fbpx

April 11, 2002

Eulogies:Albert Spiegel

Albert Spiegel, former president of The Jewish Federation of Greater Los Angeles, died at the age of 86.

Spiegel’s commitment and dedication to our community was surpassed only by the passion and zeal he displayed as he worked tirelessly to fulfill the Jewish tradition of tikkun olam — making our world a better place.

He was a member of National Campaign Cabinet for United Jewish Appeal, member of the board of the American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee, trustee for the Jewish Publication Society of America, member of the board of Overseers for The Jewish Theological Seminary of America and many more leadership positions in a total of some 18 organizations.

Spiegel was a Harvard Law School graduate, resided in Beverly Hills and was married to Bernice, with whom he shared four children.

The officers and board of directors of The Jewish Federation of Greater Los Angeles mourn his passing and wish to express their condolences to his family. — The Jewish Federation of Greater Los Angeles

Eulogies:Albert Spiegel Read More »

Your Letters

Passover Cover

I loved the photo illustration used on the cover of your Passover issue (“Happy Passover,” March 15). It was refreshing to see popular culture such as surfing fused with stories of Jewish history. Such images strike the attention of the younger masses and help open up your publication to a wider demographic.

Mindy Griser , Woodland Hills

The Waves of Judaism

“The Waves of Judaism” (March 22) was interesting on several levels. Most interesting was the statement, “But joining a congregation is not a priority. We don’t have the money.” One of the first things I want to hear from a family is that belonging to a synagogue community is one of their top priorities. That says something to me about their level of commitment to Judaism and their desire to ensure a Jewish future, in spite of their ability to pay.

The synagogue’s side of this must always be kept in mind when someone complains about being turned away from Judaism. If belonging is a priority, when one synagogue says no, there are many others that might say yes. Do not give up on Judaism or organized religion because of one bad experience.

Sylvia Moskovitz Executive Director Temple Aliyah , Woodland Hills

Conflict in Israel

The issue of true peace in the Middle East will not emanate from Israel’s recognition of a Palestinian state. Rather, it is the Palestinian Arabs’ recognition of a Jewish state to live as such in peace, without terrorism.

Alan D. Wallace, North Hollywood

Rabbi vs. Rabbi

I was shocked by the one-sided view in the letters to the editor section regarding “Rabbi vs. Rabbi” (March 22), favoring Rabbi Shmulik Naparstek. Naparstek is attempting to keep his job on the grounds that he helped raise funds. Can he produce a deed to the property that states that he privately owns it? Since when does a paid employee, fundraising under the auspices of a nonprofit organization like Chabad, expect to have the money and the property earmarked for that project stay in his possession? The donors gave the money to Chabad, not Naparstek.

Gerry Corn, Los Angeles

Anti-Semitic France

Since the French government is so blatantly anti-Israel (“Anti-Semitism Hits France,” April 5), as well as uncooperative with the United States in anti-terrorism efforts, it is time to let them know how the people of the United States feel.

I suggest that we stop buying French perfumes and expensive handbags, as well as other French imports. Perhaps those measures will make them less biased in favoring their terrorist friends.

Dr. Edward Friedman, Encino

I am greatly disturbed by France’s anti-Semitic and anti-Israeli sentiment, which is now endangering the lives of Jews within its own borders. This is the country that sold a nuclear reactor to Saddam Hussein. As they coddle Arabs at the expense of Jewish lives, I propose starting a grass-roots boycott of all French products. From now on, instead of buying French products, buy Israeli.

Aaron Shuster, Los Angeles

A Hush in Hollywood

Tom Tugend’s article, “A Hush in Hollywood?” (April 5) couldn’t have been more apt, although the title needn’t have ended with a question mark. Perhaps an exclamation mark would have been more appropriate. Indeed, Hollywood has all of a sudden gone underground.

Why does it take hundreds of dead Jews and Arabs for Hollywood to realize that this isn’t a game? It is time for Jews to emerge from the liberal coma they have been in and see the real world.

Jack Ballas, Pacific Palisades

Corrections

The Circuit misidentified the date of a gala Beverly Hilton tribute to composer Elmer Bernstein. The University Women of University of Judaism event takes place on April 18.

In the April 5 article, “The Holocaust and Rock ‘n’ Roll,” Bob Glaub, a bass player for Jackson Browne and Linda Rondstadt, is a child of Holocaust survivors. Browne and Rondstadt are not.

