The distorted vision of the American Jewish Committee

Scenario Two: Israel negotiates a cease-fire based on the simultaneous 
cessation of terrorism and colonisation, then, with international help, 
a comprehensive peace. It withdraws to its 1967 borders and, within 
them, devotes its enormous energy and genius to the building of a 
democratic, just and prosperous society. It lives at peace with its 
neighbours, makes a positive contribution to the stability and progress 
of the Middle East, and regains the good-will of humanity.

Woe to the shepherds of Israel (Ezekiel 34:2) who lead  or follow  
their flock in the wrong direction!

Now is a time to urge our people to embrace the way of peace because 
that is the most Jewish, the most Zionist and the most pro-Israel thing 
to do, and the only one that holds out any long-term hope for the future.
+++


From: TikkunMail <tikkunmail@xxxxxxxxxx>
http://www.tikkun.org/

One way that the American Jewish establishment tries to force loyalty to 
Israel is to claim that there is a world-wide conspiracy to destroy 
Israel, and soon after the Jewish people. The anti-Semitism is real, and 
it is deeply troubling to us at Tikkun, but its growth is closely linked 
to activities of the Israeli government which are morally abhorrent and 
which therefore provide "cover" for the haters. But the moment that 
anyone says this, they are told that somehow they are justifying the 
anti-Semitism (which we certainly are not doing--because racism against 
Jews or against anyone else is NEVER justified) or that they have 
revealed that they are "self-hating" Jews or anti- Semites themselves. 
By switching the dialogue in this way, the Jewish establishment never 
grapples with our claim that Israeli policy and treatment of 
Palestinians is so outrageous and hurtful that it would lead anyone to 
be upset and feeling moral indignation at the behavior, and when Jews 
world-wide then rally around that behavior and say that this is what 
their Judaism leads them to, it's not hard to understand how true racist 
haters can use this situation in the morally disgusting way they do to 
fan hate of the Jewish people.

The blindness of the Jewish establishment is often accompanied by 
statements about how the peace camp has been shown to have been naive 
and out of touch with the reality of this crazy hatred of Jews--an 
approach recently articulated in a public statement from David Harris, 
head of the American Jewish Committee.

Here, in an "open letter," a respected friend of Tikkun Community, Rabbi 
John D. Rayner of the United Kingdom, exposes the distortions in this 
way of defending the government of Ariel Sharon. He challenges what he 
calls "the demagoguery" that has become all too prevalent in the 
statements of those who portray themselves as "pro-israel" but who are 
defending policies of the Ariel Sharon government which are in fact 
weakening Israel.


Open Letter to David A. Harris, Executive Director, American Jewish 
Committee by Rabbi John D. Rayner, London, England

Dear Mr Harris,

You dont know me, so let me explain that I am a retired rabbi living in 
London, England, and have been a Zionist since my childhood in Nazi Germany.

What prompts me to write is that a friend and colleague has kindly sent 
me a copy of your ten-page Letter from One Jew to Another of October 
29, 2002. It is a brilliant piece of sustained rhetoric, which expresses 
as powerfully as anything I have read the currently dominant attitude of 
the leadership of our people both in Israel and in the Diaspora. But 
though the facts you cite - as distinct from the generalisations you 
derive from them - are true enough, you omit a whole lot of other facts, 
inconvenient to your thesis. That makes your letter an exercise in 
demagoguery rather than a sober appraisal.

Briefly summarised, your thesis is that there is a world-wide conspiracy 
to destroy the State of Israel and that in these circumstances it 
behoves all Jews to stand solidly together in unqualified support of the 
general direction of the policies of its present government. In my 
opinion that thesis is profoundly mistaken, and the policies that flow 
from it are hugely inimical to the best interests of the State of Israel 
and the Jewish people.

You address yourself to all those Jews who remain fast asleep. 
Although you dont identify them, I assume you have in mind those who 
may be broadly classed as the Peace Camp. Since that includes me, I feel 
bound to say that in my view many of its supporters, far from being 
asleep, are much more awake to reality than you appear to be. As you 
must know, they include many men and women of the highest distinction 
and eminence, both in Israel and in the Diaspora, not least politicians, 
generals, university professors, lawyers, historians, writers, editors 
and journalists.

