fbpx

November 23, 2007

Meet the multitalented, endlessly energetic Zane Buzby

There are not enough hours in the day for Zane Buzby.

At 5:30 a.m., fully awake, she sits in her home office atop Mount Washington, with a view of downtown Los Angeles’ skyscrapers, checking the news and drinking from a large mug of coffee. Her husband, Conan Berkeley, and their 15-year-old Blue Russian cat, appropriately named Blue, are both still asleep.

Once she is confident that the world didn’t explode overnight, she immerses herself in the Survivor Mitzvah Project — reading translations of the survivors’ letters and composing replies. A stack of envelopes sits on a nearby desk, a High Holy Days mailing to survivors in Ukraine and Moldova that was halted when she ran out of funds. Now she’s aiming for Chanukah.

She also worries — about Fanya K., who is borderline blind and needs an eye operation, and Elke F. who is now living alone since her husband’s death. She finds $80, emptying the Survivor Mitzvah Project’s bank account, to send to Elke to reimburse her for the burial.

Buzby logs in all the transactions in the computerized database and files all the survivors’ letters — originals, translations and envelopes — in sheet protectors in a large binder, filling a new one every four months. If there’s time, she makes final edits on a book she has compiled of their letters and photos, which she offers as a gift to donors contributing $1,000 or more and which she hopes to publish.

“Nothing I can say compares with their words,” she said .

But the Survivor Mitzvah Project is only one of her full-time pursuits, and at 9 a.m., she turns to “Stomp the Run,” a serialized live-action comedy that she and Berkeley have been creating for the past three years, serving as directors/producers. Preproduction for 100 episodes began in November.

“It’s the first totally interactive show,” Buzby said, explaining that it will appear on “new media” such as cell phones and Web sites. For “Stomp the Run,” Buzby answers e-mails and fields calls to and from New York. Later she attends editing or casting sessions as well as other meetings and often works out of her production office in Hollywood.

Buzby, who grew up in East Meadow, Long Island, began her entertainment career as an actor, songwriter and film editor. She was also a singer and moved to Los Angeles in 1977 with Berkeley and their rock band B & B.

From there, Buzby began acting, with credits that include Cheech & Chong’s “Up in Smoke,” John Ritter’s “Americathon” and “Oh, God!” with George Burns.

“I was always the crazy person,” she said.

In the 1980s, she moved into television, training in multicamera direction under “Cheers” co-creator James Burrows. She went on to direct about 200 comedic episodes, including “Newhart,” “Golden Girls” and “Married … With Children,” as well as other pilots and comedy series. Now “Stomp the Run” occupies all her time.

But along with her passion for comedy has been a passion for history — for her own Jewish heritage and for the “great immigration” and the Holocaust. She devours non-fiction and is currently reading “Women in the Holocaust” and “Minsk Ghetto.” On a trip to Hawaii, for beach reading, she brought along “The Destruction of Lithuanian Jewry.”

It was family history, however, that prompted the 2001 trip to Belarus to visit the former shtetls of her two grandmothers.

In Vishnevo, where the Jewish population was completely wiped out, she set out to find the grave of her great-grandmother, Basha Ita. Buzby and a guide searched all day for the cemetery. Finally, an elderly non-Jewish lady took them to a hill outside the town to an area, strewn with garbage and overgrown that is now the town dump. Crawling underneath the dense brush, they discovered the cemetery.

Determined to restore it, Buzby teamed up with an Israeli couple, originally from Vishnevo, and together they raised enough money to have the trees and trash removed and the tombstones righted. Four hundred graves were discovered, which were all photographed and mapped, although Basha Ita’s grave was never found.

Buzby’s passion for Jewish history also led to her business of selling and restoring samovars, candlesticks, Kiddush cups, menorahs and other Judaic ritual items, primarily from the late 1880s to early 20th century; many of them are museum-quality pieces.

She does much of the repair work herself in a home workshop equipped with the necessary tools, including a drill press she requested for one birthday.

“I’m the only one on this planet who has parts for samovars,” she claimed. Some items, such as wooden knobs and handles, she makes herself. She outsources other repairs to a few metalsmiths but laments that the profession is dying.

Buzby acquired her inventory in 1996 when she chanced upon a Judaic shop going out of business in New York’s Lower East Side. Hundreds of samovars, candlesticks and other items were slated to be melted down and sold according to weight. Buzby couldn’t allow it. She purchased the inventory from the shop’s owner and paid his rent for two months while she arranged to ship everything to California. Two years later, she opened her own business.

