#976: Just So Long As There's Something in the Glass

Just about everyone is familiar with the old saw that goes “The optimist sees the glass as being half full; the pessimist sees the glass as being half empty.” Years ago, I decided that there was actually a third option. This axiom states “As long as there’s something in the glass, there’s always the possibility of hope” I believe this is especially true in the world of politics. How so? Well, if one is overly pessimistic about the outcome of, say, an election or an issue, there is the likelihood that they will sit on their hands and let reality take its nasty course. Then too, frequently an optimist will sit back and await the good news . . . which may never come. The one who finds a ray of hope in what others may find to be either utterly hopeless or a lead-pipe cinch, is more likely to roll up their sleeves and take part in turning hope into reality.

Depending on where you live in these United States, there are just as many prospects for optimism as pessimism. As an example, a staunch Democrat has every reason to feel optimistic if they vote in, say, California, New York or Rhode Island, and every reason to feel pessimistic - if not downright hopeless -  if they reside and vote in, say, Alabama, Oklahoma or a majority of Florida.  Let’s face it: would take as much of a miracle for Republicans to control the legislature in California or Hawaii as it would for Democrats to rule in Texas or Missouri.  Being a progressive Democrat in Florida, I am grateful that we  live in the only liberal part of the state; at least those we vote for are likely to be be elected . . . even if they will be part of a tiny minority up in Tallahassee.  When it comes to my part of the state, I am an optimist; when it comes to the legislature I am a pessimist; when it comes to capturing the governor’s mansion, I am hopeful.  Thank G-d for their being something in the glass.

Every once in a while optimists get their electoral comeuppance because the hopeful have created a miracle.  Without question, the presidential election of 1948, which pitted the incumbent  Harry S. (“Give  ‘em Hell Harry”) Truman (D) against New  York Governor  Thomas E. Dewey (whom Alice Longworth Roosevelt stuck with the moniker "The Little Man on the Wedding Cake”).  Pundits and pollsters alike "knew” that Dewey would win in a landslide. So much so that nearly every newspaper in America carried the  same frontpage headline on November 2: DEWEY DEFEATS TRUMAN!  As things turned out, those who believed the glass half full lost not to those who saw the glass as half empty, but rather to those - the hopeful - who made sure their fellows went to the polls and voted for the man from Independence.  And they saw things, there was something in the glass.

Depending on which side of the aisle you occupy these days, there’s plenty of room or reason for optimism or pessimism.  MAGA-ites from Florida to Washington State along with their allies in the various state legislatures  as well as the Clown Car Caucus on Capitol Hill, see the political glass overflowing.  They firmly believe that G-d’s  savior will once again occupy the White House (even if they have to steal the election); that abortion for any reason will be outlawed at the national level; that America will "return” to being a nation of, by and for White Christians; and that LGBT+ people pay the price for defiling G-d’s word and will.  Meanwhile,  optimists see the tide turning.  They believe that finally - finally - Donald Trump will be hit with the two things he most hates and fears: losing his fortune (and thus his name) and forever being identified in the history books as America’s “most notorious grifter and biggest loser.”  I believe it will be left to the hopefuls - those who find both  strength and motivation in there being something in the glass - of doing whatever is in their power to right the wrongs of the lethal  optimists whose world-view could signal the death of democracy. In short, I am hopeful that together, we can turn back the tide of “Trumptastrophe.”

 There is far more pessimism than optimism - and just plain fear - emendating from the latest and bloodiest conflict in the Middle East. That which began with a bloody attack on the part of Hamas on October 7 of last year, has metathesized throughout the region and threatens to spread still further. Iranian-backed Houthis in Yemen firing missiles and drones at vessels in the Red Sea (which in turn led British and American warplanes to hit missile systems and launchers and other targets); Hezbollah launching missile attacks from Lebanon into Northern Israel; Israel decimating Gaza, killing tens of thousands of civilians while trying to destroy Hamas; a vexing and dangerous increase in anti-Semitism all over Europe as well as on Ivy League campuses here in the United States . . . the glass keeps draining.       

Where it would be both easy and completely understandable to see the glass as being far more than half empty, I am contenting myself with seeing something in the glass. In other words, there just may be a few hopeful signs on the horizon:

After a mostly successful round of talks in Paris last week, negotiations, aimed at securing a temporary cease-fire and the release of some hostages, will continue between an Israeli delegation and mediators from the U.S., Qatar and Egypt. It was announced earlier today (2/25/2024) that an Israeli delegation is expected to arrive in Qatar as soon as tomorrow for intensive talks with mediators aimed at closing the gaps around a new deal for a temporary cease-fire with Hamas and the release of some hostages held in Gaza - this according to an Israeli official familiar with the negotiations.

In last week’s discussions in Paris, Israel’s delegation agreed to a basic outline for a deal that would involve a six-week truce and the exchange of about 40 hostages captive in the enclave for Palestinian prisoners held by Israel, The numbers of hostages and prisoners will likely change over the course of further negotiations, the Israeli officials cautioned. Recent discussions around a potential hostage deal have focused on the release of women, elderly and wounded captives.

For the first time, Israeli politicians and political influencers are beginning to imagine out loud what a next step could look like in Gaza. Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu's newly released plan for Gaza's future lacks much innovation, but it could fit into the outline formulated by the international community. The important question is when will Israel withdraw from the Gaza Strip and allow for its rehabilitation to begin. His proposal, which calls for indefinite Israeli military control and buffer zones in the territory, rankled Arab nations and was rejected by Palestinians. This is not surprising; Bibi must dance to the tune played by his cabinet’s right flank (read: ultra-Orthodox, ultra-Nationalist) if he is to remain in power. Like his American counterpart, Donald Trump, the Israeli P.M. needs to remain in office in order to cloak himself in ministerial immunity in his ongoing corruption trials.

Influential members of the international press - including Serge Schmemann, a member of the New York Times editorial board and the former longtime Jerusalem bureau chief for “America’s Paper of Record,” has recently written about Marwan Barghouti, a long imprisoned terrorist who is considered by many to be the Palestinian’s Nelson Mandela. Unlike most Palestinian leaders, Barghouti has long accepted a two-state solution, speaks Hebrew, and learned diplomacy as a young up-and-coming assistant to Yasir Arafat. Barghouti, now in his mid 60’s, was part of Arafat’s team that helped create the Oslo Accords. During his time in the United States, he proved himself to be open and available to the press, warm and engaging.

                                       Marwan Barghouti

The search for a Palestinian leader has become more pressing, as the attention of Israel’s allies and its Arab neighbors turns to “after Gaza,” as Israelis refer to what will follow the extraordinarily destructive and deadly war there. Negotiations involving the United States and Arab states for a way to stop the fighting are intensifying, and one crucial unresolved question is whether there is anyone not linked to Hamas or the corruption in the Palestinian Authority who could take charge in a ravaged Gaza and replace the unpopular leader in the West Bank, the 88-year-old Mahmoud Abbas.