You begin by documenting how until 2000 all was going swimmingly for 
Israel and the Jewish people, then everything went wrong. So sudden, as 
you see it, was this volte face that any serious supporter of Israel 
had to be stunned by the rapidity of Israels changed international 
standing after September 2000. Evidently, you have remained stunned 
ever since, for you make no attempt to offer any explanation, as though 
the worlds anti-Semitic and anti-Zionist forces had suddenly decided, 
for no discernible reason, to have a field day.

But there is no mystery. Historical developments have causes, though 
they may take time to produce their full effects. So let me try to 
unravel the mystery for you.

" The initiation of the Oslo process raised high hopes on both sides. It 
boosted Israels peace camp, and it prompted 80,000 members of Al-Fatah 
to demonstrate in favour of it in the major Palestinian cities.


" On the other hand, the very prospect of a peace settlement, involving 
territorial compromise, provoked the rejectionists on both sides, who 
refused to accept anything less than Greater Palestine and Greater 
Israel respectively. On the Palestinian side, Hamas immediately 
launched a new series of terror attacks against Israel. On the Israeli 
side, Baruch Goldstein massacred 29 Palestinians praying in a Hebron 
mosque, and Yigal Amir assassinated Yitzhak Rabin.

" Under Shimon Peres the Oslo process made some headway, under Binyamin 
Netanyahu it was virtually halted, then resumed by Ehud Barak. But 
throughout all those years the building of Jewish settlements in the 
occupied territories, begun in 1967, went full-steam ahead, in stubborn 
defiance of UN resolutions and world opinion. This crucial fact, which 
you dont bother to mention, was bound to arouse ever-increasing 
resentment among the Palestinians, and slowly to erode their initial 
faith in the Oslo process.

" But the settlement programme involved much more than its mere 
arithmetic tells. It entailed the deployment of large detachments of the 
IDF to defend the settlers, the criss-crossing of the West Bank with 
connecting roads strictly for Jewish use only, the confiscation of 
Palestinian-owned land, the destruction of olive groves, the seizure of 
water supplies, and the strangulation of the Palestinian economy.


" Furthermore, the measures Israel felt compelled to take to suppress 
the resultant unrest included collective punishments, house demolitions, 
curfews, and daily humiliations at the checkpoints. All this intensified 
the resentment still further - how could it not?  and by September 2000 
it was like a powder keg. Then Arik Sharon, by his Temple Mount 
walkabout with a huge police escort, ignited it and so triggered the 
Second Intifada.

" Israels counter-measures became increasingly harsh, incited the 
Palestinian terrorists to step up their murderous activities, including 
suicide bombings, and caused the general Palestinian population, even 
though most of them continued to disapprove of violence, nevertheless to 
sympathise with them and to become a source of recruits for them. Hence 
the vicious cycle of attack, reprisal and counter-reprisal which we have 
witnessed in the last two years.

" All this was sensationally, and not always fairly, reported by the 
worlds media and so brought the escalating conflict graphically to the 
attention of the general public. Most people were horrified by the 
tactics, especially suicide bombings, of the Palestinian terrorists, but 
scarcely less so by the brutality of Israels reprisals, including 
helicopter gunship raids and targeted assassinations. Considering, 
further, Israels persistent defiance of UN resolutions, relentless 
colonisation of occupied land, vast military superiority, and the 
consequent disproportion between Israeli and Palestinian casualties, it 
is hardly surprising that many came to see the conflict as a grossly 
unequal one and to sympathise with the underdog.

" This climate of opinion, in turn, gave the dormant forces of 
anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism an opportunity to express themselves with 
a new brazenness, further feeding the growing animosity towards Israel 
to which you rightly draw attention. However, what this phenomenon calls 
for is not blanket denunciation but sober analysis. Not all anti-Zionism 
is anti-Semitism. Still less is all condemnation of Israels present 
policies anti-Zionism. (On the contrary, much of it is pro-Zionism in 
the best sense of that word.) Consequently your assertion of a worldwide 
conspiracy to destroy Israel is a gross exaggeration.

And now let me comment seriatim on some of your key phrases.

Despite a left-of-centre government in power racing against its own 
self-imposed deadline to achieve a historic peace with the Palestinians, 
Israel found itself the target of a calculated campaign of 
Palestinian-instigated terror. What you fail to mention is that under 
the same left-of-centre government Israel went full-steam ahead with its 
settlement programme, eroding the Palestinians faith in the Oslo 
process. Likewise, that, contrary to Israels official version, the 
eventual breakdown of the process is to be blamed, in some proportion, 
on both sides, as some of the best informed analysts, such as Dr 
Menachem Klein, have demonstrated. Furthermore, when you say that Israel 
found itself the target of a calculated campaign of terror, you 
absurdly imply that Israels antecedent policies, including its creeping 
colonisation of Palestinian land, and Sharons Temple Mount provocation, 
had nothing to do with it. Finally, when you refer to the terror 
campaign as Palestinian-instigated, you obscure the fact that the 
terrorist groups involved were opposed to Arafat and the peace process, 
and did not have the broad support of the Palestinians, who, as opinion 
polls have repeatedly shown, have continued by a large majority to 
favour a return to negotiations towards a two-state solution.

And the media, with a few notable exceptions, came down hard on Israel. 
Media bias against Israel has been frequently alleged. I can only say 
that to the best of my admittedly limited knowledge of the British 
media, not one major newspaper or radio or television channel has ever 
editorially denied Israels right to exist in peace and security within 
internationally recognised borders, or failed to be open to the 
expression of a wide spectrum of opinions.

What is Israel to do in the absence of a credible peace partner and 
faced by an unending war of terror? Regarding the second clause, Israel 
must of course take all necessary steps to defend its population. Nobody 
has questioned that, as distinct from some of the methods employed. As 
for the first clause, Israel has had several opportunities to make peace 
with the Palestinians but blown them, e.g., in 1967, when David Ben 
Gurion vainly urged its government to relinquish the conquered 
territories in exchange for peace, and has responded inadequately to 
peace initiatives by King Hussein in 1970, and by Anwar Sadat in 1977, 
and by American presidents and envoys and other world leaders at various 
times. In 1982 Israel failed to build on a cease-fire which (apart from 
one minor incident) the PLO had strictly observed for eleven months on 
Israels northern border. On the contrary, Sharon invaded Lebanon for 
the very purpose of destroying the PLO as a potential peace partner, 
just as in Operation Defensive Shield in 2002, for the same reason, he 
all but destroyed the PA. Similarly, he repudiated the Oslo process as 
soon as he became Prime Minister, forbade President Moshe Katzav to 
negotiate a cease-fire, and whenever any Palestinian terrorist group 
came close to deciding to cease targeting Israeli civilians, promptly 
ordered another military action. His whole record shows that what he 
wants is Greater Israel, or as much of it as possible, rather than a 
peace settlement involving the sort of territorial compromise that has 
any chance of being acceptable to the Palestinian people. Since he has 
done everything possible to prevent the emergence of a credible peace 
partner, to complain that Israel has none is more than a little perverse.

Arafats direct complicity in terror. To the best of my knowledge that 
is not yet fully proven. In any case the history of conflict resolution 
has often involved dealing with former terrorists. (Some former 
terrorists have even become Prime Ministers of Israel.)

Are we to succumb to a moral equivalence between Israeli and Palestinian 
behaviour over the last two years? No, we are not. But that does not 
entitle us to condone Israels violations of human rights , meticulously 
documented by its own impeccable watchdog organisations such as Btzelem 
and Rabbis for Human Rights.

A world body hopelessly stacked against Israel. On the other hand Israel 
owes its very existence to the UN, whose General Assembly and Security 
Council have consistently affirmed and re-affirmed its right to exist in 
peace and security within internationally recognised borders. Your 
failure to acknowledge this fundamental fact, as if it were a minor 
detail, shows a regrettable lack of balance.

A worldwide campaign being waged to isolate, condemn, and weaken Israel. 
Another wild exaggeration. Besides, to a large extent, Israel has 
isolated itself by its defiance of world opinion, condemned itself by 
acts of excessive brutality, and weakened itself by its settlements, 
which extend its defence lines and entail vast expenditure, to the 
detriment of its economy, welfare services and social fabric. Above all, 
the impression you seek to convey, that the whole world is out to 
destroy Israel, flies in the face of the following facts.