“I was compelled to save these things and get them back into modern life,” she said.

Buzby, who is named Zane after her great-grandmother Zipra, credits her family for her various passions and pursuits.

It was her father who told her, “You have a right to paint your dreams,” and her mother who instilled in her an avid desire to read. One grandfather, an eccentric, fun-loving man, taught her the importance of eating ice cream at 3 p.m. — every day. One grandmother, who died with a list in Yiddish of everything she planned to do for other people that day, modeled for her the value of doing mitzvot.

In the evenings, if she is not in the editing room for “Stomp the Run,” Buzby is back at her computer working on the Survivor Mitzvah Project. And while there’s always more to do, she tries to turn in before midnight.

“I have no problem sleeping,” she said.

Meet the multitalented, endlessly energetic Zane Buzby Read More »

Chicago’s cops have big troubles, but that doesn’t mean they can’t make videos about Jews

The problems of the Chicago Police Department are well-known—” target = “_blank”>LAPD proposed, but it raises a few questions:

  1. Are Chicago Jews so exotic they need a National Geographic travelog about their obscure customs?
  2. Are Chicago cops so uneducated about the world around them that they need a video like this?
  3. Who else got the special Chicago treatment; the Police Chaplain narrator mentions a total of three—Muslims? Sikhs? Hindus? Mormons?  What are they like?

On the other hand, maybe it was a good idea, especially after Update:  The rest of these USDOJ-funded videos can be Chicago’s cops have big troubles, but that doesn’t mean they can’t make videos about Jews Read More »

Beit LosCon greets Shabbat, geek style

Even if you’ve never been to a sci-fi convention, you could probably guess what you’d encounter. And likely you wouldn’t be too far off.

Fanboys and fangirls turn up at a ‘con’ to learn behind-the-scenes details of favorite franchises, and many come dressed in character, sporting costumes like Natalie Portman’s slinky white cat suit from “Star Wars: Episode II — Attack of the Clones.” Panel discussions of speculative fiction trends give way to concerts of folk music with sci-fi or fantasy themes known as filk.

But even at a gathering where it’s wise to expect the unexpected, Jewish sci-fi fans might be a little shocked to see a minyan listed on the schedule.

The annual weekend-long L.A. sci-fi convention, known as LosCon, which invades the LAX Marriott Nov. 23-25, has regularly featured religious services during its 32-year history, including a Catholic Mass and a pagan circle. But starting in 2006, Friday night and Saturday morning Shabbat services were added to the con’s list of events.

Judaism popping up at LosCon is not a total surprise. Like politics and accounting, Jews are disproportionately represented in the world of science fiction. Writers like Isaac Asimov, Harlan Ellison, David Brin, William Tenn and Michael A. Burstein have brought Jewish voices to a genre that took off in the 1930s. Jews are well represented in the fandom community, and Marcia Minsky is certainly one of them.

The Camarillo retiree first organized the minyan for LosCon 33 and will return Thanksgiving weekend for LosCon 34 to serve as lay leader for the geekiest congregation in Los Angeles — Beit LosCon.

Minsky doesn’t have a smicha (rabbinical ordination). Nevertheless, she’s dubbed herself the “Rabbi of the Con.”

“If you’re going to run services, you have to have some kind of a title,” Minsky said.

The services are based on Conservative liturgy to ensure that a wide spectrum of Jews, from nonpracticing to Orthodox, can feel comfortable. “I’m trying to make it egalitarian,” she said.

The inaugural services at LosCon 33 attracted about two-dozen people from the 1,000 LosCon attendees, and Minsky expects a similar or larger turnout this year.

When she isn’t busy telling everyone what page number to turn to in the siddur, Minsky serves as president of the Los Angeles Science Fiction Society (LASFS), the oldest continually meeting sci-fi fan organization club in the world. LosCon is the group’s annual event.

Founded in 1934 by such luminaries as Ray Bradbury and Ray Harryhausen, LASFS’ membership numbers 3,000. This reporter recently joined the North Hollywood-based club, and the membership figure is probably somewhat inflated, considering its slogan: “Death does not release you.”

Minsky, 62, has been a LASFS member for more than 20 years, and she’s drawn to the club’s literary leanings.

