Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News: Opinion

Showing posts with label Opinion. Show all posts

Wednesday, January 06, 2021

Sovereignty: “The Moment Has Been Lost for at Least Four Years” (Judean Rose)

Sovereignty is a dead issue in Israel for now, but maybe it always was. The issue of applying Israeli civil law over the Jordan Valley and Judea and Samaria comes up as regularly as Israeli elections, but never actually comes to fruition. On September 10, 2019, however, it seemed the stars had at last aligned to make sovereignty possible. That was when Prime Minister Netanyahu announced, with only one week to go before elections, his intention to apply Israeli sovereignty over all the settlements, beginning with the Jordan Valley and then moving on to settlements in Judea and Samaria.

“One place that can have sovereignty immediately applied to it after the elections is the Jordan Valley. The next government will apply Israeli sovereignty to the Jordan Valley.

“We haven’t had such an opportunity since the Six Day War, and I doubt we’ll have another opportunity in the next 50 years. Give me the power to guarantee Israel’s security. Give me the power to determine Israel’s borders,” said Netanyahu, who added that there was an “unprecedented opportunity to apply sovereignty to our settlements in the West Bank.”

We were to understand by this announcement that with Netanyahu secure in office in Israel, and the Israel-friendly President Trump in the White House, we would finally be free to do what we should have done in 1967: exercise Israeli sovereignty over all territory under Israeli control. After all, this territory is Jewish indigenous territory and has been for thousands of years. But the Jews had been dispossessed by one invading occupier after another and the land had slipped out of Jewish hands, the Jews, dispersed.

Back in 1967, however, when Israel was once again attacked by invading Arab armies, it looked like the end of the Jewish State. Instead, Israel ended up liberating much of its ancient territory, but left the disposition and administration of Judea and Samaria vague, in hopes that later, they might barter the land for peace, something that was never to happen. This has been a frustrating situation for many Israelis, in particular, those of us who actually live in Judea and Samaria.

Those of us who live in Judea and Samaria, never felt this part of Israel to be a commodity: something that could be traded away for something else. To the contrary, we felt it an imperative to settle and build on every part of our land: Jewish land. We never felt we had a partner for peace, moreover, but instead a murderous rabble, looking for opportunities to murder us, to murder Jews. Not that we thought it possible to give away our inheritance, but even if we had, we understood that giving them land would only encourage them in their bloodthirsty violence resulting in yet more dead Jews for us to bury and to mourn, God forbid.

So the horizon seemed a bit more exciting when it seemed as if, yes: this could finally happen: this thing called sovereignty. Netanyahu and Trump would make it happen. Israel would finally exercise sovereignty over this important part of our land and inheritance as Jews

But it never did happen. First, the idea that we were going to exercise sovereignty over all our territory was walked back. As I wrote in August 2019, (Peace for Peace or Sovereignty for Peace? Was Sovereignty Ever Really on the Table?) it turned out that the goal was only “to create a Palestinian state on 70 percent of Judea and Samaria through the application of Israeli sovereignty to just 30 percent of that land, effectively giving up another huge chunk of Jewish land to the Arabs for good.”

And even that partial plan got suspended, thanks to the Abraham Accords, when the United States promised the UAE not to support Israeli sovereignty until 2024. The signatories to the accords assumed that by then, Trump would be long gone from the White House. Anyone other than Trump in the Oval Office was bound to be against the idea of Israeli sovereignty in Judea and Samaria, effectively making the issue disappear off the table for good—though some still hold out hope Trump will be in the running for the 2024 presidential election.)

Still, it’s not fair and a little too facile, for Israel to pin its hopes and aspirations on an American president. It’s not right because the will to exercise Israeli sovereignty must come from the top: from strong Israeli leaders. But our current Israeli leadership doesn’t care about this issue and now and in the past, has had no will to discuss sovereignty except as a bargaining chip for the enemy, or for the sake of pushing an Israeli election toward this direction or that.

With this new Israeli election season upon us, some may be wondering if the tried and true false promise of sovereignty might once again be dangled before our eyes. But no, there are the Abraham Accords to tout, and the—disastrous for Israel–results of the American election which means that the White House will no longer be in Israel’s corner, plus the insistent need to prove stellar handling of the pandemic. All of these red letter events: the accords, the election, the pandemic, have shoved the issue of sovereignty into a faraway corner, and have rendered it obscure and practically irrelevant.

Sovereignty will not soon again be an issue to lure Israeli voters to the polls.

“I really doubt Bibi will push sovereignty. He didn't push it in the last elections except as a little teaser; but essentially, when he had the opportunity, he was not interested. And to the extent he dangled the idea in front of his supporters, it was only because Trump was in favor,” said Eugene Kontorovich who heads the International Law Department of the Kohelet Policy Forum, a Jerusalem think-tank.

But what of the changing of the guard? Why should it matter? Why doesn’t Netanyahu just do the right thing and exercise Jewish sovereignty over all of Israel’s rightful, legal, and holy land? “With Biden as president, I can't imagine Bibi opposing him on this,” said Kontorovich "He doesn't care much about sovereignty himself, and cares a lot about avoiding fights with POTUS. He likes things quiet, and does not fundamentally understand the need for sovereignty.

“I think the moment has been lost for at least four years.”

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

Jonathan Pollard is a Litmus Test. But for What? (Vic Rosenthal)

Vic Rosenthal's weekly column

The arrival of Jonathan Pollard in Israel 35 years after his arrest for espionage on Israel’s behalf has made me think about the position of the Jew in the diaspora, particularly in America.
There are facts about Pollard’s case that are shrouded in mystery (for example, the still-secret Caspar Weinberger memo that in part convinced the judge in his case, Aubrey Robinson, to abrogate his plea bargain and sentence him to life imprisonment).

There is very little impartial material written about his case. Did he do what he did out of Zionist motives or did he do it for the money (or both)? Was Judge Robinson influenced by accusations that Pollard had aided the apartheid South African regime? These questions are discussed here (from a pro-Pollard perspective). Was the sentence outrageously unfair or, as some say, was it too light? Was his sentence, like the one given to Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, intended as a warning to disloyal ‘cosmopolitan’ Jews? It is possible to find documentation of various degrees of trustworthiness to support disparate narratives.

It is certain that Pollard provided a great deal of useful information to Israel about her regional enemies that had been withheld by the US. It is also certain that Pollard was abandoned by Israel, expelled from the embassy in Washington where he sought asylum, into the arms of the FBI. And it is certain that he received the harshest sentence by far ever handed down to someone for spying for an American ally, harsher yet than what some who spied for the Soviets received.
Early Wednesday morning, Pollard was met at the airport by PM Netanyahu, who said the shehecheyanu with him and personally handed him his Israeli identity document. This of course immediately made him a political football in Israel, to the extent that he wasn’t already. But that’s not what I want to discuss.

What interests me today is the attitudes of American Jews toward Pollard, and what that tells us about how they see themselves and their position as diaspora Jews.

The diaspora has generally not been a friendly place for Jews since their expulsion from Judea after the defeat of the Bar Kochba revolt by the Romans on Tisha b’Av, 135 CE. Always outsiders, they were often exploited, expelled, oppressed, and even exterminated by their hosts. But – especially between the end of WWII and the beginning of the 21^st century – the USA has been different. Although there are examples of anti-Jewish riots and lynchings, and discrimination in employment, education, and residence, the position of Jews in America for a long period has probably been as good as or better than anywhere else in the diaspora.

Like Homer Simpson, an American Jew has two tiny creatures that sit on his or her shoulders and whisper. One says, “you are an American like other Americans, even if you are Jewish. This is your home. You have rights here.” And the other says, “never forget that you are a Jew. Your existence is precarious. Keep your suitcase packed.” I think that American Jewish attitudes toward Pollard are derived from the interaction of these voices.

On one occasion, a friend told me that “Pollard should have been executed, like the Rosenbergs.” This from a liberal American Jew who, I’m certain, opposes capital punishment in general. “America was good to him and he spit in its face,” he continued. “He was a traitor both to his country and to other Jews, who will always be suspected of having dual loyalties.”

This particular Jew is more knowledgeable than most Americans about Israel, a strong Zionist and supporter of causes related to Israel. But at the same time he was one of the approximately 69% of American Jews who voted for Barack Obama’s second term, when it should have been obvious to anyone that he was far from a friend of Israel (unlike his opponent, Mitt Romney). Needless to say, President Trump’s remarkably strong pro-Israel stance doesn’t sway my friend from his strong antagonism to the president.

When I listen to him, I hear both voices. My friend is proud of being American and takes what he sees as patriotic American positions. His center of gravity is in the US. But at the same time, there is that other small voice, the one that reminds him that as a Jew, he is less than entirely secure in America. He worries that Pollard’s actions might cause an increase in antisemitism among non-Jewish Americans. And maybe sometimes at 3 AM, he wonders if he shouldn’t have a packed suitcase under his bed.

So it is very important for him to let everyone know that American Jews in general, and he in particular, are good Americans. Maybe better Americans than some non-Jews.
This is a position fraught with cognitive dissonance.

There are American Jews that strongly support Pollard. Some (unlike my friend) are Orthodox Jews, like Rabbi Pesach Lerner, the former head of the National Council of Young Israel, an organization of Orthodox synagogues. Lerner visited Pollard in prison countless times, and helped obtain financial support for him after his release when he was unable to work. Pollard “got religion” in prison, and that may be part of it. But I have also heard some Orthodox Jews strongly denounce Pollard in words like my friend’s. And, on the other side, the Reform Movement passed a resolution to ask President Clinton to commute Pollard’s sentence in 1993; its president, Rabbi Rick Jacobs (whom I usually love to criticize), visited him in prison along with representatives of the Conservative movement.

Pollard is a litmus test of some sort, but it is not either one for Right vs. Left or Orthodox vs. (religiously) liberal. It’s something else. I know that my grandmother, who lost siblings in the Holocaust and from whom I inherited much of my sensibility, would have instinctively stuck up for Pollard, despite the fact that she was very proud of the paper that said she was an American citizen.

I think it’s related to what I called “center of gravity” above. If your center of gravity is in the diaspora you have to worry that someday you will be uprooted. If it’s located with the Jewish people, you may be less comfortable in the diaspora, but you have fewer illusions.
Where is your center of gravity?

Netanyahu has held onto the reins of power far longer than any other Israeli prime minister. But love him or hate him, at some point Bibi must go, because barring other reasons for being deposed from the prime ministerial throne, no one lives forever. The problem is, there is no one to step into Netanyahu’s shoes, because he hasn’t groomed a successor. From Jonathan Tobin:

The defection of Likudniks under Sa’ar’s leadership to join the other former Netanyahu aides that oppose him at the head of other parties, like Bennett and Lieberman, reminds us that the prime minister has never tried to groom a successor. Indeed, he doesn’t seem to believe in the concept. That “après moi, le deluge” attitude is not only a good argument for term limits. It’s a bad look for any leader in a democracy even if, as is true of Netanyahu, his expertise in diplomacy, security and economic issues may be unrivaled.

With another election looming, the fourth since April 2019, Israelis must again ponder their electoral choices. There is no question that the right is stronger than the left in Israel right now, and has been for years, but the right has reason to be dissatisfied with Netanyahu. The right doesn’t like how Bibi has handled the situation in Southern Israel where Gaza uses Israeli citizens for target practice. They aren’t crazy about the fact that Bibi promised sovereignty in Judea and Samaria and it never happened. Aside from these issues, Likud, the party of Netanyahu, is seen as failing in its mission. Likud is supposed to be the party of Greater Israel, the party that builds in all parts of the Land, but it seems like illegal Arab building in the territories gets a pass, while Jewish homes are deemed illegal and are demolished in the blink of an eye to make a show for the EU, the UN, and fake human rights organizations, whenever they give a schrie, a shout.

Because of this situation, where Likud is deemed to be not really on the right, many voters took a chance, the last several times around, on the smaller right wing parties, which sucked away votes from Netanyahu’s party, the Likud. This necessitated the Likud wooing several smaller parties to join together as a coalition, in order to gain enough seats to form a government. As these smaller parties vie for a place in the government, Netanyahu has to be careful about divvying out political favors to rising stars on the right, lest they rise above to supplant him and usurp his place of power.

And that is how someone like Gantz, someone unseasoned and unsuited to rule, rises to power. It’s all about balancing out that coalition and those favors. Bibi dare not cede too much power to anyone else on the right, lest he lose his place and fall off the throne.

But whenever elections are announced, there are always some who will jump ship to form new parties, diluting the vote even further, and demanding more favors for the sake of joining the right wing coalition. This time, Gideon Sa’ar a longtime member of Likud, tendered his resignation from the Knesset and left the Likud to form the New Hope party. That same day, Yoaz Hendel and Zvi Hauser of the Center Right Derech Eretz party signed on with Sa’ar's party. Likud members Yifat Shasha-Biton, Michal Shir, Sharren Haskel, and Ze'ev Elkin, subsequently left the party of Netanyahu to throw in their lot with Sa’ar.

This many people coming onboard with Sa’ar tells us that the former Likudnik is attempting to form a new Likud, a party that will truly represent the right, and not fake it to make it, as the Likud, under Netanyahu, has done. This is not a new phenomenon. Many parties have sprung from the loins of the Likud. Some of the parties make it, some of them don’t. But none of these parties, and none of their leaders have succeeded in amassing the power of a Benjamin Netanyahu. And this is, in part, because Netanyahu has not groomed a successor.

It is the responsibility of a leader to groom a successor. No one lives forever. No politician can stay in power forever. If Netanyahu cares about securing the future of the Jewish State, he must prepare someone to take over from him when the time comes.

That could have been Sa’ar. But Sa’ar saw no future in the Likud, because Netanyahu gave him no hope that the former more junior member of Likud might someday succeed him. Nor did Netanyahu give hope to any other rising star in the Likud that he or she might someday rise to power.

