Connect with us

Uncategorized

Netanyahu’s new government could lose a critical constituency: American conservatives

WASHINGTON (JTA) — The op-ed was typical of the Wall Street Journal’s conservative editorial page, extolling the virtues of moderation in all things.

The difference was that the author of the piece published Wednesday, Bezalel Smotrich, has a reputation for extremism, and the political landscape he was imagining is in Israel, not America.

Experts who track the U.S.-Israel relationship say the op-ed had a clear purpose: to quell the fears of American conservatives whom Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has long cultivated as allies and who may be rattled by his new extremist partners in governing Israel. 

Those partners include Smotrich, the Religious Zionist bloc leader and self-described “proud homophobe” whom Israeli intelligence officials have accused of planning terrorist attacks — and who was sworn in as finance minister in Netanyahu’s new government Thursday. They also include Itamar Ben-Gvir, who has been convicted of incitement for his past support of Jewish terrorists, who will oversee Israel’s police.

The presence of Smotrich, Ben-Gvir and their parties in Netanyahu’s governing coalition has alarmed American liberals, including some in the Biden administration. But insiders say conservatives are feeling spooked, too.

“The conservative right was with [Netanyahu] and now he seems to be riding the tiger of the radical right,” said David Makovsky, a fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy who just returned from a tour of Israel where he met with senior officials of both the outgoing and incoming governments. “And I think that is bound to alienate the very people who counted on him being risk-averse and to focus on the economy.”

In his op-ed published on Tuesday, two days before the new Israeli government was sworn in, Smotrich sought to persuade Americans that the new government is not the hotbed of ultranationalist and religious extremism it has been made out to be in the American press.

“The U.S. media has vilified me and the traditionalist bloc to which I belong since our success in Israel’s November elections,” he wrote. “They say I am a right-wing extremist and that our bloc will usher in a ‘halachic state’ in which Jewish law governs. In reality, we seek to strengthen every citizen’s freedoms and the country’s democratic institutions, bringing Israel more closely in line with the liberal American model.”

The op-ed is at odds with the stated aims of the coalition agreements; whereas Smotrich says there will be no legal changes to disputed areas in the West Bank, the agreements include a pledge to annex areas at an unspecified time, and to legalize outposts deemed illegal even under Israeli law. He says changes to religious practice will not involve coercion, but the agreement allows businesses to decline service “because of a religious belief,” which a member of his party has anticipated could extend to declining service to LGBTQ people.

Netanyahu has alienated the American left with his relentless attacks on its preference for a two-state outcome to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which he perceives as dangerous and naive. (He also differs from them on how to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons.) He has instead cultivated a base on the right through close ties with the Republican Party and among evangelicals, made possible in part because he has long espoused the values traditional conservatives hold dear, including free markets and a united robust Western stance against extremism and terrorism.

But his alliance with Smotrich and others perceived as theocratic extremists may be a bridge too far even for Netanyahu’s conservative friends, who champion democratic values overseas, said Dov Zakheim, a veteran defense official in multiple Republican administrations.

“Traditional conservatives are much closer to the Bushes, and Jim Baker and those sorts of folks,” he said, referring to the two former presidents and the secretary of state under the late George H. W. Bush.

Jonathan Schanzer, a vice president of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said the op-ed was likely written at Netanyahu’s behest with those conservatives in mind. 

“The Wall Street Journal piece was designed to appeal to traditional conservatives,” he said. “It was designed to send a message to the American public writ large that the way in which Smotrich and perhaps [Itamar] Ben Gvir have been described is based on past utterances and not necessarily their forward-looking policies.”

The immediate predicate for the op-ed, insiders say, was likely a New York Times editorial on Dec. 17 that called the incoming government “a significant threat to the future of Israel” because of the extremist positions Smotrich and other partners have embraced, including the annexation of the West Bank, restrictions on non-Orthodox and non-Jewish citizens, diminishing the independence of the courts, reforming the Law of Return that would render ineligible huge chunks of Diaspora Jewry, and anti-LGBTQ measures.