A lifelong science-fiction fan, her interest in the genre piqued when she was 9, “when reading was really reading,” she said. “I would pick up a book, and it wouldn’t matter if it was geared to a younger person, a teenager or an adult.”

Judaism also has played an important role in her life. An L.A. native, Minsky grew up Conservadox, attending services at Van Nuys’ Temple Ner Tamid, which merged with Maarav Temple to become Tarzana’s Temple Ner Maarav. She says her faith brought her serenity when she spent a year saying Kaddish for her husband.

Minsky has participated in minyans at other cons, and she says the services help her feel that the week is complete: “When I’m in services, whether at the con or the larger world, I just wrap myself into my Judaism, and I can block out everything else.”

Beit LosCon greets Shabbat, geek style Read More »

Almost . . .

As Thanksgiving approaches, I can’t help but stop and think about what I’m thankful for.

So much has happened since last year, relationship-wise, and it
struck me that as thankful as I am for what has happened, I’m equally thankful for everything that didn’t.

That’s right, I’m thankful for that bad date that left me shaking my head, for those terribly dull IM chats and for that awful phone call that left me wanting to fall asleep.

I’m thankful to all of the “almosts” and “not quites” that I’ve experienced this year; after all, if I hadn’t experienced those, I never would have found my way down this twister path to my beshert.

There is a great line in the movie “Because I Said So,” when not too geeky to be hot Tom Everett Scott is asked why he is still single. He replies with the standard “Just haven’t met the right girl” line, but then adds “There are a lot of great ‘almosts’ out there …”

Everyone out in the dating world has met or has been an “almost.” The differences between “almosts” and “beshert” are subtle, sometimes taking months or even years to be discovered. It’s like someone else making your mom’s Thankgiving turkey recipe. It tastes good, but is just not quite the same as how your mom makes it. There are subtle differences, some nearly untraceable, but to the sensitive person they are there, sitting and waiting to be discovered.

Being an “almost” is nothing to be ashamed of, in fact, most “almosts” are really great people. People with whom, for a portion of time, you saw yourself for the long run; you envisioned your happily ever after — dating, vacations, weddings, kids…. You imagined your life around this person. And things were great, for a while. But then those little missing ingredients started becoming more and more apparent — little details that started to tear things apart.

I dated my “almost” for more than a year and a half. We dated, we laughed, and we fell in love; he braved the family seders, and I vacationed with his friends. He welcomed in the High Holy Days with us, and I experienced my first Christmas eve with his friends and pseudo-family. But then, little by little, things started to change. The details of life started to overwhelm the happy relationship that we had had for so long.

The most difficult part of dating an “almost” is the time when you start to recognize that’s what it is. It’s really a three-part process — the realization, the battle, then, lastly, the acceptance. The acceptance is by far the hardest part; it takes courage and a crazy amount of strength to tell yourself — as well as your “almost” — that things just aren’t working. As they say in the song, “breaking up is hard to do …” And when you are breaking up with an “almost,” it can be devastating. It’s so scary to let go of something that has become bigger than just the relationship — friends, shared activities, weekend jaunts, all your memories with your “almost” become tainted. It’s so hard to be so close to something you’ve always wanted, only to realize that it isn’t meant to be.

However, the uplifting thing about an “almost” is the realization that there are good people out there, that if someone exists who is so close to your ideal, then your ideal might be just around the corner. Dating an “almost” gets you primed; you’ve experienced how good life can be, and now you are aware of those key ingredients that need to be properly measured. That extra bit of laughter, that dash of silliness, and that little pinch of understanding, all of those things you learned from your “almost.” As time passes, the memories that you built with your “almost” lose their tainted nature, and you can once again smile at them. Life changes, and before you know it, you walk around the corner and into the arms of your “beshert,” and all you can wish for is that all of your “almosts” will find theirs as well. So while I’m sitting around with my family this Thanksgiving, I’ll be sure to add a silent thank you to all of my “almosts,” as they helped me find what I’ve been searching for.

Caroline Cobrin is a freelance writer living in Van Nuys. She can be reached at carolinecolumns@hotmail.com.

Almost . . . Read More »

Have laptop, will prosper

Last Shabbat at Sinai Temple Rabbi David Wolpe stood at the bimah to deliver his sermon — and whipped out his laptop.

I wasn’t there, but I was told not a few of the congregants at the mainstream Conservative shul balked — what was coming out next, his cell phone? Observant Jews don’t use such devices on the holy day of rest; he might as well have whipped out a broiled lobster and drawn butter.

“I expect this to be the first and last time I open a laptop on the bimah,” Wolpe said.

Wolpe didn’t actually start checking e-mail and, say, JewishJournal.com. He brought out the small, colorful laptop to push his congregants to participate in a remarkable, world-changing program called One Laptop per Child.

One Laptop per Child (OLPC) is the name of a USA-based nonprofit launched in 2005 by Nicholas Negroponte and faculty members of the MIT Media Lab, with the goal of bringing computer technology to the children of the developing world.

Over the past two years it has created a brilliant piece of machinery, the XO-1, a water-, dust- and shock-proof, web-ready hi-tech wonder that uses open source (i.e., free) software and miniscule amounts of energy, energy that can be suplied via a hand crank or solar panel. One Sinai congregant suggested the XO-1 is the ideal computer to have around for when “The Big One” strikes.

The original idea was to create a “$100 laptop” that governments in developing countries could buy en masse and distribute to their children. “It’s an education project, not a laptop project,” Negroponte has said. Some 15 countries have committed to the program, including Rwanda and Libya — the latter signed an agreement to supply laptops to all of its 1.2 million schoolchildren, according to The New York Times.

But even committed countries wouldn’t buy a quarter million XO-1s until the product was proven, and the price couldn’t drop to $100 without selling more laptops. So Negroponte and company devised Plan B: the Give One, Get One program. For a limited time — until Nov. 26 — they are offering American and Canadian consumers the opportunity to purchase an XO for a child in your life, while donating another to a child in a developing nation. The cost with shipping works out to about $400, which includes a year of free T-mobile wireless Internet access. Because one of those laptops is headed to Cambodia or Chad, $200 of the price is a tax-deductible contribution.

Earlier this month, Wolpe met Negroponte at the home of Internet entrepreneur Dan Adler, a local project booster, and the rabbi was sold. Shortly thereafter he sent an e-mail out to the thousands of people on the Sinai list.

“This program,” he wrote, “which involves all faiths and nations, is an attempt to bring computers, curricula, and education to the very poorest parts of the world. By purchasing one remarkably inexpensive — yet remarkably effective — computer, you will enable a poor child to receive a computer as well…. Let us join people from all over the world seeking to help those who crave knowledge, information, and connection. These computers work without electricity and are specially designed to enable the poorest children to benefit. The Talmud teaches that Jews are rachamim b’nei rachamim — merciful people and the children of merciful people. Please show your mercy to children all over the world.”

But it’s not just about mercy; what makes this project resonate from a Jewish pulpit is how it provides children not with sustenance, but with the tools to sustain and enrich themselves.

Last month The Templeton Foundation asked a range of experts a simple question, “Can money solve Africa’s development problem?”

The experts agreed that Africa’s poverty comes not from lack of money or resources, but from the inability to unleash the best entrepreneurial spirit of the African people.

“The problem in Africa has never been lack of money, but rather the inability to exploit the African mind,” wrote James Shikwati, CEO of The African Executive business magazine.

Critics of Negroponte have pointed out that children in poor countries need clean water and malaria pills, not laptops. Building libraries is more cost effective than supplying machines, they say. Of course, none of these needs are mutually exclusive. But even so, there is something noble and brilliant in Negroponte’s idea that giving children the tools of a 21st century education will enable their societies to leap, rather than crawl, forward. In the computer age, one entrepreneur with a laptop can change the world — ask the 23-year-old who created Facebook — but first that brilliant kid needs a laptop.

There are a lot of things I could have written about this week — a certain conclave in Annapolis comes to mind — but here before us is this concrete chance to demonstrate our gratitude for all we have by sharing our gifts with others, and we have just until Nov. 26 to do it.

Happy Thanksgiving.

Visit the Give One, Get One program @ http://www.laptopgiving.org/en/index.php

Have laptop, will prosper Read More »

Too Many Arguments? Change the Playing Field

What do Jews do when they seriously disagree with one another? Sometimes they hold their noses, other times they do worse — they disconnect. Over the past few weeks I’ve seen a nice sampling of Jewish disagreements, and it’s made me think about the value of occasionally changing the playing field.

