Netanyahu in Washington: It takes three to dance the Mideast tango

Netanyahu in Washington: It takes three to dance the Mideast tango

Prime minister to meet Kerry, Obama and Biden on Monday, and is scheduled to address the AIPAC conference on Tuesday.

By Haaretz | Mar. 3, 2014 | 

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu arrived late Sunday in Washington, where he was scheduled to meet U.S. President Barack Obama and

address the AIPAC conference.

Click here to sign up for Haaretz newsletters

Upon landing, Netanyahu told reporters that he was committed to negotiations for a final settlement and was waiting to see proof that the

Palestinians were as well.

"It takes at least three to dance the Middle East tango," Netanyahu said. "Two are already there – Israel and the U.S. Now we need to see if the

Palestinians are also on board. In any case, in order to reach an agreement, we need to stand firm on our crucial interests. I've proven that I'm

doing that, against all pressure and all uncertainty, and I'll continue to do that here as well."

In an interview with Bloomberg's Jeffrey Goldberg published Sunday, Obama sent an unusually blunt message to Netanyahu, telling him that

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas was the most moderate leader Israel would encounter in the foreseeable future and that time

was running out for a peace deal. Obama, according to Goldberg, gave the impression that Netanyahu was the one who had to be flexible in

order to advance the peace talks.

"There comes a point where you can't manage this anymore, and then you start having to make very difficult choices," Obama said. "Do you

resign yourself to what amounts to a permanent occupation of the West Bank? Is that the character of Israel as a state for a long period of time?

Do you perpetuate, over the course of a decade or two decades, more and more restrictive policies in terms of Palestinian movement? Do you

place restrictions on Arab Israelis in ways that run counter to Israel's traditions?"

Netanyahu is scheduled to meet with U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry on Monday morning prior to his meeting with the president and with

Vice President Joe Biden following that. On Tuesday morning he is due to address the annual convention of the pro-Israel lobby AIPAC, after

which he will fly to Los Angeles.

Before taking off for Washington, Netanyahu tried to relay a harsh message on his upcoming meeting with the U.S. president: "I'll stand firm on

the State of Israel's crucial interests, first and foremost the security of the citizens of Israel," he said. "In recent years, the State of Israel has

been subject to pressures, but we have pushed through the storm and the regional tempest, and that's how it will continue to be."

To rally American Jews, Netanyahu places Israel on a permanent 'gevalt’ footing

To rally American Jews, Netanyahu places Israel on a 

permanent 'gevalt’ footing

Lessons he learned from his father’s years in New York during the Holocaust may have

 inspired the prime minister’s Munich-1938 Iran analogies and his anti-boycott battle cries.