Maybe that is because Netanyahu doesn’t see anyone in the talent pool of rising stars in the Likud who comes close to meeting the Netanyahu standard of statesmanship. And maybe there really is no one who is capable of the magic of statecraft Netanyahu-style—no one to pull rabbits out of hats, the way Netanyahu always seems to do, like when he stares down the UN . . .

. . . or speaks to Congress against the wishes of Obama.

But I’ll tell you this: I’ve seen Netanyahu speak, and it’s like he’s the entire room. You feel as though he’s speaking only to you. Maybe he was born that way, with a gift. Or perhaps Netanyahu was born with the potential to be a leader and someone took a chance--took him under his wing, and helped to nurture that gift.

All I know is that love or hate him, Netanyahu makes every other potential Israeli leader look small. I see no one with the gravitas to take his place. And that’s a scary thought for the future of Israel. Which is why Netanyahu must groom a successor, now. Netanyahu needs to create a leader in his own powerful image, a Bibi 2.0--except more rightwing--to take his place on that day when it will finally be time for him to step off the dais and let someone else lead the Jewish State to prosperity, peace, and success.

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

The Biden Administration and the “War of Return” (Vic Rosenthal)

Vic Rosenthal's weekly column

Judging from the few public statements made so far and what is known about his appointees, the Biden Administration will take up the same stance toward Israel and the Palestinians as the last Democratic administration, led by Barack Obama.
That means that it will return to the idea of establishing a Palestinian state in Judea and Samaria more or less on the pre-1967 lines. It will go back to financing the Palestinian Authority, which will find a way to pay terrorists and support their families while pretending not to, in order to circumvent the Taylor Force Act which requires the US to deduct such payments from aid to the PA. The administration will likely close its eyes to the subterfuge. It will go back to funding UNRWA, the agency that supports the exponential growth of a stateless population made up of the descendants of Arab refugees from the 1948 war, despite the fact that it exists to perpetuate the problem posed by this population, not to solve it.
I believe that it will return to the principle that the main reason the conflict has not ended is that Israel has not made enough concessions to the Palestinians, and that the way to end it is to pressure Israel to give in to Palestinian demands: for Jew-free land, for sovereignty without restrictions, for eastern Jerusalem, and perhaps even for the “return” of the refugee descendants. Although not directly part of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, it will probably reduce pressure on Iran and possibly even return to the JCPOA, the nuclear deal.
It’s too early to tell if it will also adopt the open hostility to the Jewish state that characterized Obama’s reign. That will depend on who influences Biden, both among his official advisors as well as the numerous think tanks, lobbies, and pressure groups that have an interest in the conflict – including the one operated by Barack Obama himself.
I suspect that the administration will have its hands full with other matters and so will not immediately launch a new “peace” effort. But one never knows. Sometimes rationality goes out the window when the subject turns to the Jews and their state.
Although nothing can be done with those who take a position because they see it as a step in the direction of the ultimate elimination of our state, there are still “people of good faith” who believe that the Land for Peace paradigm that inspired the Oslo Accords does provide a path to ending the conflict. If the new administration is dominated by the latter type of people, there is hope that correcting their fundamental misapprehensions might lead to a more productive policy.
These misapprehensions are spelled out persuasively in a recent book, The War of Return, How Western Indulgence of the Palestinian Dream has Obstructed the Path to Peace, by Adi Schwartz and Einat Wilf (All Points Books, 2020). Schwartz and Wilf fall on the left of the Israeli political spectrum (Wilf was a Member of the Knesset for the Labor Party), and they still favor a two-state solution. But unlike most of their comrades, they have listened to the Palestinians, and understand their actual concerns and objectives. In their book, they explain why the traditional approach has failed and propose the initial steps that are necessary for any settlement of the conflict.
All previous Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations have miscarried because Israelis and Western interlocutors have failed to realize the paramount importance of one issue – the “right of return” demanded by the Palestinians. This is possible because they have systematically misunderstood the language – whether English or Arabic – used by the Palestinians. The “constructive ambiguity” that often characterizes diplomatic language and allows parties that don’t quite agree with each other to nevertheless sign agreements has made it possible for the same words to have diametrically opposed meanings when uttered by Westerners or Palestinians.
The prime example of this is the phrase “a just solution to the refugee problem.” To an Israeli or Westerner, this can include the normalization of the refugees* in their countries of residence, their emigration to other countries, or their resettlement in a Palestinian state, should one be created. This has been the approach taken by the international community to the numerous refugee populations, including Germans living in Eastern Europe after WWII, Holocaust survivors, Jews who were forced out of Arab countries after 1948, and so on. But the Palestinian position is that there is only one “just solution”: anyone with refugee status has the inalienable right to “return” to his “home” in Israel if he wishes to do so, or to receive compensation if he prefers. And that is what this phrase means when they use it.
Naturally, given the numbers of Arabs who claim this “right,” such a mass return would change Israel into an Arab-majority state, even assuming Jews were prepared to leave their homes and peacefully give them to their “rightful owners.” The absurdity of the demand is evident. Yet Yasser Arafat walked away from Camp David precisely because Israel would not agree to it.
Another phrase whose ambiguity has prevented agreement is “two-state solution.” Virtually every Israeli that favors this understands it as “two states for two peoples.” But the Palestinians want one totally Jew-free Palestinian state, and one state in which the right of return for Arab refugees has been implemented (and which theoretically might contain Jews, at least for a while). They have never accepted the idea of any Jewish sovereignty between the river and the sea, and hence reject the formulation “two states for two peoples.”
Schwartz and Wilf explain that Western and Israeli negotiators have always assumed – perhaps because the demand is so extreme – that the right of return was a bargaining chip that the Palestinians would cash in for the currency of borders, the removal of settlements, or rights in Jerusalem. But they were wrong. The demand for “return” is the essence of the Palestinian movement.
Palestinian children learn about it, down to the particular locations to which each has the “right” to return, in UNRWA schools where they are taught by Palestinian teachers (99% of UNRWA’s employees are Palestinians). Someday, they are told over and over, they will return. Guaranteed.
Everything UNRWA does is geared toward increasing this population of angry people, convinced that a massive injustice has been done to them, and that the only solution will be for them to return, and through this return, wipe the Jews from the face of the land they are convinced we stole from them.
UNRWA was created after the 1948 war with the intention of providing temporary assistance to the refugees until they could be resettled and normalized the way all other groups of refugees had been. But the only country that cooperated was Jordan, which gave the Palestinians citizenship and allowed them to integrate into their own populations. In Lebanon there were especially harsh restrictions and poor conditions. Little by little, the Arab nations changed the temporary UNRWA into a permanent tool to mold a refugee army that they hoped would ultimately do what their conventional armies could not: eliminate the Jewish state.
Today UNRWA is the main obstacle to solving the refugee problem. But it need not be. Schwartz and Wilf provide a relatively detailed, step by step program for phasing out UNRWA in the various places that it operates, and providing solutions for the refugees from the host countries and other agencies. For example, in the Palestinian Authority areas, they propose shifting both the responsibility for the refugees, and the money that supports UNRWA, to the PA. Former refugees would study in PA schools, go to PA health clinics, and so on. There are similar programs for Gaza, Syria, and Lebanon where the remaining refugee “camps” (today mostly neighborhoods on the outskirts of cities) are located.
Real peace can only be achieved when the consciousness of the Palestinians changes and they understand that the dream of return will not be realized. This would be a long and difficult process that could only begin with the elimination of UNRWA. But it has to start before it can finish. It will require cooperation of all of the Western donor countries that have been supporting UNRWA. Perhaps the fact that from a financial standpoint UNRWA will soon be unsustainable (after all, the number of “refugees” is growing exponentially) will encourage them to cooperate.
In the short term, it’s essential that everyone involved in relations between Israel and the Palestinians understand the real issues that underlie the conflict. And it would be a good thing if all parties could agree to use words the same way. Schwartz and Wilf say that “constructive ambiguity” should be replaced by “constructive specificity.” If the European Union, for example, believes that the State of Israel should be replaced by a Palestinian state, it should say so. Otherwise, it should unambiguously oppose a right of return, and work to dismantle UNRWA as quickly as is practical.
Back to the incoming Biden Administration. I hope it will resist the attempts of the anti-Israel Left to revive the hostility of the Obama days, and instead choose to be a force for real peace.
To that end, I will be sending Joe Biden a copy of this book, with a suggestion that he read it and pass it around among his foreign policy team.
________________________
*From here on, I use the word “refugees” by itself, although it refers to those descendants of the approximately 550-700,000 original refugees who have been granted this status by UNRWA. There are more than 5 million of them today, and the number grows every day. No such refugee status has been granted to any other population; the UNHCR agency which takes care of all non-Palestinian refugees, grants refugee status to those individuals who cannot return to their country of origin due to well-founded fear of persecution (see the full definition here), and to their children. Unlike UNRWA’s refugee status, it is not hereditary.