Your Letters Read More »

The Women of Worcester

The third annual daylong symposium sponsored by the Jewish Federation in Worcester, Mass., was titled, "A Woman’s Voice," without the slightest hint of irony. Less than a generation ago, "a woman’s voice" meant only one thing, the talmudic prohibition of Orthodox men toward hearing the sound of Jewish women in prayer.

Kol isha (a woman’s voice) was used as the legal barrier against women becoming rabbis and cantors, the excuse for exclusion.

That’s why I named this newspaper column A Woman’s Voice, to break down a wall.

There were some 100 women at the Woman’s Voice seminar at the Worcester Jewish Community Center (JCC), and many had no idea what blocks had been hurdled. Why should they? By a showing of hands, more than three-quarters of those in attendance had had a bat mitzvah, most of them as adults. They were at the JCC to refine personal skills ("winning without whining"), enhance their spirituality and celebrate themselves as part of Massachusetts’ second largest Jewish city, with its own revolutionary history.

It was an activist crowd, and many were interested in knowing how Jewish experience in transforming our own rituals could help women in Afghanistan. For a woman with a memory, attending such events can provide the thrill of the normal, to see how earlier dreams had come true.

We have come far. But that was the rub. The more I talked about women’s victories of the recent past, the more I worried about the present, not to mention the future.

Pride has its limits.

It has been clear since Sept. 11 that our children, especially our college- and high school-age youth, do not feel equipped to fight the current rhetorical and political battle on behalf of the Jewish state. My sisters in Worcester are worried, too. They confirmed it last weekend with their own family stories, so I know it’s not merely the attention deficit of those raised near Hollywood. Their sons and daughters, like those I see in Los Angeles, are not picking up the torch.

Daunted by the military challenge? Overwhelmed by the politics? Terrified by terrorism? Who knows? They should be in the heat of the debate. They are not.

Perhaps they’ve been too infused by the left-leaning equivocation of the Vietnam generation. Instead, the generation now coming into adulthood is still, politically speaking, deferring to us, their parents. These are young men and women with strong Jewish backgrounds, who have visited Israel, who date Jews. They are saying, "We are numb. Help us."

I have heard too many conversations in which parents set the agenda and state their positions. The young sit by in silence.

If you are a college-age Jewish activist, write to me. I want to understand. Meanwhile, we, the parents generation, can’t wait any longer. We must find a way to help you help us. There is so much to be done, and much of it is waiting for you.

I don’t want to remind you about the Six-Day War and how it transformed young Jews of your parents’ time. You will find your own coming-of-age experience to bind you to Israel.

In the present crisis, every Jewish event must be used for community organizing. There is no chance for downtime, to gaze at the glories of the past without energizing ourselves for the current battle.

Every luncheon must include a) an educational update on Israel; b) a letter-writing campaign to legislators urging continued support for Israel, reviving the techniques of the Soviet Jewry campaign; c) outreach to the local campus or Hillel; and d) informational material on how to talk to your children about Israel.

Let’s help the next generation gain its voice.

The Women of Worcester Read More »

Israel Stands Firm on IDF Campaign

In the Byzantine politics of the Middle East, even a suicide bombing is subject to differing interpretations.

After a suicide bomber detonated his explosives aboard a bus near Haifa on Wednesday, killing eight Israelis and wounding 14, Palestinian officials said the attack proved that Israel’s military operation in the West Bank was ineffective in halting terror. The Bush administration said the attack reinforced the need for Israel to withdraw its forces. Yet, Israeli officials countered that the attack proved the necessity of continuing the operation until the entire network of Palestinian terror is eradicated.

It was at least the fourth Palestinian suicide attack to take place since Israel launched Operation Protective Wall on March 29 in an attempt to round up terrorists and collect illegal arms in Palestinian-controlled cities.

Hours after the bombing, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon vowed to press ahead with Israel’s military operation — a promise he made several times this week despite growing U.S. pressure to withdraw. For days, President Bush and other U.S. officials have been calling for an end to the operation.

Sharon gave a mixed response to the U.S. pressure early Tuesday morning, when he had the Israel Defense Force (IDF) withdraw from two West Bank cities, Tulkarm and Kalkilya, but at the same time, ordered his troops into the town of Dura, near Hebron. Israeli and American observers had speculated that Sharon would order a full-scale withdrawal before U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell arrived in Israel by the end of the week.