The first episode was during an Orthodox outreach event. About 100 young, mostly Persian Jews gathered at my house late on a Friday night, as part of Aish HaTorah’s new effort to reach out to the Mizrachi community.

After a Shabbat meal at the Aish Outreach Center, the guests walked the two blocks to my house for some “Oneg Shabbat” and an “Ask the Rabbi” session in my backyard. The rabbi, a hip and strictly observant Sephardic Jew who lives in Jerusalem, did a little stand-up routine to warm up the crowd, and then the questions began.

One of the questions was why we should bother with seemingly trivial details like which shoe we should tie on first. The rabbi didn’t flinch and drew an analogy to other trivial details, like the dot in an e-mail address. If you forget this tiny detail, he explained, your message will never get through. God has a plan, and all the details are crucial parts of God’s plan to get through to us, and for us to get through to Him.

So far, so good. But then, someone decided to ask the one question you never want to ask at a singles event: “Rabbi, how come we’re not allowed to touch until we get married?”

Talk about an attention-getter. I think even the bartender stopped pouring drinks to see how the rabbi would get out of this one. What could anyone say to convince amorous young Jews mingling under the midnight stars that you shouldn’t even hold hands or kiss your date goodnight?

Nothing.

Oh, the rabbi tried. But no matter how eloquent, witty or spiritual he got, it was clear that no one was ready to buy into such a radical message. Still, while some people “held their noses,” nobody got so offended that they left (I’m sure the Grey Goose helped).

A couple of weeks later, I saw another example of sharp disagreement, this time with a less salutary ending. I was speaking at a salon discussion called “What’s Your Story?” at Sinai Temple, right after their Friday Night Live event. The interviewer asked me about something I’d recently written about tikkun olam: “Can this grand love affair with repairing humanity become a runaway train that will take Jews further and further away from the binding glue of Jewish peoplehood?”

I elaborated and tried to be as delicate as possible — but then I got carried away and said something a Jew should never admit in public: “I put my people first.” Busted. I tried to soften it up and say “I love all of God’s children, of course, but there’s a special place in my heart for my Jewish family,” but it was too late. I saw two people make that face you make when you say “feh” — and walk out. Me and my big mouth.

At yet another event, a comrade from the political right chastised me because I have Jewish friends on the political left — and asked how I could possibly defend a Jew whose views on dealing with the Palestinians were so different than mine.

And on it went. It seems that everywhere I go these days, I see Jews holding their noses — at other Jews. Of course, the idea of Jews getting easily offended by other Jews is nothing new, but it still pains me to see Jews boycotting each other. In the Jewish community, love isn’t blind — ideology is.

Mutual tolerance sounds nice, but it’s often a polite euphemism for mutual avoidance. That’s why I think it might be a good idea, once in awhile, for Jews to take a break from the drama of ideological divisions and look for different playing fields that can help us reconnect — like Jewish culture.

This notion dawned on me the other day when one of my “left-wing friends,” UCLA professor David Myers, invited me to see his new initiative to create a world-class archive at UCLA relating to Jewish cultural creativity. As he put up slides that showed examples of Jewish cultural treasures — and articulated a vision whereby this collection would serve as a “stimulus to ongoing and future creativity” — my mind wandered, and I started dreaming about … my neighborhood.

I imagined what it’d be like to have a Jewish Cultural Museum right here in Pico-Robertson — a museum that would serve as a sanctuary of Jewish connection, where Jews of all stripes would admire the creativity of our ancestors throughout the ages.

I thought: Who could argue with culture? Great art isn’t left wing or right wing or Reform or Orthodox. Ancient archives are not there to offend us with another opinion. Instead of telling us how to live, culture delights us, enlightens us and arouses our curiosity — not to mention our Jewish pride. In the middle of our ideological arguments, while we all dig in our heels, culture is a gentle reminder that Jews have survived for so long not just by arguing, praying and sermonizing, but also by creating.

Culture is an integral part of the Jewish buffet, and for many young Jews disconnected from their Judaism, it might even be the most inviting door back.

Of course, we have great Jewish cultural institutions in Los Angeles, like one of my favorites, the Skirball. In my dream, I would see a mini-Skirball right in the heart of the hood, nestled among the shuls, food markets and falafel joints of Pico Boulevard. I love the idea that as people walk and drive through the neighborhood, they will see that Jewish creativity is part of the soul of Jewish life — at least as important as Jeff’s Gourmet or even a house of worship. In a neighborhood where many people stick to their own communities, the museum would be the place for all communities — the place that would celebrate peoplehood right in the hood.

And if we find that all these good feelings about the museum are creating too much Jewish unity, well, we could always pick a fight over the location.

David Suissa is publisher and editor-in-chief of Jewish Journal. He can be reached at davids@jewishjournal.com.

 

 

Too Many Arguments? Change the Playing Field Read More »

Annapolis parlay repeating the mistakes of Oslo

Before year’s end, a U.S.-sponsored conference involving Israel and the Palestinian Authority will convene in Annapolis, Md., to frame yet another plan to end the Arab-Israeli war and create a Palestinian state.

Sadly, this conference has as much chance of succeeding as did Oslo, because the same mistakes that ensured failure then are being made now.

During the Oslo years, the Palestinians received half of Judea and Samaria, all of Gaza, weapons and billions in aid while the world ignored Yasser Arafat’s non-fulfillment of any of his obligations to prevent terrorism, arrest terrorists, outlaw terrorist groups and end incitement to hatred and murder against Israel and Jews in their media, schools and official speeches.

We even ignored the fact that the Palestinian Authority named schools, streets and sports teams after terrorists. Indeed, Arafat was not held accountable for his lack of compliance and promotion of terror. From then until now, the Palestinian public has become more, not less, radicalized against the very existence of Israel even as Israeli concessions and U.S. funding continued.

Now the same failed scenario is unfolding with the new “Annapolis accords.” Instead of ending concessions and aid and applying pressure to the Palestinian Authority to finally fulfill its Oslo commitments, Israel and the United States are promising virtually all of Judea and Samaria, parts of Jerusalem, the forced eviction of 70,000 Jews and hundreds of millions in U.S. aid. It’s as if the past 14 years of Palestinian terror and promotion of terror didn’t happen.

But we’re told the big difference now is that P.A. President Mahmoud Abbas is not Arafat and is a “moderate.” Is that true? Hardly.

Not only does Abbas allow the incitement against Israel to continue and refuse to arrest terrorists, but he refers to terrorists as “heroes,” proclaims “our rifles are aimed at the occupation” and “it is our duty to implement the principles of Yasser Arafat.” He proved these anti-peace statements have meaning by endorsing the so-called “prisoners plan” and the Hamas-Mecca agreement, which called for more violence against Israel.

Here is further proof that Annapolis won’t succeed with Abbas: some U.S. aid to the P.A. president has ended up in Hamas’ hands; Abbas has called Hamas “an integral part of the Palestinian people;” and he promises to engage in further talks with Hamas if it cedes control of Gaza. Hamas could take over the Palestinians anytime it wishes — and Abbas knows this.

Why do Abbas and the Palestinian Authority continue to promote extremism and terror? Because their goal is not a two-state solution but Israel’s destruction.

The Arabs keep saying “no” whenever a state is offered. They rejected a Palestinian state in 1948; they didn’t establish one from 1948 to 1967 when they controlled Judea, Samaria, Gaza and parts of Jerusalem; and they rejected Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak’s offer of statehood in 2000.

Not only does Israel not appear on any Palestinian map of the Middle East, but recently Abbas told a Palestinian TV audience, “It is not required of Hamas, or of Fatah, or of the Popular Front to recognize Israel.”

And this very week, both Abbas and senior P.A. negotiator Saeb Erekat refused to recognize Israel as a Jewish state.

Regrettably, the evidence makes it painfully clear that the Palestinians never wanted a state alongside Israel but rather an Arab state in place of Israel.

Yet despite all of these disturbing facts, U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Prime Minister Ehud Olmert are willing to take some vague words in English from P.A. officials as proof of moderation, rationalize the Palestinians’ anti-peace behavior and convince themselves that maybe after they are given a sovereign state, peace will prevail. But remember, North Korea, Iran and Syria are sovereign states. Are they peace-loving countries?

Even Egypt’s foreign minister has advised that all should find a pretext to postpone Annapolis indefinitely, realizing it can’t succeed.

The Zionist Organization of America suggests that before there is any Annapolis-type conference, American Jews should urge their members of Congress, the State Department and Israel to demand that Abbas and the Palestinian Authority first comply with all its written commitments to end terror and incitement, and accept Israel as a Jewish state.

