kippur War, policy. By the 1990s, disagreeing with Israeli the community was rattled when some American policy became far less of a taboo precisely Jews, all of them affiliated both with the because Israelis were calling upon us to do so. organized community and with Israel, formed Those on the right also made their voices heard

20 | Winter 2012 Criticism and Civil Conversation /// A Symposium

when they felt Israel was making too many concessions. Many objected to the Oslo Accords and to other related proposals. By 2000, disagreeing – even quite publicly – with Israel’s policies was no longer seen as a disloyal or “self-hating” act. And yet, truth be told, while criticism came from both ends term in any case, such critics are hardly self- of the spectrum, criticism that came from the hating. In fact, they are quite enamored with “left” end of the political spectrum was always themselves and with what they perceive as their more controversial. Right-wing critics often bravery in speaking out against Israel and its painted this group as less than loyal Jews, policies. If anything, they are exceptionally despite the fact that many were longtime “self-satisfied” Jews. supporters of Israel, and the policy changes In recent years, with the rise of the BDS Yitzhak Rabin and Yasser Arafat, Madrid 1994. they were suggesting could be found on the (boycott, divestment, sanction) movement and editorial pages of many Israeli newspapers. Photo by Avi Ohayon, the growth in world opposition and hostility GPO. However, the critics from the left often toward Israel’s policies, the vituperative nature did hoist themselves on their own petard by of the criticism of Israel has increased markedly. including in their ranks people who had little This, of course, raises the stakes for others who – if any – previous connection with Israel or, wish to criticize. Do liberal critics of Israel for that matter, with the Jewish community unwittingly serve the interests of Israel's at all. George Soros is a prominent example. In enemies? Who if anyone should be excluded fact, not only did he have no connection with from a "place at the table"? Israel, but he made a point of disclaiming any Liberal critics, those who have cast their interest in things Jewish or Israeli, until it was lot with Israel, often do unintentionally hurt time to critique Israeli policies. its interests. They are often deaf to how their The Anglo-Jewish author Howard Jacobson, criticisms are heard in the public sphere. in his Man Booker award-winning novel The They respond, not without some measure of Finkler Question, depicts a London-based group justification, that if they only speak privately called ASHamed Jews which engages in verbal and behind closed doors, Israeli officials will attacks on Israel and its supporters. Among be even less likely to heed them. While they the members of the group are people whom have every right to make their voices heard, Jacobson describes as having only discovered they would do well to acknowledge that the their Jewish identity when they decided to speak wrong is not only on one side. Let them not out against Israel. On no other matters did they forget the nuance. connect with or take any interest in the Jewish It seems silly to ask whether anyone should people, their heritage, culture, or tradition. be “excluded.” No one has the right to exclude Despite this absence of any connection, they anyone. However, I admit that when the critics are convinced that the fact of their Jewish are like Jacobson’s ASHamed Jews, i.e. people identity gives them a special standing when who rather than put their lot in with the Jewish it comes to criticizing Israel. people or the Jewish state have eschewed Jacobson, who described himself as any connection to it, I pay little heed to their addressing the “anti-Zionist rhetoric which, words, especially when they are preceded by in its inflatedness and fervor – a rhapsodic the phrase, “I am Jewish.” In fact, I tend to hyperbole growing more and more detached rather irrationally dismiss the credibility of from any conceivable reality,” is talking about their arguments even when, in my heart of those whom mainstream Jews often describe as hearts, I know that they are not entirely wrong. “self-hating Jews.” While this is a questionable Ah, yes, the Teacup Ride.

HAVRUTA | 21