Esther Horgan: Went for a Run, Never Came Home (Judean Rose)

Esther Horgan, HY"D

Esther Horgan went for a run in the forest, as she was wont to do on nicer days. The air would be crisp and pine-scented, and she loved the feel and smell of being free in such a beautiful part of Eretz Yisrael. Here she could sing as loud as she wished, with only the clouds to hear. It felt good to stretch her limbs.

No doubt she came here often to run and to think, to exercise and stay in shape, while pondering life’s issues, large and small. There was bound to be always something to think about and resolve. After all, Esther Horgan was a mother of six and an immigrant who sought refuge in Israel from France, a European country that has seen more than its share of violent antisemitism over the past decade or so. Here in Israel, Esther might have thought, one can worry about things like where to send a daughter to high school or a son’s religious studies, instead of worrying that a child might be killed, God forbid, in the halls of a Jewish school, for the crime of being Jewish.

And that might have been true. And Esther Horgan may have been safer in that forest in Samaria, in the heart of Eretz HaKodesh, except that evil exists and infiltrates everywhere. Even in the Jewish State, or perhaps especially so. For many are the Arab terrorists who covet our beautiful land and want it, Jew-free, for themselves.

And the thing is, Esther Horgan wasn’t stupid. She knew that Arab terrorists might be anywhere, looking for opportunities to kill Jews. But the forest where her children were robbed of their mother was not just a random, isolated wood, but a nature preserve, a protected Jewish tourism site. The Israeli government invested here in bike paths and signage. It should have been safe.

It should have been safe for Esther Horgan to run and think and stretch her limbs in this part of the ancient Land of Israel. There should have been no danger to breathing in the pine-scented air of a forest whose name means “fragrant basil"—to bask in the glorious freedom of being alive in the Jewish State and of “coming home” to live in Tal Menashe in Samaria, indigenous Jewish territory for thousands of years.

But it wasn't safe. Eitan Melet, a field coordinator at Regavim posted about it on Facebook with this stunning 360 degree photo of the Reihan Forest, where Esther was murdered:

(photo credit: Eitan Melet/Regavim)

Eitan Melet tells us that while the forest is beautiful, and the Israeli government has invested in developing the nature reserve, there's absolutely no police or army presence there, and it's become a shooting gallery and a dangerous hangout for all the Arabs of the area—from Umm el Fahm and Reihan and the entire area—who do unspeakable things there. Melet was there only recently—a fully-armed, combat-trained male—and he was very uncomfortable.

And still, Esther Horgan went out of her home that morning, as she always did, seeking nothing but the peace of the forest. Nothing had ever happened to her before. But this one time, when she didn't come home, they found her dead, with signs of violence on her body.

From the Jerusalem Post:

"We walked together for 30 years and yesterday you went and did not return. How can a few words describe the depth and breadth of your beauty and goodness?" said Esther's husband, Benyamin. "You built both a physical house and a spiritual house – everything – and it was supposed to be just the beginning. There were so many more plans.”

Nothing had ever happened before, but she was a small thing. You can see it in the pictures. She may have been fit, but she was no match for a brutal murderer, filled with lust for Jewish land soaked with Jewish blood. It shouldn't have happened, but it did.

And still, if Esther Horgan could speak, she would tell you how much better it is to run in the forest, to die as a Jew in the Land of Israel, than to die on the foreign soil of a France that never loved us. She would tell you to keep running in all the forests and beautiful parts of our indigenous territory, land that God gave us alone, to build on and live in. Land where we might someday run, free of any danger from the enemy within.

My neighbor Jocelyn Reisman Odenheimer, not to be deterred, runs on the security road behind her home, in memory of Esther Horgan. (photo credit: Ephraim Odenheimer)

(Thanks to Naomi Linder Kahn, director, international division of Regavim, for her assistance with this piece.)

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

Cancel culture (The Real Jerusalem Streets)

Here we go again. Another day and another example of the new censorship spreading due to progressive thought police.

The publisher of a book about cancel culture by Julie Burchill has cancelled it after the writer was accused of Islamophobia on Twitter. Little, Brown said that Burchill comments were "not defensible from a moral or intellectual standpoint" and "crossed a line with regard to race and religion."

Cancel culture and mob rule of the politically correct woke are taking over. Intolerance to ideas by progressive ideology coupled with a desire to seek retribution by ostracizing those not sharing those views has become a threat to democracy and freedom of speech. According to Robert King, presently serving as the United States Department of Education assistant secretary of postsecondary education, cancel culture is "dangerous to our democracy when administrators cave to the mob." The tradition of vigorous debate and discussion, at the core of American values is being silenced by those who do not agree with you and is stifling freedom of speech.

"Those who cancel ideas, and burn books, end up canceling people and burning them as well" stated Reed Rubinstein, Lead General Counsel for the US Department of Education in his introductory remarks in an online Dept of Ed event titled "What is to Be Done? Confronting a Culture of Censorship on Campus."

Academic freedom based on the Bill of Rights which provides for freedom of speech is being challenged. The emerging prominence of social progressives shuts out not only conservative voices but an academic's ability to express his or her opinions.

