Letters: Israel’s Unity Government, The Reopening Dilemma

Israel’s Unity Government
Shmuel Rosner describes the current governmental arrangement between Benjamin Netanyahu and Benny Gantz as a camel-opotamus (“The Camel-opotamus: A Primer,” April 24). I agree that it was a necessary measure to gain stability during a turbulent time by creating a hybrid government. However, I also believe that either side may end up deviating from the agreement if it is in the best interests of his party or himself. In my opinion, this pact is not meant to last. It’s true that this agreement dilutes the authority of each party when in effect, but it is essential during these times.
Jacob Sostchen, Los Angeles

Although not everyone agrees with this assessment, we at Fuente Latina take the view that the unity government is good news.

If all goes well, the coalition government between Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and rival Benny Gantz could have greater internal consensus than its predecessors.

For the past five years, Israel has been ruled by a right-wing coalition rife with disagreements and disputes; the new development means that it now could be run by a shared center-right government, in which each of the two men would take turns in the post of prime minister for alternating terms of 18 months.

However, the announcement of the new unity government has not been welcomed by many voters of Gantz’s Blue and White Party, the broad center coalition that was almost tied with Likud in three bitter consecutive electoral calls and that broke up when leader Gantz decided to agree with Netanyahu.

The former military chief announced on March 26 that he was joining Netanyahu because, he said, the combination of the coronavirus crisis and the various threats to Israeli democracy required atypical decisions and actions.

The news landed like a bomb. His allies accused him of stealing votes from his electorate and warned him that Netanyahu could crush him politically, but Gantz insisted that he was convinced of what he was doing because he was putting Israel ahead of his own interests.

Throughout the past year, Gantz has labeled Netanyahu as dangerous for Israel and promised he would never be a part of a government led by a prime minister who is under indictment for corruption charges.

Netanyahu, on the other hand, has called Gantz weak, slow and lacking in skill to lead the country.

With this new agreement, the former enemies — now allies — are going to have to make political decisions together. If that doesn’t paralyze the country, it can only be good.
Leah Soibel, Founder & CEO Fuenta Latina, via email

Column Brought Back Memories
Months ago, a piece on friendship by Mark Schiff ran in the Journal. It prompted me to share an indelible memory (“The Perfect Circle,” Feb. 7).

It happened many years ago at the Brandeis Institute. I was approached by a man. We spent time chitchatting and touched on many things that Shabbat afternoon. Then, there was another Saturday at Brandeis when the same thing happened — we sat on a bench chatting. This was heaven for me, who has speech difficulties and other handicaps.

Quickly, the man became my friend and I started to call him Pop (my dad had died years before). Pop and his wife no longer attended the institute. I got his phone number and this marked the beginning of many phone calls between Pop and me. Our friendship spanned several years until he died.

One of the many that gifts Pop gave me was allowing me to express whatever was on my mind. After our pleasantries of “How are you?” he would ask, “How are you really?” and I was off to the races. Pop’s concern was palpable. I once held a high-ranking position, for a person like me. I told Pop that I wanted to quit the job. His advice was to stick with it. I’m so thankful for that advice. It was absolutely the best.

Here’s to friendships like mine with Pop. May others be so lucky.
Susan Cohn, via email

Jewish Ethical Questions
Thank you, Rabbi Jason Weiner, for delineating the cost-benefit analysis a person must make before risking one’s life for the sake of our community as well as humanity, especially since human life is so powerfully valued in Judaism (“Jewish Ethical Questions Around Developing a Coronavirus Vaccine,” April 24).

Tangentially, in these extraordinary times, we have both the opportunity to risk our lives in the battle against an invisible foe, in the tradition of Sarah Aaronsohn, who, after witnessing the horrors of the Armenian genocide and Turkish oppression of Palestinian Jews, spied for the British, was captured, tortured and killed herself; and/or to perform simple acts of kindness, a Kiddush HaShem, that now take on elevated importance.

For instance, my husband, Eli, a psychiatrist, risks COVID-19 exposure in order to help patients at the Kaiser facility in Chinatown who are suffering from stress and mental illness. I shelter in place, and every afternoon, I do movements to world music on our balcony. From the street, a Muslim woman in a hijab with two little girls wave at me. The little girls watch my movements, then join in. Soon, the mother moves, too. Spontaneously, we form a unity. Maybe it will carry over into ordinary times.

So many choices and opportunities.
Mina Friedler, Venicec

The Reopening Dilemma
In his analysis of how political leaders will “reopen” the country, kudos to David Suissa when he writes, “They can announce all the gradual ‘openings’ they want, but none of it will matter, because it’s not up to them. It’s up to us. It’s up to the people who will actually go out and do the mingling and consuming.” (“No One Can Just ‘Reopen’ Our Nation,” April 24).

And when will that occur? It’ll happen when we decide it’s safe for us and our loved ones to resume living the lives that we enjoyed before the COVID-19 outbreak.

And Suissa rightly and repeatedly points to our lack of preparedness as directly related to the “six weeks” it took to get the government to respond to what was universal knowledge of the forthcoming epidemic.

The only problem I have with the description of events is his assignment of blame upon “… our fearless leaders — whether they be the president, governors, mayors, health authorities or civic and community leaders.” As if the nation’s tardy response was the shared result of a weak group of leaders.

Later in this otherwise excellent description of events, blame was further blurred by describing the culprits in our nation’s tardy response to the deadly virus as “political leaders” and “bureaucracies.”

Let’s face it. There was only one person responsible for our country’s tragic six-week late response to the epidemic: President Donald Trump.

Suissa comments that “Six weeks too late” is the phrase that will forever haunt him when he looks back at the devastation of COVID-19. I share Suissa’s sentiment with the addition that I will forever be haunted by the weak, uninformed and harmful lack of leadership provided by Trump at the outset and continuing historical threat to the health and welfare of all of our country’s citizens.
Stu Bernstein, Santa Monica

Outdoor Minyans
I have seen several reports indicating that outdoor transmission of COVID-19 is rare. If that’s true, and perhaps the studies are too preliminary to be certain, wouldn’t that imply that it would be OK to have minyanim outdoors? It would probably have to be without Torah reading, as that would entail close contact.

But it’s perfectly easy to have a minyan in an outdoor space, and most shuls in Los Angeles at least have a parking lot.

For those of us saying Kaddish, it would be a blessing.
Richard Samuelson, Pasadena