Misjudging Chuck Hagel
What American Jews or Israelis think about Chuck Hagel’s views on Israel shouldn’t be the primary criterion to judge his nomination for secretary of Defense.

Jews worry for a living. Their dark history and, in the case of American Jews, their legitimate concerns about the security of the state of Israel impel them to do so.

But sometimes those concerns are overblown and reflect a kind of collective cosmic oy vey that gets in the way of sound and rational judgment.

Such is the case in the matter of Chuck Hagel’s nomination to be President Obama’s next secretary of Defense.

Some of the comments attributed to Hagel about lobbies, Israel and the like come from an interview he gave me for my last book about American Middle East policy, particularly his use of the term “Jewish lobby.”

Hagel has said many things about Iran sanctions, Hamas, Syria and Hezbollah, which his opponents have seized upon. Some are out of sync with current U.S. policy. These and other issues are matters that will and should be explored during confirmation hearings.

But the notion that the views Hagel has on Israel — admittedly independent given the norms in Congress — should be grounds to attack him as an anti-Semite, let alone an enemy of the Jewish state, who is unfit and unqualified to serve as Defense secretary is wrong and unfair, not to mention harmful to the credibility of those who hold that view. And here’s why.

More…

Netanyahu-Obama Relations at a Low Point?

How happy is Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu with the results of this week’s US presidential election? Let’s put it this way: A guy who embraces Romney in August isn’t likely to bask in Obama’s warmth in November. A guy who shows the UN General Assembly a large piece of cardboard bearing a felt-tipped illustration of a ticking bomb that looks like it’s been pulled straight out of a Road Runner cartoon isn’t one who’s likely get Obama’s devoted attention in the future.

The bomb was of course Netanyahu’s stab in late September at trying to pull the US into yet another war, this one with Iran, and when that stunt failed, he tried another tack: with every breath the right-wing prime minister seemed to castigate his American counterpart for what he made clear through implication were Obama’s pusillanimous demurrals.

Why Israeli leadership should believe—still, after all this time—that American Jews vote all-Israel all the time in American elections is a puzzle. They never do. Exit polls this time around showed that around 70 percent of American Jews at the polls voted for Obama, a number only slightly lower than four years ago. (As the late Milton Himmelfarb of the American Jewish Committee famously put it: “Jews earn like Episcopalians and vote like Puerto Ricans.”)

In other words, Mitt Romney’s declaration in late October that Obama had “pushed allies like Israel under a bus”; his insistence, after accepting the nomination, that Obama had pursued what-me-worry policies that left Iran to its own nuclear devices and Americans “less secure”—all this failed to gain traction among the very voters Romney was playing to.

More…

jpost.com

Rep. Michele Bachmann has incurred the wrath of leading Jewish groups and some Republican leaders, even though she may be one of Israel’s staunchest defenders in Congress and one of its best-known Republicans.

The reaction was spurred by the Minnesota congresswoman’s call for an inquiry into allegations that Huma Abedin, a top aide to US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, had ties to the Muslim Brotherhood.

Some of the toughest condemnations of Bachmann have come from major Jewish groups.

The allegations, and the apparent split among some in the Republican leadership over whether to denounce them, underscore a return in recent years to scapegoating “outsiders,” according to the Jewish leaders who slammed Bachmann for launching what they called a “witch hunt.”

“It’s likes someone who says there’s a Jewish conspiracy to take over the world,” Rabbi David Saperstein, the director of the Reform movement’s Religious Action Center, said in a JTA interview. “And then they say prove it’s not true. What proof can you bring to ideologues who want to believe it’s true?”

Saperstein’s July 17 statement was the first among Jewish leaders to deplore Bachmann’s call — and one of the toughest.

“I am deeply troubled by the allegations made by Rep. Michelle Bachmann and other Members of Congress in letters to the Departments of Justice, Homeland Security, Defense and State asserting that respected government officials and religious organizations are connected to the Muslim Brotherhood,” he wrote. “The letters assert that Huma Abedin, Deputy Chief of Staff to Secretary Clinton, the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), and ISNA President Imam Mohammed Magid are all connected to the Muslim Brotherhood, posing a potential security risk to the United States.

“The Reform Movement, and I personally, have worked with Ms. Abedin, Imam Magid and ISNA for many years,” he continued. “All have worked on behalf of U.S. interests at home and abroad, built relationships across religious lines and affirmed U.S. constitutional values.”

More

blogs.forward.com

If you can’t convince, you can decrease the enthusiasm to vote by making everyone pissed off and depressed.

I opened my New York Times this morning over breakfast to read one of those most virulent anti-Jewish advertisements I’ve ever seen. And it came from other Jews.

