Before the Tribunal of the American Zionist Movement

COMPLAINT

THE COORDINATING COUNCIL FOR THE JEWISH HOMELAND/ERETZ HAKODESH, Complainant v. Hatikvah, Respondents

TO THE CHAIR AND JUDGES OF THE TRIBUNAL:

The Coordinating Council for the Jewish Homeland (“Eretz Hakodesh” or “EHK”) hereby submits its Complaint Hatikvah slate (“Complaint”) concerning their abandonment and contravention of the Jerusalem Program. EHK respectfully requests the American Zionist Movement (“AZM”) Tribunal annul the Hatikvah slate of delegates to the 38th World Zionist Congress and bar the certification of mandates to persons listed on those slates, in accordance with the directive of the Zionist General Council.

PREAMBLE

As a new entrant into the elections for the World Zionist Congress, Eretz HaKodesh focused its energies upon positive election efforts, rather than negativity from other campaigns. The filing of utterly baseless and denigrating complaints from multiple liberal slates forced us to carefully examine the election rules and requirements, and what we discovered was an alarming double standard.

Hatikvah openly discards the Jerusalem Program via and beyond its support of partial BDS. This is entirely in opposition to the Constitution of the World Zionist Organization, and especially the explicit ruling of the Zionist General Council that an organization supporting even partial divestment from territories controlled by Israel is in violation of the Jerusalem Program, and must be excluded from the Zionist movoment.

EHK Complaint v. Hatikvah page 1 RULES

I. The WZO Constitution and Jerusalem Platform Provide Clear Regulations and Guidelines.

The World Zionist Organization (WZO) is an institution premised on the fundamental principles of Zionism, as defined in the WZO Constitution. That Constitution (Article 1, Section 1) states that the aim of Zionism is “to create for the Jewish People a home in Eretz Yisrael secured by public law.”

The first manifesto of the Zionist movement was the Basel Program, adopted unanimously at the First Zionist Congress in Basel, Switzerland on Aug. 30, 1897. That manifesto required clear actions, without which the modern State of Israel would not have come into existence. Specifically, it called for the settlement of “Jewish agriculturists, artisans, and tradesmen in Palestine,” organizing a federation of all Jews, strengthening Jewish feeling and consciousness, and pursuing governmental grants necessary to achieve the Zionist purpose.

The Basel manifesto was replaced by the Jerusalem Program in the 1950s. The Jerusalem Program of 1953 stated that “the task of Zionism is the consolidation of the State of Israel, the ingathering of exiles in Eretz Israel, and the fostering of the unity of the Jewish people.” Once again, Zionism was defined as having a task, requiring action. Specifically, it described “the ​ ​ program of work of the World Zionist Organization” as the following:

1. Encouragement of immigration, absorption and integration of immigrants; support of Youth Aliyah; stimulation of agricultural settlement and economic development; acquisition of land as the property of the people. 2. Intensive work for halutziut (pioneering) and hachsharah (training for halutziut). ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ 3. Concerted effort to harness funds in order to carry out the tasks of Zionism. 4. Encouragement of private capital investment. 5. Fostering of Jewish consciousness by propagating the Zionist idea and strengthening the Zionist Movement; imparting the values of Judaism; Hebrew education and spreading the Hebrew language. 6. Mobilization of world public opinion for Israel and Zionism. 7. Participation in efforts to organize and intensify Jewish life on democratic foundations, maintenance and defense of Jewish rights.

In its current version, the Jerusalem Program is incorporated into the WZO Constitution as Article 2, Section 2. It “views a Jewish, Zionist, democratic and secure State of Israel to be the expression of the common responsibility of the Jewish people for its continuity and future.” As with the Basel Program and earlier versions of the Jerusalem Program, the current Jerusalem

EHK Complaint v. Hatikvah page 2 Program offers a clear plan of actions to be encouraged and implemented by those who accept and support it.

Per Article 5, Section 1, individual membership in the World Zionist Organization is limited to those over the age of eighteen who accept the Jerusalem Program and pay membership dues. A national Zionist Federation must likewise accept the Zionist Program (Article 5, Section 2a) and admit members who accept the Constitution and the program of the WZO (Article 7(a)).

The Rules for the 2020 United States Election to the 38th World Zionist Congress require that both an individual voter accept the Jerusalem Program (Article I, Section 2(b)), and that an Election Slate “express the group’s full acceptance of and compliance with the WZO Constitution, the Jerusalem Program and the AZM Constitution.”

II. According to the Determination of the Zionist General Council, “Any organization or person supporting BDS must be excluded from the Zionist movement.”

Resolution 1.2 of the Zionist General Council XXXVII/5, approved in November 2019 (attached hereto as Ex. I) (“ZGC Anti-BDS Resolution”), states that direct or indirect support for either ​ “‘full’ or ‘partial’ BDS is inconsistent with and shall be deemed a violation of the Jerusalem Program… any organization or person supporting BDS must be excluded from the Zionist movement” (emphasis added). ​

The resolution expressly includes and restates “territories controlled by Israel.” It is the ZGC’s position that one who supports any form of boycott directed against Jewish residents of Israel-held territories in Judea, Samaria, the Golan Heights or elsewhere is in violation of, rather than a supporter of, the Jerusalem Program.