But a deadly suicide bombing Tuesday in Jenin — the West Bank city that has witnessed the fiercest fighting since Operation Protective Wall began — may only harden Sharon’s resolve to press on. Speaking after he received word that 13 Israeli reservists had been killed in a Palestinian ambush in Jenin’s crowded refugee camp (the total dead is now 15), Sharon sounded a defiant tone. "This battle is a battle for survival of the Jewish people, for survival of the state of Israel."

Clashes continued in Jenin on Tuesday evening, when another Israeli soldier was killed and 12 were wounded while searching a building. On Wednesday, Sharon spoke at an army command post overlooking the Jenin refugee camp and vowed to stay in the West Bank until the anti-terror campaign is finished. If Israel withdraws now, "we will have to return," he said. "Once we finish, we are not going to stay here. But first, we have to accomplish our mission."

On Wednesday, armed Palestinians in Jenin began surrendering to Israeli forces. Reports said some 200 Palestinians, including civilians, had given themselves up.

More than 100 Palestinians are believed to have been killed during the Israeli operation in the Jenin camp. Among those reported killed was Mahmoud Tawalbeh, 23, a leader of Islamic Jihad who masterminded a number of suicide bombings in Israel.

Since the start of Operation Protective Wall, 22 Israeli soldiers have been killed in Jenin. The refugee camp is a stronghold for Islamic terrorists, and dozens of Hamas and Islamic Jihad suicide bombers have been dispatched from there.

On Wednesday, the United States, United Nations, Russia and European Union issued a joint statement calling on Israel to pull out immediately from Palestinian cities. The statement also called on both sides to implement a cease-fire, and urged Palestinian Authority President Yasser Arafat to do everything possible to prevent terrorist attacks against Israeli civilians.

U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan issued the statement following a meeting in Madrid on Wednesday with Powell, Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov, E.U. Foreign Policy Chief Javier Solana and Josep Pique, the foreign minister of Spain, who currently holds the rotating E.U. presidency.

Meanwhile, attempts were continuing on the diplomatic front. Powell said he would meet with Arafat later this week as part of efforts to reach a cease-fire. Powell made the announcement Tuesday in Cairo, the second stop in his Middle East peacemaking mission. He was in Morocco a day earlier. Speaking Wednesday, Powell denied speculation that the suicide bombing near Haifa had derailed his peace effort even before arriving in Israel.

Also Wednesday, White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said Bush would "remain persistent" in efforts to get Israel to withdraw from the West Bank. Fleischer also told reporters that Bush has no plans to withhold U.S. aid to Israel if Sharon refuses to withdraw troops. When a reporter spoke of Sharon’s refusal to heed Bush’s repeated demands for a withdrawal, Fleischer said, "Welcome to the Middle East." Fleischer also reiterated that the United States sees Palestinian suicide bombers as terrorists, not freedom fighters.

A similar view was voiced Wednesday by the European Union, which called on Arafat to stop describing suicide bombers as martyrs and clearly condemn them as terrorists. However, E.U. lawmakers also voted for new measures to pressure Israel to stop its military operation.

Meeting in Brussels on Wednesday, the European Parliament approved a nonbinding resolution calling on E.U. governments to impose an arms embargo on Israel and suspend the E.U. association agreement with Israel, which governs trade and political ties between Israel and the European bloc.

Israelis, however, are giving Sharon widespread backing for the offensive. A recent Jerusalem Post poll found that 72 percent of Israelis support the wide-scale military operation, and 36 percent favor the expulsion of Arafat.

Fifteen percent of respondents said they believe the reoccupation of Palestinian cities should be permanent.

Israel Stands Firm on IDF Campaign Read More »

Two Wars; One Just One

Two Palestinian-Israeli wars have erupted in the Middle East. One is the Palestinian nation’s war for its freedom from occupation and for its right to independent statehood. Any decent person ought to support this cause. The second war is waged by fanatical Islam, from Iran to Gaza and from Lebanon to Ramallah, to destroy Israel and drive the Jews out of their land. Any decent person ought to abhor this cause.

Yasser Arafat and his men are running both wars simultaneously, pretending they are one. The suicide killers evidently make no distinction. Much of the worldwide bafflement about the Middle East, much of the confusion among the Israelis themselves, stems from the overlap between these two wars.

Decent peace seekers, in Israel and elsewhere, are often drawn into simplistic positions. They either defend Israel’s continued occupation of the West Bank and Gaza by claiming that Israel has been targeted by the Muslim holy war ever since its foundation in 1948, or else they vilify Israel on the grounds that nothing but the occupation prevents a just and lasting peace.