Paid for by the Emergency Committee for Israel, the ad goes after two liberal organizations with the verbal equivalent of a firing squad. The Center for American Progress, a Washington-based think tank which generally writes about issues such as tax policy and immigration reform, and Media Matters, an unabashedly liberal group, are labeled anti-Israel extremists and bigots in the ad, which took up an entire page of the front section of the Times.

What’s more, the ad lists foundations that apparently fund CAP and Media Matters, and urges readers to call and complain. Just to be helpful, phone numbers are included. And it uses quotes from two Jewish leaders, Alan Dershowitz and Spencer Ackerman, who were not consulted and disapprove of the ad.

And what are the crimes committed by CAP and Media Matters that deserve this public punishment?

According to the links on ECI’s website, CAP is so dangerous to Israel because of offensive comments made by two of its staffers on their personal Twitter accounts, not on the CAP website or its blog. The comments have been deleted, the authors apologized, but apparently that’s not good enough.

More broadly, writers like Ben Smith, of Buzzfeed and Politico, have argued that CAP and Media Matters “have emerged as vocal critics of their party’s staunchly pro-Israel congressional leadership and have been at odds, at times, with Barack Obama’s White House.” And being at odds with the Obama administration in this case means criticizing Israel far more harshly and repeatedly than the White House ever has.

I wave no banner for CAP or for MJ Rosenberg, the main writer for Media Matters. I understand why some of their comments can be construed as unfair and hyper-critical. But honestly, the brouhaha over these tweets and posts is the kind of thing that gets a few Washington insiders all riled up, and has little to do with the way most American Jews act, think and vote.

For the past several days I’ve been getting a hinky feeling about the Israel-firster-Zionist-controlled-government thing that was dragged to the forefront in early December. I’m referring to the Josh Block kerfuffle that started when Salon’s Justin Elliot wrote an article about Mr. Block (who subsequently lost his gig) entitled Right-wing listserv targets Israel’s critics.

The original article was then followed up with one by Politico’s Ben Smith claiming that the subject of Israel was causing agitation amongst Democrats: Israel rift roils Democratic ranks.

That article was in turn pounced on by the Washington Post’s right-wing blogger, Jennifer Rubin, who wrote no less than three articles about it: Uncovering the anti-Israel enablers, The Israel media war in the Democratic Party, and Simon Wiesenthal Center: Time to clean up the discourse.

Over the course of the next several weeks I followed the back-and-forth between left & right over the accusations that were leveled against the Center for American Progress (CAP), Media Matters, and ThinkProgress. By mid-January things seemed to have quieted down a bit, then I found the following article and video at Salon on Wednesday 1/25:

What the Adelsons will want for their money
The $10 million in pro-Newt money that transformed the GOP primary appears to be all about US policy toward Israel

[…]

Koppel: But there has to be a so-what at the end of it. So if you win, what does Adelson get out of it?

Gingrich: Well, he knows I’m very pro-Israel. And that’s the central value of his life. I mean, he’s very worried that Israel is going to not survive.

Video at Salon…

Yes, the video is from Mondoweiss and I’m well aware of how they lean. That’s not the point. The point is that, to me, it sounded like a subtle dog whistle—bait for anti-Semites on both ends of the political spectrum. I pointed this out in a comment here at LGF and was told not to worry about it too much, so I left it alone (but my “this could get ugly” radar was still pinging loudly nonetheless).

Two days later, on Friday 1/27, Caroline Glick wrote an opinion piece for the Jerusalem Post called The Zionist Imperative which, IMO, slammed American Jews as basically being a bunch of namby-pamby pantywaists with regard to their support for Israel. She also asserted that they must support Israel unconditionally, even at the expense of US interests (added emphasis mine):

[…] To oppose Iran’s nuclear program effectively, American Jews are required to oppose these strongly supported US policies. And at some point, this may require them to announce they support Israel’s right to survive and thrive even if that paramount right conflicts with how the US government perceives US national interests.

That is, it may require them to embrace Zionism unconditionally. […]

More at the Jerusalem Post…

On the same day that the Glick article was published, another article by Michael Isikoff was published at MSNBC: Gingrich funder isn’t trying to ‘buy’ the presidency, aide says. That immediately reminded me of the old loaded question, “Do you still beat your wife?” One of the parts that stood out was this (added emphasis mine):

[…] In a talk to an Israeli group in July, 2010, Adelson said he wished he had served in the Israeli Army rather than the U.S. military—and that he hoped his young son would come back to Israel and ‘be a sniper for the IDF,’ a reference to the Israel Defense Forces. (YouTube video of speech)

‘I am not Israeli. The uniform that I wore in the military, unfortunately, was not an Israeli uniform. It was an American uniform, although my wife was in the IDF and one of my daughters was in the IDF … our two little boys, one of whom will be bar mitzvahed tomorrow, hopefully he’ll come back— his hobby is shooting — and he’ll come back and be a sniper for the IDF,’ Adelson said at the event.

