Fractured American Jewish Community Is First Victim of Iran Nuclear Deal
Chemi Shalev
In the campaign to convince American Jewish groups to come out against the Iran nuclear deal, Israeli opposition leader Isaac Herzog has emerged as a strategic asset.
In some of the heated deliberations taking place in national Jewish organizations and local Jewish Federations across America, opponents of the deal with Tehran are using Herzog as a trump card to challenge the motives and loyalties of its supporters: How can a good Jew defend Obama’s deal, they ask, when Herzog and the rest of Israel oppose it?
A demonstrator holds a sign at a rally near the Israeli Consulate in New York March 3, 2015.
A demonstrator holds a sign at a rally near the Israeli Consulate in New York March 3, 2015. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warned against accepting a nuclear deal with Iran in a speech to Congess.Reuters
Herzog may have subsequently dissociated himself from the all-out war that Benjamin Netanyahu and AIPAC are waging against the Obama administration in Congress, but the nuance is lost in the fierce firefights that have broken out among American Jews since the July 14 Vienna signing of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) between the P5+1 countries and Iran. It is a battle royal that is taking place in the boardrooms of Jewish organizations from coast to coast, in synagogues, community centers and social gatherings, behind closed doors or out in the open, in polite debate or, increasingly, in heated emotional dispute. It pits Jews against Jews, conservatives vs. liberals, hawks and doves, Republicans and Democrats, donors against professionals, rabbis against their flock and, in recent days, against one another.
For every statement for or against there is an immediate rebuttal, for every argument a counterargument, for each manifesto a harsh rebuke. Both sides swear allegiance to the greater good of both Israel and America, but as time goes by, the acrimony grows acute, resentment festers, the bitterness strikes roots. Whether the deal is as good as the Obama administration claims or as bad as Netanyahu says, it has already claimed its first victim: a fractured American Jewish community.
Obama speaks about the nuclear deal with Iran at the American University in Washington.
Obama speaks about the nuclear deal with Iran at the American University in Washington, August 5, 2015.AP
Already divided in recent years against the backdrop of unprecedented tensions between Obama and Netanyahu and growing disenchantment with many Israeli policies, the community is polarizing, perhaps, as some claim, even splitting at the seams. And it is doing so out in the open, for the world to see.
Along with its internal convulsions, American Jews are also the subject of intense external scrutiny, justifiable and malicious. A few minutes after New Jersey Senator Bob Menendez predictably announced on Tuesday that he would be joining his Jewish colleague from New York Chuck Schumer in opposing the Iran deal, he was subjected to a harsh torrent of insults and diatribes on social media that were mostly anti-Jewish in nature. These manifestations of anti-Semitism are then cultivated and inflated by cynical Iran deal critics and artificially linked to legitimate if sometimes injudicious remarks made by Obama and other administration officials.
While the pro-Israel lobby ducks under cover of this alleged incitement, the community reels from the reemergence of long dormant insinuations and accusations of dual loyalties and undue influence. GOP activists, meanwhile, stoke these flames in the hope that next time around, Jews will finally see the error of their ways and vote Republican.
On the national level, AIPAC has set the tone, with mainstream organizations such as the American Jewish Committee and the Anti Defamation League following suit; J-Street and smaller organizations stand mostly alone in support of the deal. Many Jewish professionals and executives concur with criticism of the Iran deal, but even those who don’t are wary of their conservative donors, whose voices are often louder and financial pressures more direct than those of their liberal counterparts. Some activists feel compelled to speak out, fearing that silence will render them irrelevant on the most dramatic Jewish issue of the day; others are wary of accusations that they were ignoring the collective opinion of Herzog and other Israelis or repeating the sins of their forefathers who stood by as the Holocaust engulfed the Jews of Europe.
The most riveting showdowns by far are taking place in the 151 Jewish Federations that have traditionally steered clear of divisive political issues, preferring to stick with fundraising for Israel and Jewish education while providing social services to their community. The Federations’ foray into disputed territory has sparked dissent and outrage among Obama supporters and among some of his opponents as well: a few have threatened to reassess their contributions. Many Federation bigwigs are concurrently active in AIPAC: in recent weeks, the powerful Washington-based lobby has made a point of beginning conference calls with activists with a tally of the Federations that have joined the fight and those that are still sitting on the fence. Some Federation officials have complained of direct pressures being exerted by the Prime Minister’s Office in Jerusalem or in its name.
To date, 18 Federations have come out against the Iran deal, with most urging their members to lobby members of Congress to vote it down. The list of fighting Federations is slightly more than 10% of the total number, but it includes most of the big hitters, including Chicago, where a fierce battle was waged between opposing sides; Los Angeles, which was forced to issue an acknowledgement of the “complexity” of the issue and the “diversity” of opinions after its original statement of opposition sparked a fierce backlash, along with Boston, Miami, Philadelphia and other major Metropolitan areas. The biggest of them all, however, the New York UJA-Federation, has decided to maintain neutrality and steer clear of the divisive battle.
It’s hard to tell with which side enjoys more support in the community. The very definition of the target audience is in dispute: does it include all self-professed Jews or only those who participate in communal life or take an interest in Israel. The only reliable poll, at least in this writer’s view, was conducted by Professor Steve Cohen and published in the Jewish Journal a few days after the JCPOA was signed. It showed solid support for the nuclear deal, but that was before Netanyahu, the Republicans and right wing pundits sank their teeth into it, and before AIPAC and other groups began spending tens of millions of dollars advertising its dangers and pitfalls. Among American Jews, like their Israeli brethren, fear and suspicion have a home turf advantage over optimism and hope.
Jewish officials I have spoken to in recent days are worried, perhaps even scared: they feel helpless despite the earthquake beneath their feet and the irreparable damage that it may cause. Many are frustrated that Netanyahu has chosen to lead the charge without devoting a second thought to how it might weaken the Jewish community. In a few months Netanyahu will try to enlist American Jews to do battle against the boycott movement, one senior Jewish figure told me, but he could be facing a demoralized and disoriented community that has alienated and distanced many of its members while wasting precious resources and limited goodwill on a campaign that was doomed from the outset.
$m.stack.teaserArticleAuthorImage.content.alt
Chemi Shalev
Commenti
Posta un commento