One simplistic argument allows Palestinians to kill all Israelis on the basis of their natural right to resist occupation. An equally simplistic counterargument allows Israelis to oppress all Palestinians because an all-out Islamic jihad has been launched against them.

Two wars are being fought in this region. One is a just war, and the other is both unjust and futile.

Israel must step down from the war on the Palestinian territories. It must begin to end occupation and evacuate the Jewish settlements that were deliberately thrust into the depth of Palestinian lands. Its borders must be drawn, unilaterally if need be, upon the logic of demography and the moral imperative to withdraw from governing a hostile population.

But would an end to occupation terminate the Muslim holy war against Israel? This is hard to predict. If jihad comes to an end, both sides would be able to sit down and negotiate peace. If it does not, we Israelis would have to seal and fortify Israel’s logical border, the demographic border, and keep fighting for our lives against fanatical Islam.

If, despite simplistic visions, the end of occupation will not result in peace, at least we will have one war to fight rather than two. Not a war for our full occupancy of the holy land, but a war for our right to live in a free and sovereign Jewish state in part of that land. A just war, a no-alternative war. A war we will win — like any people who were ever forced to fight for their very homes and freedom and lives.

Two Wars; One Just One Read More »

World Briefs

More Hezbollah Attacks

The United States promised Israel it would warn Syria against an escalation along Israel’s northern border. Hezbollah continued to fire mortars and anti-tank rockets into Israel from Lebanon on Monday, lightly wounding a shepherd in one attack. Israel’s Security Cabinet decided to continue maintaining a restrained response to the cross-border attacks, in order to give diplomatic efforts a chance.

Netanyahu to Speak for Israel

Former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has agreed to serve as a spokesman for the Israeli government.

Netanyahu will “help clarify and present Israel’s positions,” an Israeli official said. Netanyahu’s assistance was sought by Prime Minister Ariel Sharon in the wake of negative coverage of Israel by the American media, despite the fact that Netanyahu will likely challenge Sharon eventually for the Likud Party leadership.

Meanwhile, Sharon announced Monday that he will add three new Cabinet ministers to the government: National Religious Party (NRP) incoming leader, Effi Eitam, a former brigadier general and political hawk; NRP’s outgoing leader, Yitzhak Levy; and Gesher Party leader David Levy. The Labor Party has warned that it may leave the government if Sharon broadens the governing coalition without Labor’s approval. Additionally, former Israeli ministers Avigdor Lieberman and Binyamin Elon are negotiating to return to the government.

Poll: Bush Backed on Middle East

Most Americans support President Bush’s handling of the Middle East crisis, according to a new poll. Sixty-seven percent say they approve of the president’s actions, according to a new CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll that was conducted April 5-7, but respondents were split over whether Bush has a clear and well thought-out Middle East policy.

Sympathy for Israel has gone up since early March, but most Americans said the United States should not take sides in the conflict. More than half of Americans view the Israeli military incursions into Palestinian areas as “legitimate acts of war” while 70 percent see recent violence committed by the Palestinians against Israelis as “acts of terrorism.”

Arrests Made in France Hate Crimes

More than 35 people were arrested in France for recent attacks against Jews. Nine of those were arrested in connection with the recent firebombing of three synagogues; the others for verbal or physical abuse. Fifteen of those arrested are under 18 years old. Most were people who had been in trouble with the police before, according to a police spokesman, who added that their actions were not organized. The recent spate of anti-Semitic attacks is believed to have been carried out by French Arabs motivated by the ongoing violence in the Middle East.

Briefs courtesy Jewish Telegraphic Agency

World Briefs Read More »

Remembering the Fallen

The day before Israel’s Independence Day is Yom HaZikaron Lechalelay Tsahal (Memorial Day for the Fallen of the Israel Defense Forces), which this year begins on Monday night April 15.

It is characteristically Jewish to place Memorial Day right before Independence Day. Whereas in the Catholic tradition, for example, you have the exuberant Mardi Gras before the austere Lent, in Judaism, you have the Fast of Esther precede the gaiety of Purim, and the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur) a few days before Succot, traditionally, the happiest of Jewish holidays.

The onset of Israel’s Memorial Day itself follows Jewish tradition in that it occurs with nightfall, rather than midnight; in effect, the two holidays merge into each other, with the mourning of Yom HaZikaron flowing into the celebrating of Yom HaAtzmaut.

Many communities have their own Memorial Day ceremonies, especially honoring the fallen relatives of families who live in that community. (If a person dies at any time during the course of his or her military service, he or she is considered an official Israel Defense Forces (IDF) casualty.)

