fbpx

September 28, 2007

Am I Blind?

Does the American Jewish community take a “myopic” view of Israel? A local Jewish leader, known for his progressive views, believes that it does.

In a recent article in this paper, Daniel Sokatch began by telling the story of a Jewish activist friend who came across a demonstration in Times Square, and saw — to his shock — friends from his movement burning an Israeli flag.

As Mr. Sokatch sees it, these kinds of experiences leave a lot of young American Jews “with a sense of confusion, torn allegiances and discomfort.” He attributes much of this disillusionment to the Jewish community’s inability, or unwillingness, to portray a more realistic view of Israel, “warts and all.”

In the article, he cites one major “wart”: the “occupation.”

In his view, if we could only be more even-handed in the way we portray Israel’s great virtues to our young Jews — if we recognized, for instance, that Israel’s “occupation” has subjected Palestinians to “a difficult and often miserable experience” — then, perhaps, there would be less confusion and torn alliances, and our “disillusioned” Jews would even “go out and help save the dream all by themselves.”

I’m not so sure.

Let’s put ourselves in the shoes of this disillusioned Jew Mr. Sokatch is speaking about. He sees “progressive” friends of his burning the Israeli flag and vilifying Israel as an “apartheid” regime. In the news, he sees that the United Nations and much of the world community have deemed that this particular Israeli “occupation” — not the ones in Tibet or Cyprus, for example — is worthy of more condemnation and flag-burning than all the mass murders of millions of people in places like Cambodia, the Congo, Rwanda and Darfur.

Now what do you tell this disillusioned Jew? Huh, sorry, we as the Jewish community should have given you a “heads up” a long time ago regarding Israel’s shameful “occupation?”

Or do you tell that person: Just like the best countries, Israel makes many mistakes, but one of them is not a lack of effort at making peace. When you see your buddy burning the Israeli flag and demonizing Israel, remind that person how much Israel has tried to trade land for peace, and the terror they got in return. Here’s a book, here’s a leaflet, here are some Web sites that will arm you with those facts.

Whatever you do, Mr. Disillusioned Jew, do not let them get away with calling Israel a Nazi-Apartheid state. That is a calumny of the highest order. If we as Jews don’t defend Israel against these unfair and slanderous attacks, who will? The United Nations?

But let’s keep going on the subject of warts.

Mr. Sokatch says that here in America, it’s “very difficult to hear alternative opinions about Israel” and that “public criticism is frowned upon.” Really?

Open up any major American Jewish newspaper, and you will see wide-open debates — like the one we are having right here — on a slew of Jewish and Israeli “warts.” Has he ever read those letters to the editor that are read by tens of thousands of American Jews? Has he seen how brutally critical and cynical American Jews can get about the corruption and incompetence of the Israeli government, or the intolerance of its religious authorities?

Jews might be afraid of terrorists, but they’re not afraid of their own warts.

In fact, if Mr. Sokatch believes that our Jewish “capacity for self-criticism” can help disillusioned Jews reconnect with Israel, I have an idea for him: Gather as many of these Jews as you can, and give them a two-hour “Wart Seminar.” Get the last few editions of the five top Jewish papers in the country, and go through with the audience all the warts that we in the Jewish community proudly expose and explore every single week.

You probably know all those stories. There’s one about a wealthy Persian American Jew who has been fighting for years to effect a change in the governmental system in Israel, to make it more representative. I worked on that wart.

There are many more — like polluted Israeli rivers, the secular-religious divide, the public disgrace of Gush Katif refugees still looking for a home, corruption at the highest levels, even presidents accused of sexual improprieties.

The point is, no matter what the official positions are of major organizations, Jews don’t like to hide warts, even about Israel. The “messages of pride” that are a natural staple of a people’s self definition and preservation — the kind we give over to young Jews in summer camps, for example — have not been a substitute for the vigorous disagreements and debates among American Jews on their “alternative opinions of Israel.”

When Mr. Sokatch gets “wart specific” in his article, he makes no mention of myriad governmental and other shameful “warts” that have made socio-economic victims of thousands of Jews in Israel. He cites only the “occupation.”

As he well knows, Jews and Israel have plenty of warts to go around; his own organization (Progressive Jewish Alliance) works to alleviate many of them. We can spend a thousand hours debating the “occupation,” and we do, but we usually end up going around in circles.

In the end, though, perhaps it is telling that we are all, to a certain extent, consumed with the conundrum of Judea and Samaria. We each obsess over it from our own Jewish viewpoint. I am outraged at how a hypocritical world has blown it all out of proportion, so I get all protective. Mr. Sokatch can’t ignore the pain of Palestinians, no matter how guilty he finds their leaders. Religious settlers can’t imagine giving up a land gifted by God, so they dig in. Others just want to be done with it — but those bloody rockets won’t stop falling.

We are all caught in this 40-year dance of death, defiance and destiny, and we have no clue how it will end.

In the meantime, I say we keep a watchful eye on those who wish to harm us, make the case for Israel without apology and leave the myopia to others.
David Suissa, an advertising executive, is founder of OLAM magazine and Meals4Israel.com. He can be reached at dsuissa@olam.org.

Am I Blind? Read More »

Sukkahs are for sleeping

We were all refugees from New York, where shivering in the sukkah made global warming seem like an attractive alternative.

Taking up residence in California conferred some advantages — and responsibilities. We were intent on doing what our Ashkenazi forebearers, who lived in inhospitably cold climates, could not do.

We were intent on doing Sukkot the way the Talmud prescribes, meaning 24/7, including spending nights there.

In the days before our property was secured with gates and fences, camping out was somewhat frightful to some of the more timid children, until they hit on a solution.

“Do you think we could have some extra ushpizin in the sukkah?”

Ushpizin are the traditional visitors on Sukkot, the spirits of seven biblical figures — Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, Aaron and David — each of whom joins us on a different day of the holiday, according to the Jewish mystical tradition. Shuli Rand brought them to the attention of the non-Jewish world with his delightful movie by the same name.

I was puzzled. Why were the kids trying to tamper with tradition?

“Just whom would you like us to invite, besides the regulars?” I asked.

“Two special ushpizin,” they responded. “Mr. Smith and Mr. Wesson.”

We never did require the services of the special forces. The traditional ushpizin, however, have rendered faithful service to our household.