Smotrich in his op-ed casts the changes not as radical departures from democratic norms but as tweaks that would align Israel more with U.S. values. He said he would pursue a “broad free-market policy” as finance minister. He likened religious reforms to the Supreme Court decision that allowed Christian service providers to decline work from LGBTQ couples. 

“For example, arranging for a minuscule number of sex-separated beaches, as we propose, scarcely limits the choices of the majority of Israelis who prefer mixed beaches,” Smotrich wrote. “It simply offers an option to others.”

In the West Bank, Smotrich said, his finance ministry would promote the building of infrastructure and employment which would benefit Israeli Jewish settlers and Palestinians alike. “This doesn’t entail changing the political or legal status of the area.”

Such salves contradict the stated aims of the new government’s coalition agreement, Anshel Pfeffer, a Netanyahu biographer and analyst for Haaretz said in a Twitter thread picking apart Smotrich’s op-ed.

“Smotrich says his policy doesn’t mean changing the political or legal status of the occupied territories while annexation actually appears in the coalition agreement and his plans certainly change the legal status of the settlements,” Pfeffer said.

Danielle Pletka, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, said foreign media alarm at the composition of the incoming government was premature.

“I suspect that the vast mass of people will maintain the support that they have for Israel because it hasn’t got anything to do with the passing of one government to another and has everything to do with the principle that Israel is a pro-American democracy in a region that’s pretty important,” she said.

That said, Pletka said, the changes in policy embraced by Smotrich and his cohort could alienate Americans should they become policy.

“I think a lot of things can change if the rhetoric from Netanyahu’s government becomes policy, but right now, it’s rhetoric,” she said. “What you tend to see in normal governments is that they need to make a series of compromises between rhetoric that  plays to their base and governance.”

Pletka said Netanyahuu’s stated ambition to expand the 2020 Abraham Accords to peace with Saudi Arabia would likely inhibit plans by Smotrich to annex the West Bank. In the summer of 2020, the last time Netanyahu planned annexation, the United Arab Emirates, one of the four Arab Parties to the Abraham Accords, threatened to pull out unless Netanyahu pulled back — which he did.

“It’s not just the relationship with the United States,” she said. “This might alienate their new friends in the Gulf, which, at the end of the day, may actually have more serious consequences.”

Netanyahu has repeatedly sought to relay the impression that he will keep his coalition partners on a short leash.

“They’re joining me, I’m not joining them,” he said earlier this month. “I’ll have two hands firmly on the steering wheel. I won’t let anybody do anything to LGBT [people] or to deny our Arab citizens their rights or anything like that.”

Zakheim said that Netanyahu, who is Israel’s longest-serving prime minister, from 1996 to 1999 and then from 2009 to 2021, has proven chops at steering rangy coalitions — but there are two key differences now. 

Netanyahu wants his coalition partners to pass a law that would effectively end his trial for criminal fraud, and so they exercise unprecedented leverage over him. Additionally, Netanyahu in the past has faced the greatest pressure from haredi Orthodox parties, who are susceptible to suasion by funding their impoverished sector. That’s not true of his new ideologically driven partners.

“If you look at his past governments, he has really never been forced into real policy decisions  by those to the right of him,” Zekheim said. “Now he’s got a problem because these 15 or so seats of those to his right are interested in policy, not just in money.”

Makovsky said Netanyahu appears to be leaving behind a conservatism that was sympathetic to the outlook of its American counterpart.

“His success has been that he’s a stabilizer. He’s risk-averse. He’s focused on the prosperity of the country, with high-tech success. He’s the one to be seen as the tenacious guardian against Iranian nuclear influence,” he said. “And those are things people could relate to. Now,  it just seems like he’s just throwing the playbook out the window.”

