fbpx

November 16, 2014

Sunday Reads: Accepting America’s decline, Iran’s peacemaking efforts, Power on anti-Semitism

US

Rosa Brooks argues that admitting American power is in decline is essential for the formation of a coherent foreign policy:

Unfortunately, American political leaders share a bipartisan inclination to deny these realities. Mostly, they succumb to the Lake Wobegon effect: “Declinism” and “declinist” have entered the American political vocabulary, but only as purely pejorative terms.

This is both stupid and dangerous. How can we adapt our global strategy to compensate for the ways in which U.S. power has been declining if we refuse to admit that decline?

Max Boot suggests an alternative ISIS strategy:

Critics will call this strategy too costly, alleging that it will push the United States down a “slippery slope” into another ground war. But while this approach will undoubtedly incur greater financial cost and higher risk of casualties, the present minimalist strategy has scant chance of success and risks backfiring — the Islamic State’s prestige will be enhanced if it withstands half-hearted U.S. airstrikes. Left unchecked, the Islamic State could expand into Lebanon, Jordan, Turkey or Saudi Arabia, making a major ground war involving U.S. troops more likely. By contrast, this strategy would enhance the odds that the group could be defeated before Obama leaves office.

Israel

Uri Savir points out that, like in the case of the accord with Egypt, any peace agreement Israel reaches is bound to be an imperfect arrangement with hostile forces:

In other words, we want to have peace with a friendly country. The bad luck is that peace is made with enemies. It is imperfect and takes a long time to realize, but produces long-term strategic benefits, as it did with Egypt. Luckily it was Menachem Begin who was prime minister at the time and not Benjamin Netanyahu. Netanyahu would still today be negotiating security arrangements and would never evacuate the Israeli settlements from Sinai. Thanks to the peace with Egypt, thousands of lives of young Israelis and Egyptians were spared.

Ben Dror Yemini doesn’t think that the leaders of Israel’s Arab parties reflect the true sentiments of Israel’s Arab population:

Most Israeli Arabs are loyal citizens – and when I say most, I mean the vast majority. Within a population of around 1.25 million people (excluding East Jerusalem) there are not only hundreds of hooligans, but thousands, who are likely to have the support of an additional percentage or two.

Troubled times see the extremists flourish. On the backdrop of Islamic Movement leader Raed Salah's ongoing incitement, it would only take one incident to set the sector ablaze. The majority don't attend the demonstrations. But hundreds of youths do. Maybe even thousands. The impression created stains the entire Arab minority.

Middle East

The Middle East Institute’s Alex Vatanka takes a look at Iran’s involvement in Caucasian peacemaking:

There can be no question that the ongoing process of détente between Iran and the United States can radically change the regional political dynamics in the South Caucasus. On the one hand, there are undoubtedly those in Yerevan who see a less isolated Iran as a boon for Armenia and as a way of more easily circumvent the Azerbaijani-Turkish cordon. From an Iranian perspective, however, better ties with Western states should be seen as an opportunity to be less fixated on a Western footprint in the South Caucasus.

According to Tom Rogan, ISIS leader al-Baghdadi’s words should be carefully headed:

But while al-Baghdadi’s message will inflame the hearts of terrorists, we must listen to his words with strategic clarity because they testify to the I.S. agenda. This is not a group defined by a narrow purpose. Rather, insulated by their theological insanity, the Islamic State’s leaders want to recruit an army to conquer the earth. Unless challenged urgently and effectively, they will continue to spread global chaos in that pursuit.

Jewish World

Here is Samantha Power’s bold speech on the threat of European Anti-Semitism and the insufficient action of European governments:

frankly, it is deeply concerning that even as anti-Semitism is rising in Europe, a third fewer countries are participating in the 2014 conference than took part in the 2004 conference; and only one in three of the countries that sent a foreign minister or other cabinet level official in 2004 has sent one at that level to this conference. Now this is not meant in any way to disrespect the high-ranking officials who are here today or the members of parliament who have such an important role to play in this cause. But it does beg the question: Doesn’t this issue – at the very least – merit the same show of solidarity and commitment from governments today as it did a decade ago?

Jonathan Sarna believes that many of our Pew-generated fears concern religion in America, not just the Jewish community:

In brief, what students of contemporary Jewry view in narrowly Jewish terms are problems confronting contemporary American religion, period. Recognizing this fact—namely, that America society is mired in a religious recession—points, in turn, to a somewhat different conclusion from the one offered by Wertheimer and Cohen. Theirs is a linear analysis (“if current trends continue… ”); but the history of American religion has been decidedly cyclical. Time and again, prophets-of-doom have railed at the disappearance of cherished beliefs and practices, and, time and again, religious revivals have arisen “miraculously” to give the lie to those warnings. Thus, religious decline in the aftermath of the American Revolution was followed by the Second Great Awakening, and the great “religious depression” of the 1920s and 30s was succeeded by the postwar revival of the 1950s.

