Tuesday, February 9, 2010

J Street: Is it good for the Jews? Sermon February 5th

There is a relatively new kid on the block of Jewish organizational life which is creating a great deal of controversy. The new organization –founded in April 2008-- is J Street, which describes itself as “the political arm of the pro-Israel, pro-peace movement.” It is attempting to create a strong, dynamic organization which represents Jews (and some non-Jews) who support Israel, while at the same time are often more critical of Israel government policy and actions than most pro-Israel organizations.

Its website explains that “J Street was founded to change the dynamics of American politics and policy on Israel and the Middle East. We believe the security and future of Israel as the democratic home of the Jewish people depend on rapidly achieving a two-state solution and regional comprehensive peace. Our mission is to promote meaningful American leadership to achieve peace and security in the Middle East and to broaden the debate on these issues nationally and in the Jewish community.”

J Street was developed to challenge AIPAC as the primary voice of the organized Jewish community on Capitol Hill with regard to Israel, and to provide a meaningful organization for many particularly younger Jews who have felt disenfranchised by the Jewish establishment. Its name is a play on words, with the J standing for Jewish; the lobbyist corridor in Washington DC is K Street and there is no J Street in the District. Now there is.

J Street is actually comprised of three independent organizations:
--a registered lobby and non-profit corporation;
--a political action committee to support candidates for office;
--an educational fund and education/outreach organization.
(It is not unusual for organizations to be structured like this for legal and fundraising purposes.)

Israel is quite often an emotionally charged issue and J Street has been met with much controversy. It has been fairly criticized by some who support it, such as Rabbi Eric Yoffie, the President of the URJ who spoke at the J Street inaugural conference this past fall. It has also been unfairly vilified by others who perceive it as a threat to Israel and to the pro-Israel efforts of AIPAC.

I speak this evening as a supporter of AIPAC and its mission, but one who believes that there is room for other voices in the Jewish community. I have not yet decided whether I can support J Street as one of those voices, but hope that it develops into an organization I can support.

The questions we, as a Jewish community, should address regarding J Street are:
--Do we need an organization like this?
--Will it complement the efforts of AIPAC on Capitol Hill or undermine them?
--What are the limits of criticism of Israel from a pro-Israel organization?

J Street claims that it is filling a need in the Jewish community of a prominent organization representing the pro-peace, pro-Israel community. While this community has always existed in the form of organizations such as Breira in the 1970s and Brit Tzedek v’Shalom more recently, they have generally been small groups with relatively limited impact. J Street was started by a small group of activists who are well financed, but is working to build a national grassroots organization. In fact, last night they held their first local kickoff events in 21 cities across the country including Seattle.

The J Street leadership recognizes that there are many Jews, particularly young Jews, who are conflicted about Israel and feel disenfranchised. They care about Israel, or at least did so at one time, but have been turned off by some of Israel’s actions. They do not want to be part of the Jewish establishment which they perceive as being uncritical of Israel, but want to have their voices heard. J Street hopes to draw these people back into the world of Jewish engagement with Israel.

If J Street is able to accomplish this goal and provide a significant voice for these Jews it will do a great service to our community which continues to struggle at reaching the 20 and 30 somethings who have drifted away from active Jewish life. Birthright Israel is one attempt to engage the younger cohort with Israel and Jewish life. And there are many independent minyanim which have cropped up across the country, but each of these efforts has only reached a limited number of Jewish young adults. It remains to be seen whether J Street will be able to develop significant grassroots support, which –in the long run—will go a long way to determining the ultimate success and impact of this organization.

The second, and perhaps most important question, is whether J Street will complement or undermine the important work that AIPAC does on Capitol Hill. AIPAC is unquestionably one of the most effective lobbying organizations on any issue and in large part responsible for the overwhelming support which Israel receives from Congress. While there are other groups that lobby on Israel issues, including at times the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism, none approach the ability of AIPAC to influence Congress. It has been said that when AIPAC speaks, Congress listens.

AIPAC is very concerned about J Street; AIPAC’s supporters have offered some of the strongest criticism of J Street. The primary concern is that there will no longer be a unified voice coming from the Jewish community. AIPAC’s effectiveness has been due in great part to the perception that it represents the vast majority of the Jewish community and that for the most part we speak with one voice.

Now members of Congress will see that the Jewish community does not always speak with one voice and that at the very least there is a minority within the community that has a different take on some issues, is willing to openly criticize Israel and will encourage Congress and the United States to take a more active role in the pursuit of peace. Of course, most members of Congress know this; but unless they directly see an organized effort to present another voice, they are not likely to pay much attention.

So there is good reason to believe that J Street will –to some extent—undermine the work that AIPAC does. However, I do not think that it will have a serious impact on AIPAC’s efforts as long as AIPAC continues to enjoy the support it does in the Jewish community.

The third important question concerns criticism of Israel within the Jewish community. AIPAC does not face this issue because it is committed to supporting actions and positions of Israel’s government, whether it is a more left leaning Labor or Kadima government, or a more right leaning Likud. When Israel made the decision a few years ago to withdraw unilaterally from the Gaza Strip, AIPAC supported the effort, even though some of its members did not.

J Street has indicated that it is not afraid to criticize Israel and to encourage the United States to pressure Israel toward returning to the peace talks. Now, there are some within the Jewish community who oppose all public criticism of Israel because, they argue, it plays into the hand of Israel’s enemies and therefore serves to undermine Israel. There is a certain amount of validity to this argument.

However, Israel’s enemies will continue to say what they want and do what they do regardless of criticism of Israel from the Jewish community. Furthermore, we certainly are not afraid to criticize Israel when it fails to support the rights of Reform Jews or the rights of Women of the Wall to worship freely. We should similarly be free to offer words of criticism on other matters in an appropriate manner.

It is best, for example, when these criticisms are voiced within the Jewish community, in the Jewish press for example, rather than “washing our dirty laundry” in public so to speak. But sometimes these issues have their way of going beyond our community and often there is very little that we can do about it. We can certainly discuss the appropriate parameters of such criticism, but we should not attempt to stifle such criticism since such efforts are bound to fail.

In this regard, J Street has a particular challenge in that it is attempting to reach out to a broad range of Jews, some of whom are more willing to openly criticize Israel than others. Every time J Street takes a particular position or fails to take a particular position it will please or displease some of its potential constituents. Some will continue to support the organization, but others will walk away.

In order to navigate this challenge, J Street has to clearly articulate its basic principles, as it attempts to do on its website and in other materials, and recognize that it cannot represent the entire “pro-peace, pro-Israel” community. There will be those who think J Street is not critical enough and those who think J Street is too critical. J Street needs to accept this fact of Jewish life and recognize that there are enough Jews between these positions to support their efforts.

So, is J Street good for the Jews? I am not ready definitively to answer that question because it is really too early to do so. I cannot agree with those who have already rejected J Street, but I am not personally ready to embrace it. I believe that it can be good for the Jews if it is able to mobilize and energize young Jews who otherwise would not find a voice on the issue of Israel, if it is able to consistently articulate a “pro-peace, pro-Israel” position without being co-opted by some who might want to lead it in other directions, and if it is able to offer its criticism in appropriate ways. If J Street is able to meet these challenges in the long run, it will indeed be good for our community.

Rabbi Bruce Kadden
February 5, 2010/22 Sh’vat 5770

No comments: