Uncategorized
Diaspora alarm over Israel: Your guide to what the critics are saying
(JTA) — I started reporting on North American Jews and Israel in the last century, and for years covered the debate over whether Jews in the Diaspora had a right to criticize the Israeli government in public. The debate sort of petered out in the early-1990s, when Israel itself began talking about a Palestinian state, and when right-wing groups then decided criticizing Israel was a mitzvah.
Nevertheless, while left-wing groups like J Street and T’ruah have long been comfortable criticizing the Israeli government or defending Palestinian rights, many in the centrist “mainstream” — pulpit clergy, leaders of federations and Hillels, average Jews nervous about spoiling a family get-together — have preferred to keep their concerns to themselves. Partly this is tactical: Few rabbis want to alienate any of their members over so divisive a topic, and in the face of an aggressive left, organizational leaders did not want to give fuel to Israel’s ideological enemies. (The glaring exception has been about Israeli policy toward non-Orthodox Judaism, which is seen as very much the Disapora’s business.)
In recent weeks, there has been an emerging literature of what I have come to think of as “reluctant dissent.” What these essays and sermons have in common, despite the different political persuasions of the authors, is a deep concern over Israel’s “democratic character.” They cite judicial reforms that would weaken checks and balances at the top, expansion of Jewish settlements that would make it impossible to separate from the Palestinians, and the Orthodox parties that want to strengthen their hold on religious affairs. As Abe Foxman, who as former director of the Anti-Defamation League rarely criticized Israel, told an interviewer, “If Israel ceases to be an open democracy, I won’t be able to support it.”
I read through the various ways Jewish leaders and writers here and in Israel are not just justifying Diaspora Jews who are protesting what is happening in Israel, but providing public permission for others to do the same. Here is what a few of them are saying (with a word from a defender of the government):
‘I didn’t sleep much last night’
Yehuda Kurtzer: Facebook, Feb. 8
Kurtzer is the president of the Shalom Hartman Institute of North America, the New York-based branch of the Israeli think tank that promotes a diverse, engaged relationship with Israel. In a recent blog post, he neatly describes the dilemma of Diaspora Zionists who aren’t sure what to do with their deep concerns about the direction of the Israel government, especially the concentration of power in a far-right legislative branch.
Centrist American Jews who care about Israel are caught between “those to our right who would see any expression of even uncertainty about Israel’s democratic character as disloyalty, [and] those on the other side who think that a conversation about Israeli democracy is already past its prime,” he writes. He is also concerned about the “widespread disengagement that we can expect among American Jews, what I fear will become the absent majority — those who decide that however the current crisis is resolved, all of this is just ‘not for them.’”
Kurtzer likens Israel to a palace, and Diaspora Jews as “passersby” who live beyond its walls. Nonetheless, he feels responsible for what happens there. “The palace is burning and the best we can do is to tell you,” he writes. “It is also how we will show you we love you, and how much we cherish the palace.”
An open letter to Israel’s friends in North America
Matti Friedman, Yossi Klein Halevi and Daniel Gordis: Times of Israel, Feb. 7
Three high-profile writers who moved to Israel from North America and who often defend Israel against its critics in the United States — Gordis, for one, has written a book arguing that American Jewish liberalism is incompatible with Israel’s “ethnic democracy” — now urge Diaspora Jews to speak out against the current Israeli government. They don’t mention the territories or religious pluralism. Instead, their trigger is the proposed effort to reform the Supreme Court, which they say will “eviscerate the independence of our judiciary and remake the country’s democratic identity.” Such a move will “threaten Israeli-American relations, and it will do grave damage to our relations with you, our sisters and brothers in the Diaspora,” concluding, “We need your voice to help us preserve Israel as a state both Jewish and democratic.”
All Israel Is Responsible for Each Other
Rabbi Angela Buchdahl: Sermon, Jan. 27
Buchdahl, the senior rabbi of New York City’s Reform Central Synagogue, isn’t looking to Israeli writers for permission to weigh in on Israel’s political scene. In a sermon that takes its name from a rabbinic statement of Jewish interdependence, she asserts without question that Jews everywhere have a stake in the future of Israel and have a right to speak up for “civil society and democracy and religious pluralism and human rights” there. She focuses on the religious parties who are convinced that “Reform Jews are ruining Israel,” as you might expect, but ends the sermon with a call to recognize the rights of all Israeli citizens, Jewish and non-Jewish, “and also those living under Israel’s military control.” Of those Palestinians, she says, “We can’t feel comfortable sitting in the light of sovereignty next to a community living in darkness and expect to have peace.”
And like Kurtzer, she worries that concerned American Jews will simply turn away from Israel in despair or embarrassment, and urges congregants to support the Israeli and American organizations that share their pluralistic vision for Israel.
On That Distant Day
Hillel Halkin: Jewish Review of Books, Winter 2023
In his 1977 book “Letters to an American Jewish Friend: A Zionist Polemic,” the translator and author Hillel Halkin made a distinction similar to Kurtzer’s image of Israel as a palace and the Diaspora as passersby: Jews who don’t emigrate to Israel are dooming themselves to irrelevance, while immigrants like him are living on the stage where the Jewish future would play out. His mournful essay doesn’t address the Diaspora, per se, although it creates a permission structure for Zionists abroad to criticize the government. Halkin sees the new government as a coalition of two types of religious zealots: the haredi Orthodox who want to consolidate their control of religious life (and funding) in Israel, and a “knit-skullcap electorate [that] is hypernationalist and Jewish supremacist in its attitude toward Arabs.” (A knit skullcap is a symbol for what an American might call the “Modern Orthodox.”) Together, these growing and powerful constituents represent “the end of an Israeli consensus about what is and is not permissible in a democracy — and once the rules are no longer agreed on, political chaos is not far away. Israel has never been in such a place before.”
Halkin does talk about Israeli expansion in the West Bank, saying he long favored Jewish settlement in the territories, while believing that the “only feasible solution” would be a two-state solution with Arabs living in the Jewish state and Jews living in the Arab one. Instead, Israel has reached a point where there is “too much recrimination, too much distrust, too much hatred, too much blind conviction, too much disdain for the notion of a shared humanity, for such a solution to be possible… We’re over the cliff and falling, and no one knows how far down the ground is.”
Method to Our Madness: A Response to Hillel Halkin
Ze’ev Maghen: Jewish Review of Books, Jan. 10, 2023
Ze’ev Maghen, chair of the department of Middle East studies at Bar-Ilan University, is hardly a dissenter; instead, his response to Halkin helpfully represents the views of those who voted for the current government. Maghen says the new coalition represents a more honest expression of Zionism than those who support a “liberal, democratic, egalitarian, inclusive, individualist, environmentally conscious, economically prosperous, globally connected, etc., etc., society.” The new government he writes, will defend Israel’s “Jewish nationalist raison d’être, and keep at bay those universalist, Western-based notions that are geared by definition to undermine nationalism in all its forms.” As for the Palestinian issue, he writes, “I’d rather have a fierce, hawkish Zionist in the cockpit than a progressive, Westernized wimp for whom this land, and the people who have returned to it after two millennia of incomparable suffering, don’t mean all that much.”
The Tears of Zion
Rabbi Sharon Brous: Sermon, Feb. 4, 2023
Brous, rabbi of the liberal Ikar community in Los Angeles, doesn’t just defend the right of Diaspora Jews to speak out in defense of Israeli democracy and Palestinian rights, but castigates Jewish leaders and communities who have been reluctant to criticize Israel in the past. “No, this government is not an electoral accident, and it is not an anomaly,” she says. “This moment of extremism has been a long time in the making and our silence has made us complicit.”
—
The post Diaspora alarm over Israel: Your guide to what the critics are saying appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Tensions in Israel loom large in these Oscar-nominated shorts
Despite a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, two Oscar-nominated short films show that the deep division that the war sowed in Israeli society will take a long time to mend.
Butcher’s Stain, a nominee for Best Live Action Short Film, is the debut of Israeli director Meyer Levinson-Blount, who based it on an experience he had working at a supermarket. Samir, a Palestinian employee at an Israeli grocery store, is accused of tearing down hostage flyers in the breakroom. A single dad who can’t afford to lose his job, he sets out to find the real culprit, only to find himself betrayed by his Israeli friends.
The 36-minute documentary Children No More: “Were and Are Gone,” directed by Israeli filmmaker Hilla Medalia, follows a group of Israeli activists who silently protest the war by going to public spaces and holding photos of Palestinian children killed by the Israel Defense Forces. At the beach and on the street, they are yelled at and physically threatened by passersby who call their acknowledgement of Palestinian death an endorsement of Hamas.
