US Jews are not an ‘asset’ – they are a partner

In a series of meetings and ceremonies, Israel’s Knesset marked 100 years of ties between the Jewish State and the US Jewish community yesterday.

The timing corresponds with the American Jewish heritage month. The topic of celebration was the contribution made by US Jews to building Israel. The agenda was full: a Knesset committee “discussions on the American Jewish contributions to Israel’s security, social welfare, absorption of new immigrants and educational system, as well as a marking of the subject in the Knesset plenary.” And in addition, an exhibition of photographs and films sketching the involvement of the American community in strengthening Israel. Labor MK Nachman Shai and the Ruderman Family Foundation should be commended for orchestrating this effort.

It is important for Israel to recognize the contribution of US Jews to its founding and wellbeing. It is important to recognize this contribution in the right way and with the right approach. Relations between these two great Jewish communities are changing, as we all know. Once upon a time Israel was the little brother, but it is now the big brother. Once upon a time Israel was too fragile to worry about such things as thanking US Jewry and considering US Jewry when it enacts policies, but it is now mature enough to do such things.

Keeping these relations realistic is advisable. Keeping these relations with the proper goals and issues in mind is advisable. Not all Israelis understand this – and not all Americans do. On both sides of the ocean Jews seems to have the unhelpful habit of talking about these relations in ways that do not always correspond with actual social realities.

Former Mossad chief Efraim Halevi, for example, made the following observation in a Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee hearing on “American Jewry as a strategic asset to Israel’s security”: “The problem in our relations with American Jewry is that we are losing many young people… because of the fact that we do not consider them Jews according to Halacha…This is a strategic issue…”.

There are at least two problems I see with the Knesset discussion and with Halevi’s analysis.

The first problem concerns the context – that is, Israel’s tendency to focus much too much on Jewish Americans as a “strategic asset” rather than as a partner in the Jewish journey. American Jews, of course, do play a significant role in strengthening Israel materially and politically, and thus are a strategic asset. But Israel’s frequent tendency to look at them instrumentally as an “asset,” instead of thinking about them as a partner, was evident at the Knesset discussion and throughout yesterday’s celebration. It makes the conversation dull. It makes it, at times, even somewhat cynical. Israel’s bond with the largest non-Israeli Jewish community has value in and of itself. It has value even if US Jewry ceases to be a “strategic asset” in the simple sense.

Then there is the issue of what Halevi Said. He said that we are “losing many young people” – and that is possible, even if far from certain. He said that we are losing “many” young people “because of the fact that we do not consider them Jews according to Halacha” – and that is plain wrong. A. because Israel legally does not recognize people as Jews according to Halacha, B. because there is no evidence supporting Halevi’s contention that Israel is losing anyone because of its definition of Jewishness, C. because if Israel is indeed losing “many” young Jewish Americans, it is probably first and foremost due to social processes within the American Jewish world, and not due to nuanced Israeli policies on complicated matters such as the definition of Jewishness.

Having said that, Halevi is not wrong to claim that Israel has problematic policies on matters concerning the recognition of Jewishness. It does have a problem with its policies dealing with conversion, and those governing the rabbinate and its different functions, and those complicating its relations with Reform and Conservative Judaism. Israel has problem, and it should try to solve these problems.

But making these problems the cornerstone of its relations with US Jewry would be a mistake for both sides. It would be a mistake for Israel because a change in these policies is not going to alter deep-rooted trends that impact the psyche of Jewish Americans and their relations with Israel. It would be a mistake for Jewish Americans because the likely outcome of focusing on this point will be disappointment (the new initiative by notable American Jewish leaders to “press for a two state solution” will have the same disappointing effect – but that’s a topic for another day).

Israel, as Foreign Ministry Director Dore Gold said yesterday, does “not need to reinvent itself to maintain the relationship.” It does not need to do such a thing – and it will surely not do such a thing. It will have policies that Israelis find desirable – as much as US Jews will follow the trends that they find desirable. Thus, the focus of these two communities should not be on changing one another, but rather at learning to live with differences and structuring a shared Jewish agenda that takes these differences into account.