—
The post Netanyahu’s new government could lose a critical constituency: American conservatives appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Uncategorized

‘It’s a whole ‘nother level of hate’: Pro-Palestinian groups target Oregon Hillel director

The fall semester at Oregon Hillel started with a stolen sukkah. Days later, the director found his face plastered on flyers around University of Oregon’s campus, branding him “Enemy of the People.”

Then came the Oct. 7 anniversary, when pro-Palestinian demonstrators marched to the Hillel House and set fire to an American-Israeli flag on the sidewalk outside.

“It’s a whole ‘nother level of hate and protesting,” said Oregon Hillel Director Lenny Steinberg. “These intimidation factors are starting to grow.”

A tense start

Oregon Hillel serves the University of Oregon in Eugene along with Oregon State University in Corvallis, where the sukkah was stolen. After being up for only a few days, the entire structure, its decorations and everything in it disappeared. The theft is still under investigation and it’s unclear if it was hate motivated.

For Steinberg, who has led Oregon Hillel since 2024, the incidents marked a tense start to the school year — but not an entirely unexpected one. Tensions in Eugene have run high since the Hamas attacks on Israel in 2023 and the subsequent war in Gaza. The university saw an encampment, protests that sometimes offered support for Hamas, the tearing down of Israeli hostage posters and a drawing of a swastika on a dorm bulletin board.

During the spring semester, Oregon Hillel scheduled an event with the 2021 Miss Israel title holder Noa Cochva. She planned to speak with students and answer questions about her home country, but decided to cancel the event due to protests and safety concerns. Instead, she spoke with Hillel students off campus.

While anti-Israel protests are now commonplace across American campuses, protesters’ demands in Oregon have gone beyond simply calling for their university to cut ties with Israel, they want their university to cut ties with Hillel.

“The director of Oregon Hillel supports the continuation of Zionism and genocide in Palestine,”  the flyers state. “Hillel off Campus!!!”

A QR code on the posters links to an article about how students in the academic senate at the New School voted to defund and cut ties with Hillel. The New School did not ban Hillel, as the students had no authority to make such a decision.

Steinberg said campus security footage captured two masked individuals wearing sunglasses and all-black clothing putting up the flyers. Four campus activist groups posted an online statement defending the flyers but didn’t explicitly claim to be responsible for them.

“The poster says nothing about Judaism,” the statement reads in all caps. “The reality of the situation is that Oregon Hillel, a staunchly Zionist group, and the administration create a dangerous space for Jews by synchronizing a Zionist agenda with Judaic practice on campus.”

The statement was shared on Instagram by the local chapters of Jewish Voice for Peace, Revolutionary Women’s Committee, Young Democratic Socialists of America and the Eugene Revolutionary Study Group. None of the organizations responded to the Forward’s request for comment.

Steinberg said that, when he saw the flyers, his first thoughts were about the safety of his family, himself and the Jewish community. While he was directly targeted in the posters, he said many Jews reached out to him with their own safety concerns.

Steinberg took offense at the poster, saying it was spreading lies about him and that he in no way supports genocide. As for the accusation of being a Zionist, he said those who distributed the poster have a different definition of the term than he does. He believes that to them, Zionism means Jewish supremacy in Israel, full support of the Israeli government, support for settlers in the West Bank and denial of Palestinians’ right to self-determination.

To him, Zionism means having an ancestral home and self-determination alongside Arabs.

“Zionism doesn’t necessarily, to me, mean everything has to be Jewish,” he said. “It doesn’t mean that the State of Israel gets everything right. They don’t. We don’t get everything right here, but it’s my home, and I love it for all of its amazing beauties and even its flaws.”

Oregon’s Hillel is not unique. It fosters Jewish community through events and offers a space for students to gather, and like many Hillels, funds trips to Israel via both the Birthright and Perspectives programs. Birthright is the free 10-day trip to Israel offered to young adults with one Jewish parent, while Perspectives is a trip offered to students of Jewish and non-Jewish backgrounds to experience both Israel and parts of the West Bank.