The resolution highlights the fact that “anti-Jewish boycotts and imposts (the equivalent of ​ sanctions)” were described by Theodor Herzl as “types of persecutions against Jews that made a Jewish State necessary” — decades prior to the advent of the Nazi boycott of ​ 1932. Thus support for BDS is tied to an ancient and hateful Anti-Semitic pattern deplored by Herzl himself. The resolution also says that the Israel Supreme Court called BDS “political terrorism” — and that “BDS directed at territories controlled by Israel is unlawful.” ​ ​

The text of the ZGC Anti-BDS Resolution specifically does not limit its application to new slates or individuals joining an election, national Federation or the World Zionist Organization. Rather, ​ ​ it demands that an organization or person be excluded, removed, if at any time that organization ​ ​ or individual expresses support for BDS. Neither is there grounds to “grandfather in” a slate that ran prior to the 2019 passage of this Resolution. Any slate that now supports even partial BDS, even indirectly, is in violation of the Jerusalem Program and must be excluded from further participation in the Zionist movement.

EHK Complaint v. Hatikvah page 3 VIOLATIONS

III. The Hatikvah slate openly espouses Divestment by the WZO itself from territories held by Israel.

During a televised election forum on February 25, 2020, Hatikvah representative and delegate Nomi Colton-Max called for the WZO to divest itself from Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria over the 1948 Armistice Green Line.1 Divestment from territories controlled by ​ Israel is specifically identified by the ZGC Anti-BDS Resolution as a violation of the Jerusalem Program, requiring that the organization or person be excluded from the Zionist Movement.

Kenneth Bob, the President of Ameinu, Treasurer of the Board of Directors of J Street and the Chair of the Hatikvah Slate, produced a letter describing the importance of voting in the elections for the World Zionist Congress and what he described as its “archaic, out of touch institutions.”

This quotation appears on a web page attributed to “Ameinu Office” on thirdnarrative.org, a self-described “sister site” to Ameinu.net. The title of that web page is “You Can Vote Now to ​ Curtail Funding Settlements!” (attached hereto as Ex. U). Hatikvah does not merely “oppose the ​ current policy of permanent occupation and annexation” as it says in its platform. Rather, ​ ​ divestment from territories controlled by Israel was a core message of the Hatikvah campaign to prospective voters. ​

IV. The Hatikvah Slate explicitly rejects the Jerusalem Program, and supports Partial BDS while claiming that Partial BDS is Not BDS.

Kenneth Bob writes: “you need to ‘affirm the Jerusalem Program’ as the platform of the World Zionist Organization (WZO). While the language is not how Ameinu necessarily frames Zionism in 2020, clicking on it is simply acknowledging that it is the platform of the WZO, and it is necessary to do so in order to vote” (see Ex. U). This is a clear rejection of the Jerusalem Program, and an instruction to voters that they need not personally accept it “in order to vote.”

During the election forum mentioned above,2 Hatikvah’s Nomi Colton-Max first stated that “the slate does not support BDS.” But when pressed by moderator Rabbi Mark Golub, she admitted that there are members of the HaTikvah coalition who support boycotts against Jewish businesses in Judea and Samaria beyond the 1948 Armistice Line, but declaimed that “I do not

1 Debate hosted by Jewish Broadcasting Service. https://jbstv.org/wzc-election-forum-1/ ​ 2 See footnote 1

EHK Complaint v. Hatikvah page 4 believe that a settlement product boycott alone” is support of BDS. This position cannot be ​ reconciled with the ZGC Anti-BDS Resolution.

Delegates and member organizations of the Hatikvah slate have demonstrated their support for Partial BDS in practice. In 2016, Hatikvah delegate Peter Beinart helped spearhead a letter ​ calling for “a targeted boycott of all goods and services from all Israeli settlements in the Occupied Territories, and any investments that promote the Occupation” in The New York Review of Books (attached as Ex. K). Young delegate Rikki Baker Keusch, an intern at Ameinu, likewise states clearly: “I support a settlement boycott” (see “The entry law bars too many ​ Zionists,” attached as Ex. L). Delegate Daniel Sokatch is the CEO of the New Israel Fund — ​ according to NGO Monitor, the NIF supports “organizations that lawfully discourage the ​ ​ purchase of goods or use of services from settlements” (profile attached as Ex. M), and the NIF opposes the anti-BDS laws enacted in “numerous U.S. states” specifically cited favorably in ​ ​ Resolution 1.2 (sample attached as Ex. N).