Sukkot, it seems to me, suffers from an abundance of thematic riches. Our literature explores so many different themes associated with the observance. Sitting around the festive holiday table, we discuss bitachon, or dependence upon God’s Providence. With walls of thin plywood and roofs of California palm provided by the city of Los Angeles, we talk about our own strategic envelope — of protection coming from above, rather than through the strength of our walls.

The clumsiness of the sukkah makes us examine the fragility of life, the nonpermanence of all our edifices. After a few days of this, we are no longer astonished by how much happiness and camaraderie comes with living simply, with nothing but a table, chairs and food shared with family and friends.

We ask ourselves what it takes to make us happy and how happiness is related to the baring of our souls and the unburdening of dead weight from our souls that Yom Kippur brings. We ponder the difference between the covering of sechach above us, which readily admits Divine illumination, and the opaque coverings that some cultures erect, shutting out any connection to the Divine.

We try to implement the feeling of unity of the Jewish people invoked by the Four Species that the Torah instructs us to take in hand on the first day of the holiday, each with its own flavor and texture, each symbolic of a different kind of Jew, and that become a mitzvah only when they are joined together.

Why, though, did our Creator park this treasure-trove of meaning in a lot that was already full? Weren’t Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur enough to explain to skeptical employers, hearing about yet another absence from the office? Wouldn’t January have been a better time for another holiday, maybe the week after spending winter school break with the kids? We could use a holiday then.

A holiday devoted to happiness and joy is the perfect chaser to the strong, dark brew of the reverence and sobriety of the Days of Awe. Associating Judaism with tension and seriousness is poison to the raising of Jewish children; Sukkot broadcasts the message that the serious stuff is always followed by good times. Still, could it have hurt to wait a month or two till the next holiday?

The answer has much to do with the High Holy Days and Jewish chutzpah. Some folks have structured entire religions around the theme of forgiveness and redemption. Jews wouldn’t settle for that; God had to give them more.

Once forgiven, what do we do for an encore? Sukkot argues that with the negative stuff out of the way, the only possible next step is forging a stronger, warmer relationship with God, with joy and celebration making the shidduch. Here’s where the ushpizin help on two levels.

You can’t build a relationship with something you cannot fathom and understand. If you want to feel close to God, you have to understand something about Him. At this point, things get a bit complicated.

Judaism, surprisingly, is not particularly top-heavy with theology, even though we taught the notion of a single God to a non-Jewish world that produced plenty of theology, when they weren’t too busy burning us. Our home-grown thinkers spent more time telling us what God isn’t than what He is.

They were aware of how little man could comprehend about God. Safer to say less than to subject God to an extreme Divine makeover and turn Him into our own image.

Without chapters of ominous-sounding prose, the ushpizin tell us about God. Each one represents a different aspect, a different characteristic about God. In the mystical tradition, each is an archetype of one the sefirot, the kabbalistic protocols through which the Divine will make its way down to what we experience as material reality.

We discover that, at least as observed through human eyes, the absolute unity of God has very different facets. This is more important than is first realized, especially in today’s world.

We observe that many of our neighbors get stuck on a single aspect of godliness, often with unhappy consequences. Some groups see God as synonymous with love — and leave no room for responsibility and justice. Others move in an opposing direction, finding God chiefly a Being of authority and stern justice and demanding submission to the point of sacrificing reason — and the rest of humanity.

Through the ushpizin, Jews encounter a God who, despite His unity, is thoroughly complex and can only be known to us in very different personalities. Through the Seven Shepherds, as they are called, we discover a hierarchy of values, with chesed, lovingkindness, at the top, but incomplete without reference to inner strength, to the intellectuality of Torah, to the binding of the spiritual to the practical.

Sukkahs are for sleeping Read More »

Christmas in Sukkot?

Last year we moved into a home large enough to build the sukkah we’ve been
dreaming of for a long time.

My partner, Stephen Ariel, designed a sturdy,
easy-to-assemble structure, and with the abundant bamboo in our backyard we
could harvest homegrown skakh (branches used for covering the sukkah).
Thanks to help from my buddy Tom, the sukkah was erected in an afternoon.

The only thing left was what I had been waiting for — the decor. I dashed off to Target to get blue and white lights, then to the Mitzvah Store for ornaments, lulav and etrog. With our friends Wendy and Bo’s boys, Alek and Lukas, we were ready for hiddur ha’mitzvah, magnifying the mitzvah of making and dwelling in the sukkah.

I forget when it happened, but it was one of those “It should have been in a Woody Allen film” moments. As we were in the fervor of decorating, my partner came into the backyard and observed the giddy joy of what was going on.

“Gosh, it sure seems like Christmas time at the rabbi’s house,” he lovingly remarked.

We had a good laugh, but the comment stuck with me, ultimately resonating in a profound and unexpected manner a few days later.

We hung the lights as Sukkot drew near. Alec and Lucas provided valuable design assistance (as you would expect from a 7-year-old and a 4-year-old), and the etrog was placed in its multicolored velvet case. All that remained was to bring in the ushpizin, the honored, memorialized guests.

Facing east, I hung a beautiful banner reminding us of our heralded ancestors, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, Aaron and King David. While the kids and I had generous ornaments and artwork to grace the roof and the lower walls, only the classic ushpizin occupied eye-level territory — and somehow, despite all of what was hanging, something was missing.

With my liberal Jewish mind in high gear, I got it — I needed more ushpizin! Besides the glory of our ancient guests, aren’t there so many more who no longer live, yet still infuse us with wisdom and illuminate our lives through their accomplishments?

The next day, I sat at the computer and created generations of new ushpizin to hang from our walls, feeling as if my whole Jewish perspective opened to a wider lens. Where to begin?