Neither movie particularly stands out in its style or structure as something revolutionary. However they both capture how difficult — and sometimes impossible — it has been to have civil discourse since Oct. 7. People are quick to make assumptions about others’ motivations for sympathizing with either or both sides. Friendships fall apart. Blanket statements alienate people from one another.
The shorts also demonstrate how emotionally charged images have been during the conflict. Both the Israeli hostage posters and the Palestinian flyers showcase the victims’ humanity, hoping viewers will empathize with the subjects regardless of their politics.
But protesters across the world have called the hostage posters Zionist propaganda and tearing them down has been likened by some to a form of anti-colonial resistance. In Children No More, some Israelis respond to the faces of dead Palestinians with the middle finger. In Butcher’s Stain, Samir is accused of supporting terrorism because he posted about children dying in Gaza on social media. To recognize the humanity of someone you may not agree with has become a politically incorrect act.
Reactions to the shorts have further demonstrated the polarizing climate they capture. Israeli culture minister Miki Zohar lambasted both films as being “against Israel,” saying they “amplify our enemies’ narratives.” When I watched Butcher’s Stain at the IFC Theater in New York, the woman two seats down from me became visibly agitated, her knee bouncing up and down as she scoffed disapprovingly before loudly whispering to her partner that the “fucking film” was “antisemitic” for portraying the Israeli employees as bigoted.
There were similar reactions when the Israeli-Palestinian documentary No Other Land won best documentary last year. The film about Israeli forces destroying the Palestinian village of Masafer Yatta was accused of being anti-Israel propaganda. Conservative commentator John Podheretz congratulated “Hamas for its Oscar win” on social media.
Clearly, the Academy was not swayed by last year’s critics to back away from films about Palestinian suffering. In fact, Butcher’s Stain’s selection feels pointed, as it’s the only political drama among the five live action short competitors this year (compared to last year’s lineup that included films about poaching, immigration, child labor, and the Bosnian War). Another Oscar nominee is The Voice of Hind Rajab, a dramatization of Palestinian emergency workers efforts to save the titular five-year old, up for best international feature.
Regardless of whether or not the shorts take home trophies on March 15, they leave audiences with pressing questions about the future now that there is a ceasefire: Can people with different views — in Israel and elsewhere — learn to talk to each other again? Will images of human suffering always be seen as political propaganda? And will Israeli society ever be able to move on?
The post Tensions in Israel loom large in these Oscar-nominated shorts appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Toronto synagogue hit by gunfire hours after Purim event
(JTA) — A Toronto synagogue was hit by gunfire late on Monday night, just hours after a Purim celebration was held there.
No injuries were reported in the shooting, according to police, which targeted Reform synagogue Temple Emanu-El at around 10:49 p.m. The event, which was billed as a “sing-along shpiel” and costume contest, had run until 9 p.m.
But Rabbi Debra Landsberg told reporters that she couldn’t sleep much Monday night: She was still inside the building when the shooting occurred, and could hear the gunshots.
“I’m a bit shaken up,” she said. “It is devastating that there are those in this society that want to shatter what we have here.”
Police did not confirm how many shell casings were found outside the building, but the synagogue wrote on Instagram that “20 shots were fired at our synagogue.”
“We are working closely with law enforcement and security partners,” the post read. “We remain united and resilient. Our building is damaged; our congregation is not. Chag sameach, everyone.”
The incident is being investigated by Toronto police’s hate crime unit, as well as the gun and gang task force; the suspect is currently unknown.
Police have upped their presence in Toronto’s Jewish neighborhoods since the war in Iran broke out on Saturday, as well as around houses of worship and other Jewish institutions, deputy chief Robert Johnson said in a press conference on Tuesday. Iranian agents have a record of targeting Jewish sites with gunshots and other disturbances, and Jewish security officials have urged vigilance since the war began.
When asked if there was any connection between the Temple Emanu-El attack and the war in Iran, Johnson said making that connection “would be speculation at this point.”
The shooting is the latest in a string of crimes targeting Jewish institutions and residents in Toronto. A Jewish girls’ elementary school was hit by gunfire three times in 2024 alone. This past December, mezuzahs were ripped from residents’ doorposts in multiple buildings, including a seniors’ residence. A month prior, police said a suspect had “damaged the outer glass windows” of Kehilath Shaarei Torah, a synagogue near Temple Emanu-El. (Police visited that synagogue while investigating the Temple Emanu-El shooting, which prompted false reports that both synagogues were attacked on Monday night.)