Kristina Arriaga, Commissioner to the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom showed how laws become inefficient and useless if not culturally supported. We are told being a dissenter is actually a threat to the tribe, a threat to our way of life. It was reported that 63% of Americans are afraid to speak their mind. Polarization is growing stronger. It is a vital human right to speak out. No one can take what is in our minds and hearts away from us. "Silencing is not good" emphasized Arriaga, the human rights expert.

The first night of Hanukkah Ivanka Trump posted a family photo to say "Happy Chanukah from our family to yours!" In response, the tweet received hundreds of vicious, threatening comments.

The hateful comments on the Hanukkah tweet are one recent example of the vitriol, Ivanka has received from strangers on social media.

A Tennessee lawyer was forced from his position by a state board because a lawyer he was investigating called him an "anti-Muslim bigot."

A meme against Joe Biden roused a complaint against a veteran elementary principal who was then removed by the school board. Postings on her private social media, including support for the police and Republican candidates were reasons given to force her resignation.

A former Supervisor of Special Education in Pennsylvania said she was forced to resign after reposting criticism of Black Lives Matter on Facebook for ignoring black conservatives, black unborn babies, and black police officers.

"The animosity against ‘Israel’ on campus, used to mask animosity against Jewishness did not cease, even as the classroom was replaced with the Zoom call," wrote Blake Flayton in "The Hate that Can't Be Contained" for Tablet. His article contains a long list of incidents against Jewish students in leading universities from the East Coast to the West.

In response to US university professors and students' harassment, the US Department of Education recently initiated a hotline to report abuse and seek assistance. The new hotline freespeech@ed.gov is open to emails for reporting abuse on campus.

Cancel culture mobs have taken down statues of Southern Civil War leaders along Monument Avenue and vandalized General Robert E. Lee in Richmond, VA. In Boston, Abraham Lincoln was a victim of the politically correct ideology.

Rewriting history by removing "offending" books from library shelves and scrubbing names from buildings has already occurred. Thomas Wolfe's "You Can't Go Home Again" is no longer available in a Massachusetts library. Flannery O'Connor, Mark Twain, and others are being banned. American literature is being lost to political correctness.

In 1949, English novelist George Orwell published 1984, as a dystopian social science fiction novel. Orwell developed in his work the consequences of totalitarianism, mass surveillance, repression in society, and the role of truth and fact in politics.

The Ministry of Truth in 1984 controls information - news, education, entertainment, and the arts. By correcting historical records to agree with Big Brother's pronouncements the Party is able to manipulate what is seen to be true.

Barricade the streets. Defund the police. Let mobs rule and governments cave under pressure.

Daily it appears we are taking another step towards 1984 being a prophetic vision and not a work of fiction.

Will the media and social media manipulate what we are allowed to see and say?

Will the new US administration hold off threats to free speech and democracy?

Are Israeli Jews “Betraying” Americans by Liking Trump? (Vic Rosenthal)

Vic Rosenthal's weekly column

Here we go again. Another yawning gulf between Israelis and American Jews, “a rupture that threatens Jews everywhere, the trust between Jews in Israel and the Diaspora, and in the long run, Israel,” say Evan Morris and Dennis Jett.
It’s not bad enough that the Israeli religious establishment does not show respect for Reform “Judaism,” or that we can’t appreciate how much Barack Obama really “[had] our back,” or that we keep electing “right-wing” governments with Bibi Netanyahu as PM, or that we keep failing to understand how an enemy state in mortar range of our center of population and our single international airport would actually be good for us.
It’s much worse than any of that. In fact, we are “going off the rails” and have “betrayed our American cousins.”
We did this by preferring Donald Trump to Joe Biden.
Oh sure, Trump did what no American president cared to do, carried out the will of the Congress and moved the embassy to the capital of the Jewish state. Clinton, Bush, and Obama loved to talk about our “unbreakable relationship,” but when it came down to the legitimacy of our presence in Jerusalem, they religiously signed that waiver every six months. Trump even instructed the oft-antisemitic State Department to allow those born in Jerusalem to have “Jerusalem, Israel” on their passports. Compare that to the Obama Administration’s refusal to say what country Jerusalem was in – they even scrubbed “Jerusalem, Israel” from official websites.
No big deal, Morris and Jett said. “Trump is not a reliable ally and could never be … Given the right circumstance or perceived slight, Trump would turn on Israel.” So then Trump went and recognized Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights, and sponsored the development of a peace plan that was for the first time based on reality, rather than Henry Kissinger’s 1974 promise to the Arabs to reverse the result of the 1967 war.
Trump did even more. He spurned the view that the Palestinians should be given unlimited aid regardless of their behavior, and enforced the Taylor Force act that demanded aid be reduced when it was used to pay terrorists. He ended the perpetual support for the descendants of the Arab refugees of 1948, and disproved the idea – expressed by John Kerry (ironic video) in 2016 – that appeasement of the Palestinians was a precondition for normalization with the larger Arab world.
And now, although already a lame duck, Trump continues to promote normalization between Israel and multiple Arab and Muslim countries. We’re still waiting for him to “turn on us.” Are you surprised that Israelis overwhelmingly prefer Trump to Biden, who promises to re-enter the Iran deal and go back to giving the Palestinians a free pass in an interminable “peace process?” How could it be otherwise?
Nevertheless Morris and Jett insist that Trump is Bad For The Jews. They say he represents “emerging Fascism.” And how do we know this? Because Trump “alternately excused and encouraged” “the white supremacists that marched in Charlottesville.” In fact, he did no such thing. The accusation is a perfect example of the Big Lie technique: it has been repeated countless times, and has now entered the realm of conventional wisdom. But it still isn’t true.
Morris and Jett say Trump supporters “promulgate conspiracy theories based on antisemitic lies.” Maybe some do, just like some of the remarkably vicious members of the American Left who are on the other side. Israelis are not in touch with the details of American politics, nor do we follow the swirling winds of accusations thrown at each other by the two sides. But I have yet to hear anything antisemitic from Trump himself.
Antisemitism is clearly burgeoning in America, and that is rightly a serious concern for American Jews. But the attempt to blame Trump for it – while ignoring the anti-Trump extremists like the Pittsburgh shooter, the Farrakhanists, the Black Hebrews, and the misozionist Left – is dangerously mistaken, despite its wholesale adoption by the Trump-hostile media.
Apparently Morris and Jett think as little of Netanyahu as they do of Trump, calling our PM “boorish” for waiting about 12 hours after other foreign leaders to congratulate Biden on the election. This is the cheapest shot imaginable, considering that the official announcement came on Shabbat, 7 November, and Netanyahu tweeted his congratulations on Sunday.
The piece concludes with an accusation that Israelis are “willing to ignore the very real threat to our democracy, to our way of life and safety, just to help advance [their] own parochial needs.” I admit to being struck almost dumb by this. The Iran deal and the conflict with the Palestinians could have existential consequences for Israel. America has enormous power and influence, which its presidents often wield in our region, sometimes to our great disadvantage, as in the case of President Obama. Israel, on the other hand, has little power to influence America; PM Netanyahu pulled out all the stops to derail the pernicious Iran deal, without success. Perhaps our concerns are “parochial,” but they are quite serious. And I remind them that Donald Trump received more votes than any previous American presidential candidate, even if he did not win the election.* So the vileness of Trump is not a forgone conclusion.
The entire article has an unfriendly, even threatening tone, as if to suggest that if we don’t fall in line with the 77% of American Jews who voted for Biden, we’ll be sorry.
The two authors are not just a pair of idiots, as the content of the article suggests. Morris is a specialist in biomedical engineering and radiology and a psychiatrist who teaches at Yale. Jett is a former ambassador who had a long career with the US State Department, and now teaches International Affairs at Penn State. Both were Fulbright scholars who worked in Israel.
But they share the arrogance of Americans who don’t understand the interests and apprehensions of Israelis, and who would prefer that we play our role as a banana republic that is an American satellite, quietly.
_________________________
* No, I’m not going to comment on whether the election was fair.