First, my biological family — many, sadly, who are gone but nonetheless inspired me in what I tried to accomplish first as a performing artist and now as a rabbi. Lore and Suissa Jeremias, my grandmother and her sister, concert pianists in Germany; Sam Goldman, the middle-class tailor who was a world-class grandpa; Shemayah Stein, my great-great-great grandfather, the first of four rabbis in our family; and among others, my mom and dad, whose presence I still miss. That placard alone inspired deep memories, but there were more to come: Theodore Herzl, Henrietta Szold, Golda Meir and Yitzhak Rabin; Albert Einstein, Jonas Salk and Sigmund Freund; Maimonides, Ibn Ezra, Baruch Spinoza, Abraham Geiger and Abraham Joshua Heschel; S.Y. Agnon, Isaac Bashevis Singer and Anne Frank; Camille Pissarro, Marc Chagall, Judy Chicago and Louise Nevelson; Gustav Mahler, Maurice Ravel, George Gershwin, Aaron Copland and Leonard Bernstein, whom I was blessed to know both as teacher and friend. These names, printed and laminated, now hung from the branches of the roof, and what was formerly only pretty décor now became a swirling medley of colors, textures, history and heritage.

As the sun set, I flipped the switch and our sechach was aglow, illuminated by myriad blue and white lights. The table, set with the lulav and etrog in their pride-of-place in the center, and the too-fun-not-to-pass-up glowing grape clusters (what can’t you find at Judaica stores?) wrapped gracefully around plates brimming with dessert delicacies.

Guests arrived, and with them, engaging comments: “Who was Louise Nevelson?”; “I didn’t know Pissarro was Jewish!”; “Who are all these Steins?”

Jews, Muslims and Christians partook in our mitzvah of leisheiv ba’sukkah (to sit in the sukkah) with equal measure of wonder and delight, curiosity and respect.

We gathered together to shake the lulav and etrog and spoke of God’s bountiful gift of food enough to feed the world — and humanity’s folly in not allowing that to happen. We remembered those suffering in Darfur, those who tragically understand the notion of “temporary dwelling” in a way we would never want to know. We thought of so many citizens of our city living in cardboard boxes not 10 miles from our home in the Miracle Mile, and what a miracle it was to just have a house to call your home.

We resolved through our ritual to diminish the nomadic reality of this world in some way — to take from our experience within the sukkah not simply a lovely Jewish ritual, but a sacred mandate to engage in tikkun olam. I stood amid family, friends, colleagues and new acquaintances featuring a rainbow of ages, faiths and backgrounds, all with faces aglow. As I observed this collage of humanity, warmth and generosity of spirit, I thought, “Maybe Stephen Ariel was right. Maybe there is a bit of ‘Christmas,’ literally Moshiachzeit — a messianic time — infusing our bamboo-roofed hut.”

Sometimes God’s gifts come in surprising packages.

Stephen Julius Stein is a rabbi at Wilshire Boulevard Temple and the director of the synagogue’s Center for Religious Inquiry.

Christmas in Sukkot? Read More »

Briefs: U.S. House approves Iran divestment; Olmert real estate deals probed; Barghouti seen leading

House Votes to Sanction Iran

The U.S. House of Representatives voted overwhelmingly on Tuesday to toughen sanctions against Iran. The Iran Counter-Proliferation Act bans American firms from using foreign subsidiaries to bypass current sanctions against Iran’s energy sector; bans nuclear dealings with entities that trade with Iran’s nuclear sector, a measure that would cut off nuclear cooperation with Russia; bans free-trade agreements with countries investing in Iran; and tightens the president’s ability to waive the sanctions.

The 397-16 vote was well ahead of the 290 votes the House would need to override a presidential veto, but the bill’s companion in the Senate is stalled and likely won’t be considered this year. The American-Israel Public Affairs Committee strongly praised the bill’s passage as a step toward discouraging Iran’s suspected nuclear weapons ambitions.

“To change Iran’s course, the United States and the international community must use every economic, diplomatic and political tool available,” AIPAC said in a statement. “U.S. sanctions have already helped to discourage investment in and banking cooperation with Iran, and further international action may be able to persuade the Iranian government to comply with its international obligations.” The bill was initiated by Rep. Tom Lantos (D-San Mateo), the Jewish chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

Olmert Probed on Real Estate

Israeli Attorney General Menachem Mazuz on Monday ordered an investigation into prime minister Ehud Olmert’s purchase of a house in Jerusalem after a state audit suggested the price was unreasonably low. That raised suspicion that Olmert was put in a position of returning favors to the property’s former owner. The Prime Minister’s Office called the probe “gratuitous.” Olmert, who is under investigation in two other affairs, has denied all wrongdoing. Many of the suspicions against him originate with State Comptroller Micha Lindenstrauss, whom the prime minister has accused of conducting a witch hunt.

Clinton’s Jewish Donors Meet

The Clinton Jewish Leadership Finance Council launched two days of discussions in Washington on Tuesday. A minimum $10,000 contribution to JACPAC, a Jewish political action committee, was required to attend. Those who qualified discussed strategy, reaching unaffiliated Jewish voters and foreign policy. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) is the current front-runner for the Democratic presidential candidacy.

Barghouti Seen Leading Palestinians

Marwan Barghouti is the next leader of the Palestinian people, a senior Israeli official said. National Infrastructure Minister Benjamin Ben-Eliezer said Tuesday that Israel, which jailed Barghouti, a charismatic Fatah lawmaker and terrorist, for life in 2003, should now consider freeing him as a means of offsetting the influence of Islamist Hamas.

“Anyone who has the safety of life in Israel in mind knows there is no alternative to releasing Marwan Barghouti because he is the strongest party on the Palestinian side,” Ben-Eliezer told Army Radio. “In my humble opinion, this man will be the next leader of the Palestinians. For us he is a murderer, but Arafat was no less a murderer than he, and yet Rabin extended his hand to him. We have to think differently and make an effort in this direction.”

Ben-Eliezer said any clemency for Barghouti should be conditioned on the release by Hamas of Gilad Shalit, an Israeli soldier held hostage in the Gaza Strip since June 2006. Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has ruled out releasing Barghouti. But political sources recently revealed that Olmert’s predecessor, Ariel Sharon, proposed letting the Fatah leader go in exchange for the United States granting an early release to jailed Israeli spy Jonathan Pollard. Washington rebuffed that idea.

Israel to Fund Aliyah Groups

Nefesh B’Nefesh, the United States-based aliyah organization, and Ami, a French aliyah organization, will now receive about $1,000 per immigrant directly from Israel. Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Immigrant Absorption Minister Ya’acov Edri supported Sunday’s funding decision. The organizations, which previously received some funding through the Jewish Agency, are seeking to become wholly independent.

Non-Jews Can Lease JNF land

The Jewish National Fund (JNF) told Israel’s High Court on Monday it will lease land to non-Jews. The court delayed a ruling for three months on whether the JNF should be obligated to lease land to non-Jews in order to give the organization time to reach an agreement with state Attorney General Menachem Mazuz. In the meantime, the JNF and the Israel Lands Authority agreed to formalize an interim land-swap agreement wherein the JNF will be compensated with land from the ILA whenever the JNF leases land to non-Jews. This arrangement ensures that the amount of Jewish-owned land in Israel remains the same, a spokeswoman for JNF said. JNF owns 13 percent of Israel’s land, or about 650,000 acres, some in high population areas. The High Court case stems from a petition filed in 2004 by Adalah, the Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel. Adalah said it would appeal JNF’s about-face Monday and instead seek a precedent-setting ruling to cement the JNF’s obligation to lease land on a religion-blind basis.

Barenboim Named U.N. Peace Envoy

Israeli conductor Daniel Barenboim joins a Jordanian princess, a Brazilian writer and a Japanese-American violinist as Messengers of Peace for the United Nations, a post in which he will promote peace around the world, The Associated Press reported. The foursome were to be honored Friday in a ceremony marking the International Day of Peace. A world-renowned conductor and pianist, Barenboim co-founded an orchestra bringing together young Israeli and Arab musicians. He recently initiated a music education project in the territories.

Report: Madonna Eyes Tel Aviv Apartment

Madonna, who spent Rosh Hashanah in Israel along with fellow kabbalah enthusiasts, has voiced interest in a luxury residential complex going up in northern Tel Aviv, Yediot Achronot reported Sunday. Prices for apartments there begin at $1 million. Other prospective clients include Steven Spielberg, the daily added. When Madonna was in Israel two years ago, local media reported that she might buy a house in Rosh Pina, a village near the mystical town of Safed.

YouTube Contest Aims to Boost Israel’s Image

The Israeli consulate in New York has launched a video competition on YouTube to boost Israel’s image. The best videos will be aired Oct. 11 at Madison Square Garden in New York, when Israel’s perennial basketball champion Maccabi Tel Aviv plays the New York Knicks. Fans will watch the clips on the arena’s giant screens and choose their favorite. The winner will win a round-trip ticket to or from New York and two tickets to a Knicks game. The game will help raise funds for Migdal Or, an organization that helps thousands of children from broken homes. To participate in the video competition, which ends Sept. 30, upload a 30-second clip to YouTube and send a link to www.isrealli.org/maccabitelaviv/. David Saranga, the consulate’s media attache, initiated the project. “We chose YouTube as a platform because by doing it we also increase the amount of positive videos about Israel,” he said. “Today a search for the term ‘Israel’ yields many inciting clips.”

Briefs: U.S. House approves Iran divestment; Olmert real estate deals probed; Barghouti seen leading Read More »

Plenty of theater at the UN, but Iran nuclear issue still unresolved

The high political theater surrounding Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s visit to New York this week triggered plenty of protests, headlines and debates. But it remains unclear if, even after all the exertions this week, the international community has inched any closer to resolving the standoff over Tehran’s nuclear program.

Ahmadinejad’s Jewish critics gathered Monday in the thousands across from the United Nations, portraying the Iranian leader as the heir to Adolph Hitler and the quintessence of evil.

“You are being heard around the world today,” former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Richard Holbrooke told the anti-Ahmadinejad rally. “You’re not wasting your time by being here today. Ahmadinejad is losing the PR battle.”

For his part, Ahmadinejad parried by accepting an invitation from Columbia University, where he presented himself as a reasonable democrat and academic willing to engage in dialogue and face sharp questioning from students. The Iranian leader may have not won many admirers this week, particularly with remarks like the one denying Iran had any homosexuals, but he dominated the opening of the U.N. General Assembly and did not appear to lose any significant ground on the world stage.

Members of the U.N. Security Council remain as divided as ever, with China and Russia resisting American and French calls for more stringent sanctions on the Islamic Republic. A further rift has also opened up within Europe, with Germany openly opposing France’s desire to see Europe impose separate sanctions if the Security Council effort fails.

In the end, Ahmadinejad’s provocations, and his critics’ tremendous show of force at Columbia and the United Nations, may help break the impasse — or at the very least strengthen the American case for further sanctions. But on the more important question — whether sanctions can succeed in preventing Iran’s acquisition of a nuclear weapon — the experts are skeptical.

Trita Parsi, an adjunct professor at Johns Hopkins University and author of “Treacherous Alliance: The Secret Dealings of Israel, Iran, and the United States,” says that sanctions have been in place against Iran for more than two decades and have only succeeded in making the country stronger.

“We should set aside these notions and try to focus on what’s going to work. And what hasn’t worked for 20 years is sanctions,” Parsi said.

Critics argue that American policy has been overly obsessed with sanctions, rather than with changing Iran’s behavior. For that, the United States would need to offer carrots as well as sticks.

“Sanctions are not just there for their own sake,” said Gary Sick, an Iran specialist at Columbia. Sick claims that sanctions have been useful, particularly in pressing Iran to reach an agreement on outstanding issues with the International Atomic Energy Agency, as it did last month. In that, he agrees with Malcolm Hoenlein, the executive vice chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, who told JTA that sanctions have placed Ahmadinejad under mounting pressure and now the international community should tighten the screws.

Hoenlein said that he truly believes effective sanctions could obviate the need for war. But Sick and Parsi agree that ultimately, if the United States genuinely wants Iran to change course, American officials will have to negotiate with Iran and offer it incentives.

“Up until now we have never put an offer on the table to Iran,” Sick said. “We’re not using sanctions to accomplish anything. If you want to actually change Iran’s behavior, you’re not going to do that by putting on more sanctions.”

As many have observed this week, the attention lavished on Ahmadinejad in New York only strengthens him at home, where he is otherwise exceedingly unpopular — not because of his hard-line on Israel, but because of his economic policies. Last December, his party lost ground in city council elections in what was widely seen as a referendum on his leadership.

“At the end of the day, those in Iran that are trying to move diplomatically are having their jobs constantly undermined by the rhetoric of Ahmadinejad,” Parsi said. “Every time he gives an interview, half the Iranian Foreign Ministry has to focus on damage control.”