We must also demand that U.S. funding be conditioned on fulfilling these 14-year-old Oslo obligations and urge no consideration of Israeli concessions until this happens. Otherwise, any “agreements” will suffer the same fate as Oslo.

Morton Klein is the president of the Zionist Organization of America.

Annapolis parlay repeating the mistakes of Oslo Read More »

Jewish groups should support Annapolis peace process

The call for American Jewish organizations to support the current peace efforts came from an unexpected direction: Israel’s Chief Rabbi Yonah Metzger.

For years closely associated with the right-wing National Religious Party, Metzger recently asked representatives of American Jewish groups in Washington to “influence the American administration” to do their utmost for the success of the Annapolis peace conference.

He even had a specific idea: American Jewish organizations should use their political influence to arrange for Israeli and Palestinian religious leaders to be present in Annapolis, at the time of the conference, to give the conferees spiritual support.

Israel’s chief rabbi was accompanied by the head of the Palestinian Muslim courts as well as by other Jewish, Muslim and Christian leaders. They all made pleas similar to Rabbi Metzger’s, which were very moving. So moving, in fact, that their interlocutors — representatives of American Jewish organizations — were too embarrassed to tell the distinguished clerics that America’s large national Jewish groups are not even expressing public support for Annapolis. Let alone actively working to make it succeed.

Most American Jewish groups are either silent — or worse, are seeking excuses to avoid supporting this peace effort.

Americans for Peace Now and several other dovish groups publicly endorsed the Annapolis process. But except for them, hardly any Jewish organization has lauded the Bush administration’s renewed interest in Israeli-Palestinian peace. Hardly any group has commended Prime Minister Ehud Olmert for his bold statements of commitment to seeking a final settlement with the Palestinians.

When asked by reporters to explain the silence, leaders of the largest national Jewish organizations — people who are normally happy to voice an opinion on almost anything — say that it’s too early, that the current process is too short on specifics.

Well, it’s not. The Annapolis conference is around the corner and its goals, as laid out by Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, are quite simple:

The idea is to turn the two-state solution from a vision into a reality by relaunching bilateral Israeli-Palestinian negotiations. Unlike past efforts, however, this one will hopefully be supported by Arab countries and other international stakeholders.

It also offers a “political horizon” for Israelis and Palestinians: a joint commitment, in advance, to address all outstanding “core issues” of the conflict, including borders, the future of Jerusalem and the future of Palestinian refugees. You can either support this initiative or oppose it. But how can American friends of Israel stay indifferent to it?

Some say that the Annapolis process is not likely to succeed. They may be right. A reasonable dose of skepticism is certainly healthy. But skepticism ought not be an excuse to deny support for this effort. Most mainstream Jewish organizations, as a part of their mission statement, claim to support the policies of the democratically elected government of Israel. By failing to support Israel’s current peace policy, these Jewish groups are not only being untrue to their principles, they are also taking part in turning justified skepticism into a self-fulfilling prophecy.

It is not surprising to see the ultranationalist, dogmatic groups rise in opposition to the peace efforts. The American Jewish extreme right always has resisted and always will resist Israel’s efforts to rid itself of its “occupation” of the West Bank.

But where are the centrist, non-messianic, mainstream Jewish groups that say they support Israel’s quest for peace?

Earlier this month, in a speech that warmly endorsed the Annapolis process, Olmert called on regional and international leaders to “be open to hope and face the genuine and clear risks and difficulties so that the process may move ahead.”

Jewish community leaders are well advised to heed the pleas of Israel’s political and spiritual leaders.

Ori Nir is the spokesman of Americans for Peace Now.

Jewish groups should support Annapolis peace process Read More »

Saudi king’s gift should fulfill ‘contract with humanity’

We are in receipt of a refreshing piece of news from Jeddah, Saudi Arabia via the New York Times:

“On a marshy peninsula 50 miles from this Red Sea port, King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia is staking $12.5 billion on a gargantuan bid to catch up with the West in science and technology.”

This is not some humdrum investment. King Abdullah University for Science and Technology will create one of the world’s 10 most endowed science centers and, if it also manages to create an environment of academic freedom, might well be what the Arab world needs at this juncture of history.

Any program that liberates society from the grip of ignorance and helplessness should create opportunities for the millions of its angry youngsters and, naturally, should dwindle the pool of potential recruits to jihadi training camps. It deserves our blessing.