Ami Ayalon, a highly decorated Israeli official who had served as naval commander in chief, head of the internal Shin Bet security service and cabinet member, recently referred to Barghouti as “The only leader who can lead Palestinians to a state alongside Israel. First of all because he believes in the concept of two states, and secondly because he won his legitimacy by sitting in our jails.”

Even before completing, editing, recording and posting this blog piece, I can hear the jeers and catcalls from some of my readers who love to prove how little I know about virtually anything; calling me a fool, a dupe and a naïve self-hating Jew. Fortunately, over the course of a reasonably long life, I’ve developed a pretty thick hide and a desire to feel hopeful whenever I see at least a few drops in the glass.

Copyright©2024 Kurt Franklin Stone

#962: ס'איז שװער צו זײַן אַ ייִד ("It's Hard to Be a Jew")

Audio Block

Double-click here to upload or link to a .mp3. Learn more

Although it is rather simple to translate the title of this essay from Yiddish to English, its meaning can likely only be understood on an emotional level by what we Jews refer to as “MOT,” - i.e. “A member of the tribe.” Translated into French (C'est dur d'être juif), Spanish Es difícil ser judío) or even German (Es ist schwer, Jude zu sein), the expression loses the cultural angst, the shrug-of-the-shoulders fatalism that pervades the original. In English, French, Spanish, German or any other language, the expression is only “understood” as a mere translation of words . . . a matter for the cerebellum. In Yiddish, it is best translated by what we MOTs called די קישקע - “the guts.”

                               Rabbi Abraham Ibn Ezra

Historically, Jewish literature is filled with the kind of fatalism that is best comprehended in the guts, rather than the frontal lobes, which make expressive language possible. Jewish fatalism is perhaps best expressed by that most distinguished of rabbinic commentators and poets, Abraham Ibn Ezra (1089-1167) who wrote: “If I started out selling candles/the sun would never go down.  If I started selling funeral shrouds/people would stop dying. If I went into the arms trade/ universal peace would break out.” 

Got it?

Although rabbis, scholars and writers of every stripe have long attempted to explain Jewish fatalism and the ongoing historic nature of anti-Semitism,  no one has truly succeeded; it is just a fact of life.  And now, as the modern State of Israel and Hamas, a terrorist group fueled by its ghoulish 7th century theocracy go-toe-to-toe with one another in war, those who know little - if anything - about history and clash between theocracy and Democracy have chosen to take sides with “the Palestinians” (who historically, don’t really exist) over the Israelis (who, for most of history were the ones referred to as "Palestinians”).  The Gaza Strip is ruled not by a government, but by a terrorist group called Hamas, which is an acronym for Harakat – Harakat al-Muqawamah al-Islamiyya – or "Islamic Resistance Movement.  In Arabic, hamas (حماسة) also means “zeal,” “fervor” or “ardor,” which just about says it all. 

The religious “zeal” of the Islamic Resistance Movement has as much to do with the murderous October 7 attack on Israel, as does the more than half-century occupation of Gaza by the Israelis.  Truth to tell missiles have been raining down on Jewish Gaza-border towns and kibbutzim  on a regular basis for years and years.  It’s just that the October 7th attack/invasion was on such a massive scale and that the Netanyahu government was caught with its pants down . . . largely concerning itself with political issues affecting the P.M.’s ability to keep his right flank satisfied and himself out of the courtroom where he faces charges of fraud, breach of trust and accepting bribes in three separate scandals involving powerful media moguls and wealthy associates.

By the end of the day (October 7, 2023), Israel declared war on Hamas, thus beginning its massive assault on Gaza. Today, nearly 37 days into the war, the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) have killed more than 10,000 people; of these, the majority are civilians. Food, water and fuel have been embargoed; surgeons in Gaza City are performing operations and delivering newborns by flashlight, because there simply is no electricity. And all across the world, people are condemning Israel for its “heartless excesses” and demanding an immediate cease-fire. The chances of this happening are slim at best; Hamas would immediately get back to restoring its weaponry and fortifying its many subterranean encampments. Israeli military leaders have no interest in a case-fire; not due to a love for killing Palestinian civilians or insensitivity towards saving and repatriating the hundreds of civilians kidnapped by Hamas.

In Hebrew, one would say that the Israelis - and Jews worldwide - are caught בין הפטיש והסדן - literally, “between the hammer and the anvil” . . . more commonly, “between a rock and a hard place.” On the one hand, almost all will admit that Israel, a sovereign state with a democratically-elected government, has every right to defend itself against heavily-armed terrorists whose rai·son d'ê·tre is the annihilation and utter dismemberment of Israel and the Jewish people from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe. On the other, Israel’s response to Hamas’ deadly - and ongoing - invasion is both deeply repellant and repugnant. But what can the Israelis do? To a growing number of anti-Semites, and-Zionists, the answer is simple: “Just die! Leave the Palestinians alone. Stop your intended act of genocide!”

On the other side of the aisle, there are ultra-conservatives coming out of the cracks urging that “all Palestinians should be killed,” or urged the banning of all pro-Palestinian groups on college campuses for offering “material support” to terrorists. The rise in supporting Palestinians and attacking Israelis and Jews in general is being both seen and heard in both Europe and South America. Indeed, ס'איז שװער צו זײַן אַ ייִד “It’s hard to be a Jew.” Recently, both the Trump-supporting Fox entertainer Sean Hannity and the left-leaning U.K. talk show host Piers Morgan have interviewed Mosab Hassan Yousef, the disowned son of Hamas co-founder Sheikh Hassan Yousef.

In both interviews, Yousef., who was long ago dubbed the“Green Prince” (also the title of a 2014 documentary based on his autobiography) for his efforts to help the Shin Bet (the Israeli security agency) thwart terror attacks during the Second Intifada in the early 2000s. In both interviews, Yousef (a “marked man” who now lives in San Diego), predicted that once Israel removes Hamas from power in the Gaza Strip as it has vowed to do following the October 7 terror onslaught, Palestinian residents would celebrate and thank Israel for ending their oppression and “lust for power.” Contrasting 21st century Israel and Hamas “which possesses a 7th century mentality,” Yousef went on to describe the two sides in saying: “. . . the gap is very huge. Hamas represents chaos. This is where they thrive. Israel represents order; democracy – Hence those are the two opposite extremes that have been clashing,"

Like many Jews, it truly hurts, bothers and worries me that Israel has taken such savage reprisals against the people of Gaza.  Yes, I support Israel’s right to defend itself and its citizens by going after and eliminating the murderers of Hamas.  And yet, I feel like that parent who chastises the child by saying “But we expect more of you.”