While Ahmadinejad may not be known for holding his tongue, anti-Ahmadinejad rhetoric continues to escalate to near-apocalyptic proportions, particularly in Jewish circles. Ahmadinejad is now routinely compared to Hitler and the current period to 1938, the year in which a naive British prime minister, Neville Chamberlain, sacrificed the Sudetenland to an ascendant Nazi Germany. At the U.N. rally Monday, many protesters held yellow signs featuring Ahmadinejad’s face in the center of a black swastika.

“President Ahmadinejad seeks to be another Hitler,” U.S. Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) said at the rally, in a comment typical of the way speakers described the Iranian leader. “He brags about it.”

This rhetorical escalation comes as the Jewish community confronts allegations that the pro-Israel lobby used its outsized influence in Washington to propel the American invasion of Iraq. For some, the current situation contains dangerous echoes of the run-up to the Iraq war, a concern that Jewish leaders shared not too long ago. Yet this week, in a battle over perceptions, the media spotlight was focused on the central role of Jewish-led rallies in ratcheting up the pressure on Iran.

For Jewish leaders, Hitler-Ahmadienjad comparisons appear morally clarifying, placing the Iran issue in stark terms as a choice between good and evil. They also suggest a narrow range of policy options: The commonly understood lesson of 1938 is that tyrants cannot be reasoned with — only confronted with Churchillian resolve.

The potential danger of a nuclear Iran does not allow for a more cautious approach, say Israeli leaders, Jewish organizations and many U.S. lawmakers and presidential candidates. But some observers of Iran see things differently.

“We’re constantly focused on the most extreme and radical comments,” Parsi said. “But if we’re only focused on them, then we paint ourselves into a corner where the only way out is war.”

Plenty of theater at the UN, but Iran nuclear issue still unresolved Read More »

Olmert straddles line between hawks and doves

With the planned Middle East summit in Washington less than two months away, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert is caught in an ideological battle between his party’s doves and hawks.

Who prevails could have major ramifications for Israel’s prospects of peace with the Palestinians.

Under pressure, Olmert has been sending mixed messages. Like the doves in the centrist Kadima Party, he says he believes a moderate Palestinian Authority leadership led by P.A. President Mahmoud Abbas represents a unique window of opportunity for peacemaking that should be explored fully.

But like the hawks, Olmert says a final-status agreement will take at least 20 to 30 years.

The prime minister is also caught between opposing pressures from the international community and his party’s hard-liners.

The international community, led by the United States, wants Israel to reach agreement in principle with the Palestinians on the core issues of the conflict: final borders, the status of Jerusalem and the question of the right of return for Palestinian refugees.

The United States wants this to happen before the November parley, to which it has invited Syria and Saudi Arabia in an attempt to expand the summit’s scope. As these Arab states have been reticent to open diplomatic channels with Israel amid Israeli-Palestinian fighting, progress on the Israeli-Palestinian track is essential to the success of broader Arab-Israeli peace and November’s summit.

Kadima’s hawks, however, are warning Olmert not to go too far, otherwise his government could fall.

The leading spokesman for Kadima’s doves is Olmert’s close confidant Haim Ramon, the deputy prime minister and former Labor Party man who has drafted a far-reaching joint agreement of principles with the Palestinians on the core issues of the conflict.

The hawks’ ideologue is Knesset member Otniel Schneller, a West Bank settler from Ma’aleh Michmash, near Ramallah, who has drafted a detailed counterproposal that envisions a much slower peacemaking process that could last decades.

In early September, in what was widely believed to be a trial balloon for Olmert, Ramon leaked elements of his draft plan to Israel’s daily Yediot Achronot. On the matter of Jerusalem he proposed a simple split: In a final peace deal with the Palestinians, Jewish neighborhoods would go to Israel, Arab neighborhoods to the future Palestinian state.

Though this is not a new idea — it had been raised by then-Prime Minister Ehud Barak in the Camp David negotiations with Yasser Arafat seven years ago — it infuriated Kadima’s hard-liners, many of whom had come to Kadima from Likud.

At a key meeting of Kadima’s leadership last week, Transportation Minister Shaul Mofaz argued that it was premature to talk about final-status issues with the Palestinians.

“I urge all those who have lost patience to learn from the lessons of the past and to consider how all the wild rushes towards final settlement have ended,” declared Mofaz, a former defense minister under Likud.

Mofaz’s attack on the current Israeli-Palestinian peace process encapsulated the divisions in the ruling Kadima Party.

The doves believe the West Bank Palestinians now have a moderate leadership committed to peace, and therefore a unique opportunity exists for accommodation that should not be missed. The hard-liners counter that this belief is a dangerous illusion that will lead only to more bloodshed and a Hamas takeover of the West Bank — as happened in June in the Gaza Strip — as soon as Israel withdraws from the area.

Schneller in particular warns against any attempt to force final-status issues. In a detailed peace plan he calls “The Complete Vision,” Schneller argues that the reality on the ground must change — along with Palestinian and Israeli hearts and minds — before peace can be attempted.

In Schneller’s view, past peacemaking attempts failed because Israelis and Palestinians were not truly reconciled and because Israelis were divided about how to deal with the Palestinians. Israelis and Palestinians first must establish “good neighborly relations,” and Israelis must reach a wide national consensus on the general terms of a peace package, before negotiations can begin.

Once that is achieved — no mean feat — Schneller proposes five stages of negotiation, each of which could take several years.

Schneller says he has been “greatly encouraged” by responses to his plan from Olmert and other Cabinet ministers, and that Ramon’s peace plan has no chance of being accepted in the party.

“Sixty percent of Kadima voters are ex-Likudniks, 30 percent Labor and 10 percent Shinui,” he said. “They do not identify with Ramon’s radical left-wing ideas.”

Olmert’s difficulties on the Palestinian front don’t end with Kadima’s hawks. His right-wing coalition partners, Shas and Yisrael Beiteinu, both have warned they will bolt the coalition if he makes concessions on any of the core issues.

There is another major snag: The Palestinians don’t accept the Ramon formula either.

In negotiations so far, major differences have emerged between the two sides on form and substance regarding final-status issues.

On form, Abbas wants a detailed, binding declaration of principles while Olmert wants a more vague joint statement.

