Opinion & Commentary:
Israel's friends not always so friendly ... or helpful
Harry Glazer
Feb. 1, 2008

It's a rather confusing time to be an ardent Israel activist.

Israeli politicians are negotiating with a Palestinian leader, Mahmoud Abbas, who is widely seen as powerless. Meanwhile, Israeli leaders seemingly ignore the growing arsenal Hamas is building in Gaza through underground tunnel smuggling from Egypt.

News reports have indicated that Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert intends to offer the Palestinians sovereignty over parts of Jerusalem even though, as Daniel Pipes has pointed out (see http://www.danielpipes.org/article/5314), the majority of Israeli Arabs residing in Jerusalem prefer to remain under Israeli rule. Meanwhile, a report in a right-wing Israeli newspaper (Arutz Sheva, Jan. 13) indicates that Olmert is prepared to offer concessions in the area of the Palestinians' claimed right of return.

As a frequent letters-to-the-editor writer who has defended Israel's security needs for decades, I find these activities quite disconcerting. How should I respond?

My consideration of the benefits versus the costs of active, public opposition to the Israeli government by US Jews is informed by a thoughtful essay by Rabbi Michael Broyde, the rabbi of the Young Israel of Atlanta and a law professor at Emory University, on the Web site hirhurim.com (http://hirhurim.blogspot.com/2007/12/if-i-forget-thee-o-jerusalem.html). While Rabbi Broyde ostensibly addresses Orthodox Jews in the US, I believe his assertions are salient to all American Jews who active on Israel's behalf.

Rabbi Broyde argues against Jewish public activism in opposition to Israeli policy on the grounds of prudence, halakha (Jewish law), and smart public policy. As a matter of prudence, Rabbi Broyde notes: "Public advocacy against the policies of the government of Israel confuses supporters of Israel in general who see that even Israel's most fervent advocates do not support the government of the Israel." He adds that our internal divisions regarding Israel make it more likely that policies we all see as bad for Israel will be adopted by the US government.

In the realm of Jewish law, Rabbi Broyde quotes the prominent rabbinic authority Rabbi Joseph Soleveitchik, who stated publicly in 1967 (shortly after the West Bank, and the Western Wall, was recaptured in the Six Day War): "we rabbis should not be involved in decisions regarding the safety and security of the population ... if the government were to rule that the safety of the population requires that specific territories must be returned, whether I issue a halakhic ruling or not, their decision is the deciding factor ... I will say that as dear as the Western Wall is, the two million lives of Jews are more important."

As a matter of public policy, Rabbi Broyde notes that the political, diplomatic, strategic, and security concerns facing Israel are quite complex. A reasonable observer would conclude that the amount of information available to the general public in all these categories is considerably less than what is available to the Israeli government. Thus, public activism by U.S. Jews in opposition to Israeli government policies is, by necessity, founded on partial information that may well be missing crucial details.

I remain deeply concerned about the efficacy and long-term implications of Israel's negotiations with Palestinian leaders who are (I believe) not ready or capable of delivering true peace. Yet I find my responses tempered by Rabbi Broyde's sage perspective.

Taking into account Rabbi Broyde's counsel, I also find myself increasingly at odds with some of the passionate defenders of the state of Israel in our own state of New Jersey.

Over the years, I've subscribed to a few local Jewish communal e-mail listservs and regular e-mail updates for Israel supporters. I've been amazed at how much of the material coming out of a few of these sources is critical of Israel, its politicians, and/or its policies recently.

One ostensibly non-partisan listserv has sent out a number of notices about different rallies protesting Israel's participation in the peace conference in Annapolis this past November, and subsequent negotiations between Olmert, PA President Abbas, and US President George W. Bush. This listserv now often sends out news articles that 'prove' the folly of negotiations or reveal plans for 'dangerous' Israeli concessions. One e-mail sent out over the listserv, forwarding an alert from another group, encouraged readers to 'flood the Israel embassy and consulates with calls, faxes, and e-mails protesting the current negotiations ... become a thorn in their side." As I learned later, the e-mail alert originated from a well-known national Orthodox organization.

As far as I can recall, for a few months now, the listserv has not offered any other opportunities for Israel activism -- no letter-writing campaigns on behalf of Israeli hostages in Gaza and Lebanon, no organized calls to the United Nations to protest daily missile attacks on Sderot from Gaza-based terrorists, no invitations to events with noted Israeli leaders. Only protests against Israel.

Another listserv sent out a message about a rally in late November, to "prevent the Israeli government from leading the Jewish state to extinction." This forwarded e-mail mocked American Jewish leaders who "continue to shirk their responsibility to the Jewish people by refusing to protest" the negotiations in Annapolis, which it linked to a "second Holocaust."

I do not want to diminish the fact that developments in Israeli politics do -- justifiably -- give us Israeli activists much cause for concern. Yet such concern does not provide a license for divisive behavior that ultimately diminishes Israel's overall standing in the US.

I respectfully encourage our communal organizations and associations focused on Israel to carefully consider Rabbi Broyde's perspective and think twice before engaging, promoting, or condoning more strident public actions in opposition to Israeli government policy.