“Settlements” is the chosen subject of many a question posted by the anti-Israel crowd on Quora. The word has been, for ages, a dirty word in the lexicon of the Arab War Against the Jews. And in fact, even among right-wing Israeli Jews, the word “settlements” has fallen into disfavor. We don’t need this word, because it’s enough to say we’re building homes. And every human being has the right to shelter, especially in indigenous territory where previously, no homes existed, land that was returned to Israel when the Jews were attacked and fought back.

We didn’t ask for the wars. We have a right to the land we regained. We have a right to shelter and to build homes on Jewish land. Full stop.

The world, however, believes that Jews have no right to shelter. They call the settlements “illegal.” Because they prefer to think of it this way. And after Europe went ahead and murdered close to 7 million Jews in the Holocaust, they now want us to have no place to go. They want to install the Arabs on our land, strip the Jewish State of its ancient name “Israel,” and revert instead to the insulting Roman designation of “Palestine.” They want to take away Jewish land from the Jews and call it an Arab state.

Just as this antisemitic, anti-Israel crowd has managed to turn reality on its head, robbing Jews of their rights to Jewish land and to shelter, we have a responsibility to restore the narrative of truth, by constantly driving these facts home to the public. Quora is a good place for this. On Quora you have the anti-Israel crowd pushing lies, but you also have people pushing back with the truth.

By way of example, not long ago, I was asked to answer the following question on Quora:

Why are Israeli settlements in the West Bank all over the place? Isn't this dangerous for Israel? Won't this culminate in a binational state as it makes it difficult to partition the land?

There were some pretty detailed responses among the answers, but I kept my own response short and to the point, believing this to be better absorbed by readers, and therefore more efficient than a long and wordy answer:

It’s not the West Bank. No water in sight. It is and has been for thousands of years, Judea and Samaria. It is part of Jewish indigenous territory, and like any other human beings, Jews have a right to shelter. No reason they shouldn’t build homes for themselves or establish towns and cities in their ancient homeland.

It takes very little time to craft a quick response like this and to do so is as important as any other work we can do on behalf of Israel and the Jewish people. Every time someone answers a lie with the truth, the narrative of truth is strengthened and spreads further into the ether that is public opinion. How do we know this work is bearing fruit? The UAE will be importing olive oil and wine from Samaria, and Bahrain was going to label items from Judea and Samaria as “made in Israel” before they retracted that decision, presumably due to pressure from the PA.

At Chanuka time, we remember that the Greeks tried to Hellenize the Jews of Israel, forbidding circumcision, Sabbath observance, and the study of Torah. The Greek occupiers of Jewish land went so far as to sacrifice a pig on the altar of the Holy Temple, profaning everything that is holy to Jews. This is not much different than the way the UN and the EU collude with the PA, Hamas, and other Islamic extremists to drive Jews out of their land, their holy places, and into the sea. The ultimate goal is to separate Jews from their land and from Jewish observance, too. They may see Jewish practice as an affront to their beliefs, seeing as how Christianity and Islam were meant to supplant and obviate the need for Judaism.

Chanuka, however, is a time of miracles. We see our former enemies coming to accept a Jewish presence in the Middle East. We watch as peace accords spring up, new ones almost every week, miracles in our own time. There are good and practical reasons for making peace with Israel. But the accords and newly formed diplomatic ties are also an acknowledgement of reality: the Arabs lost. The Jews won and turned a barren, forsaken land into a busy and bustling, successful modern state.

The peace accords come from the knowledge that the Jews have more than earned the right to seek shelter: to live in and build homes on Jewish land. That comes from simple people, like you and me, just putting the truth out there, over time. Slowly, slowly, the truth is making inroads, like water dripping on a rock, gnawing away at the hard substance, and cracking it open over time.

Chag Urim Sameach!

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

The Jewish Agency for Israel is Partnering with Evangelical Christians and “They’re not here just to pick grapes” (Judean Rose)

The Jewish Agency for Israel is actively partnering with evangelical Christians who seek to bring Israeli Jews to Jesus. That’s because 1) These missionaries are saving the Jewish Agency money by setting up and running absorption centers for new immigrants, lone soldiers, and young pre-army students and 2) The missionaries swear up and down until they’re blue in the face that they’re not missionaries—they swear they’re not here to bring Israeli Jews to Jesus.

That promise of innocence is of course, ridiculous. They are missionaries. Full stop. If the Jewish Agency believes them, I’ve got a bridge I can sell them for cheap.

As mentioned in an earlier column: Shannon Nuszen is working to expose the mission of evangelical Christians in Israel—Jews are trying to shut her down, regular Jewish Israelis, not unlike the Jewish Agency, are happy to save money. And just like the Jewish Agency, these Jews swear up and down that the missionaries aren’t missionaries. The evangelicals, meanwhile, harvest grapes in the Jewish orchards of Samaria for free—a dream come true for any farmer. (But at what ultimate cost?)

With all that free labor, is it any wonder that some Israeli Jews fight the notion that in actual fact, these Christians are here to bring Israeli Jews to Jesus? But Jews looking the other way on the presence of missionaries in Israel has, perhaps, another subtext: some Israeli Jews retain a pathological need to seek constant approval from outsiders. These remaining vestiges of the ghetto mentality of these Israelis living free and easy in Israel is almost understandable: What happened to past generations in the diaspora has no doubt scarred the less emotionally hardy of our people.

So if just regular Israeli Jewish Joes support the evangelicals in their mission, it only stands to reason that the Jewish Agency believes it can get away with underwriting projects like the Aliyah Return Center for Lone Soldiers, run by, yes, missionaries.

Now it wouldn’t happen in America. This is made clear in this most recent clip from Beynenu, narrated by Rabbi Tovia Singer.

From the film:

"What's going on here in Israel would not go on in the United States. Both the Reform and Conservative movements have bylaws that they will not work with messianics, who are evangelical fundamentalist Christians who use Jewish terminology, symbols, and icons in order to bring Jewish people to know Jesus in a Jewish way.

“Here in Israel there seems to be no separation.

“The Reform Movement [in America] is the most liberal, and even they would not allow anybody of the messianic movement to be involved in any aspect of their education, much less run their programs.

"Jewish Community Centers around the world deal with the problem of messianics working to infiltrate their centers and social networks all the time, and they work very hard to address it.