Sunday Reads: Accepting America’s decline, Iran’s peacemaking efforts, Power on anti-Semitism Read More »

A Dark and Heavy Cloud of Memory Hovering Over Budapest’s Jews

I have been acutely aware of the Holocaust since I was a young child in the mid-1950s and first saw on my parents’ bookshelf a copy of Life Magazine’s photo display of the liberated death camps.

When I became a young adult I read and studied everything I could get my hands on about the Shoah, and over the decades I have seen countless documentaries and feature films on that singular tragedy in Jewish history.

However, when my synagogue group recently visited Central Europe, I felt overwhelmed in a completely new way by the dark clouds of memory that hovered everywhere we visited. I have found myself rethinking what it means to be Jew even now after all these years. Our journey to those places where Jewish communities once thrived but are no more, standing on the streets and in the plazas where Nazis deported and murdered Jews, where Hitler screamed at the masses and brown shirts burned books, where magnificent synagogues are now empty or were destroyed, and stood in the room where the Nazis decided on the Final Solution changed me. It will take some time, I suspect, for me to understand fully how.

Of the three major cities we visited – Budapest, Prague and Berlin (we also spent time in Bratislava and the Terrezin Concentration Camp), I was most depressed by what we found in Hungary. Despite its rich Jewish history dating back 1800 years and its once large Jewish population in Budapest and the surrounding country-side, today only 80,000 Jews remain in the city, and most are highly assimilated and elderly.

The Jewish community estimates that there are today only 8000 members of Jewish communal organizations, and only 500 Jews are active and regularly attend synagogue. There are, however, 1000 Jewish students attending Jewish schools. It is those children who offer the only real hope of any kind of Hungarian Jewish revival – such that it is.

Modern Hungarian Jewish history is well-known. Once the Germans invaded Hungary on March 19, 1944, Adolph Eichmann quickly and efficiently coordinated the liquidation of all the Jews in the Hungarian countryside. Within a year the Nazis, in alliance with Hungarian anti-Semites, murdered 700,000 of Hungary’s 800,000 Jewish population. Indeed, between May and July, 1944, the Nazis sent 12,000 Jews daily to the gas chambers all but extinguishing what had been the largest Jewish community in Central Europe.

During this onslaught some Jews escaped the terror in the country-side by flooding into Budapest, thus swelling that population to between 250,000 and 280,000 Jews. Though a few famous statesmen tried to save Hungary’s Jews (e.g. Raoul Wallenberg of Sweden, Charles Lutz of Switzerland, and the Italian businessman Giorgio Perlasco – along with the Jewish attorney Rudolph Kastner), Hungarian Jews were essentially doomed.

The Hungarians were among the most vicious anti-Semites in Europe. In Budapest, the Nazis stepped aside and allowed the fascist Hungarian Arrow Cross militiamen to do much of their dirty work. The Arrow Cross shot ten to fifteen thousand Jews in the ghetto and marched hundreds to the Danube River where they ordered the Jews to remove their shoes and then shot them into the waters that turned blood-red.

The “Shoe Memorial” of 50 bronze shoes, conceived by film director Can Togay and the sculptor Gyula Pauer, marks the place at the river’s edge just three hundred meters from the ornate Hungarian Parliament building where the crime was done (for photos, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoes_on_the_Danube_Bank). It is noteworthy, as well, reflective of Hungary's refusal to take responsibility for its role in the Holocaust, that the plaque at this site mentions only “victims” not “Jewish victims” of the Arrow Cross militia.

At the end of the war only 100,000 Jews were left alive in Hungary and only because the Nazis took over Hungary so late and didn't have time to finish what they set out to do before the allies won the war. The Soviet Communists promised an end to all forms of discrimination thus giving Jews a measure of hope, but the persistence of Hungarian anti-Semitism resulted in 20,000 Jews (one fifth of the city’s Jewish population) fleeing Hungary during the 1956 uprising.

Today, the Hungarian government is right-wing and authoritarian. Though it officially condemns anti-Semitism, it has done little to stop anti-Semitic skinhead activity and the publication of anti-Semitic books and periodicals. Hungary has not at all processed the past and takes no responsibility for the crimes it committed, as has Germany. Nonetheless, the writer Eli Valley (see below) notes that since the end of the Communist era in 1989 all religious groups, including Hungary’s Jews, have experienced a kind of revival.

There are two small Progressive Reform Jewish communities in Budapest (see http://www.reformjudaism.org/budapest-culture-community) and there is a Jewish Studies program at the Central European University in Budapest that has taken on an important role in revitalizing Jewish studies in the former Soviet bloc (http://web.ceu.hu/jewishstudies/).