On substance, Ramon talks about Israel’s West Bank security barrier as the basis for a final border between two states, while the Palestinian Authority talks about the 1967 Green Line. The Palestinians want compensation for any land annexed by Israel on a one-for-one basis; Ramon says that in land swaps quality, not just quantity, must be taken into account.

The Palestinians want any agreement to include a safe passage between the West Bank and Gaza; Ramon says that has no place in a general agreement of principles.

Perhaps most important, the Palestinians want a timetable for implementation — something the Israelis are loath to give.

For now, Olmert is keeping his options open. On Monday he told the Knesset’s Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee that in a peace deal Israel would withdraw from large tracts of the West Bank, but that was unlikely to happen for another 20 or 30 years.

Schneller says Olmert is too smart a politician to allow Kadima to collapse over an illusory peace process.

Whether or not Olmert will be able to continue straddling the line between his party’s hawks and doves come November, when the eyes of Washington and the world will be on the Israeli-Palestinian track, remains to be seen.


Leslie Susser is the diplomatic correspondent of the Jerusalem Report.

Olmert straddles line between hawks and doves Read More »

On Second Thought

This week, I will sit on my porch, gaze at the pergola and see in its place a bamboo mat. I will remind myself of the biblical commandment, “in a sukkah you shall sit seven days.” And I will then, as I work my way through the interminable “three day yom tov” look up at the Southern California sky, through my bamboo mat, plastic apples and leaves and other kindergarten decorations, and ask, “Why do we do eight days?”

The story goes, as my rabbis taught me in yeshiva, that the Jews in Jerusalem would light a fire on the hilltop when they saw the new moon each month. Fire after fire upon hilltop after hilltop would be lit in succession, eventually making their way to the top of the Mulholland Drive of Babylon. By the time the fire was seen by the people in the valleys of Babylon, Jews scratched their heads in collective confusion as to whether the new moon was today or yesterday. And since time traveled fast in the land of Israel but inevitably slowed once we were no longer blessed by the land (OK, my rabbis did not teach me that, but it was strongly implied), Jews did not know precisely which day was the first of the month, so as a result Jews observed an extra day of Sukkot, Pesach and Shavuot to avoid the chance they were violating the chag. Which is why in Israel, there is one day of yom tov at the beginning and end of Sukkot and Pesach, and everywhere else they observe two days of yom tov.

But hey, today, we have, can you believe, Hebrew calendars, electricity, airplanes and even this thing called the Internet, and time is simple to tell and the dawn of the new moon is pretty easy to decipher. Even if you live in smoggy Los Angeles. So, then, why the need for the two days?

This question often becomes a bigger subject for discussion in a year like this, when the chag starts on Wednesday night, and the two-day yom tov becomes three when you add in Shabbat. By the time Saturday afternoon rolls around, the feeling is, “I cannot wait for the yom to end and this is no longer tov.”

I first grappled with this question the year I spent in yeshiva in Israel after high school. On the first night of Sukkot, the rabbis explained the different permutations possible for us Americans spending “just” a year in the Holy Land (or as it is commonly referred to this time of the year — the place to do “one day”).They talked about how you can do one day or two days, while emphasizing that one day is for those fortunate ones who are committed to living in Israel. For those observing two days, the opinion from the rabbis was to not observe two days but do what was called famously, “a day and a half,” where you prayed like it was not the chag but you were not to turn on lights or do any other forbidden activity.

I sat there, studiously listening to all of the options. After all, I was studying in a yeshiva and took my religion seriously. A day and a half? Odd, but it seemed like a logical compromise in a yeshiva world where every question had a talmudic answer. But as the sun set on the first day and I returned to my room about to observe the “day and a half,” I opened my door, heard music blaring from a nearby Israeli room, looked at the light switch and turned it on without a moment’s hesitation and knowing full well aliyah was not in my plans at that time.

It was at that moment that I had clarity. Two days? A day and a half? Ridiculous. Every time we hear the rabbis talk about what the Torah says, we listen, but here the Torah says seven days for Sukkot and Pesach and we do eight. Huh?

The truth is, the rabbis don’t have a good answer for continuing to observe a second day. So, why not change it? Ay, there’s the rub. Have you ever met an Orthodox rabbi who would admit change is a good thing?

This is where the Law of Return really can play a role. We get on a plane to Israel, declare ourselves citizens of the Jewish State and then — voila — we can observe one day. A friend of mine is doing just that. And who can argue with him? I have friends, devout Orthodox rabbis, who live in Israel but when they are here, tell me, always in a hushed tone, “yeah, the second day I checked my e-mail.” Another solution, although a little more expensive but becoming more popular, is to buy land in Israel. Rabbis have held that if you own land in Israel you can observe one day. Anyone interested in a one-one hundredth share of an apartment? Or better yet, buy a piece of the desert on the way to Eilat. Land is cheap. We can get in now.

I don’t pretend to hope for change from the rabbinate. Instead, maybe we should just all boycott the second day of shul. Do the “day and a half” thing. Here in Los Angeles. Stay home. Sleep late, enjoy your coffee and leisurely read the paper. If there is no minyan, maybe then they will get the idea. Unless of course, the new moon really isn’t when we thought. Then, well, I guess we would just have to Google it.

Joshua Metzger is at an online video start-up in Los Angeles. He has also written two plays, the first of which was selected for development at the National Playwrights Conference. He attended Jewish day schools in New York City.

On Second Thought Read More »

In defense of Madonna

I interviewed Madonna in the early ’90s. At the time I was the managing editor of “In Jerusalem,” a weekend section of The Jerusalem Post. Madonna was in the ‘hood as part of an influx of A-list pop stars who made a symbolic trek to the Holy Land to show support for the fledgling peace process. Other famous notables included Sting, Neil Young, Pearl Jam and Guns N’ Roses, not to mention a red carpet full of actors, movers and shakers, and wannabes.

Recently, Madonna and her husband, British film director Guy Richie, were in Jerusalem celebrating the Rosh Hashanah holiday and attending a kabbalah (Jewish mysticism) conference. They were joined by celebs Demi Moore, Ashton Kutcher, Rosie O’Donnell and designer Donna Karan. Madonna met with Israeli president Shimon Peres, and the two exchanged gifts. He gave her a copy of the Tanach. She gave him a volume of “The Book of Splendor,” the guiding text of kabbalah. Madonna is not a Jew. Nor is her hubby. Yet she wears the red kabbalah string around her wrist, calls herself Esther as well as an “Ambassador for Judaism.”