"Yet here in Israel we have messianics partnering with the Jewish Agency running absorption centers for new olim, lone soldiers, and young pre-army students. Nowhere else in the world would Jews think to cross this line!

"The Jewish Agency is partnering with the Aliyah Return Center, a Christian organization headed in this country by a Messianic Jew. It's astounding!"

This latest—some would say shocking—clip from Beynenu is, in part, a response to the Jewish Agency, which has accused the organization of doctoring footage to back the narrative that the evangelical Christians are missionaries. Here is the official press release from the Jewish Agency for Israel on the subject:

“The Jewish Agency runs an educational facility near the Sea of Galilee called Bikat Kinarot. The site, fully managed by The Jewish Agency, includes facilities for lone soldiers, new immigrants, preparation for service in the IDF and serves as a regional center for those involved with civic projects.

“We have a formal agreement with the Canadian Christian Zionist organization Return Ministries to provide volunteers and to assist with construction, maintenance and landscaping work on the campus. This is done within a very clear contractual framework, stipulating that any kind of missionary activity is strictly prohibited.

“We are familiar with Beynenu and while the videos are heavily edited, using old and irrelevant footage and containing many false statements, they do raise grave questions and concerns for us regarding our relationship with Return Ministries.

“Let us emphasize that Return Ministries has no involvement whatsoever with any Jewish Agency programming. Any involvement of Return Ministries or the Aliyah Return Center beyond the very clearly demarcated roles mentioned above is in clear violation of their agreement with The Jewish Agency. The Jewish Agency will make no compromise on allowing any missionary activity. We are examining the allegations and intend to take firm action if they are found to be correct. We reject any effort to apply pressure on our internal process by any outside body, who is trying to tarnish our good name. If necessary, we will take steps to prevent this besmirching of The Jewish Agency’s reputation and unwavering dedication to keeping the Jewish people connected to each other and to Israel.”

That’s the official statement to the press. An internal email from the Jewish Agency, however, tells a different story:

“From this examination we have issued a very strong formal letter of complaint sent to Return Ministries. As we have searched for the facts, numerous violations of our contractual agreement have been discovered which have been included in our letter.”

As a result, Beynenu, went ahead and sent the following letter to the Jewish Agency:

As for claims by the Jewish Agency that Beynenu is using doctored, old, and irrelevant clips to prove a specific and unfounded point, Shannon Nuszen has this to say:

"We wish we could say that this is Hollywood, but these videos are real and it's happening in Israel. We understand that leaders are upset about this, and I think we all understand that mistakes happen. However, it would be a bigger mistake to be defensive rather than taking this seriously and addressing the problem.

"Whether they are baptizing olim, or just doing the gardening, we should not be partnering with Messianics. Legitimizing Messianics undermines Jewish communities, and as the Jewish Agency emphasizes, these communities are the building blocks of Jewish life.

"This would not happen anywhere else in the world, but for some reason this grave mistake has happened here in Israel.

"I assure you we are on the same side, and we would be happy to help the Jewish Agency address this serious matter."

So what exactly is Beynenu, and why are they going after these evangelical Christians like a dog with a bone that just won’t let go? Nuszen says that Beyneynu is a team of former missionaries, counter missionary experts, and “concerned persons of influence.” Here is Beynenu’s official mission statement:

Beyneynu is a non-profit organization that monitors missionary activity in Israel and works with government and community leaders to create awareness of the challenges facing the public and to facilitate the establishment of proper boundaries in their partnerships with faith-based organizations.

Establishing “proper boundaries” would seem to be something sorely lacking here between the Jewish Agency and organizations like Return Ministries, Hayovel, and the Aliyah Return Center. As a Jewish Israeli, I am happy that organizations like Beynenu exist. Because the last thing I want Jewish Israelis (such as my children) to encounter, is a missionary hiding the fact that what he really wants is for you to come to Jesus.

(h/t Shannon Nuszen of Beyneynu)

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

Vic Rosenthal's weekly column

The first batch of Pfizer Corona-virus vaccine landed in Israel today. PM Netanyahu announced that he will be the first to get it, live on television, in order to build public confidence. Although it’s impossible to get Covid from it, there is still a possibility of other side effects, and many people would prefer to let others be the pioneers with the arrows in their backs. Even the Israeli Doctors’ Union has insisted on reviewing the research data (Hebrew link) on the vaccines before medical staffs receive it. “We don’t want to be guinea pigs,” said a spokesperson (literally, “experimental rabbits”). The plan is – assuming the doctors are satisfied – is to immunize them first, followed by older citizens. I suggested that bus and taxi drivers, who are both at risk to catch the disease and to infect others, should be included, but apparently they didn’t listen to me.

This first shipment is small, only about 3,000 – 4,000 doses, intended to test the methods of shipment and distribution. Later this month there will be a larger shipments, up to 4 million doses. By the Spring, there should be enough for all of Israel’s population. The Health Ministry was waiting for the American FDA to approve it before giving the final go-ahead, and that occurred yesterday.

Meanwhile, people are still getting sick, some are dying, and the dysfunctional government is still flailing ineffectually as we approach our third wave. A nighttime lockdown was supposed to go into effect today, but at the last moment the Justice Ministry announced that such a lockdown would have “legal problems” because it would “limit the motion of citizens.”

This encapsulates the absurd situation perfectly: a nighttime lockdown would have minimal effect on the epidemic, because people have nowhere to go at night anyway, with restaurants and bars closed. But it would be an obstacle to the continued anti-Netanyahu demonstrations in front of his residences in Jerusalem and Caesarea, so Bibi’s government wants it. On the other hand, the Minister of Justice, who is the former head of the Histadrut labor federation and a bitter foe of Netanyahu, wants the demonstrations to continue. No lockdown. Such dedication on both sides!

I wasn’t going to write about politics, but I should note that the process of dissolving the Knesset and calling new elections is proceeding apace. A preliminary motion to do so passed last week, and a Knesset Committee set the next vote (there need to be three more) for this coming Monday. At the same time, Netanyahu’s biggest rival in the Likud, Gideon Sa’ar, announced yesterday that he is quitting the Likud and starting a new center-right party, which has already attracted several heavy hitters from the opposition. A snap poll showed that Sa’ar’s party would get the third greatest number of seats if the election were today. Most of his support would come from Netanyahu’s party.

A sidelight: the party may be named “New Hope,” which immediately brought up comparisons to Star Wars and the appropriate campaign music (video) for the new party.

This has completely upended everyone’s calculations, since that kind of performance in the election would mean that Netanyahu and the Haredi parties would not come close to the 61 seats needed to form a government. There will now be a huge amount of maneuvering and dealing both before and after the election, which will make it even less likely that the ~~parasites~~ government ministers will be able to spend time on their actual jobs, for which they are very well paid by the citizens. It’s too early to predict, but I am hoping that this will break the deadlock and we will get a real government, instead of this “unity” government in which the various members are more interested in cutting each other’s throats and not being jailed than governing.

