Why Are Some in the Media Misrepresenting Jewish Attitudes Towards a Ceasefire?

According to NBC News, “Hundreds of Jewish organization staffers call for White House to back Gaza ceasefire.” Apparently, the editors of the piece didn’t question the contradiction between their sub headline, “Most signed anonymously for fear of their jobs,” with the text of the letter, which states that signatories want to “demonstrate broad support within the Jewish community for a ceasefire.”

Which is it? Is there broad support for a ceasefire, or is this view so radical that espousing it would cost someone their job?

The fact that NBC ran this story about a letter that is signed by so many as “anonymous” or without any kind of identifiers (such as a last name, city or state), raises serious journalistic questions. How do they know the true number of signatories when nearly 30% of the signatories do not clearly identify themselves? Why are they giving a platform to a letter that contradicts itself?

No matter, this open letter was used as evidence by others in the media that there is popular support in the American Jewish community against Israel defeating Hamas.

Just after the print article published, MSNBC’s Ali Velshi spoke about the letter, saying “More than 500 staffers representing more than 140 Jewish organizations across the country from synagogues and museums to community centers and philanthropic organizations signed an open letter to President Biden calling on a ceasefire.” In fact, these individuals do not represent these organizations and do not claim to do so. They are quite explicit that they are writing “as individuals.” Velshi has taken a letter signed by some random Jewish individuals and presented it as the authentic view of the American Jewish community. This is tokenism.

In reality, calls to leave Hamas in power and demand an Israeli ceasefire are outside the mainstream of Jewish opinion.

Not one of the 50 diverse organization that make up the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations are calling for a ceasefire. Instead, their CEO, William Daroff, has reposted comments against a ceasefire, such as those by Secretary of State Antony Blinken, who said, “A ceasefire — in this moment — with Hamas still alive, still intact, with the stated intent of repeating Oct. 7th again and again and again, that would simply perpetuate the problem.”

It’s not just at the organizational level. A recent poll by the Jewish Electorate Institute found that 74% of Jewish voters approve of President Biden’s handling of the war between Israel and Hamas. Specifically, by a margin of nearly 2-1 American Jews support the United States vetoing a United Nations Security Council Resolution calling for a ceasefire.

So why the mischaracterization? Presumably, proponents of a ceasefire want to see the hostilities end in order to stop the bloodshed in Gaza and see the people of the coastal enclave begin rebuilding their homes and their lives. And using Jews as tokenism is of course effective, when it comes to a public relations war. However, when it comes to the actual war, sadly, a ceasefire while Hamas continues to control the Gaza Strip would achieve the exact opposite result.

Presumably, proponents of a ceasefire want to see the hostilities end in order to stop the bloodshed in Gaza and see the people of the coastal enclave begin rebuilding their homes and their lives … Sadly, a ceasefire while Hamas continues to control the Gaza Strip would achieve the exact opposite result.

In fact, “Israel, Hamas agree to ceasefire to end bloody 11-day war,” read the headline of an AP article on May 21, 2021, describing the conclusion of the last major round of fighting in Gaza. That ceasefire largely held until Oct. 7^th, 2023, when Hamas unleashed the most vicious and widespread terrorist attacks that Israel has ever experienced.

A ceasefire would, in effect, restore the status quo ante, allowing Hamas to continue using Gaza as a launching pad for terrorism against Israel, and send a message to Hezbollah and Iran that they can attack Israeli civilians with impunity.

This is an untenable position for Israel in light of comments by Ghazi Hamad, a member of Hamas’ decision-making political bureau, who said: “The al-Aqsa Flood [Oct. 7 attack on Israel] is just the first time and there will be a second, a third, a fourth because we have the determination, the resolve and the capabilities to fight.”

A ceasefire now would also condemn Palestinians civilians to more oppression and human rights abuses under the brutal rule of Hamas. Indeed, the State Department’s West Bank and Gaza 2022 Human Rights Report details “credible reports of unlawful or arbitrary killings by Hamas personnel; torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment by Hamas personnel; arbitrary arrest or detention; political prisoners or detainees; serious problems with the independence of the judiciary; arbitrary or unlawful interference with privacy; serious restrictions on freedom of expression, including violence, threats of violence, arbitrary arrests or prosecutions of journalists, censorship, and criminalization of libel and slander; serious restrictions on internet freedom; substantial interference with the freedom of peaceful assembly and freedom of association; serious and unreasonable restrictions on political participation; serious government corruption; lack of investigation of and accountability for gender-based violence; crimes, violence, and threats of violence motivated by antisemitism; unlawful recruitment and use of child soldiers; crimes involving violence and threats of violence targeting lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, or intersex persons; and the worst forms of child labor.”

Surely these aren’t the values the ceasefire advocates are seeking to impose on the people of Gaza. It certainly isn’t the opinion of the overwhelming majority of the American Jewish community.

As rabbis spanning the Jewish denominational spectrum, we too wanted to add clarity, which is why we organized an open letter signed by nearly 700 rabbis that explicitly rejects the letter covered by NBC News. Unlike the pro-ceasefire letter, these rabbis all include their full names, cities and states, making them easily identifiable. Put simply, the position that requires anonymity to espouse isn’t mainstream. The position that you can attach your name to is.

So, if the leaders of American Jewish organizations reject calls for a ceasefire, the average American Jew rejects calls for a ceasefire, and American Jewish religious leaders reject calls for a ceasefire, why are some in the media continuing to present fringe positions as mainstream?

Rabbi Jeremy Barras is Reform pulpit rabbi in Miami, Florida. Rabbi David-Seth Kirshner is a Conservative pulpit rabbi in Closter, New Jersey. Rabbi E. Samuel Klibanoff is an Orthodox pulpit rabbi in Livingston, New Jersey.