“This is the fourth time a Jewish institution has been targeted for gunfire in Toronto over the past two years, in addition to countless threats and acts of vandalism,” said Adam Minsky, president of UJA Federation of Greater Toronto, in a statement. “Every day, families across our community carry deep concerns for the safety of their children. But we are resilient and refuse to be intimidated. We will continue to proudly celebrate Jewish life.”
Noah Shack, CEO of the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs, said in a statement that incidents like this will “inevitably lead to much worse.”
“As we witnessed in Australia, when incitement goes unchecked and synagogues are threatened, we can expect to see mass violence and tragedies that could have been prevented,” Shack wrote.
So far this year, anti-Jewish hate crimes have made up 63% of all reported hate crimes in Toronto, according to Johnson, continuing a trend of increased antisemitic crimes since Oct. 7, 2023.
“These numbers are not abstract. They represent real people and real harm,” Johnson said. “Our commitment is clear: We are doing everything within our authority to protect Toronto’s Jewish community.”
Toronto Mayor Olivia Chow called the shooting “an unacceptable act of antisemitism and intimidation.”
She also alluded to the timing of the shooting, which came days after war broke out between Israel and the United States and Iran.
“As we have seen repeatedly, incidents increase across our city as international events unfold. I want to be clear: it is never acceptable to target faith communities or cultural groups,” Chow wrote.
Shack said the shooting took place “at a time when Iran’s Islamic regime poses a heightened threat to Jewish and Persian communities worldwide,” and urged authorities to “redouble measures to safeguard our country and all Canadians.”
Just one night before the Temple Emanu-El shooting, another shooting occurred at around 2:30 a.m. in Toronto. Nobody was injured, but police said there was “damage” to businesses in the area, including Old Avenue Restaurant, a restaurant owned by pro-Israel activist Esther Bakinka. The hate crime unit “is aware” of the investigation, according to police, but not leading it. Bakinka wrote on Facebook that the restaurant’s upcoming Purim celebration would be canceled due to “extenuating circumstances.”
Deputy mayor Mike Colle called Bakinka “a courageous fighter for protection of our Jewish Community,” and called for the creation of a joint task force to combat antisemitic violence, “especially now with the Middle East on fire.”
The post Toronto synagogue hit by gunfire hours after Purim event appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Trump rejects idea that Israel drew US into war with Iran: ‘If anything, I might have forced Israel’s hand’
(JTA) — President Donald Trump rejected claims that Israel had pulled the United States into the war with Iran on Tuesday, instead suggesting that he had “forced their hands.”
Trump’s comments came after Secretary of State Marco Rubio told reporters on Monday that the United States entered the conflict because officials “knew that there was going to be an Israeli action” and expected to become embroiled as a result. Rubio’s comments ignited questions about whether Trump was taking his cues from the Israelis.
“Based on the way the negotiation was going, I think they were going to attack first and I didn’t want that to happen,” Trump told reporters at the White House on Tuesday during a press conference with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz. “So, if anything, I might have forced Israel’s hand, but Israel was ready and we were ready.”
The president’s claims appeared to contradict reports from the Pentagon to Congress on Sunday that there was no intelligence suggesting Iran planned to attack U.S. forces first.
“If we didn’t do what we’re doing right now, you would have had a nuclear war and they would have taken out many countries because you know what? They’re sick people,” Trump told reporters on Tuesday. “They’re mentally ill sick people. They’re angry, they’re crazy, they’re sick.”
While Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have denied suggestions that Israel steered the U.S. into the conflict, which has rapidly escalated tensions across the region, critics across the political spectrum have continued to question the extent to which the United States’ actions were influenced by Israel.
During the president’s meeting with Merz, the German leader told reporters that the two countries had a shared desire to get rid of the “terrible regime in Iran,” with Trump adding that Germany had allowed U.S. forces land in “certain areas,” though the U.S. was not asking Germany to provide troops.
The meeting followed a joint statement on Sunday by France, Germany and the United Kingdom in which the three countries vowed to “take steps to defend our interests and those of our allies in the region.”
While Republican lawmakers largely backed the joint U.S.-Israeli strikes on Iran Saturday morning, rising American casualties and suggestions by Trump that he had not ruled out sending troops into Iran have spurred concern from some about the potential for a drawn-out conflict.
The post Trump rejects idea that Israel drew US into war with Iran: ‘If anything, I might have forced Israel’s hand’ appeared first on The Forward.