So what is to be done and how can we get across to the growing masses of those who support the “poor oppressed Palestinians” against the “genocidal Israelis?”

One possible answer is to teach history; to open the minds, hearts and souls of those who protest in the streets with a handful of crucial facts to ponder.  The other day, my friend Herb Stoller forwarded me the following video from an unknown Yemini under the title of “Hypocrisy for ‘Pro-Palestinians.”  It just about says it all:

All I can get is that those who whole-heartedly support the Palestinians against the military might of the Israelis, ponder what this young man has to teach . . . and learn a bit of history. It just might save the world from the planet’s most catastrophic collision.

Not only is it “hard to be a Jew”; it is doubly difficult to be an intelligent human being.

Copyright©2023 Kurt Franklin Stone

#957: Operation "Swords of Iron"

On October 6, 1973, (the tenth day of the Jewish month of Tishri, known as Yom Kippur - the Jewish “Day of Atonement”) Egypt and Syria launched a surprise attack against Israel. The ensuing battle, which we in the west know as the “Yom Kippur War” and those in the Middle East call “The Ramadan War,” lasted a mere 18 days, with Israel besting its Arab enemies and ultimately, their Russian backers.  Precisely 50 years and 1 day later, the terrorist group Hamas, which controls the Gaza Strip, and is  funded largely by  Iran, launched more than 2,000 rockets from the Gaza Strip into Israel, 

Needless to say, this murderous multi-pronged assault/invasion, which includes terrorist attacks from the ground, the sea and the air, is quite a bit different from the Yom Kippur War of 1973. True, both wars, (1973 and 2023) saw the IDF (Israeli Defense Forces) caught dangerously flatfooted. One obvious difference is that in 1973, Israel was attacked primarily by two countries - Egypt and Syria; in this new war, Israel’s enemy is far more amorphous - a well-armed, well-funded terrorist militia. In 1973, Israeli deaths in that 18-day war amounted to 2,688 . . . none of whom were civilians. Hamas quickly named their invasion “Operation Al-Aqsa Deluge,” after the Al-Aqsa Mosque, Islam’s 3rd holiest site, and long a bone of contention with observant Jews, who hold that it is the same site that housed both the First and Second Temple, long destroyed. Jews refer to the area as הר הבית (har ha beit - “the Temple Mount”), Muslims as al-Haram al-Sharif, the Noble Sanctuary.” 

Mohammad Deif, the enigmatic, leader of Hamas' military wing, claimed that the specific flashpoint for launching Operation Al-Aqsa Deluge was Israel's continued aggression on the area occupied by Al Aqsa. "They [Israeli forces] consistently assault our women, the elderly, children and [the] youth; and prevent our people from praying in the Aqsa Mosque while allowing groups of Jews to desecrate the mosque with daily incursions," he said.

Deif’s reasoning is doubtful, at best, and for a couple of reasons. First, there is nothing new about his charges; second, for the most part, they are false. Muslims have had access to al-Haram al-Sharif for purposes of entering the mosque for years. And third, while it is true that a large gathering of haridim (ultra-Orthodox Jews) did enter al-Haram a week ago (the fifth day of the Jewish Fall festival of Succot) armed with decidedly non-lethal lulavim v’etrogim, the attack on Israel by the terrorists of Hamas was far too complex and well-planned to have been the creature of a few days pique and tension; they must have been planning this multi-pronged incursion for months and months.

The Israeli response, which P.M. Netanyahu officially named מבצע חרבות ברזל miv’tza kharvot barzel - “Operation Swords of Iron”) has already seen 500 deaths in both Israel and the Gaza Strip. (By the time this essay is posted and you read it, these figures will no doubt have greatly increased. IDF strikes against Hamas targets in Gaza have already reportedly killed at least  230 Palestinians; Hamas terrorists are currently holding Israeli civilians hostage in their homes. 

The timing of this horrific assault is notable, hitting Israel at one of the most difficult moments in its history. It comes after months of profound anxiety about the cohesion of Israeli society and the readiness of its military, a crisis set off by the far-right government’s efforts to reduce the power of the judiciary.  The conflict also jeopardizes a months-long effort by President Biden and his top aides to push Saudi Arabia to normalize diplomatic relations with Israel, its historical adversary. Saudi Arabia has never recognized the Jewish state out of solidarity with Palestinians but had seemed ready to change its policy.  In its first public comment on the war, the Saudis called for de-escalation, but stopped short of blaming Hamas . . . a sign that the progress Saudi, Israeli and American diplomats have been making might now take a backseat to regional politics.

While governments the world over - with the notable exception of those in the Middle East - have voiced support for Israel’s right to defend itself and its people - and, for the part condemning Hamas - here in America, Republican response is both highly partisan and none too surprising.  Virtually the entire cast of characters vying for their party’s presidential nomination (a quest fraught with failure) have blamed President Biden Hamas’ attack on the Jewish State.  Republican presidential contenders immediately tried to pin a portion of the blame on Biden,  seeking to tie his recent decision to release $6 billion in blocked Iranian funds in exchange for freeing five Americans who had been detained in Iran to Saturday’s complex attack. The White House pushed back fiercely against the GOP criticism, noting that the money unfrozen last month in the prisoner swap has yet to be spent by Iran and can only be used for humanitarian needs.  While campaigning in Iowa former POTUS Trump criticized President Joe Biden for being a ““weak leader. The Israeli attack was made because we are perceived as being weak and ineffective and with a weak, a really weak leader,” he told a gathering of his MAGA supporters. 

By contrast, all Democrats from the most centrist to the most progressive, have expressed support for Israel while roundly condemning Hamas. Even Minnesota Representative Ilhan Omar (herself a Muslim) took to X (formerly “Twitter”) voicing her concern: I condemn the horrific acts we are seeing unfold today in Israel against children, women, the elderly, and the unarmed people who are being slaughtered and taken hostage by Hamas. Such senseless violence will only repeat the back and forth cycle we've seen, which we cannot allow to continue. We need to call for de-escalation and ceasefire. I will keep advocating for peace and justice throughout the Middle East.”

Without question, the politician in the worst shape is Israeli P.M. Netanyahu, who is taking the brunt of the blame for his country’s lack of intelligence . . . despite having one of the very best cyber intelligence capabilities in the world. Haaretz opinion writer Yossi Verter hit the nail on the head in his first op-ed after the invasion: Israel was humiliated and routed on Saturday. A “small” terror organization exposed the nakedness of a regional superpower with intelligence and cyber capabilities that are among the best in the world. Even if all of the Gaza Strip is destroyed (and there is no need for this), and even if . . . Mohammed Deif, and his associates roll in the alleys, this will not make up for the biggest security failure since 1973. It will not sweeten the bitter taste of the debacle, and it won’t ease the shock of the number of those killed and kidnapped.”