In other news, an Emirati billionaire has bought 50% of the Beitar Jerusalem Football [soccer] Club, which has a fan base that includes a sometimes violent anti-Arab group called “La Familia” which insults Arab players on opposing teams and has made it impossible for Arabs to play on the team (even non-Arab Muslims didn’t last). I’m making no predictions here, either.

Finally, speaking of Star Wars, a well-respected Israeli scientist who was head of Israel’s space security program for many years has published a book in which he says that aliens have a contract with the US government and an underground base on Mars, where they are working with American astronauts. According to Prof. Haim Eshed, they have not revealed themselves to us yet because “humanity is not ready.”

He got that part right.

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

Wokeism, Jew-hatred, and Misoziony (Vic Rosenthal)

Vic Rosenthal's weekly column

You hear about it, but you don’t really believe it.

What is happening in American universities to Jewish students, and particularly those who support Israel even to a small degree, is appalling, and it hasn’t diminished as courses have moved online during the pandemic. Misoziony, “new antisemitism,” and plain old Jew-hatred that doesn’t even try to disguise itself have become part of the everyday experience of Jewish students in a way that would have been unimaginable for me or for my children when we were students. Read Blake Flayton’s article at the link above. You can say that it’s just a collection of anecdotes, but they are characteristic of the atmosphere at most universities.

One of the more distressing aspects of it is that it is not just coming from other students, but often from faculty and administrators. The adult authority that is expected to protect students goes missing when the victims are Jewish. Administrators that are exquisitely sensitive to reports of microaggressions against “people of color” or sex/gender minorities, often act as though Jewish students do not deserve protection, because after all they are the most privileged of the privileged. In the event that they are not properly anti-Israel – they don’t even have to identify as Zionists – they are vilified and discriminated against in multiple ways for supporting a “racist apartheid state” that can only be repaired by allowing its enemies to overrun it. Those staff members that do sympathize with Jewish concerns or Israel are often afraid that they will be targeted if they don’t stay quiet (see here, here, here, here, etc.)

Campuses are pervaded by a postmodern ideology, which permits free speech only for those that support it, and a postcolonial one that institutionalizes racist attitudes against “whites,” by which they mean (somewhat incoherently) anyone that does not belong to one of a variable collection of “oppressed” groups. Jews, despite a history of millennia of pogroms, expulsions, and genocides, are never included.

Unfortunately, the postmodern/postcolonial ideology (“wokeism”) is not limited to the universities anymore. The so-called “cancel culture” that pervades progressive media is derived from postmodern ideas like truth being a social construct while feelings are a priori valid. The willingness of both the Left and the Right to simply invent “facts” – because the irrefutable “truth” of their narrative overrides any possible falsification by reality – comes from the same place. The ideology has spread to k-12 education, too. And, surprisingly, even the corporate world is becoming suffused with it, as shown by the obsession with various forms of sensitivity training and “anti-racism education.”

This is not surprising, because the woke penetration in the universities has been going on for at least two decades, and graduates now work for the biggest corporations, media, law firms, ad agencies, local and national government, and public and private education. One misses the 19^th century robber barons who were interested primarily in money, and didn’t have social objectives like the management of Google or Twitter.

Elements in the black community also seem to find wokeism congenial, because the idea that they are a colonized population makes it possible to argue that all the problems that they face in the larger American society are due to the structural racism inherent in it. That implies that they are owed something in addition to equality of opportunity, because of what was taken from their ancestors by slavery and continues to be taken from them by institutional racism. Unfortunately, the anti-Jewish aspects of woke culture fit in with the historical antisemitic bias of the black community, which was introduced by the Nation of Islam as early as the 1930s, and today is represented by Louis Farrakhan. The racial disturbances and controversies of the 1960s (like the New York teachers’ strike) sharpened the differences between blacks and Jews in urban areas.

Other groups in American society, such as the non-Evangelical Protestant Churches have also adopted a great deal of the woke ideology. Evangelicals, with their belief in absolute biblical truth, and traditional Catholics and Orthodox Jews who also reject the idea of the relativity of truth, have rejected it.

The woke generation adopts various causes that they believe oppose injustice. They are somewhat arbitrary in their choices: although they devote a lot of attention to racism against black people in the US, they almost entirely ignore the phenomenon of black slavery in Muslim countries, which seems to primarily interest conservatives. Of course one of the most prominent causes – far more prominent than is justified by the number of “victims” of oppression and the degree to which they are oppressed – is the Palestinian one.

I would argue that the Palestinian cause, which might better be called “the anti-Jewish sovereignty movement,” actually favors injustice, as its pretense of promoting Palestinian self-determination is easily shown to be a smokescreen for ending Jewish autonomy. Such things as the violence of the Palestinian side compared to the defensive actions of the Jewish side; the vicious racism and religious prejudice of the Palestinians; their poor treatment of women and LGBT people; economic inequality; cruelty to animals; neglect of the environment; oppressive, undemocratic government; and other characteristics that are normally anathema to the woke are completely acceptable when the perpetrators are Palestinian.

One reason for the popularity of their cause is the large number of Arab and Palestinian students in American universities. Google “scholarships for Palestinian students in the USA” and you get a surprising number of results. There are numerous organizations (including the US State Department) that offer them, and some like the FMEP and AMIDEAST, which would be expected to seek out political activists. Many of these students are activists, and they tend to be highly focused on their goals. Many lead chapters of Students for Justice in Palestine and similar groups.

Since the 1970s, Arab countries pumped millions into American universities to establish departments and endow chairs of Middle East Studies – by which they meant Arab/Muslim studies – which often became centers for political activism.

Devotees of the Palestinian cause are found throughout American society, among the woke population as well as more traditional liberal segments. The degree of misinformation that these people have absorbed can be stunning. Recently, liberal/progressive icon Barack Obama published a book in which he presented a short discussion of the Israeli-Arab conflict and its history. It was remarkable for the number of falsehoods and biased statements it contained, clearly aimed to justify aggression against Israel and to damage the legitimacy of the Jewish state. Did he honestly believe this tissue of lies for the eight years that he was President of the US? Or did he simply write them into his book to justify his anti-Israel policies and to influence his successors? I’m not sure it matters.

American Jews are in a difficult position today. The traditional violent Jew-hatred that was mostly expressed by uneducated people is still there, and social media has given it a new life, resulting in several murderous incidents. At the same time, the misoziony of the overeducated class, which is trickling down to the average American, often spills over into antisemitism. Jews in urban areas (that’s most of them) also have to face hostility from many of their black neighbors as well.

Finally, Israelis need to realize that the pendulum of public opinion in the US, especially among the decision-making class, is swinging against the Jewish state. The Arab and Iranian strategy of introducing money and activists into Western universities has been hugely effective in changing the national perception of Israel for the worse. The change took some years, but with the help of other social and political trends, is now rapidly accelerating.

We had a brief respite with the Trump Administration, which strongly opposed wokeism and also was truly pro-Israel in a way that few previous ones were. But that was an anomaly. In the past, an anti-Israel president had to contend with a generally pro-Israel public, and a Congress that reflected that view.

The future will be different.

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.