By Chemi Shalev | Feb. 20, 2014 |

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has placed the anti-Israel Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions Movement
on the same timeline as historic anti-Semitism. “The most disgraceful thing is to have people on the soil of
Europe talking about the boycott of Jews,” he told the Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish
 Organizations this week. “In the past, anti-Semites boycotted Jewish businesses and today they call for the
 boycott of the Jewish state.”
Netanyahu’s objectives are clear: to delegitimize the BDS movement, to deter potential supporters with the
stench of anti-Semitism and to rally American Jewry to take part in the battle. It is an effective if virtually
anti-Zionist message: Israel’s predicament today is a direct extension of the persecuted, defenseless and
ultimately perished Jewish communities of Europe. The establishment of the state, in this regard, has made
 no difference.
The essence of this view has become a permanent feature of the dialogue between Netanyahu and the
Israeli right with public opinion, Jewish or otherwise. By creating symmetry between criticism of the
Jewish State and classic anti-Semitism, the government absolves itself of any responsibility for Israel’s
 isolation and uses the taboo against anti-Semitic statements as a weapon of mass deterrence, as Secretary
of State John Kerry recently learned.
Netanyahu has used the same historical analogy to rally the American Jewish community against the
 Obama Administration’s policy on Iran. Speaking to the General Assembly of Jewish Federations last
November, Netanyahu said: “When the Jewish people were silent on matters relating to our survival, you
 know what happened ... All of us have to stand up now and be counted.”
Some Jewish leaders criticized Netanyahu’s open call to U.S. Jews to lobby against their government, but
 they were answered with various versions of the famous saying ascribed to Greek doctor-philosopher
Hippocrates: Extreme situations call for extreme measures. If Iran is the Nazi beast incarnate, if the year is
1938, if Geneva is Munich and the Jews are facing another Holocaust − this is no time for diplomatic
niceties and concerns about “what the goyim will say.”
Younger American Jews may find it difficult to identify the iconic Jewish boy raising his hands in front of a
Nazi soldier at Warsaw Ghetto in the lively, modern, start-up Israel that rules over two million Palestinians
− and this dissonance may alienate them further − but for their parents and grandparents, especially those
involved with Jewish organizations, the correlation is clear, as are the accompanying pangs of conscience.
These have been stirred, often deliberately, by the robust and sometimes bitter debate about President
Franklin Roosevelt’s attitude toward the annihilation of European Jews in World War II. The underlying
political message is clear: Like his Democratic successor today, Roosevelt was widely admired by American
 Jews even though he cared very little for them or their brethren in Europe. And his liberal Jewish
supporters, even though they were well aware of the atrocities across the Atlantic, kept their silence for
 fear of the president and public opinion.
Netanyahu is well acquainted with this debate: He grew up with it at home. His father, Benzion, spent the
war years in New York, working with his Revisionist colleagues to fight the British “White Paper” in
Palestine and to urge the Roosevelt Administration to do more for European Jews. He became a harsh
critic of Roosevelt and his “cowardly” Jewish fans.
“In their contacts with President Roosevelt, Jewish leaders thought of themselves as weak or helpless,” the
elder Netanyahu told historian Raphael Medoff in an interview published posthumously in the Jerusalem
Post. “FDR used the Jews, but there was no room in his heart for the plight of the Jewish people.”
What could American Jewish leaders have done? Netanyahu was asked, and his answer shed a strong light
on his son’s political tactics and the 2012 presidential election campaign. “Roosevelt understood the
language of political power. Jewish leaders could have done what my colleagues and I did − we went to the
Republicans. And then Roosevelt got the message.”
It was with this “language of political power” in mind that the pro-Israel lobby hooked up with the
Republicans and stormed the Senate a few weeks after Netanyahu urged them to “stand up and be counted”
against the Iran nuclear accord and in favor of additional sanctions. But the zeal for historic redemption
 may have eclipsed the lobby’s usual prudence and caution: In the head-to-head confrontation with the
administration, the lobby was defeated, at least for now.
When Netanyahu addresses the AIPAC conference in Washington in 10 days, he will try to lift morale and
rally the troops and may very well succeed. Perhaps someone should ask, nonetheless, whether it is
appropriate for a regional and reportedly nuclear regional superpower like Israel to see itself as a helpless
victim in the ghetto, and whether it should be managing its affairs on a permanent “gevalt” basis.

Rabbinic Statement of Concern

Jerusalem Mayor Nir Barkat is reportedly backing the candidacy of Rabbi Shmuel Eliyahu to the post of Chief Rabbi.  Rabbi Eliyahu’s history of divisive statements and actions is, unfortunately, a matter of long record.  

Prominent rabbinic voices from all streams of American Judaism are serving as convening signers on a letter of concern, which we will deliver to Mayor Barkat in advance of the upcoming election for Jerusalem Chief Rabbi. Several of the mayor’s appointees sit on the municipal commission that elects the chief rabbi, and that is the reason we are directing our sentiments to him.

We need to let Mayor Barkat know that appointing a rabbi with a history of extremist, exclusionary behavior as Chief Rabbi of Jerusalem sends exactly the wrong message.

Rabbis are invited to sign onto the statement below.

שַׁאֲלוּ, שְׁלוֹם יְרוּשָׁלִָם;  יִשְׁלָיוּ, אֹהֲבָיִךְ

Seek the welfare of Jerusalem; those who love you shall prosper. (Psalms 122:6)

To the Honorable Nir Barkat:

We, rabbis serving Jewish communities throughout the world, write to express our concern regarding the possible nomination of Rabbi Shmuel Eliyahu to the post of Chief Rabbi of Jerusalem.

As Israel’s capital and the center of our spiritual lives, Jerusalem has special significance to Jewish communities the world over. But Jerusalem’s special status does not blind us to your challenges. In a city too often divided between Jews and Arabs, and between various streams of Orthodox, liberal and secular Jews, we must seek leaders who would work to unite the city’s peoples for amity and progress.

Rabbi Eliyahu has a history of divisive and controversial statements and actions. He took the lead in issuing a halachic ruling forbidding Israeli Jews to lease property to Arabs. He opposes military service in the IDF for women. He has characterized Arabs and Muslims in racist, derogatory language. And he was deemed unfit for the office of Chief Rabbi of Israel by Israel’s Attorney General.

Mayor Barkat, you bear the responsibility for ensuring that Jerusalem is a prosperous and welcoming city for all its inhabitants. We believe that Rabbi Eliyahu’s ascension to the chief rabbinate would send a signal of intolerance and divisiveness at a time when Jerusalem cries out for unity and social justice. The position of Chief Rabbi in Jerusalem has been vacant for many years.

As you consider filling this position, please consider the deep connection to Jerusalem among Jews worldwide, and the symbolic nature of a Chief Rabbi’s tasks, which should indeed exemplify a light unto the nations and a sensibility worthy of the unique history and meaning of the city.

Respectfully, there are already hundreds of signatures!

Reform Jews 'not Jewish,' says Knesset law committee head

In response to MK David Rotem's remarks, Reform Movement in Israel sends urgent letter 

to Knesset Speaker Yuli Edelstein demanding he be called to order.

By Judy Maltz | Feb. 5, 2014 |

The chairman of a powerful Knesset committee has described the Reform movement as
“another religion” and “not Jewish.”
MK David Rotem, chairman of the Knesset Constitution, Law and Justice Committee, made
the remarks during a discussion held by the committee on Tuesday on proposed changes in the
law on child adoption. His was responding to a query about the Reform movement’s interests in
these changes.
Rotem, an Orthodox Jew, is a member of Likud-Beiteinu.
In response to his remarks, the Reform Movement in Israel sent an urgent letter to Knesset
Speaker Yuli Edelstein demanding that Rotem be called to order.
“Remarks such as these make it impossible for MK Rotem to continue to chair discussions on
sensitive issues such as conversion, Who is a Jew and other
topics related to religion and state and the relationship between Israel and the Diaspora," wrote
Gilad Kariv, executive director of the Reform movement in Israel.
Rotem was the Knesset member behind a conversion bill that drew fierce opposition two years
 ago from the leaders of Conservative and Reform Judaism in America. That bill would have
given the chief rabbinate in Israel exclusive authority over all conversions in the country.
He did not respond to repeated requests from Haaretz for a statement on the matter. 

Boycotting reality

Instead of welcoming Kerry, Netanyahu quarrels with him and refuses to understand that 

Israel's most essential interest is ending the conflict.

Haaretz Editorial | Feb. 4, 2014 

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry’s statement at the Munich Security Conference, that Israel will face
boycotts should negotiations with the Palestinians fail, is a level-headed view of reality that the Israeli
government chooses to continually ignore.
Two weeks ago, Denmark’s Danske Bank, the country’s largest, blacklisted Bank Hapoalim over its role in 
financing settlement construction. A week ago, Holland’s second largest pension fund,PGGM, announced 
that it was divesting from Israel’s five main banks, for similar reasons. Last Thursday, Norway’s Finance
Ministry ordered the government pension fund not to invest in the Israeli firms Africa Israel Investments
and Danya Cebus. Germany recently said it intends to condition a scientific cooperation agreement as well
as grants to Israeli high-tech companies on the exclusion of companies in the West Bank or East Jerusalem.
In July, the European Union Commission released new guidelines forbidding EU organizations from
providing grants or loans to Israeli organizations with ties to settlements. Even the compromise achieved
over Horizon 2020 is indicative of the trend – Israel is losing legitimacy in the eyes of many European states.
Instead of working toward an agreement with the Palestinians that would fundamentally alter Israel’s political
 status, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his cabinet are trying to change the subject. It’s
embarrassing to hear Strategic and Intelligence Affairs Minister Yuval Steinitz demand 100 million shekels
for a public campaign against the boycott movement. He doesn’t understand that the problem is policy, not
public relations. Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon’s claim that “settlements aren’t an obstacle to peace,”
raises doubts over his ability to accurately perceive reality. Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, on the
other hand, prefers to chastise his underlings for saying the boycotts against Israel will only intensify, rather
than addressing the reasons for the boycotts.
The prime minister beats them all: Instead of welcoming Kerry as an ally, he publicly quarrels with him and
hints that the secretary of state is trying to pressure Israel to “give up essential interests.” Netanyahu refuses
to understand that Israel’s most essential interest is ending the conflict, and that Kerry is a fair, dedicated,
 mediator who needs the support of all parties in order to complete this complex process. Netanyahu refuses
 to understand that now is the time for big decisions, not small politics.

How John Kerry won me over

The U.S. Secretary of State gets the concerns of Israel and the U.S. Jewish community.

By Rabbi Eric H. Yoffie | Jan. 30, 2014 | 

Speaking at a lunch to 50 Jewish, Muslim, and Christian clergy that he had invited to Washington on Tuesday,
Secretary of State John Kerry gave a compelling, no-nonsense speech on the need for the leaders of Israel and
 Palestine to embrace his forthcoming peace initiative. Tough and persuasive, the Secretary made clear to all
 present what he expected from both Israelis and Palestinians, while also offering reassurances to each side;
and, in my view, he addressed the concerns of Israel and of the American Jewish community with special
care.
The purpose of the gathering, in part, was to advance the work of a newly created office in the State
Department that is intended to engage religious partners in the peace effort. This might be seen as a
questionable strategy. After all, as long as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is viewed as the nation-state of
Israel disputing matters of land and water with the Palestinians, it is a problem that can be solved; land and
 resources, after all, can be divided. However, the minute that Israel is seen as “a dagger pushed into the
heart of Islam” and Palestine as an intrusion by Muslims onto land promised by God to the Jews, then a
peaceful settlement becomes impossible. The key, in other words, is not to bring religion into the conflict,
but to keep it out, and to keep the struggle a national one rather than a holy war between two ancient faiths.
But while that is the theory, the problem, as Secretary Kerry has recognized, is that it is too late. Religious
groups have already asserted themselves on both sides, and many, although not all, of those with extreme
or rejectionist views are motivated by religious ideals—or, more precisely, the distortion of religious ideals.
 The State Department’s initiative is intended, therefore, to enlist the assistance of moderate religious
voices in all three of the Abrahamic traditions in sending a message of conciliation and political compromise.
In calling on the religious leaders for help, Mr. Kerry did not resort to bromides or rely on platitudes. He
discussed the elements of a two-state solution to which each side would be asked to commit, and expressed
optimism that an agreement could be reached—first on a framework document and then on a plan to
 implement it. He made it clear that what he was proposing was intended to secure a lasting, secure,
phased-in, and equitable peace that met the major requirements of both parties.
The alternatives to such a peace, he noted, are grim: The one-state solution does not exist, unilateral steps
are doomed to failure, and the status quo is unsustainable. But his primary message was hope. He expressed
 confidence that the leadership existed on both sides to bring about a separation between Palestinians and
Israelis on terms that would allow each to flourish and the region to thrive, and expressed his personal
 determination to see the process through.
Of particular interest to me, as a Jewish participant, was his focus on security for Israel. He stated
repeatedly that the agreement would provide for Israel’s security; that security guarantees would be
specific and detailed; that consequences for violations would be included; and that the United States
would be involved in and stand behind the security arrangements. Clearly, Mr. Kerry had heard from all
parties in Israel that security provisions are essential. Yes, the Palestinians are suffering; yes, the
occupation must end; yes, some settlements must be withdrawn.
But even while all of this is true, absent tough measures to assure security for Israel’s citizens, there would
 be no majority in Israel for far-reaching concessions. Secretary Kerry, I saw, had gotten that message,
internalized it, and committed to it.
I was struck, as well, by the Zionist tone of his appeal. Zionism is not complicated; it is about the
establishment of a Jewish and democratic state in the Land of Israel.
This is language that Mr. Kerry used. He spoke about the need for Israel to be a democratic state and,
not once but several times, about the importance of preserving Israel’s Jewish character. And it was
fascinating to me that while some in Israel’s governing coalition speak frequently about a Jewish Israel,
they never mention a democratic Israel; while the American Secretary of State, a religious Catholic,
 reminds us that Jewish and democratic are inextricably intertwined, and that Zionism cannot exist with
one but not the other.
Mr. Kerry, of course, spoke of expectations and assurances for the Palestinian side as well. Israel’s leaders
face difficult decisions; so too do Palestinian leaders. The agreement to be reached, he made very clear,
will not be one-sided.
Will the region finally be blessed with peace? I can’t say for certain.
If this is to happen, Israelis will need to accept the reality of Palestinian suffering, and understand that
without dignity for the Palestinians, there can be no dignity for Israel. And Palestinians will need to accept
 the reality of tiny Israel’s ever-threatened borders.
But this I will say: I left the meeting convinced that chances for peace are better now than they have been
 in a very long time; I left certain about my country’s commitment and concern for Israel; and I left deeply
 impressed with a Secretary of State who has worked, with unflagging devotion, to making
Israeli-Palestinian peace a reality.

Rabbi Eric H. Yoffie served as president of the Union for Reform Judaism from 1996 to 2012. 
He is now a writer, lecturer and teacher, and lives with his family in Westfield, New Jersey.

Shulamit Aloni, former minister and staunch civil rights supporter, dies at 85

Aloni, an Israel Prize laureate, was born in Tel Aviv and first elected to Knesset in 1965.

By Haaretz | Jan. 24, 2014 | 8:46 AM

Shulamit Aloni, the former leader of Israel's Meretz party and Israel Prize laureate who, throughout her life,
fought for equality and civil rights, died on Friday morning at age 85.
The cause of death was not disclosed, but Aloni died at her Kfar Shmaryahu home surrounded by family.
She will be laid to rest at 4 P.M. on Sunday in the central Israeli town's cemetery, her family said in a
statement.
Born in Tel Aviv in 1928, Aloni was a member of Hashomer Hatzair youth movement and later volunteered
 for the Palmach, an elite force of the Jewish underground military in pre-state Israel, fighting in the 1948
War of Independence.
Aloni was first elected to Knesset in 1965 on the ticket of Labor Alignment (Ma'arach), the predecessor of
the Labor Party. On the eve of the 1974 election, Aloni defected from Labor and founded Ratz, the
Movement for Civil Rights and Peace, which secured three seats in the eighth Knesset.
Aloni was appointed a minister without portfolio in Yitzhak Rabin's first government in 1974, but resigned
after the National Religious Party joined the coalition. In the 1984 election, Ratz won five parliamentary
seats after Peace Now members Ran Cohen – and later Yossi Sarid – joined the party.
Aloni was among the founding members of Meretz during the 12th Knesset, when Ratz formed an alliance
with Mapam and Shinui in 1991. The new party won 12 seats in the Knesset election a year later. Aloni, who
led the party, joined Rabin's coalition and was appointed minister of education and culture.

She served as education minister in Rabin's cabinet between 1992-1993 and as science and arts minister
between 1993-1996.
Aloni retired in 1996, after Sarid was elected Meretz chairman.
In 2000, she was awarded the Israel Prize for her lifetime achievements and contribution to Israeli society,
 despite protests from Israel's religious establishment.
In awarding her the prize, the committee of judges praised her for being a voice for citizens, for "struggling
 to repair injustice and hoist the flag of equality between the different peoples and faiths in Israel."
Aloni authored six books in her lifetime, including titles about children's and women's rights. In 2008, at
age 80, she published "Democracy in Shackles" (Demokratia BeAzikim), about the state of Israel's
democracy. In it, she wrote, "The state is returning to the ghetto, to Orthodox Judaism, and the rule of the
fundamentalist Rabbinate is only growing stronger."
She lamented that the "blooming, free and enlightened Israel that prided itself on research and progress
 now bows before the rabbis, Haredim and settlers, who demand everything for themselves in the name of
religion."
Aloni was married for 36 years to Reuven Aloni, who helped found the Israel Lands Administration.
He died in 1988. The couple lived in Kfar Shmaryahu, an upscale town not far from Tel Aviv, where they
raised three children, Dror, Nimrod and Udi.
Politicians mourn 'trailblazing' Aloni
Ministers and MKs from across the political spectrum mourned Aloni's death on Friday, praising her
courage and no-nonsense approach to defending civil rights.
Meretz leader Zahava Gal-On called Aloni "trailblazing" and said she would continue to inspire all Israelis
who care about civil rights and equality.
"She transformed Israel into a better place to live and never stopped fighting for the values she believed in
and with which she will forever be associated: peace, absolute equality irrespective of religion, gender and
race," Gal-On said, adding that the Meretz party would continue to defend the rights Aloni fought for
throughout her life.
Labor Party leader Isaac Herzog said that Aloni set an example for his generation. "Aloni instigated
significant change in Israeli public discourse and broke down the walls that protected antiquated ways of
thinking and outdated paradigms," Herzog said. "For this, as a nation, we must respect her. She will be
remembered as a courageous fighter for peace, coexistence and minority rights."
Defense Minister Moshe Ya'alon said Aloni made great contributions to Israeli discourse about democracy
and said that despite their fundamental differences of opinion, "I always respected her determination in
standing up for her views and voicing her opinion loud and clear, as well as her great concern for Israel and
 its future."
Ya'alon said that his debates with Aloni were always "challenging" and that he valued her modesty and
integrity, and her "groundbreaking struggle for civil and women's rights, which brought about positive
changes in Israel's image and character."

Former Knesset Speaker Reuven Rivlin also recalled not seeing eye-to-eye with Aloni, but said he
respected her as a woman who "wasn't swayed by populism, but expressed her beliefs and views as they
were."