Givat Ze’ev’s ceremony takes place beside its own memorial monument. The ceremony begins at 7:50 p.m. with the lowering of the Israeli flag to half-staff, the lighting of memorial torches and the recitation of the Yizkor memorial prayer.

Businesses are open on Memorial Day, though friends and relatives of the deceased will usually fill the country’s army cemeteries with prayers and reminiscences, placing stones and flowers at the graves of their loved ones (parts of some of these cemeteries are only open during this one day of the year). Schools are open, too, with learning focused on the themes of service and patriotism to one’s country, and with a special school assembly.

State radio and television programming (advertisement-free on this day) tells specific life stories of some of the soldiers who died, and victims of terror incidents are also recalled.

At precisely 11 a.m., a siren will sound for two minutes across the country. During these two minutes, it is customary to stop whatever you are doing. Traffic on Israel’s roads and highways comes to a complete halt during this period, as drivers and passengers all get out of their vehicles and stand silently at attention. There is an official national ceremony in Jerusalem to mark the end of Memorial Day before the festivities of Independence Day can commence.

When the holiday does begin a short while later, it is with a renewed awareness of the price that Israelis have paid and continue to pay for their independence.

You are Invited

The Consulate General of Israel will hold a Yom haZikaron service on Mon., April 15 at 6:30 p.m. at Adat Ari El Synagogue (12020 Burbank Blvd., North Hollywood). Consul General Yuval Rotem and County Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky will be among the speakers. The public is urged to attend the free event, which will be held in Hebrew and English.

Remembering the Fallen Read More »

Birth of a Jewish Nation

I have been asked by the Hillel Foundation at Dartmouth College to meet with them on the occasion of Israel’s 54th birthday. There aren’t too many of us still around who were there at its birth, and they would like to hear, from the perspective of a participant, what made it possible for the Jewish state to survive while the Palestinian state, also created by the United Nations, crashed in flames.

I’ll save you a trip to Hanover, N.H.

In 1948, we fought a war of survival for which we had been well-prepared. The Jewish state lived because its people had, over the decades, formed an army, created a democratic form of national government, established a viable economic base, set up a system of social services, built a modern educational structure including universities and evolved a western legal framework, so that when the moment arrived on May 15, 1948, all of these necessary institutions were in place.

The Palestinian Arab state died as it was being born. Its political organizations and its society were tribal and village-centered. Its leaders never thought in terms of a national movement. Its economy was largely agrarian and its people too often illiterate and technologically unskilled. In war, it relied on neighboring Arab states to protect it, and their interests were not necessarily those of the Palestinians. Little was in place on May 15, 1948, to enable the Palestinian state to survive.

As for the war itself, it was a close thing. We had the advantage of trained manpower, but they had those Arab armies, better equipment, long borders across which assistance could flow freely, the heights (Jews tended to live in the valleys of Palestine, Arabs in the mountains) and a cohesive population. At least they all spoke Arabic, whereas our soldiers spoke a dozen languages and often couldn’t make themselves understood, quite a handicap under conditions of combat.

We had, in addition to our sense of purpose, short lines of supply, a democratically elected government and advanced technological skills. Perhaps most important, we had the assistance of that eminent Zionist, Joseph Stalin, who early on decided that a Jewish state created in the midst of the Arab world would cause problems for the Western powers, thus giving the Soviet Union an opportunity to benefit. Beginning in June, an airlift from Prague brought us much badly needed equipment, manufactured originally for Hitler’s armies. By the end of the war, we were flying Messerschmit fighters, using Spandau machine guns and firing rifles with swastikas emblazoned on their stocks.

I am certain that I will be asked how it is possible that Israel, having won its War of Independence in 1948, the Sinai Campaign in 1956, the Six-Day War in 1967, the War of Attrition in 1970 and the Yom Kippur War in 1973, is still fighting what appears to be an unending conflict. The answer is that Israel did not win a war, it won a series of brief — but bloody — battles separated by years of uneasy truce. Never once did Israel destroy the enemy’s capability of renewing the conflict at a time of its choice.

Israel won as the Allies won World War I; 15 years later, along came Hitler, and the war started up again. Israel has never totally crushed its enemies as the Allies did in World War II, nor can it. Israel is too small, too vulnerable and too lacking in the kind of totalitarian ethos that might make such a victory over the Palestinians acceptable. The Palestinians, different in so many ways from what we were in 1948, are on the verge of creating their own state, and when the present bloodbath has ended in mutual exhaustion, will some day point to their intifada as the start of it all, as Israelis refer to the War of Independence.