In 2018, when AirBNB announced that it would delist only Jewish properties, but not Arab ones, in Judea and Samaria, Strategic Affairs Minister Gilad Erdan, whose portfolio includes Israel’s Anti-BDS activities, responded by encouraging Israelis to cease using the AirBNB platform. Five organizations published an open letter (attached as Ex. O) to Minister Erdan claiming that AirBNB’s boycott of individual Jewish residents was “refusing support for the occupation” and should not be “characterized” as BDS. They called AirBNB’s effort “quintissentially pro-Israel,” and Erdan’s condemnations “baseless rhetoric.” The letter also called upon Erdan to stop requesting U.S. state governors to invoke anti-BDS laws against AirBNB — referring to the state laws which the ZGC Anti-BDS Resolution highlighted as productive anti-BDS measures.

All five organizations listed on the letter to Minister Erdan,3 which directly contravened Israel’s Anti-BDS efforts, are component members of the Hatikvah coalition, and four of the five individual signatories are Hatikvah candidates. Three of them, Jeremy Ben-Ami, Daniel Sokatch, and Jill Jacobs, are in leading slots on the Hatikvah slate, and therefore are set to be seated at the Congress if the ZGC Anti-BDS Resolution’s directive is disregarded.

None of these delegates, or the slate, made any effort to bring their positions in consonance with the ZGC Anti-BDS Resolution following its passage. On the contrary, the statements of Mr. Bob and Ms. Colton-Max clearly demonstrate that Hatikvah stands by its previous positions, despite adoption of a ZGC Resolution demanding the exclusion of those who hold those stances from the Zionist movement. There is no question that this Resolution mandates that all ​ ​ Hatikvah delegates, and most particularly the aforementioned delegates and affiliate organizations represented on that letter, must be barred from the World Zionist Congress and the Zionist movement generally.

3 J Street, T’ruah: The Rabbinic Call for Human Rights, Americans for Peace Now, Partners for Progressive Israel and New Israel Fund.

EHK Complaint v. Hatikvah page 5 V. The Hatikvah slate regards the Jerusalem Program as a “vague set of general principles” to be distorted or discarded according to “their views of Zionism,” rather than those established by the WZO and ZGC.

In their joint filing before the Tribunal of February 10, 2020, regarding “Complaint Regarding Vicious Campaigning of ZOA Slate Members and Friends of ZOA” (attached as Ex. R), the Hatikvah and ARZA slates asserted as follows (unedited):

The Jerusalem Program constitutes a vague set of general principals, that has been and continues to be open to interpretation by all members of the Zionist Community. It does not constitute rigid principals interpreted only by the ZOA. Accordingly, both ARZA and Hatikvah, like the ZOA, have the right to interpret the meaning of the various planks in the platform in a way that comports with their views of Zionism. Such conduct does not constitute the violation of the Election Rules in anyway.

This statement is patently untrue, and entirely in opposition to the Jerusalem Program. The claim that the Jerusalem Program is “vague” or “open to interpretation” indicates an unvarnished effort to explain away lack of support for the Jerusalem Program and its tenets.

VI. ARZA and Hatikvah caucused and plan to caucus and vote together. The violations of one are directly tied to the other.

The New York Jewish Week described the partnership between ARZA and Hatikvah in the following language (see “As Zionist Elections Get Underway, the Battle for Progressives’ Votes ​ Heats Up,” attached hereto as Ex. Q): ​

The Reform and Hatikvah platforms largely overlap on the issues, with both advocating for a two-state solution and promoting religious equality and women’s rights. “I can’t think of anything where we and ARZA would be in disagreement,” said [Hatikvah Election Campaign Director Hadar] Susskind. As Rabbi Weinberg, president of ARZA, pointed out, the Reform and Hatikvah slates sat together in the previous congress. The two slates are likely to sit together again this year.

The Tribunal has already received our Complaint concerning the support for divestment by the WZO and other organizations from territories controlled by Israel and the open reinterpretation of the Jerusalem Program by ARZA. The demonstrated violations of the Jerusalem Program by ARZA in that Complaint are fully probative to this Complaint and are incorporated by reference.

EHK Complaint v. Hatikvah page 6 CONCLUSION

VII. Conclusion / Remedy

Hatikvah’s rejection of the Jerusalem Platform is found in other ways than their support of BDS against territories controlled by Israel, but this clear violation alone is sufficient and binding.

The American Zionist Movement Tribunal is obligated to follow the unambiguous directive of the Zionist General Council, which determined even indirect support for even “partial” BDS to be akin to the “anti-Jewish boycotts and imposts” deplored by Theodor Herzl, and thus inherently opposed to the Zionist Movement — “inconsistent with and... a violation of the Jerusalem Program.”

Hatikvah slate leaders, and their organizations, openly support boycotts of Judea and Samaria. In effect, the Zionist General Council has directed the American Zionist Movement, the recognized Zionist Federation in the United States of America, that the Hatikvah slate “must be excluded from the Zionist movement” and annulled.

EHK Complaint v. Hatikvah page 7