Netanyahu is in such a political bind that he has reached out to centrist opposition parties Yesh Atid and National Unity to enter an emergency government. Netanyahu made the offer during a meeting with Yesh Atid leader Yair Lapid and National Unity party leader Benny Gantz held earlier today, saying such a government would be the same in format as the Levi Eshkol government then-opposition leader Menachem Begin joined before the Six Day War in 1967.

Gantz says he is considering entering such a government for the duration of the war but insists that government would “deal with security challenges alone” and in a manner that would allow “substantive partnership and influence over decision-making in relevant forums” for his party. Lapid said that he would join “a reduced, professional, emergency government” and says it would be impossible to manage a war with “the extreme and dysfunctional composition of the current cabinet,” essentially calling on the prime minister to remove the far-right Religious Zionism and ultra-nationalist Otzma Yehudit parties from the government in order for him to bring his Yesh Atid party into the coalition.

Regardless of how the government is restructured and who leads for how long, Israel is likely in for a long war . . . one that is as existentially challenging as any it has fought over the past three quarters of a century.   How the war will affect the future of a two-state solution, negotiations with Saudi Arabia, the “unstable stability” of the Middle East, the rise of anti-Semitism and a thousand other things is yet to be known, let alone to be seen.  

But know this of a certainty: the world is a better place for all, when Israel is both safe and secure.  Whether or not one agrees with everything the Israeli government or its people do (and I for one do not), it is still well worth our support.   As tiny as it is, as riddled with issues as it can be, Israel has proven time and time again what it can accomplish for the world when given the chance to live in peace. For when Israel succeeds, so too can the entire world.  

Stand with Israel, the iron fist inside the velvet glove . . . 

Copyright©2023 Kurt Franklin Stone

#950: I Really Do Love Israel . . . However

There is an old tale (most likely originally told in Yiddish) about a Jewish man who got lost at sea and eventually made his way to an uncharted island in the middle of nowhere. After many decades, a passing ship noted smoke rising from the heretofore unknown piece of land, and thus sent a small launch in its direction to check it out and satisfy their curiosity. Tying up their launch, less than a half-mile from the island’s shore, they swam over and were amazed to be greeted by an elderly man with a long beard.

After exchanging pleasantries and learning how he had wound up being there - and that he really had no idea precisely how long ago that was - he asked if he could take them on a brief tour so that he could show them the beauty of his home. The visitors were amazed to discover that over the years the old man had created numerous vegetable gardens, a small patch of land devoted to growing wheat which provided him with flour, a lovely pasture with goats and sheep, and a hatchery for fish. He proudly showed them the grass hut he had built for his home, and then urged them to go with him to the other side of the island so that he could show them "the pièce de résistance.” Trekking to the other side of the island, they immediately spotted two beautiful huts standing proudly on their own mound of highly compacted sand.

“And what are these?” the launch leader asked, “and why are there two, considering that there are no other people living here?”

“Ah,” said the old man, “a good question indeed. Why two? You see, the elderly fellow told them, these are my two shuls.” Quickly seeing the lack of comprehension in their faces, he said : “My two synagogues . . . my places of Jewish worship.”

“But why two?” they asked once again. “Simple,” he told them.” Then pointing to the one on the right he proudly told them “This is the synagogue I go to religiously seven days a week, three times a day in order to pray.” "

“And the other one?” the leader asked.

“That’s the one I would never step foot in!” he said, spitting on the sandy ground . . .

“The Talmudic Argument” by Giuseppe Bonalini

This whimsical bit or irony is probably best understood by what we Jewish folk refer to as “M-O-T” - namely, “Members Of the Tribe.” You see, for as long as we’ve existed, despite being a single people (עם אחד - ahm echad - in Hebrew), we have had our arguments, disputes, and fallings-out with one another. Sometimes they have been vehement enough to cause one segment to walk away from another - e.g. building a shul to which no one goes, as in the story above. But in the long run, over many millennia, we have, more often than not, stood shoulder-to-shoulder when things got really dicey.

Another tale - this from the Talmud: Rabbi Eliezer was in an argument with five fellow rabbis over the proper way to perform a certain ritual. The other five Rabbis were all in agreement with each other, but Rabbi Eliezer vehemently disagreed. Finally, Rabbi Nathan pointed out "Eliezer, the vote is five to one! Give it up already!" Eliezer got fed up and said "If I am right, may God himself tell you so!" Thunder crashed, the heavens opened up, and the voice of God boomed down. "YES, RABBI ELIEZER IS RIGHT. RABBI ELIEZER IS PRETTY MUCH ALWAYS RIGHT." Rabbi Nathan turned and conferred with the other rabbis for a moment, then turned back to Rabbi Eliezer. "All right, Eliezer," he said, "the vote stands at five to TWO."

OK. I’ve - hopefully - gotten the point across that among Jews, arguing can sometimes be akin to sport, sometimes a matter of seriousness.  So let’s get serious . . .  

Over the past year or so, politics in מדינת ישראל (midinat Yisrael - the “State of Israel”) has become more than the subject of argumentation; they have become both unsettling and potentially earth-shattering.  In many ways, what’s been happening on the Israeli political scene is not all that much different from what’s going on in the United States: an increasingly right-wing, religion-driven minority enacting their other-worldly will over the will of the majority . . . as well as leaders whose greatest desire is to remain (or regain) their seat of power in order to stay out of prison.

        Israeli P.M. Bibi Netanyahu

Over the past two years, Israel has seen a number of governments collapse due to coalition partners being unable and unwilling to work with one another. Not even a so-called “Unity Government” could get along. To American observers of Israeli politics, their system is close to incomprehensible; it has aspects of British Parliamentarianism (from which the executive branch achieves its power) and the post-Ataturk Turkish Republic system of governance. Like the U,.K. (and New Zealand, Canada and Saudi Arabia), Israel has no constitution . . . which is part of their problem. Its heterodynamic (sometimes active, sometimes dormant) system makes political unity all but impossible. Case in point: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin (Bibi) Netanyahu, the state’s longest-serving PM, in order to remain in that post, cobbled together a coalition which included two of the most ultra-orthodox parties in the business. In turn, these parties - which represent a small minority of the country’s voters and/or wishes, have the power to turn one of the world’s most modern, best-educated, and most technically advanced countries into a 8,560 square mile (approximately the size of New Jersey) shetl . . . the name for medieval Eastern European Jewish market town where rabbis ruled, women’s main tasks were to cook, clean and bear children, and there was no distinction between secular and religious.

This not having a constitution wasn’t the original plan. Israel’s Declaration of Independence explicitly called for a constitution, and the first Knesset (parliament), elected on January 25, 1949, was supposed to create one. They deliberated it for many months but the discussions reached a deadlock. It rapidly became clear that no constitution would be enacted; instead the Knesset would enact a series of Basic Laws that would in time be combined into a constitution. After nearly three-quarters-of-a-century, Israelis are still waiting.