For those who remain, there are only a few options to live a Jewish live in Budapest. However, most Hungarian Jews now wonder whether, indeed, they even belong in Hungary. Our Jewish guide told us that if conditions worsen she, her teen-age son and husband (a journalist who was fired when he reported candidly on the government’s right-wing authoritarian policies) will certainly, despite generations of their family having lived in Hungary, leave.

For a detailed description of the Hungarian Jewish community and its history, see the excellent work The Great Jewish Cities of Central and Eastern Europe: A Travel Guide and Resource Book to Prague, Warsaw, Cracow, and Budapest, by Eli Valley (publ. Aaronson, 2005). It is out of print, but can be purchased through Amazon.

A Dark and Heavy Cloud of Memory Hovering Over Budapest’s Jews Read More »

The Virtues of Compromise

One might think that absolutism is a sign of strength. If one has “moral clarity” then they shouldn’t budge an inch on their position. Judaism takes a very different approach, arguing that compromise is the approach of the wise:

Rabbi Yehoshua ben Karcha says, It is a mitzvah to seek compromise. As it is written, “Truth and peaceful judgment should you judge in your gates. It would seem that where there is judgment there is no peace, and where there is peace there is no judgment. What is the judgment that incorporates peace? Compromise (Sanhedrin 6b).

Thee rabbis applied value to religious compromise. In the Talmud (Bava Metzia 30b), Rabbi Yochanan is quoted as saying that Jerusalem was destroyed in the time of the Romans only because the people judged according to the Torah. The astonished reply is, “What kind of judgment should they have applied—that of the sorcerers?” The reply: “What Rabbi Yochanan meant was that litigants insisted on strict enforcement of the law and were unwilling to compromise.” Rambam affirms this value for religious compromise (Hilchot Sanhedrin 22:4).

This is not only true for political matters but also for financial matters.

When Rabbi Nehuniah ben ha-Kaneh was asked the secret of his unusual longevity, one of the traits he mentioned was: “I was always willing to yield in monetary matters.” (Megillah 28a)

Yet, American history is replete with the tragic consequences of a failure to compromise. The Civil War, for example, was the result of eleven Southern states refusing to deal with an elected President who was opposed to slavery, and their attempt to secede and drive Union forces out by military force. Even though the Confederacy was defeated, the “Solid South” has retained an antipathy towards President Lincoln for a century and half.

Indeed, compromise, while at times painful, has produced enduring results. During the New Deal, President Franklin D. Roosevelt concentrated on economic issues rather than civil rights, and most often created policies based on a consensus of experts. In June 1934, President Roosevelt created The Committee on Economic Security (CES) for the task of developing “…at once security against several of the great disturbing factors in life–especially those which relate to unemployment and old age.” While the CES members quickly (January 1935) approved a way to create Social Security as well as disability and unemployment insurance, it did not find a means to encompass health insurance, and its funding depended on a regressive tax on individuals (once you pass the maximum threshold, you do not pay a penny more of tax). On the other hand, it cannot be denied that millions of elderly, disabled, and unemployed Americans faced starvation without this legislation, so overall the law has benefited our society .

It is no secret that compromise is a dirty word in Washington these days. Consider these examples of a partisan gridlock that has not been seen in generations:

·       Six Republican co-sponsors of a bill to establish a commission that would recommend steps to reduce the federal deficit reversed their position and voted no after President Obama supported the bill, which then failed to pass under Republicans requiring a 60-vote majority to pass.

·       In a televised interview in July 2013, House Speaker John Boehner justified the unprecedented lack of bills passed by Congress: “We should not be judged by how many new laws we create. We ought to be judged on how many laws we repeal.”

·       In November 2013, Senate Majority Leader (Democrat) Harry Reid charged that Senate Republicans had filibustered nearly half of all the presidential appointees in American history (82 of 168). Incredibly, an investigation of this claim turned out that Sen. Reid had understated the percentage. When separated by individual appointees who had been filibustered, it turned out that more than half (79 of 147) of all blocked Presidential appointees had been those nominated by President Obama in his first five years in office.

·       Jonathan Bernstein, a columnist for Bloomberg View, put things in perspective:  “The correct count of how many bills have been filibustered during Obama’s presidency is: approximately all of them.”

·       In a Pew Research poll released on November 12, while a majority of Democrats (52 percent) supported working with Republicans even if it disappointed some Democrats, fully two-thirds of Republicans (66 percent) supported this statement opposing compromise: “‘Stand up’ to Obama, even if less gets done in Washington.”

Can compromise be achieved in any area? Some possibilities exist. California’s recent approval of Proposition 47, which has reclassified some minor crimes from felony to misdemeanor (reducing sentences and the prison population overall), might spur a coalition of Democrats and libertarian Republicans (e.g., Rand Paul) to reduce the huge prison population. With five more state ballot victories (in Republican-dominated states) in November, 29 states have now passed minimum wage measures that are above federal levels, raising the hope that Congress will act to raise the federal minimum wage. However, one has the impression that if President Obama endorses either position, filibusters will ensue.

An even more compelling issue would require much less of a compromise. Recently, the United States was gripped with an hysterical, unscientific reaction to a small group of people coming home from Africa after having either treated or come in contact with people who had the Ebola virus. Kaci Hickox, who had worked for Doctors Without Borders with Ebola patients, came home asymptomatic and tested negative for Ebola. Yet New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, backed in support by Governor Andrew Cuomo of New York, initially put her in quarantine, citing an “abundance of caution.” Undeterred, Hickox stated that the Governor had “an abundance of politics” for spouting superstition rather than science. In Maine, Hickox’s troubles continued, as Maine’s Governor Paul LePage and health officials lent credence to the idea that Ebola might be spreading by means other than close contact with symptomatic patients and their fluids, and tried to confine her against her will. When a judge finally set Hickox free, Governor LePage indicated his lack of medical knowledge by stating: “We don’t know what we don’t know about Ebola,” but nevertheless maintained that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommendations for Ebola care were “totally false.” Another Republican representative wondered out loud why the Surgeon General had not gotten involved.

Usually, the U.S. Surgeon General would be the voice of American medical standards (many people still remember the Surgeon General’s report on smoking in 1964 that highlighted the health risks of tobacco smoking, and its beneficial effects on smoking sensation thereafter.) The Surgeon General’s role is to speak with the authority of American medical science, reporting consensus on health conditions and their treatment, and influencing medical care and consumer knowledge.

Unfortunately, since Regina Benjamin left the position in July 2013, the Senate has failed to vote on a successor. President Obama nominated Dr. Vivek Murthy, a graduate of Harvard and Yale who has an MBA in addition to his doctorate, and is an internist at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and lecturer at Harvard Medical School. He is the son of immigrants and is an embodiment the American Dream. He also co-founded TrialNetworks, a software company that seeks to facilitate the synchronization of work among researchers and clinical trial investigators. As a relatively young man, he combines an extraordinary grasp of medical knowledge with a knowledge of modern technology that older candidates would not possess.

Dr. Murthy has been endorsed by former Surgeon General Dr. David Satcher, who served under Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, as well as the American Cancer Society, American Diabetes Association, and American Heart Association. On November 12, the American Public Health Association joined with one hundred state and national health organizations to urge the Senate to approve Dr. Murthy as Surgeon General. The letter cited one of Dr. Murthy’s chief health concerns (certainly more serious than Ebola):

Dr. Murthy stated that educating the public about the obesity epidemic would be one of his top priorities as surgeon general. Thirteen states now have adult obesity rates above 30 percent, 41 states have rates of at least 25 percent, and every state is above 20 percent. Addressing the obesity epidemic is essential to improve health and reduce the growing rates of chronic disease, which now make up 75 percent of America’s health costs.

The reason why Dr. Murthy’s nomination has been held up defies description. While he was approved by the Judiciary Committee in February 2014, his nomination has since been blocked by Senate Republicans because he once tweeted that firearm violence constituted a health issue, and he supports a ban on assault weapons, to which the National Rifle Association objected, and as a result all Republicans (and some Democrats from states where the NRA is strongest) continue to block Dr. Murthy’s nomination.

The key question today is whether there is a lowest point that can be reached in a failure to compromise. Will we heed the warning of Rabbi Yochanan, or will we sink further into the political morass.

One’s character is not solely measured by their ideals, but also by how they’re willing to compromise. There are, of course, values that should not be compromised. But for the sake of peace, often we must compromise our upper hand even when we are certain of the truth. Rashi teaches that doing “the right and the good” “refers to a compromise, within the letter of the law” (Devarim 6:18).

The State of Israel is constantly compromising to try to bring peace. Yet, time and time again, peace talks fail even when so much compromise is offered. The art of compromise is far from easy and all of us have much to learn. So much more work needs to happen on the global, national, and interpersonal front. First, we must swallow our pride and be willing to retract on our absolutes for the sake of lasting peace. Our task is not merely pragmatic (spreading peace) but also epistemic (learning to humbly see some truth in opposing positions).

 

Rabbi Dr. Shmuly Yanklowitz is the Executive Director of the Valley Beit Midrash, the Founder & President of Uri L’Tzedek, the Founder and CEO of The Shamayim V’Aretz Institute and the author of six books on Jewish ethics.  Newsweek named Rav Shmuly one of the top 50 rabbis in America.”

The Virtues of Compromise Read More »