" That, as just mentioned, the UN has invariably affirmed Israels right 
to exist in peace and security within internationally recognised borders.

" That the same holds true for most of its Member States.

" That Egypt and Jordan have concluded peace treaties with Israel.

" That in 1993 Arafat, on behalf of the PLO, made a historic declaration 
recognising Israels right to exist.

" That the Oslo process nearly succeeded. At Taba, in January 2001, the 
negotiators issued a statement saying: The two sides have never been 
closer to reaching an agreement.

" That there have been several joint peace initiatives, including the 
2001 Israeli-Palestinian Declaration, calling for No to bloodshed, No 
to occupation, Yes to negotiations, Yes to peace, which was signed by a 
large number of pre-eminent Israeli and Palestinian politicians and 
intellectuals, and the Israel-Palestine Coalition for Peace.

" That less than a year ago, in Beirut, the Saudi peace plan, envisaging 
normalisation of Arab-Israel relations, was endorsed by nineteen Member 
States of the Arab League. It constituted a major breakthrough.

The combined weight of these highly significant facts, which you disdain 
to mention, comprehensively confutes your conspiracy theory.

Nobody pretends that the present situation is not fraught with great 
difficulties and dangers. Nevertheless the outlines of a realistically 
attainable solution have been crystal-clear for some time. They involve 
an agreement simultaneously to stop Palestinian terrorism and Israeli 
settlement building (as recommended by the Mitchell Report), evacuation 
of the settlements, acceptance of the 1967 Green Line (with minor 
adjustments) as Israels border, the establishment of a demilitarised 
but viable Palestinian State with its capital in East Jerusalem, and 
massive world aid to build up the Palestinian economy and to resettle or 
compensate the Palestinian refugees in a way that does not threaten 
Israels demography.

The achievement of such a resolution of the conflict is completely 
within the realm of possibility. It only requires that the large 
majority on both sides, who want peace, should assert their will, if 
necessary against their political leaders. There is no other way 
forward, and your letter, far from advancing it, militates against it. 
It does so by bolstering the currently prevalent mood of the Jewish 
people, which is one of self-pity and self-righteousness, paranoia and 
hysteria, denial of reality, refusal to listen, and adherence to the 
fatal illusion that peace depends on security rather than security on 
peace. It is the exact opposite of what responsible Jewish leadership 
requires at the present time.

Today the Jewish people face a fateful choice between two scenarios.

Scenario One: Continuation of the present policy. More of the same. An 
increasingly oppressive occupation of an increasingly resentful 
Palestinian population. An endless cycle of violence and 
counter-violence. Perhaps even resort to unconscionable expedients such 
as wholesale expulsions (ethnic cleansing) in a desperate attempt to 
remove the irritant and preserve the Jewish majority of Israels 
population. Fortress Israel, loathed by humanity and defying humanity 
until doomsday.

Scenario Two: Israel negotiates a cease-fire based on the simultaneous 
cessation of terrorism and colonisation, then, with international help, 
a comprehensive peace. It withdraws to its 1967 borders and, within 
them, devotes its enormous energy and genius to the building of a 
democratic, just and prosperous society. It lives at peace with its 
neighbours, makes a positive contribution to the stability and progress 
of the Middle East, and regains the good-will of humanity.

Woe to the shepherds of Israel (Ezekiel 34:2) who lead  or follow  
their flock in the wrong direction!

Now is a time to urge our people to embrace the way of peace because 
that is the most Jewish, the most Zionist and the most pro-Israel thing 
to do, and the only one that holds out any long-term hope for the future.

Yours sincerely,


Rabbi John D. Rayner







---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]


"[C]apital comes dripping from head to foot, from every pore, with blood and 
dirt."
--Marx, Capital, Vol. 1, Chapter 31

Community email addresses:
  Post message: marxist@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  Subscribe:    marxist-subscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  Unsubscribe:  marxist-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  List owner:  Hunter Gray <hunterbadbear@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Shortcut URL to this page:
  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/marxist

Also take our one-question survey at
  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/marxist/polls 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/