But the real reason this good news caught my attention was that it evoked a somewhat heretical thought: These $12.5 billion do not belong to King Abdullah; they belong to you and me — and King Abdullah is merely paying back a tiny fraction of the debt he owes us.

Let me elaborate.

We are conditioned to think, almost axiomatically, that natural resources belong to the people who reside on top of them. There is a glaring flaw in this axiom when viewed from a global citizenship perspective. Here we are, 6.5 billion Homo sapiens, stranded on this godforsaken planet, seeing our energy resources dwindling by the day, their cost rising by the night and a handful of self-appointed custodians asking us to pay premium prices for what the earth has graciously given all of us.

Why?

What divine rule or moral principle decrees that scarce natural resources be privatized and given to landlords who happen to own property in the vicinity of those resources? Wouldn’t it be more prudent and equitable if such resources were designated and managed for the benefit of all mankind?

Of course, I am not suggesting that the West proclaim ownership over Middle East oil reserves. That would not fit in with current trends in international law.

What I would like to suggest, though, is that we apply the logic of good citizenship and offer the Saudis (and Dubai, Iran, etc.) a reasonable win-win deal. They will retain custody of the earth’s oil, and we will keep paying them for the right to use it, with one catch: Part of our payment will be invested in the development of new energy sources.

I would like to believe that our forward-looking cousins should be thrilled and honored to sign this noble “contract with humanity.” Indeed, looking back at the history of technology, we find that century after century, this kind of contract was in fact practiced in the civilized world.

Let us start with England, the cradle of the Industrial Revolution. As soon as the steam engine was invented in the late 18th century and coal energy began moving trains and steamboats, record revenues started pouring into the British treasury, and a good chunk of it was invested in universities and research institutes. This allowed Michael Faraday, the son of a blacksmith, to attend evening classes in chemistry, build an experimental laboratory at the Royal Institution of Great Britain and, eventually, in 1831, discover electromagnetism.

The citizens of planet Earth were fairly pleased then with the return on their investment. A minor depletion of coal reserves paid off in electricity, and with it came new revenues, new innovations and new energy sources, including hydroelectric power and deeper coal mines.

A similar transaction took place in the 20th century. Revenues from electric lighting, streetcars, refrigerators and assembly lines were partially invested in research and education, which led to the discovery of nuclear energy. Again, the good citizens of planet Earth were pleased with the cycle that their energy reserves had spun. A meager investment in the form of depleted resources got converted into revenues, revenues into research, research into innovations and innovations back into new, larger and previously inaccessible energy resources.

But something went foul with petroleum. Until the 1950s, the industrial countries produced nearly all the petroleum they needed — the revenues from which were generously invested, as before, in research and development. But by the end of that decade, the gap between production and consumption had widened — and major quantities had to be purchased from countries in which research and education were practically nonexistent and the contract with humanity unheard of.

My rough calculation suggests that, in total, the inhabitants of this planet have paid the gigantic sum of $8 trillion to the oil-producing countries in the Middle East, all for the privilege of using the planet’s own energy resources. This is 100 times more than all the foreign aid that Israel has ever received in its entire existence.

Given the enormity of this investment, it would only be natural for one of the investors to humbly ask what the return has been on our investment? Regrettably, I believe I am the first investor to raise this question; my 6.5 billion partners have not read the fine print of our contract and have written it off as a cost of doing business with owners of a foreign planet.

Moreover, when I try to figure out the answer to my humble question, the findings are quite disheartening. Planet Earth, so it seems, has converted $8 trillion worth of its energy reserves primarily into four commodities:

1. Swiss bank accounts of kings, princes and sheikhs.

2. Hate-spewing madrassas in Pakistan and the Middle East.

3. Thousands of missiles and rockets aimed at Israel.

4. A well-endowed anti-American, anti-Israel propaganda machine in Europe and on U.S. campuses.

None of the above seems conducive to the discovery of new energy sources, as stipulated in the unwritten contract with humanity. The number of scientific papers produced per capita in the Arab world is about 50 times lower than in the industrial countries. Research and development expenditure (as a percentage of GDP) was a mere 0.4 in 1996, five times lower than in war-beleaguered Israel.

Saudi king’s gift should fulfill ‘contract with humanity’ Read More »