But as those of us know, it’s not so easy being Jewish.

The ultra-Orthodox community has cried “Shanda without a sheidel! They proclaim Madonna and her merry band of tinseltown kabbalists an abomination. They say she has turned kabbalah into a three-ring circus, and in response they have engaged in an impassioned we-don’t-want-her-among-us campaign.

Truth be told: Many of those holier-than-thous who are bad-mouthing Madonna were once themselves on the wrong side of the tracks, before they rediscovered Judaisim and 613 new ways to live their lives.

Let’s set the record straight: Madonna is good for the Jews.

In a world chock-full of anti-Semites, the pop icon is displaying her heartfelt connection to Israel and Judaism in klieg lights. She celebrates Jewish pride, and she declares through her words and artistic endeavors that Judaism provides a profound source of meaning and spiritual depth. Unlike many doubters who were born Jewish — the assimilators, the self-haters and the apathetics — Madonna, the Material Shiksa, is proud of her inner Jewishness, and is not afraid to wear it, sing it, shout it, love it.

With one flash of the camera, Madame M does more for the Jews than our Jewish lobbies combined: In short, Madonna has made shul cool.

She inserts kabbalah teachings in her music and even in the context of her best-selling children’s books. And Lord knows, we Jews need to do whatever we can to appeal to our Internet-brainwashed kids. With intermarriage skyrocketing, and Hebrew School “totally boring,” Madonna’s stories, particularly “The English Roses,” is a beautifully recreated modern kabbalah tale. Her protagonist, Binah, is a motherless teenager who embodies the gift of mitzvah. Her difficult life sets a shining example for a group of rich, spoiled “Gossip Girls,” who are insanely jealous of Binah’s physical beauty. Binah teaches the girls how to appreciate what they have, and that being a good friend is much more fulfilling than buying the latest iPod Shuffle.

Madonna is not a liar (she never said she was a virgin, she said she was like a virgin). She is and has always been unapologetic, a woman without regrets. She couldn’t care less what you think, as she abides by her own set of principles. Not to mention that she is a physical wonder to the 40-plus crowd. Nearing 50, Madonna has never looked better. Her body is toned and strong, her face is more beautiful than in her youth. Her eyes now glow with the wisdom of an incessant seeker, who was once lost and is now found.

Make no mistake, we are not talking Saint Madonna here. Everybody knows she has been there, done that to the nth degree, but in her controversial journey, Madonna is an inspiration to those who have lost their way, proving that they, too, can find the light at the end of the tunnel.

And her light happens to shine upon Jewish teachings. How bad is that?

Accept her, embrace her. While the likes of Britney and Lindsay are rehab hopping, and other it girls are spending their days trying to avoid the slammer, Madonna the Goy is busy running around the world being a Good Jew.

So here’s to you, Esther. Bruchim Habaim, as they say in the Old Country. Any time you need a holiday, you are not only welcome in my house, but also at my Sabbath table.

Lisa Frydman Barr is a Chicago-based writer.

In defense of Madonna Read More »

Who’s afraid of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad?

When Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad spoke at Columbia University the other day, he did not emerge with the “propaganda victory” that neocon pundit Bill Kristol assured us he would receive. He didn’t seem to be having fun either.

Instead, he had to listen while Columbia President Lee Bollinger lambasted him for the terrible state of civil liberties in Iran: the executions, the political prisoners, the persecution of homosexuals. Bollinger also questioned Iran’s foreign policy — sometimes skating past the province of the proven, but never beyond the realm of legitimate inquiries-and he challenged the Iranian for suggesting the Holocaust is a “myth.”

Agence France-Presse called the introduction “a humiliating and public dressing down.”

And then, after presenting his point of view, Ahmadinejad faced frequently hostile questions from the audience. Immediately before the Columbia speech, he had spoken via satellite to the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., where he also had to answer audience questions. Before that he appeared on “60 Minutes,” where he had faced still more questions. For a few days in September, the president of a repressive religious regime actually had to engage his critics.

No wonder the hawks were up in arms. For months, Kristol and company have been telling us that engaging Iran is a dreadful, futile mistake. When they complained about Columbia’s decision to let that country’s president speak on campus, they were simply continuing this crippling inability to distinguish conversation from surrender. Maybe they were genuinely afraid that this would be a PR triumph for Ahmadinejad, and maybe they just didn’t like the idea of a pause for reflection as they steamroll us to war. Either way, they were wrong.

Bollinger’s critics didn’t restrict themselves to complaining. The speaker of the New York Assembly, Sheldon Silver (D-Manhattan), has suggested the state could cut back its assistance to the university to punish it for hosting the Iranian. As it happens, I’d like to see that support slashed anyway, in part because-as Silver’s threat demonstrates-such money often comes with strings attached. But what freedom-loving American can help but be repelled at the impulse behind Silver’s proposal, this idea that the government should use the power of the purse to shut down a discussion it dislikes? Who can help but be repelled at the implication that Columbia’s students can’t hold their own in a debate with the president of Iran?

Interviewed by The New York Sun, Silver explained his position.

“What makes it more outrageous is the fact that some dean yesterday said he would have invited Adolf Hitler,” he said. “It’s totally outrageous. This is not a matter of academic freedom. This is a matter of legitimizing people, one who was the perpetrator of the Holocaust and one who denies its existence.”

I prefer the attitude of the Jewish students who turned out to listen to their Iranian visitor, to ask him questions and to boo and jeer when they disapproved of what he was saying. If you saw C-SPAN’s abbreviated coverage of the event, you may have noticed the many yarmulkes adorning heads in the audience. I doubt the people who wore them admire Ahmadinejad any more than Silver did. But they apparently understand that the solution to bad speech is more speech, and that even bad speech can be valuable. In response to one query, about the mistreatment of homosexuals in Iran, Ahmadinejad claimed that there simply are no gays in his country: “In Iran we do not have this phenomenon. I don’t know who has told you that we have it.”

Anyone listening to that lie learned a lot about Iranian society. Ahmadinejad himself may have learned a thing or two from the laughter that swept the room after his answer.

