Last week, an interesting piece of data was published by three scholars of the Cohen Center for Modern Jewish Studies at Brandeis University. Ted Sasson, Len Saxe and Michelle Shain discovered that amid all the brouhaha and in spite of many articles claiming the opposite, the hypothesis that the war in Gaza last summer alienated liberal American Jews from Israel “is not supported”. Repeat: not supported.
The study examined the views of young Jewish Americans – participants and applicants in Taglit-Birthright. “As expected” the authors of the study write, “respondents’ feelings about Israel during the war were filtered through their general political orientations, with moderates and conservatives more likely than liberals to view Israel’s conduct as justified and to feel support. Nonetheless, 78 percent of liberals viewed Israel’s conduct in the war as mostly or completely justified compared to 21 percent who viewed it as unjustified. Similarly… a majority of liberals very much felt support for Israel and just 29 percent very much or somewhat felt estranged”.
Of course, if these are satisfying numbers is a matter of expectations (as I wrote a while ago). You might say that the fact that less than 40% of young Taglit participants see the Gaza war as “completely justified” is hardly encouraging. You can argue that the fact that only half of the young “liberals” felt “very much” (as opposed to somewhat, a little or not at all) support for Israel is not enough. The Brandeis scholars would disagree. “The present study”, they write, “joins a growing body of evidence utterly incompatible with a conventional wisdom that portrays American Jews as alienated from Israel”. What a disappointment for the party of alienation – a growing party that makes it a habit to threaten Israel with a coming doom of detachment.
American Jews are pushed away from Israel, this party argues, and it is all because of Israel's choices and policies.
But this party is wrong: if the Jews decide to detach from Israel – it is their choice, not Israel's.
Now the party of alienation is having a field day this week with Netanyahu's speech to Congress. The argument is simple: Netanyahu goes with the Republican majority in congress while most American Jews support the Democratic Party. Netanyahu battles with President Obama – a President for whom most American Jews voted twice. Netanyahu wants war with Iran, and Jews are weary of war, especially one for which Israel, and hence the Jews, could be blamed (surely, unnecessary provocations by Rabbi Shmuley add fuel to a fire).
Jews are right to be concerned about the speech. Many notable commentators find its rational difficult to understand. I find it difficult to understand. And yet, the speech is happening, and now the Jews of America again have a choice.
They can hate it, for many good reasons, and find in it a reason, or an excuse, to oppose Israel. “Jewish leaders, Jewish voters, nobody is going to feel comfortable being put in this situation”, former ambassador Martin Indyk told the WP. The speech, former Secretary of Labor Robert Reich told the TOI, “is having a polarizing effect here in the United States, pushing many Americans to side against Israel, and thereby posing a long-term threat to Israel’s security”.
A Jewish Senator condemned Netanyahu for saying that he speaks for “the Jewish people” and found his statement to be “arrogant”. Well – it is. But is also, to some extent, true, as I explained in length some two weeks ago. Two Jewish Congressmen, Yarmuth of Kentucky and Cohen of Tennessee, had a choice. They could say that the speech is ill-timed and problematic and still attend it. But they chose to boycott the Prime Minister of Israel. “I'm for Israel, but this speech, I believe, is at the wrong time”, Representative Cohen said. Timing? That's his problem? I think not, as the timing is perfect: just days before the deadline for an Iran agreement. And as for Israel's elections – the Israeli political timetable is none of Cohen's business (nor Obama's: the “timing” claim is a preposterous claim repeatedly raised by the administration – it is, pure and simple, meddling in internal Israeli political affairs).
Besides, if Cohen and Yarmuth are so worried about the “partisan brush” with which this “affair” has painted US-Israel relations, one wonders why their choice is to take the same brush and paint some more on the wall of partisanship.
As with the Gaza war, one wonders if most American Jews truly have “mixed feelings”. Maybe it is just the narrative that the party of alienation is advancing to make things seem worse than they really are?
Of course, the speech complicates the lives of many people, is controversial, and in many ways problematic. But Jewish Americans are capable of navigating a complicated situation. They can be plenty unhappy about Netanyahu's decision to go to congress, and still believe that his message on Iran is right on the mark. They can be plenty unhappy with Netanyahu's policies, but also with Obama's. Jewish Americans can feel uncomfortable with a situation that pits an Israeli government against their US government of choice – and still understand that in some situations such things are inevitable. They can keep voting Democratic, and get angry with an Israeli leader who feels more comfortable with the Republicans, and still remember that the matter at hand is a grave matter – and that the politics is a side show, annoying as it might be for them (and for some Israelis too).
Jewish Americans are not forced by Netanyahu to “side against Israel”, neither on Iran nor on any other matter. If they sadly do “side against Israel”, it is a choice.
More news and opinions than at a Shabbat dinner, right in your inbox.