‘All we care about is being good Zionists, being good citizens of Israel, because even though I am not Israeli born, Israel is in my heart,’ he said toward the end of his talk. […]

More at MSNBC…

Bear with me while I point out one more piece. A day after the above, yesterday, Saturday 1/28, Chris Hayes’ “Story of the Week” on his MSNBC program Up had the title Democracy for Billionaires. Again, it was about Adelson (and Gingrich). The part about Israel starts around 3:30, then at about 5:02 Hayes says (added emphasis mine):

The complete and total breakdown of our campaign finance system, combined with the explosion of inequality, means that such a pairing was inevitable and is likely to grow more common in the future.

Think about it for a second. If you were a multi-billionaire—Adelson is worth over 20 billion—how much would you be willing to spend to own the President of the United States?

Full video at Up w/ Chris Hayes…

I didn’t know much about Sheldon Adelson prior to this week, and what I’ve read over the past several days I dislike immensely. I also think the Citizens United decision was a horrible mistake. I’m fully aware that one far-right billionaire doesn’t represent all Jews, nor does a right-winger like Glick saying that American Jews must put Israel’s interests before those of the U.S. mean that every American Jew (or even every conservative American Jew) feels that way or will take her advice.

What is making me extremely uncomfortable is where this appears to be headed since we now have the mainsteam media giving credence to and, well, mainstreaming some very ugly ideas that could lead to a dark place I don’t want to see us go as a nation.

Why should I care if I’m not a Jew? Well, first of all because feeding bigotry and conspiracy theories is just plain wrong, no matter who does it. Perhaps more importantly, it’s dangerous—especially when the target is a large group of people who happen to share a particular ethnicity or religion, and who also happen to be a minority in the country in which they’re being targeted. Obviously, being part of a religious minority myself makes the sense of danger even keener.

I hope I’m wrong on this and things don’t keep escalating they way they appear to be. I hope Gingrich gets trounced in Florida and drops out the race soon. I hope people on the right like Adelson and Glick will stop saying some of the things they’ve been saying (though, obviously, they have every right to say them) because they’re feeding something evil. As a liberal, I also desperately hope those on the left who are taking the bait and mainstreaming it will STOP IT before things spiral out of control.

I didn’t like it one bit when American Muslims were being vilified and accused of being “The Other”, supposedly involved in a nefarious conspiracy to take over America, and I dislike it equally as much when it’s Jews (or any other group) being treated the same.

Be on your guard, America.

The article below struck me as being very thoughtful & heartfelt. It also provides a glimpse into issues—such as politics & law in Israel, women’s issues, and the status of Diaspora Jews (who is a “real” Jew)—that I think most non-Jews, myself included, are probably unaware of.

The author is critical of the status quo, but not in a partisan political way—at least it didn’t seem that way to me. She clearly loves Israel deeply, but is unhappy about the direct personal effect some of the existing laws have on her family (and may have in the future on her soon-to-be-born daughter).

Obviously, a magazine article cannot possibly convey all the complexities & subtleties present in Israeli society (or any society, for that matter), so if anyone would like to expand upon or rebut any of her points, I’d be very interested in reading what you have to say.

A Personal Note

Some may wonder why I’m so interested in following news about Jews both here in the U.S. and in Israel, so I will tell you: Part of it is a desire to better understand the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but I’m even more keenly interested in the many parallels I see between the Jewish & Muslim experiences.

One of the main parallels, IMO, is the struggle to become successfully integrated into non-Muslim/non-Jewish societies. By “successfully integrated” I mean being fully accepted as being as patriotic and “American” as our fellow countrymen, and no longer regarded with suspicion en masse as if our loyalties are somehow suspect simply because we dress differently or have unfamiliar religious practices, different religious holidays, etc.

Another parallel is the struggle of our co-religionists overseas to form modern, democratic states based on very old—some may say outdated—religions. This seems to be happening in tandem as I watch some Arab countries escaping dictatorships and trying to reconcile freedoms with tradition/religion, and also as I watch Israel try to reconcile a system that seems largely secular on the surface, yet nonetheless appears to be influenced by religious orthodoxy (in terms of politics & certain laws). How to be a “Jewish state” and still be fully democratic? How to be an “Islamic state” and become fully democratic? Can it be done?

As for the Palestinian issue, not to mention the issues faced by religious minorities in Muslim majority countries, how do we all find a way to live with each other in our rapidly shrinking world? How do you have a true democracy when a portion of your society doesn’t have equal rights (or even citizenship)? I realize that the I-P case is unique due to the ongoing violent hostilities, but it’s something that is going to have to be resolved sooner or later, though I have no clue how.

Anyway, that’s it—those are the reasons for my interest. Now, on to the article!

If all goes according to plan, this March we’re going to bring a daughter into the world. Specifically, we’re going to bring her home to our apartment on Chen Boulevard, in the center of Tel Aviv, the city we’ve made our home, though we were born in the United States and Canada.

Had you asked us six years ago where we dreamed of raising a family, we’d have answered ‘Israel’ without hesitation. But recently we’ve begun to doubt whether we should raise her in the Jewish state.

[…]

Since the founding of Israel in 1948, the Orthodox have had the power to decide who is a Jew and how a Jew can live and die by controlling the mechanisms of marriage, divorce, and burial. What this means practically is that the government body that oversees all major life-cycle events—as well as regulating food production—is a religious institution, the Chief Rabbinate of Israel.

Orthodox religious law is the law of the land: Only a man can marry a woman, only a man can grant a divorce. And because of Orthodoxy’s systemic exclusion of women from positions of power—its refusal to allow women to be rabbis, or to recognize female Reform and Conservative rabbis—the interests of women have been disregarded.

[…]

In this context, our daughter will not be considered Jewish by the state. That’s because Erin’s mother had Conservative Jewish conversion in Canada before Erin was born, and because we decided it was insulting to ask Erin, who lived her whole life as a Jew, to ‘convert’ just because a state-employed rabbi decided she is not Jewish enough.

We could not be married in Israel because of Erin’s official lack of Jewishness, despite the fact that we are observant Jews who keep Shabbat and a kosher home. (Our marriage certificate is from the state of Illinois.) Likewise, our daughter could in the future be legally barred from marrying the person she loves in Israel. If the laws continue as they are, the two of us will not be able to be buried in the same state-run cemetery, and our daughter would be excluded from burial in a Jewish cemetery when her life is spent. She’ll be a citizen, just as we are, and she’ll serve in the army, just as Ariel did. But if the status quo persists, she will go from cradle to grave knowing that in the eyes of the government of the state of Israel she is not a Jew.

[…]

It is time that the world Jewish community knew about this systemic bias in Israel—and time for Diaspora Jewry to act. It is amazing to think that while American Jews raise money for the state, lobby their political representatives to support Israel, and send their children on Birthright, the rabbinate denies the Jewishness of many of these Diaspora Jews.

[…]

More at Tablet magazine…

This was very nice to see. After my positive interactions here at LGF it really doesn’t surprise me, but nonetheless it’s heartening to see numbers confirming the empathy I’ve personally experienced. It’s my sincere hope that American Muslims will appreciate it and return it in kind, so I’ll be passing it along to friends. It’s a great early Eid gift.

Oh, and a shout out to the secularists, atheists, and agnostics who surpass even American Jews in believing American Muslims are not sympathetic to Al Qaeda.

The source article at New York Magazine is short, so I didn’t copy much of it here, however the full 132-page report can be downloaded in PDF format from the Abu Dhabi Gallup Center:

Muslim Americans: Faith, Freedom, and the Future
Examining U.S. Muslims’ political, social, and spiritual engagement 10 years after September 11

Update 1:05pm: I just realized that Lidane also posted about this poll (thanks!), but since she didn’t link to the same article and the tone & focus of the ThinkProgress piece was different, I’ll let mine stand.

There’s a lot of bad blood between Jews and Muslims around the world, but according to a new report by the Abu Dhabi Gallup Center, American Jews hold fewer prejudices against American Muslims than most other religious groups.

[…]

Jews, Muslims: You guys should hang out more often.

More at New York Magazine…

Noah Pollak at Commentary has written out a well thought out response to the recent article The Failure of the American Jewish Establishment by Peter Beinart in The New York Review of Books.

This is part of an ongoing debate that highlights the schism between liberal Jews and Israelis, with more and more liberal Jews criticizing Israel as an increasingly authoritarian country, while ignoring the reasons for the massive shift in Israeli public from the left towards the right in the post-Oslo era. It is a serious debate, and something that should be dealt with seriously.

For some more commentary on the schism between Zionism and Liberalism see:
Liberalism and Zionism by Benjamin Kerstein at the New Ledger and for two views in support of Beinart, check out Marjorie Ingall in Tablet Magazine, and Carlo Strenger in Ha’aretz.