In all honesty, I cannot state that my being there at the time did much for Israel, which would have gained its independence without my presence. But, as they tell us on election day, every vote counts, so get out of the house and follow your conscience. Unencumbered by family responsibilities, I did.

Looking back from this distant vantage point, I don’t regret a moment of it.

Birth of a Jewish Nation Read More »

Hate Israel, Not Jews

It was on full display last year at the global anti-racism conference in Durban, South Africa, but the "demonization" of Israel has reached a fever pitch during the past month with the surging death toll in the Middle East, say Jewish observers.

Even as Holocaust Remembrance Day is marked this week, anti-Israel critics worldwide increasingly are employing Nazi and Holocaust imagery and analogies to describe the Jewish state’s behavior toward the Palestinians.

At the same time, Western Europe — particularly France — has seen a rash of attacks on synagogues and other Jewish institutions, prompting one French Jewish leader to compare the current situation to Kristallnacht.

All of which seems to prove the adage coined by the French writer and philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre: "Words are loaded pistols."

Pro-Israel advocates say they accept the fallibility of Israel and the right to criticize it. However the line between anti-Israel sentiment and anti-Semitism blurs when the world seems to hold Israel to a higher standard than all other countries.

"I wouldn’t have a problem if the Fourth Geneva Convention were convened to discuss Rwanda and Northern Ireland and Kashmir and the Middle East, but why is it that it’s been convened only twice in its 53-year history — both times to discuss Israel? That’s anti-Semitism," Abraham Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), said, referring to a set of human rights guidelines passed after World War II.

Veiled beneath today’s vitriol for Israel, Jewish observers detect a form of anti-Semitism of the we-don’t-hate-Jews-just-the-Jewish-state variety, which was first formally enshrined when the United Nations equated Zionism with racism in 1975. Likening Israelis to Nazis is particularly nefarious, advocates say, and goes hand in hand with the Holocaust denial pervasive in the Arab world.

"To open the world for new crimes against Jews, you either have to say the Holocaust did not exist or to minimize or trivialize it by saying that the victims are really the victimizers," said Rabbi Michael Melchior, Israel’s deputy foreign minister. "This is total demonization of the state of Israel, and, therefore, of the Jew. Whether they be an Israeli Jew or a French Jew."

In some cases, the rhetoric is purely political, aimed at damaging Israel’s image. For many of those who blindly mimic the rhetoric, it’s ignorance of history. But for a sizable portion — especially many in Western Europe — it is a way to ease the conscience, said Holocaust historian Michael Berenbaum.

"It’s some measure of solace for Europeans that Israel seems to be in the morally compromised position, because it relieves them of the residual guilt they have for the Holocaust," said Berenbaum, a professor at the University of Judaism in Los Angeles and the former director of the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum’s Research Institute. "It’s a way of getting even with Jews, whom they think have lorded the moral depravity of the Europeans over their heads."

The current movement can be traced to the 1960s, Foxman said, when some in the Arab world embraced the Holocaust denial propagated by unreformed Nazis.

"The idea was, if the only reason Jews were given Israel was because of the Holocaust, then if this is a hoax, they don’t really deserve it," Foxman said. Over time, he said, Arab and Muslim Holocaust deniers have generally become even more zealous than neo-Nazis. Then came the "Zionism Is Racism" equation, a U.N. resolution that remained on the books until it was rescinded in 1991. U.N. officials, including Secretary-General Kofi Annan, have described that period as a stain on the world body’s record.

Nevertheless, it was feared the Arab world was angling to resurrect the equation at the U.N.-sponsored World Conference Against Racism, late last summer in Durban. In fact, the denunciations of Israel there were broader and more visceral. Israel and the Middle East overwhelmed all other issues, as Israel was branded an "apartheid state" guilty of "genocide," "ethnic cleansing" and "war crimes."

As Irwin Cotler, a Canadian politician and human rights lawyer, said in Durban, "In a world in which human rights has emerged as the secular religion of our time, Israel, portrayed as the worst of human rights violators, is the new anti-Christ."

Most disturbing to Jewish observers was not that Arab and Muslim delegates were ganging up on Israel, but how easily so many otherwise compassionate activists from around the world jumped aboard the bandwagon.

In light of the now-renewed rhetorical offensive against Israel, Foxman said, "Durban was the dress rehearsal to see if this kind of anti-Semitism could sell. And with all these well-meaning people there who would have laid down their lives for others, no one was willing to stand up for the Jews."