Throughout his professional career, Steinberg, 38, has worked for numerous Jewish organizations including the Jewish Federation, the Jewish Community Center in Portland and most recently the Jewish fraternity Alpha Epsilon Pi. Given his line of work he was well aware of the “encampments, and political climates and what hostilities there might be” brewing on campuses before he took the Hillel position in 2024.

“Still, I don’t think any of that truly prepared me for what’s really transpired and happened over these last few weeks,” he said.

While the pro-Palestine groups that shared a statement on the flyer insist it is not antisemitic, Steinberg disagrees. He argues the posters are intended to make Jews feel uncomfortable, while calling for the removal of one of the only Jewish groups on campus.

“That to me is antisemitism masked heavily in anti-Zionism,” he said.

While these events have strained the Jewish community, Steinberg said students have displayed “resilience.” Dozens of people donated to the Corvallis’s new sukkah, the University of Oregon and multiple politicians made statements supporting the Jewish community, and many attended Hillel’s recent unity shabbat.

“Students came, and for the first time in almost two weeks, you could see the weight lifted off their shoulders,” Steinberg said. “You could see that they felt like they belonged and they actually mattered at a time when so many other people are telling them ‘you don’t.’”

The post ‘It’s a whole ‘nother level of hate’: Pro-Palestinian groups target Oregon Hillel director appeared first on The Forward.

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

NYC Comptroller breaks campaign promise to Jewish voters to buy Israel Bonds, drawing praise from Mamdani

New York City Comptroller Mark Levine’s decision not to resume the city’s investments in Israel Bonds, breaking a campaign promise he made to Jewish voters last year, drew mixed reactions Wednesday from supporters of Israel and advocates for the Palestinian cause. It also marked another symbolic shift in the city’s relationship with Israel under Mayor Zohran Mamdani.

The decision, first reported by The New York Times, is a significant reversal for Levine, the city’s highest-ranking Jewish elected official, who repeatedly promised last year to restore the investments after his predecessor ended a nearly 50-year practice of buying Israeli government debt.

The city’s pension funds previously held $39 million in Israel Bonds, which returned roughly 5%. Former Comptroller Brad Lander, who is also Jewish, decided not to purchase new bonds when the holdings matured in 2023, citing the city’s policy against investing in foreign government debt.

In an interview with the Times, Levine cited financial concerns and technical challenges, including those related to the war in Gaza and Israel’s political instability, in explaining why Israel Bonds are “not an investment that we can make right now.”

He insisted the decision was not driven by political pressure or a shift in his personal support for Israel, and left open the possibility of purchasing Israel Bonds in the future. The pension funds still hold $285 million in Israel-related assets, including common stocks and more than $1 million in Israeli real estate investment trusts.

The move was nonetheless a political victory for Mamdani, a longtime supporter of boycotts of Israel, who opposed the bond purchases and has sought to reshape New York City’s relationship with Israel, politically, emotionally and economically.

“I welcome the comptroller’s decision,” Mamdani told the Forward on Wednesday. “It is something that I’ve said in the past … I don’t believe that our city should purchase Israel bonds. We don’t purchase the bonds of any other sovereign nation. I don’t think that we should make an exception when it comes to Israel.” The mayor can neither prevent the investment nor overrule it.

Lander, now a congressional candidate, also voiced his approval via text message. “The pension funds are not invested in the bonds of other foreign countries,” Lander said, “and previous comptrollers’ decisions to buy Israel bonds nonetheless were a political move, not a fiduciary one.”

Why Levine changed his mind

For Jewish voters who supported Levine’s campaign, the reversal raises questions about a promise he made while seeking the office of the city’s chief financial officer.

“This has been a rock-solid investment for decades,” he said during the campaign. “Israel has never missed a bond payment, and a good, balanced portfolio should have global diversity.”

When Mamdani suggested Lander’s move should become permanent, Levine pushed back. “Israel bonds have never missed a payment in 70 years, ever, not once,” he said in April. “They pay excellent interest.”