Bibi Netanyahu’s current governing coalition is, as mentioned above, easily the most ultra-conservative and religious in Israel’s history. This is not to say that the various religious parties have remained on the political sidelines up until now. To the contrary: religious parties have always held seats within the 120 member Knesset and have been minor partners in various coalitions in exchange for which they fulfill their major goals. To wit, maintaining the Orthodox strangle-hold on marriages, divorces and conversions, receiving deferments for their young men from military service (so that they may spend their lives studying Talmud) and receiving monetary appropriations directed to the haredim (Hebrew for “those who tremble” - the most ultra-Orthodox) community. On May 23, 2023, Netanyahu’s Knesset approved a raise for Agudat Israel and Otzma Yehudit - the two most powerful religious parties - NIS 250 million raise, to be used for building additional settlements. Even this “chanukah present” came as the result of argumentation: the two party’s opening demand was for NIS 600 million. The cash handouts to the ultra-Orthodox have sparked anger as Israelis of all backgrounds contend with soaring prices and increased interest rates.

Netanyahu’s pandering to the religious parties in his coalition (there are five different parties occupying 31 of the 64-seats making up this session’s majority), has led him to pass legislation calling for a complete overhaul of the Jewish State’s Supreme Court. The 15-member court — which meets in a graceful building on a hill in Jerusalem alongside Parliament — includes secular liberals, religiously observant Jews and conservative residents of Jewish settlements in the occupied West Bank. One justice is an Arab Israeli; six are women, including the court’s president.

  Protesting Netanyahu as a Threat to Democracy

The government has primed itself for battle against the court by portraying it as a bastion of a secular, left-leaning elite and a closed club out of touch with changes sweeping the country. Experts say that characterization has not been true for years.  On September 12, the Court will hold hearings on the overhaul legislation . . . putting them in the Orwellian position  of ruling on their own legitimacy. The legislation in question cancels the court’s ability to use the somewhat vague and subjective standard of reasonableness to overturn government decisions and appointments.  This has raised the hackles and the ire of Israel’s politically astute, mostly secular, majority.  Many believe that Netanyahu has pushed for this legislation as a means of circumventing his own legal problems. 

At the same time, Netanyahu’s ultra-Orthodox allies in the Knesset are seeking to expand the powers of all-male rabbinical courts, and to bar women and men from mixing in many public arenas.  As part of his agreement to give his ultra-Orthodox allies what they want in exchange for keeping him in power, Netanyahu has already made several concessions that have unsettled secular Israelis. Among them are proposals to segregate audiences by sex at some public events, to create new religious residential communities, to allow businesses to refuse to provide services based on religious beliefs, and to expand the powers of all-male rabbinical courts.  Israel’s laws have not been amended to reflect the concessions, but some fear that the changes are already coming, at the expense of women. The Israeli news media has been full of reports in recent months about incidents seen as discriminatory. 

Bus drivers in central Tel Aviv and southern Eilat have refused to pick up young women, because they were wearing crop tops or workout clothes. Last month, ultra-Orthodox men in the religious town of Bnei Brak stopped a public bus and blocked the road because a woman was driving.  As a response, members of בונות אלטרנטיבה (Bonot Alternativa,  Hebrew for “Building an Alternative,”, a  pro-democracy group, as well as a nonpartisan umbrella group of women’s organizations) show up at weekly antigovernment protests dressed in scarlet robes and white wimples that mimic those of the disenfranchised women forced to bear children in the dystopian television show based on Margaret Atwood’s novel “The Handmaid’s Tale.”

There are any number of similarities between Netanyahu’s obsessive need to maintain his premiership, and  Donald Trump’s need to regain his presidency: Both need to give in to their country’s most conservative supporters in order to retain (or regain) power; Both are narcissistic ego-maniacs; Both need power in order to stay out of prison.  

Why Trump needs to be reelected is obvious; everyone in the world knows of all the legal challenges he faces.  Unless he returns to the White House in January 2025, he’s going to wind up in Leavenworth; no Democratic POTUS would ever deign to grant him a pardon.

In the case of Bibi Netanyahu, not nearly so many people know that he has been charged with fraud, breach of trust and corruption. He has pleaded not guilty and says he is the victim of a politically orchestrated “witch-hunt” by the media and the left to remove him from office. (Sound familiar?) As a sitting Prime Minister, he cannot be forced to leave office. (BTW: Netanyahu is not the only member of the cabinet with a troubled legal past: Deputy P.M. Aryeh Deri was convicted of taking $155,000 in bribes while serving as the interior minister, and was given a three-year jail sentence in 2000; Minister of National Security Itamar Ben-Gvir has faced charges of hate speech against Arabs and was previously convicted of supporting a terrorist group known as Kach, which espoused an extremist religious Zionist ideology.)

There are those who, reading this post, will accuse me of being either a “self-hating Jew,” a “Jewish anti-Semite,” or a “radical anti-Zionist.” Nothing could be further from the truth. I really, truly love the people of Israel; I love its history, its language and literature (I speak, read and write Hebrew with passable fluency); I love its many, many achievements in the worlds of science, medicine, technology and the arts; of how this tiny country is, generally speaking, the first one to send emergency medical services to both friend and foe alike whenever and wherever the need arises.  I also love it enough to forgive those on the religious right who do not consider me a rabbi, nor will permit me to perform a wedding or effect a conversion within its borders.  G-d willing, some day that will change . . . if and when the people who see the Jewish state the same way I do, recognize that they/we are a majority.

What troubles me - and greatly so - is the direction its politics have taken over the past many years. The very nature of Israel’s national identify has been radically altered by a small faction that seeks to replace the Zionist-humanitarian-socialist democracy of Ben Gurion, Golda Meier and the founders, and turn it into an unrecognizable place based on a rigid Biblical/Rabbinic code of law . . . even if it means going against the will of the majority.

But make no mistake about it: one can be inalterably opposed to this wrenching right-wing turn and still be a patriotic מאהב ישראל (m’ahayv Yisrael _ a ”lover of Israel”). 

Debate, disagreement and divisiveness, after all is said and done, are all part of the Jewish genome.

Copyright©2023 Kurt Franklin Stone

"Between the Hammer and the Anvil"

Later this evening, President Biden will depart on Air Force One for Israel, his first official visit to the Middle East since taking the oath of office nearly 18 months ago. After talks with Israeli Prime Minister Yair Lapid (who at the moment also serves as Israel’s Foreign Minister) and representatives of the Palestinian Authority, the President will get back on board his plane Air Force One and become the first POTUS to fly directly from Israel to Saudi Arabia.  During his brief stay in Jeddah, where he will be attending the GCC+3 summit on Saturday with leaders of the Gulf Cooperation Council — Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE, along with Iraq, Egypt and Jordan. Biden will also hold private talks with both Saudi King Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud and Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (generally referred to as “MBS”), the oil-rich kingdom’s de facto leader.