With Israel’s siege of Palestinian cities, refugee camps and the Ramallah headquarters of Yasser Arafat, Israel has been barraged with Holocaust denials, Nazi comparisons and blood libels that circulate globally via the Internet.

On March 7, according to the ADL, the director of the Palestinian News Agency, Ziad Abd-al-Fatah, said: "What they are doing now to our people is a ‘Holocaust’ in every sense of the word, while what happened to them was not a ‘Holocaust,’ since researchers doubt its veracity and the testimonies are also doubtful."

On March 21, Algerian diplomat Mohamed-Salah Dembri told the U.N. Commission on Human Rights in Geneva that "Kristallnacht repeats itself daily" against "the ghettoized Palestinian people."

The fusillade has also come from beyond the Arab world.

On March 26, Portuguese writer Jose Saramago, who won the 1998 Nobel Prize in Literature, was quoted as describing the Israeli blockade of Ramallah as "in the spirit of Auschwitz" and "this place is being turned into a concentration camp." On April 5, the Kuala Lumpur-based newspaper, The Star, quoted Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad saying Israelis needed to be stopped, like the Bosnian Serbs.

Not many are speaking out against the incendiary rhetoric.

One notable exception, though, was the president of the International Committee of the Red Cross, Jakob Kellenberger. On March 26, in his address to the U.N. Commission on Human Rights, Kellenberger said: "It would be misleading to think that recent or present-day international crimes surpass the evils that humans have historically inflicted on humans. Does anyone really believe that the suffering caused by current conflicts around the globe surpasses the ravages of World War II and the atrocities that accompanied it?"

Still, rebuttals seem few and far between.

"I’m concerned that people have not stood up," Berenbaum said, "but maybe what I’m saying is that I’m also concerned that I haven’t stood up.

"I’m equally concerned that perhaps we haven’t made our point over many years about the Holocaust, which allows for this ignorance and God-awful abuse of history."

To more forcefully counter this "demonization" of Jews, Melchior announced in January plans to create the International Forum for Combating Anti-Semitism. The blue-ribbon panel of non-Jewish figures should be in place within six months, he said.

Why non-Jews?

"Anti-Semitism undermines the basic fundamentals of democracy and decency, and anyone who cares about those two things should fight against it," Melchior said." As someone once said, anti-Semitism is a sickness that non-Jews have, but which Jews die of."

We have to start taking seriously what they say, because they mean what they say."

Hate Israel, Not Jews Read More »

Paths to Peace?

Even before the first Israeli tanks swept into Ramallah at the start of Operation Protective Wall, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon was being asked what he intended to do the day after the tanks withdrew. From day one, it was clear that the operation would not in itself put a stop to Palestinian terror. No matter how badly the terrorist infrastructure was hit, it would be only a matter of time until the suicide bombers were back on Israel’s streets.

Unless, that is, there was some political solution to the Palestinian- Israeli conflict.

But how best to achieve it? During the past few weeks, as more suicide bombings claimed more Israeli lives, and the scale of Israeli retaliation intensified, there has been a flurry of new ideas. Some, despairing of any hope of a negotiated deal between Israel and the Palestinians, advocate unilateral measures or externally imposed solutions.

There are three basic approaches: incrementalism, unilateralism and international intervention. All three hold out some hope — and all three are deeply flawed.

Both Sharon and the American administration have been inclined to continue along the slow incremental path from violence to cease-fire to graded political re-engagement, outlined in the "Tenet-Mitchell" framework, named for CIA Director George Tenet and former U.S. Sen. George Mitchell. The idea was to rebuild mutual confidence and trust after the collapse of the attempts to resolve all the issues in one fell swoop at Camp David in July 2000 and Taba in January 2001.

Badly burned by the failure of the permanent-status exercise, the parties lowered their sights and accepted the step-by-step approach.

But it didn’t work. The trouble with Tenet-Mitchell was that it left the endgame open. Sharon was not prepared to spell out his vision of final status until the Palestinians stopped the terror. To do so, he argued, would be to reward violence and encourage more violence.

The Palestinians, however, were not prepared to stop the violence until they knew where the political process was leading. To break the vicious circle, the Americans offered their vision of final status — two states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side.

But the plan was too vague for the Palestinians. It said nothing about Jerusalem or refugees.

Moreover, as Palestinian terror escalated, and world opinion restricted Israeli retaliation, Palestinian Authority President Yasser Arafat became convinced that violence was paying off and saw no reason to stop it.

Now new ideas to resuscitate the failing incrementalist approach are being put forward.

Ya’acov Peri, a former head of the Shin Bet, suggests a carrot for the Palestinians — every month of quiet will be rewarded with the evacuation of an Israeli settlement.

More realistically, U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell is trying to build a wide international coalition with the Europeans and moderate Arab states to pressure the parties to at least start the incrementalist process.

Operation Protective Wall, besides trying to smash the Palestinian terrorist infrastructure, was also ostensibly an attempt to pressure the Palestinians into declaring a cease-fire and starting Tenet-Mitchell.

But will a humiliated and discredited Arafat be in any mood to declare a cease-fire? And if he does, will his badly hit security services be able to maintain it? And why should he want to stop the terror, after the wave of world sympathy, especially European, the latest chapter of violence has gained him?

The assumption that Arafat will not call off the violence and that there is no partner for dialogue on the Palestinian side has led many Israelis on the left and the right to propose unilateralist solutions.

The basic idea is that Israel withdraw unilaterally to a new line from which it can better defend itself and begin talks with the Palestinians, who would create their own state, on a political solution as soon as they are ready.

Sharon’s growing emphasis on buffer zones to prevent suicide bombers from reaching Israeli population centers, reiterated in his early April policy speech to the Knesset, is a version of unilateralist thinking, and is indicative of the prime minister’s conviction that there is no chance of any agreement with the Palestinians as long as Arafat is leader.

The key question for the unilateralists, of course, is where you draw the new line.

Meir Pa’il, a former far-left Knesset member, would pull back to the 1967 borders and put up a sophisticated electronic fence to stop the bombers getting through. The advantage of Pa’il’s line is that it would constitute full withdrawal in accordance with U.N. Resolution 242 and would be seen by the international community as bringing Israeli occupation to an end.

The concomitant disadvantage is that it would mean giving the Palestinians all the land for none of the peace and little incentive to make peace. It would also entail dismantling all the settlements and moving over 200,000 settlers out of their homes without a peace agreement to show for it.

Labor Party leaders, like former Prime Minister Ehud Barak and Knesset member Haim Ramon, therefore, propose withdrawing from 75 percent to 80 percent of the West Bank, leaving most of the settlements intact, and negotiating the remaining 20 percent to 25 percent of the land and other outstanding issues on a state-to-state basis.

The advantage of the plan is that it could trigger a negotiating dynamic. The disadvantage is that the international community would regard Israel as still in occupation of Palestinian territory.

A team under minister-without-portfolio Dan Naveh, who was former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s chief negotiator with the Palestinians, has also been working on a unilateral separation plan. It has Israel moving back to wide buffer zones along the old 1967 borders and in the Jordan Valley, and may prove to be the blueprint for Sharon himself.

The trouble with this scheme is that it would gain no international support and be vigorously resisted by the Palestinians and the Arab world. The lack of international enthusiasm for unilateral solutions and the fact that by definition they do not include an end to the conflict has spawned solutions based on the international community imposing its will on both parties.

Left-wing Meretz leader Yossi Sarid wants to see an American mandate in the Palestinian territories, nursing the Palestinians to statehood and peace with Israel along the lines of the Saudi peace initiative. The new mandate, which is also being backed by former Foreign Minister Shlomo Ben-Ami, would have U.N. sanction and would automatically replace the Israeli occupation.

American or NATO soldiers would be stationed between Israel and the Palestinian territories to protect both sides. This view is gaining momentum in some diplomatic circles, especially in Europe.

Jerome Segal of the University of Maryland’s Center for International and Security Studies adds a precise set of conditions the Palestinians must meet for statehood, including recognizing Israel as a Jewish state and accepting international weapons inspectors.

The advantage of the imposed solution is that it is final and underwritten in the most emphatic way by the international community.

The question is whether outside countries would be prepared to make the commitment, and even if they did, whether they would be able to impose their will on both sides.

What would they do if the terror persisted and if some of it were aimed at their own forces?

When Powell arrives in Israel later this week, he and Sharon may find themselves out of sync.

Powell will be trying to revive the incremental approach, while Sharon seems to have moved on to a unilateralist mindset.

The result could be an American leap of faith to greater international involvement, first to cool the situation and then, some time down the road, to impose a solution.

One idea being considered is the convening of a 1991 Madrid-style international conference of all major players and all Middle Eastern countries.

Paths to Peace? Read More »