Colette Avital, who served as Israel's consul general in New York, recently explained (as quoted in The Jerusalem Post, Jan. 7, 2001) that "the major Jewish organizations of the United States of America are supposed to represent and to speak on behalf of the government of Israel." She's right: supporting Israel has historically been one of the main missions of American Jewish institutions. A staffer at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee once told me that it sees itself as "Israel's lawyer" in Washington.
But for the moment, that passive role is obsolete. For the first time in Israel's fifty-two years, the time has come to replace advocacy with something quite different: a policy of tough love.
Historically, the Israelis lead, the Americans followed. The Israelis made sovereign decisions, put their lives on the line, were closer to the action, better informed; further, they had an impressive record of building and protecting their state. It made perfect sense for American Jews to provide them with fairly uncritical support.
Those simple days are over, however. American Jews can no longer afford blindly to accede to Israeli leadership. There are three reasons for this.
1) The weakness of Israel has become an albatross around the necks of the diaspora. In the good old days, the diaspora benefited from Israeli prowess, now it suffers from Israeli demoralization. The hundreds of anti-Semitic incidents on six continents in October 2000 vividly bring this home.
2) The Jewish holy sites are not Israel's alone to decide on. In particular, the Temple Mount is something over which all Jews have a say, regardless of where they live.
3) Israelis have shown an inability to protect their national interests since the Oslo agreement of September 1993. The record of this period undercuts the Israeli claim to superior knowledge or sound judgment.
Instead of deference, American Jews should adopt an approach of tough love – meaning a show of concern for Israel not by acceding to it but by arguing with it. This might include several elements: We won't lobby on your behalf if you take steps which we consider harmful. We won't give funds to you so long as you take such steps. We will give you a piece of our mind.
This new approach admittedly requires a revolution in attitudes, but how much longer should one wait? Until it is too late? (April 8, 2001)
receive the latest by email: subscribe to daniel pipes' free mailing list
The above text may be cited; it may also be reposted or forwarded so long as it is presented as an integral whole with complete information provided about its author, date, place of publication, and original URL.