Diplomatic missions don’t simply pop up out of thin air; they require a loft of careful planning and frequently involve complex, interweaving back stories.  As regards Israeli P.M. Lapid’s preparations, he has, over the past several days had personal conversations with Jordanian King Abdullah, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas (the first in at least 5 years) and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan; Israel has long had diplomatic relations with the first, shares common interests with the second, and wishes to become closer diplomatically with the third. In a message to the Saudis ahead of Biden’s expected direct flight from Israel to Jeddah, Prime Minister Lapid called for all countries in the region to build ties with Israel. “From Jerusalem, the [US] president’s plane will fly to Saudi Arabia, and he will carry with it a message of peace and hope from us,” Lapid said at the opening of the weekly cabinet meeting.

For his part, President Biden’s preparations for attending the GCC+3 and face-to-face meeting with MBS) involve issues ranging from Saudi human rights violations to the brutal murder/dismemberment of Jamal Khashoggi, a U.S. resident who worked for an American newspaper. In the 2020 presidential election, Biden was pointedly harsh when it came to characterizing the Saudi track record on human rights abuses as compared to Donald Trump, who frequently treated the oil-rich kingdom as America’s 51st state. During a debate in 2019, Biden said, “. . . the present government of that country [has] very little social redeeming value,” and that he would stop selling weapons to Saudi Arabia and “make them, in fact, the pariah that they are.”

Now, of course, Biden’s visit to Saudi Arabia has as much to do with oil and gas prices (which despite the daily dooming headlines has actually come down by nearly half dollar a gallon over the past several weeks). Considering how close we are to the midterm elections and how low the president’s ratings are - largely due to gas prices and inflation - he must be seen as doing something to help ameliorate the situation. Simply stated, that’s what politicians do.

As MSN op-ed writer Jonah Shepp noted in today’s Intelligencer column, “Whether or not one buys the justifications, global economics and politics have conspired to send Biden to meet with the Saudis whether he wants to or not. And from a moral standpoint, he probably doesn’t.”  Such are the exigencies of global politics, where idealism  and a nation’s historic sense what we stand for, of what is right and wrong must, from  time to time, take a deeply troubling backseat to economic necessity.  In going and - as some would have it - “groveling” at the feet of the Saudis, President Biden is nonetheless pretty much insulated from Trumpist and otherwise reactionary rhetorical brickbats.  Those who will most likely find fault with his hat-in-hand diplomacy at the doorstep of the House of Saud are those perched to his political left; who cannot and will not abide with lending credence to a kingdom ruled by ultra-fundamentalist Wahhabists.

(For the uninitiated, Wahhabi is to Sunni Islam what Dominionism is to fundamentalist Christianity: Taliban-like theocracy for the masses, but libertine lifestyles for the leaders.)  It’s the Wahhibi revivalists who keep women veiled and under the thumbs of their husbands and brothers, and issue lethal fatwas at the drop of a burqa. Likewise, it’s the Dominionists who demand that an impregnated 10-year old may not, regardless of circumstance, undergo an abortion . . . unless it’s their own daughter, sister or mistress.

The current Israeli P.M., former television host, journalist, actor and songwriter, Yair Lapid, who was until less than a decade ago widely ridiculed as a cocky and superficial political novice, is in somewhat the  same position as Joe Biden, one of the most experienced and long-lived politicians of the past half century. Like Biden, Lapir is in an electoral pickle; the Israeli government has pretty much collapsed, and he is facing yet another nationwide election. His political coalition, which runs the gamut from centrists, two-state enthusiasts and Arab parties, is once again taking on Bibi Nitanyahu’s Likud block. He senses that increasing Israel’s ties to gulf-state, oil-rich Arab states and sultanates makes good political sense; hence the recent reaching out to Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the U.A.E.

At the same time, this means that Lapid is all but giving his state’s imprimatur to countries and kingdoms whose record on human rights and the treatment of both women and religious minorities is the bipolar opposite of the Jewish State . . . the only democratic state in the Middle East.

Talk about being between the proverbial rock and a hard place! But then again no one ever said that hardcore politics and diplomacy were easy. Just how much civility, humanity and morality Lapid is willing to give up in order to secure greater, more powerful friendships is anyone’s guess. Selling the soul of a state to those who have spent generations promising the utter destruction of that state is a hard call. In an ideal world - whatever that is - Israel would tell Saudi Arabia and MBS to “stick it!” . . .. to begin treating women with equanimity and understanding . . . to finally abandon the 7th century and begin acting like modern men.

In Hebrew, the translation of “Between a rock and a hard place” is בין ההפשיט והסדן (bayn ha-pasheet v’ha-sah-dahn) literally meaning “between the hammer and the anvil.”  While I certainly do not envy P.M. Lapid for being in this position, I do understand that in reaching out to MBS,  he may well be positioned to help make Saudi Arabia - and indeed many of the oil-rich Muslim sheikdoms - better able  to enter the 21st century. 

Copyright©2022 Kurt F. Stone

Guess Who?

We’ve all heard it time and again. It’s gotten to the point where many we wish we wore hearing aids, just so we could shut them down or take them off . . . if for no other reason than to blot out the noxious noise of political lunacy and outright lies. How often do we have to listen to such blather as “Fake news,” "The greatest election fraud in the history of the country . . . in the history of any democracy," and “The deep state is deep within this government” before we go absolutely מְשׁוּגָע (m’shugah - “bonkers)?

If you think you know who’s been making all these אמירות הזויות (amirote h’zvee’yot - “delusional statements”) look no further than the language we are employing . . . it’s Hebrew . . . the language of about-to-become former Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu. And yes, the over-the-top charges with which Bibi has long been attacking his political enemies does sound an awful lot like the bilious puke the previous POTUS has been spewing at his political foes. In matter of fact, they frequently sound and act like they are following the same playbook . . . one written from right-to-left, the other from left-to-right.

But as Ed Valenti (the father of the modern infomercial and creator of Ginzu Knives) would say, “BUT WAIT, THERE’S MORE!” Both Trump and Netanyahu are largely despised by a majority of their respective constituencies for being cruel, overly abrasive, fabulistic (to put it kindly) and consumed with the fear that they will end their days bankrupted and perhaps behind bars. Unlike Trump, Netanyahu is already on trial for his sins; unlike Netanyahu, Trump maintains just enough political power among his base to continue being a cause for political concern.

As you are reading this post, there is every likelihood that Bibi Netanyahu’s twelve year run as Israeli P.M. will have come to a crashing conclusion. And while he is still a member of the Knesset and leader of the once vaunted Likud bloc, he leaves his post under a deep, storm-tossed cloud. Israel hasn’t had a functioning budget in more than two years. His personal relationship with President Joe Biden, although publicly strong is, behind closed doors, problematic at best. Bibi’s longtime coalition, an amalgam of hard-core conservatives, ultra-nationalists and far-right religious parties is about to be replaced by a coalition consisting of 3 conservative parties, 2 liberal, 2 centrist and, for the first time, an Arab party. About the only thing they have in common is their utter dislike for Bibi.

Under a rotation deal, Naftali Bennett, leader of Yamina (“Rightward”) will serve as P.M. for the first two years, with Yair Lapid, leader of the centrist Yesh Ateed (“There is a future”) party taking over as P.M. for the next two. Speaking about the new unity coalition, Israeli political scientist Shlomo Avineri said “The parties are disparate, but they share a commitment to reconstitute Israel as a functioning liberal democracy . . . . In recent years we saw Netanyahu begin to govern in a semi-authoritarian way.” Another prominent political observer, Tamar Hermann, who teaches at Israel’s “Open University” noted “They (the parties in the coalition) will not deal with the highly contentious issues between left and right,” In practice, this means a likely concentration on domestic rather than foreign affairs.

Here in the United States, President Biden, who has long prided himself on “working across the political aisle” in order to get things done, has found that compromise with Republicans is next to impossible. In Israel, the fact that so many disparate parties have agreed to come together in common cause - despite their innate philosophical and political differences - is a telling sign. In Israel, hard core political folks on the right have a tendency to move closer to the center. Here in the United States, it is nigh-on impossible to find even a handful of Republicans who will back any bill or initiative emanating from the Democrats. Their fear of Trumpian revenge surpasses their love of country.

                      Yair Lapid and Naftali Bennett

Naftali Bennett, an America-bred modern Orthodox self-made tech millionaire who is considered to be to the right even of Mr. Netanyahu on many issues, is determined to deliver higher standards of living and prosperity to a population weary of such paralysis.  His main coalition partner,  former newscaster Yair Lapid, is a former news anchor known for his chiseled good looks Lapid Lapid is the Tel Aviv-born son of the fiercely secular former justice minister Yosef "Tommy" Lapid, another journalist who left the media to enter politics. His mother, Shulamit, is a novelist, playwright and poet. Lapid was a newspaper columnist and has also published a dozen books. His role as a presenter on Channel 2 TV boosted his stardom.

The new 8-party coalition will make establishing good relations with the Biden administration, a priority, and improving relations with America’s majority liberal Jewish community - another significant goal - will also require centrist restraint. The parties in this coalition, which range from Mr. Bennett’s Yamina party on the far-right to Labor and Meretz on the left, and Ra’am (the acronym for הרשימה הערבית המאוחדת (ha-r’shemah ha-ahraveem ha’m’ohkhedet - “United Arab List”) disagree on virtually everything from L.G.B.T.Q. rights to public transport on Shabbat. The one thing they do agree on is that Netanyahu must go. Autocracy must be replaced by democracy.

The decision by Ra’am, to join the government so soon after last month’s violent clashes between Jewish and Arab mobs in Israel last month, reflects a growing realization that the marginalization of Arab parties brings only paralysis and repetitive elections. It also suggests a desire among some Palestinian citizens of Israel to exert more political influence. Fakhira Halloun, an expert in conflict resolution at George Mason University, recently wrote: “Usually the dominant discourse is one of perceiving Palestinians inside Israel as an internal enemy. We need to change this perception by not being always in the opposition.”

Certainly, Ra’am, with four seats in Parliament, will be critical to the survival of the coalition, even if it will not hold any cabinet posts. The coalition will have to consider the interests of the Palestinian minority in a different way. Among many questions to be answered, none is more important than whether Mr. Bennett turns out to be an ideologue or a pragmatist.  Already, the new Knesset has chosen a member of Yair Lapid’s Yesh Atid, Mickey Levy, to become the new Speaker.  He beat out Yaakov Margi, an ultra-Orthodox politician who is part of Mr. Netanyahu’s right-wing coalition. Mr. Levy, 69, is a former police officer who commanded police units in Jerusalem during the second intifada, or Palestinian uprising, in the early 2000s. He later served as a police attaché at the Israeli Embassy in Washington, according to his biography on the Parliament website, and then ran a bus company.  As speaker, Mr. Levy will exert considerable influence over parliamentary procedure, giving his government greater influence over the passage of legislation. This is a sign that Bennett and Lapid are serious about making this government work.

Unquestionably, there is much work to be done together by political parties and factions that have long been at one another’s throats. If they can help put Israel back on a strong democratic footing it will teach democracies the world over that those who manage to place country above party and the commonweal above the individual have it within their collective power to work miracles.

Copyright©2021 Kurt F. Stone

'45 Is NOT the Best Friend Israel Ever Had

One of the easiest ways to start a heated argument these days is to claim that Donald Trump is unquestionably NOT “the best friend Israel ever had.” For many American Jews and non-Jews alike especially - those who view politics mostly through the “blue and white” Israeli lens - 45’s moving the American Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem and then recognizing Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights provided more than enough brownie points to earn him the exalted title of “The best friend Israel ever had.”. Gee, and I have long been of the opinion that when it comes to Israel - or Canaan, Judea, Palestine Eretz Yisrael or whatever you choose to call it - Moses, Theodore Herzl and David Ben Gurion dwarf the man who currently occupies the White House.

Like the vast majority of American Jews, I am both a staunch Zionist and an ohayv Yisrael (a lover of Israel). Unlike many, I am able to read, speak, write and understand both ancient and modern Hebrew with a reasonable degree of proficiency, and am a close student of both her history and politics. Again, like a majority of American Jews, I am not a particular fan of P.M. Netanyahu, am totally against the BDS (Boycott, Divest and Sanction) Movement, and am a devoted Democrat. I find no disparity between loving and supporting the Jewish State and finding fault with - and speaking out against - various policies, principles and politicians whenever necessary. To my way of thinking, this does not make me - or those who are of similar mind - any less a Zionist than those whose litmus test is 100% fealty. Sorry guys: Democracy should not - and in fact does not - make any such demands.

Which gets us back to the question of whether or not Boss Tweet is “the best friend Israel ever had.” The answer has to be a resounding NO!! While there are dozens upon dozens (hundreds?) of idiotic, mean-spirited, mendacious anti-democratic things ‘45 has done to make his eventual historic ranking beneath that of Presidents Andrew Johnson, Zachary Taylor and Warren G. Harding, the one which should truly bother American Jews the most is his making Israel a wedge issue in American politics. To wit, the POTUS - with the knowing acquiescence of Bibi Netanyahu - have done the unthinkable: turned support for Israel - which for decades has been a bipartisan imperative - into a political wedge issue. Trump, with the active support of Stephen Miller and Jared Kushner, have done everything in their power to convince America that Democrats are anti-Israel anti-Semites while Republicans are the only people who “truly can be counted on” to support Israel. As the New York Times’ Tom Friedman noted just the other day, Few things are more dangerous to Israel’s long-term interests than its becoming a partisan matter in America, which is Israel’s vital political, military and economic backer in the world.