He also called out critics who had been protesting outside his office. “We have had no protesting about our investments in Saudi Arabia, our investments in Pakistan or China, only this one little, tiny sliver,” Levine said.

A spokesperson for Levine’s office said the decision was strictly financial, not political, and noted that the decision applies only to the city’s short-term investments, where concerns about regional instability and financial risks make Israel Bonds “less attractive than other options.” Though the office did acknowledge that it invests in some bonds with lower returns.

Levine conceded that when he made the campaign promise, he did not have a complete understanding of the city’s financial options. “Perhaps a year and a half ago,” Levine told the Times, “I would have expected that the ratings would have been improved by now and/or that the interest rate would have gone up.”

Jewish leaders, who criticized Lander’s decision when it was revealed last year, remained largely silent on Wednesday.

Former comptroller warns of consequences

Scott Stringer, who served as comptroller from 2013 to 2021 and also ran for mayor last year, warned that Levine’s decision could have broader political and social consequences. ”This is a major victory for BDS, and it’s going to have long-term ramifications,” Stringer told the Forward. “This indecision will, unfortunately, spark more BDS calls that could cause further antisemitism.”

Stringer and his predecessors — John Liu and Bill Thompson — purchased tens of millions of dollars in bonds during their time in office. Stringer called Israel Bonds a “sound long-term investment” and argued that the city should not base its decisions on short-term developments.

“It’s a sound investment today, and it’s a sound investment for the future,” he said, adding that it also sends an important symbolic message, especially “because of the politics of the moment.”

When Landers ended the investment in 2023, former Mayor Eric Adams protested but couldn’t stop it. Moshe Davis, who was Adams’ Jewish liaison and worked with then-First Deputy Mayor Randy Mastro, drafted a letter to Lander, saying the decision called into question his “fiduciary duty to the city’s pensioners.” On Wednesday, Davis suggested Levine was “feeding the BDS lie” just like his predecessor.

“Our city deserves a comptroller who stands up to anti-Israel propaganda,” Davis said, “the way he promised on the campaign trail.”

An Israel Bonds spokesperson criticized Levine’s reversal, pointing to his repeated campaign promises. Nate Miller, a spokesperson for Israel Bonds, pointed to the strength of Israel’s economy and said investors have purchased more than $8.5 billion in Israel Bonds since the Oct. 7, 2023 attack on Israel and the Gaza war. Despite Levine’s decision, Miller said, “We look forward to sitting down with him and his team.”

Levine’s spokesperson said the comptroller’s office “continues to evaluate investment opportunities based on their financial merits and our fiduciary responsibilities.”

The post NYC Comptroller breaks campaign promise to Jewish voters to buy Israel Bonds, drawing praise from Mamdani appeared first on The Forward.

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

A town in the Alps that rescued Jews from the Nazis

Read the original Yiddish article here.

During a trip to the French Alps this year, I discovered a village with a fascinating Jewish history.

Saint-Martin-Vésubie sprawls across a mountain in southern France near the Italian border, its slopes dotted with colorful houses. A river runs through the center of town, lined with pine trees and ripening grapes.

On my first day there, the town’s tour guide, Anne Sivirine, told us that for a year during World War II, Saint-Martin-Vésubie actually served as a city of refuge for more than 1,200 Jews.

Among those refugees were Jews from Germany, Poland, Holland and Belgium, who had escaped to the zone libre, the French term referring to the territory in southern France, which, during the first two years of the war, was not yet occupied by the Nazis. My grandmother Feyge and her family had tried to flee Belgium for southern France, but due to various circumstances, didn’t manage and remained in the Belgian city of Antwerp.

In November 1942, the Nazis entered the zone libre, while their allies, the Italians, occupied the southeast region of France. Although the Italians administered their own “race laws,” the Jews in Italy, and for a while in southern France, weren’t in danger, and that was no small thing towards the end of 1942, when most Jews in Europe had already been murdered by the Germans.

Thanks to the efforts of Angelo Donati, an Italian Jew living in Nice at the time, the Italians agreed to establish a center for Jewish refugees in Saint-Martin-Vésubie where they could live a relatively normal life. Although prior to the war, only one Jewish family — the Levin-Drisdos — lived there, it soon became a fully Jewish shtetl.

At the beginning of 1943, in the middle of the war, Jews learned, prayed, worked, founded youth and sports organizations, and even married. The French residents, for the most part, were friendly to the Jews, and many provided food and other means of support. Such kindness towards Jewish refugees was rare then.

Those halcyon days ended in September when the Italians surrendered. The Germans occupied Italy, and within a few days — Saint-Martin-Vésubie too. When the Jews heard the news, local residents helped them escape to the mountains, where they aimed to sneak over the border into Italy. The days were cold and rainy, and the exodus from Saint-Martin-Vésubie became immeasurably difficult. (Even I, a tourist during peacetime, found climbing those hills very difficult.)

In Italy, hundreds of Jews found hiding places, but the Germans caught many of them. They, and those Jews who stayed in the village, especially the elderly and children, were deported to Drancy, the detention center near Paris, and from there to Auschwitz.

Even then, dozens of Jews remained in Saint-Martin-Vésubie, and local people continued to hide them. Not everyone in the village lent a hand, but most of them knew what was going on and kept silent. Only one Jew was actually handed over to the authorities: Gregoire Dridso, the patriarch of the Levin-Dridso family, who had lived there before the war began.

Years later, Yad VaShem designated 10 of the locals as Righteous Gentiles.

If you’ve never heard of this heroic, humble village, you aren’t alone. Even in Saint-Martin-Vésubie, the events of World War II weren’t publicly mentioned for years.

The reason for the silence was a practical one, Sivirine explained. “There were those who helped the Jews, and those who collaborated with the Nazis, and everyone needed to live together after the war. But one day a young woman overheard the old folks talking about ‘the hidden Jews’, and that opened up a Pandora’s box.”

Since then, the residents of Saint-Martin-Vésubie openly acknowledge what their town did to save the Jews. Aside from the main memorial in Saint-Martin-Vésubie, the village now has three others: one for the Jews who perished; a second one in honor of the Righteous Gentiles, and a third that describes how the townspeople risked their lives to help the Jews under the Nazis.

Since Saint-Martin-Vésubie began sharing this chapter of its history, several books have been published on the subject. The town itself released a book in French, called The Jews and the Righteous Ones of Saint-Martin-Vésubie. Later, historian Susan Ziccotti penned a book in English, Holocaust Odysseys: The Jews of Saint-Martin-Vésubie and their Flight through France and Italy. There were also three novels inspired by this chapter in the town’s history, including Wandering Star by French Nobel laureate writer J. M. G. Le Clézio.

Saint-Martin-Vésubie takes pride in something else, too. The town’s main church has a wooden statue of the Madonna that dates back to the Middle Ages, and is revered by its residents. Each year the townspeople carry it in a procession into the mountains, believing that the statue was created there.

About 10 years ago, the residents of Saint-Martin-Vésubie established a new tradition: Each year on Sept. 3, in memory of the Jews who escaped to the mountains, they march to the mountain pass at the border with Italy. There, at a marker honoring the Jews, they memorialize those who died and those who survived, thanks to the Saint-Martin-Vésubie residents at the time. Occasionally, the children or grandchildren of the rescued Jews participate.

In Italian and in French, the inscription says: “Through this mountain pass, in September 1943, hundreds of Jews from all over Europe passed through, seeking ways to save themselves from antisemitic predators.”

Then, movingly, the text adopts a different tone: “You, who’ve arrived here as a free person, need to remember that this is what could happen when equal rights aren’t extended to all.”

The post A town in the Alps that rescued Jews from the Nazis appeared first on The Forward.

Continue Reading

Copyright © 2017 - 2023 Jewish Post & News