Silver isn’t the only politician looking for ways to punish Columbia. Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-El Cajon.) tried to juice up his bottom-tier presidential campaign by announcing he’d “introduce legislation in Congress to disqualify Columbia University from any future federal support.”

Another Republican contender, Mitt Romney, grandstanded even more shamelessly, proclaiming that the Iranian shouldn’t have received an entry visa in the first place. If you suspected that Silver and Hunter represent just a tiny sliver of the electorate, Romney’s statement should give you pause. Romney isn’t an ordinary flesh-and-blood candidate, after all; he’s a machine calibrated to say whatever is most likely to emerge from a focus group of Republican primary voters.

The most desperate attacks on Columbia have charged the institution with hypocrisy. One argument — Kristol trots it out, and so do John McCain and The Wall Street Journal — faults the school for allowing Ahmadinejad to speak while barring ROTC from campus. The two policies might have been comparable, I guess, if Ahmadinejad had used his time to train the audience for the Islamic Revolutionary Guards. Others note that the Columbia Political Union just cancelled its plans to have Minuteman founder Jim Gilchrest speak at the university. That might have been damning if the Columbia Political Union had sponsored Ahmadinejad’s talk, but the latter was a project of the School of International and Public Affairs, an entirely different organization.

But even if the Political Union had run the controversialevent, so what? The organizers would be hypocrites, sure, but that would prove only that they acted spinelessly when Gilchrest’s speech was at stake, not that they acted improperly when inviting the president of Iran.

One more critic — Abe Foxman of the Anti-Defamation League — has called Columbia’s decision “a perversion of the concept of freedom of speech,” declaring, “There’s no requirement, no moral imperative, to give him a platform that he will not give [his opponents] in Tehran.” Foxman is right, to an extent. President Ahmadinejad does not have a right to give a lecture at Columbia, and Columbia does not have a duty to let him in. Columbia does not have a right to receive our tax dollars, either, and politicians do not have a duty to subsidize it. If you’re a libertarian looking for a loophole, a reason you shouldn’t feel obliged to defend the event, it’s not hard to find one. The First Amendment is not at issue here.

But free speech is at issue, because this tempest gets to the heart of a key argument for the open marketplace of ideas: the idea that hearing what other people have to say and confronting their ideas is good, and that doing so makes us not weaker but stronger.

Who’s afraid of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad? Read More »

Sukkahs become ‘Artful Dwellings’ in a holiday exhibit at the Skirball

Wearing matching light-green pants and jacket and a white hat, Marlene Zimmerman sits on one of the wooden benches of “Joyful Visions: An American Sukkah,” her installation currently on view at the Skirball Cultural Center. The artist looks contemplative and at peace under 100-year-old hanging vines that wind through the pergola at the top of her design; such a tranquil setting seems appropriate for a show timed to the seasonal harvest holiday.

Zimmerman’s installation is one of three works from the Skirball’s permanent collection on view in the exhibition “Artful Dwellings: Sukkot at the Skirball.” The other two are by artists Sam Erenberg and Therman Statom. All of these environmental works were first exhibited by the Skirball 10 years ago, and they invite the viewer to walk inside, meditate and, in the case of the works of Erenberg and Zimmerman, sit down.

Within Zimmerman’s wood structure, which has open windows above the two benches, scenes of sukkot are painted on the wall against a light-blue backdrop. Based on photographs culled from Internet correspondence and cold calls across the country, Zimmerman depicts sukkot from every state in the union.

Like the miniaturized versions of synagogues from around the world on display at the Museum of the Diaspora in Tel Aviv, Zimmerman’s art provides, as she says, “a Jewish geography lesson.”

One noteworthy scene is that of the St. Paul, Minn., sukkah shaped like a yurt. The community “consulted the rabbi, and it met every specification,” Zimmerman says.

Known for her work as a folk artist, Zimmerman captures images of Jews not only from northern climes but also from the South and West, such as the Jewish community of Honolulu, where American servicemen from World War II took part in the harvest festival, and the “Delta Jews” of Mississippi, where documentary filmmaker Mike DeWitt is seen next to a sukkah covered with wisteria.

As one might imagine based on the title of the piece, Erenberg’s “Tabernacle” suggests the temporary structure of a nomadic people. The work’s minimalist interior includes a water basin, used for purification in biblical days, while the exterior looks a bit like a Rubix Cube, except with an opening between two of the panels. It reminds us of the sacred tent that our forebears built while wandering in the desert when they did not have the ability to build a permanent temple.

That is not to say that Erenberg’s work is incomplete. Viewed from right to left, as if one is reading Hebrew, it tells the complete story of creation on the exterior mural, with whorls of dark blue paint on the extreme right representing the time before Genesis. Erenberg’s next panel is painted in a fiery red, giving the impression of an explosion, perhaps like the Big Bang.

Next we see a tree, with a triangular opening at its middle. The tree flowers in spite of the cutout, but the abrupt presence of the triangle, half of a Star of David, conveys the importance of persistence in the face of adversity. Growth, Erenberg seems to say, can be halted if we are not persistent, if we allow the yield signs to block the way to fulfillment.

Statom’s installation may be the most avant-garde. A glass artist who frequently uses the form of the house, according to Skirball senior curator Grace Cohen Grossman, Statom has created a glass structure marked up with graffiti, as if it were a canvas. Some of the scrawl is legible, including the names of various Jewish patriarchs –Abraham, Isaac and Jacob — as well as female icon Esther. Other scribblings can not be discerned, but one can make out a sketch of the State of Israel.

Statom’s outline of the Jewish nation is truncated, so that the northern half lies on one piece of glass, the southern half on another. Although the demarcations do not correspond with the Palestinian territories, Statom is clearly noting the division of the country, if not the broken nature of the peace process.

Statom, who is not Jewish, also includes blown glass and drawings of various fruits, such as grapes and pears, and places candles and candlestick holders on top of the sculpture. And in what Grossman terms a touch of “whimsicality,” he suspends leaves made of aluminum above the sukkah.

Like the dreams of the Israelites in the desert, the leaves seem to undulate and float to the top of the high-ceilinged space, or to the heavens.

“Artful Dwellings: Sukkot at the Skirball” runs through Nov. 11. 2701 N. Sepulveda Blvd., (310) 440-4500. Sukkahs become ‘Artful Dwellings’ in a holiday exhibit at the Skirball Read More »