As I noted in an essay posted last February (Politics - Like Acting and Aging - Ain’t For Sissies) ‘45’s strategy for reelection would involve turning the as yet unnamed “Squad” into the face of the Democratic Party, thus hopefully shoring up his support among evangelical Christians (who form the largest pro-Zionist bloc in America) while convincing more and more Jews that if they love Israel, they must vote Republican.

(It should be noted that a majority of white evangelicals consider Israel to be the Jesus Landing Pad. Once all the Jews congregate in Jerusalem, Jesus can return with his flaming sword. Jews who refuse to accept him as their savior will die. In other words, Jews are nothing more than eschatological doormats for white evangelicals.)

The “Trumptanyahu” strategy vis-à-vis keeping two duly elected Muslim members of Congress from entering Israel (Reps. Omar and Tlaib) is the bottom of the barrel. Yes, both of these women (along with the other two members of “the Squad” - Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York and Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts) are supporters of the BDS movement and would never, ever get my vote. Nonetheless, it is up to the voters of their districts - not the Israeli P.M. and certainly not the POTUS - to cast judgment on them by driving a lethal spike into the heart of the democratic principles which have guided our countries for generations. Historically, no president has ever - and I mean EVER - forced a foreign leader to deny duly elected members of Congress from entering his/her country. By doing so, it shows that both Trump and Netanyahu are more interested in being reelected than in preserving democratic values. Bibi caved after reading a Trump tweet to the effect that permitting Omar and/or Tlaib entry would be a sign of “weakness.” It should be kept in mind that Netanyahu, like Trump is facing national elections, which he- again like Trump - must win in order to keep from going on trial for corruption. And, in order to win and retain his position as P.M., he must stay in the good graces of the most conservative, ultra-nationalist factions in Israel’s political universe . . . just as ‘45 must cater to his political base made up largely of ultra-conservative, pro-gun white evangelicals. The two - ‘45 and Bibi - are in their way, fraternal twins. Indeed, many a pundit has declared “Netanyahu is pretty much identical to Trump . . . but with a better vocabulary - in 2 different languages.”

‘45’s latest foray into foreign policy via tweet has drawn harsh criticism from both sides of the aisle. Even the vaunted, establishmentarian AIPAC (America Israel Public Affairs Committee) has broken with the president over the Tlaib/Omar fiasco. "We disagree with Reps. Omar and Tlaib’s support for the anti-Israel and anti-peace BDS movement, along with Rep. Tlaib’s calls for a one-state solution. We also believe every member of Congress should be able to visit and experience our democratic ally Israel firsthand," AIPAC tweeted this past Thursday. Both Florida Senator Marco Rubio and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) chastised P.M. Netanyahu (though not the president by name) for denying entry to two members of Congress. Said Senator Rubio, “I disagree 100% with Reps. Tlaib & Omar on #Israel & am the author of the #AntiBDS bill we passed in the Senate,” he tweeted. “But denying them entry into #Israel is a mistake. Being blocked is what they really hoped for all along in order to bolster their attacks against the Jewish state.” House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) called Israel’s decision to bar the two representatives “outrageous,” and revealed that in recent exhaustive talks with Ron Dermer, Israel’s Ambassador to the United States, that they would be permitted their visit. But then the POTUS became involved and all bets were off.

This of course puts Democrats in a politically dicey situation; condemning many of Omar’s and Tlaib’s comments (and rightfully so) while supporting their right to visit Israel and perhaps see how democracy works - even if not perfectly so - in the Middle East.

Trump and Netanyahu share many political commonalities . . . not the least of which is gleefully putting short-term gains (e.g. reelection) before long-term progress.

In any event, it is growing clearer every day that Donald Trump is NOT the “best friend Israel ever had.” And those who ignore all the other noxious aspects of his being, ultimately do so at the sake of weakening and perhaps losing the state they truly love. For with the exception of moving the American Embassy to Jerusalem and recognizing Israeli sovereignty over the Golan, he hasn’t done jack. What he has done is go against virtually every Jewish value handed down from Mt. Sinai, codified in rabbinic literature and passed on from generation to generation.

That is definitely not the mark of a haver - a “friend”.

So go ahead . . . attack me, call me an anti-Semite; tell me I don’t know what I’m talking about; insist that I am a deluded liberal stooge . . . but please try and do it in Hebrew if you can.

 445 days until the next presidential election.

 Copyright©2019 Kurt F. Stone

Is Bibi "Your Prime Minister?"

This past Saturday evening, on his way back from an event at the California-Mexico border, ‘45 made a brief stop in Las Vegas, where he spoke at the annual meeting of the Republican Jewish Coalition. Throughout the crowd one could see many men - and a few women as well - wearing red kippot (yarmulkes) emblazoned with “Trump” in white. This isn’t a dig; truth to tell, I’ve owned a L.A. Dodger kippa for more years than I can count. ‘45 began his nearly hour-long speech with a dig at Rep. Ilhan Omar, who came under fire earlier this year for comments appearing to accuse American Jews of dual loyalty to Israel, spurring the president to claim last month that Democrats “hate” Jews.” (Gee, I’m a Democrat, as are my mom and sister, my wife and kids, as well as our machatunim (Hebrew for “our children’s spouses’ parents”) and none - so far as I am aware - can be accused of hating Jews.)

In going after Rep. Omar, ‘45 mockingly “thanked her” by adding “Oh, I forgot. She doesn’t like Israel, I forgot, I’m sorry. No, she doesn’t like Israel, does she? Please, I apologize.” Predictably, this got a roar of laughter and a prolonged bit of clapping from the assembled crowd of adoring acolytes. He then seemed to confuse the Republican group with US Jews in general when he asked how they could have supported his predecessor Barack Obama. “How the hell did you support President Obama?” he asked the audience. “How did you do it?” he asked, to which several of the attendees yelled back “we didn’t.”

The president got the crowd going by reminding them that in keeping his campaign pledge to move the American Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem and developing such a strong relationship with Israeli P.M. Bibi Netanyahu, he had proven himself to be the “best friend Israel ever had in the White House.” He then went off the rails when he proclaimed “I stood with your prime minister at the White House to recognize Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights,” and then, speaking of the Democrats added “If implemented, the Democrats' radical agenda would destroy our economy, cripple our country, and very well could leave Israel out there all by yourselves. Can't do that." [Emphasis added]

Whether or not ‘45 was engaging in misstatement by referring to Bibi as “your prime minister,” he was unknowingly agreeing with both Rep. Omar and every Neo-Nazi in the Land of the Free - that American Jews are guilty of “dual loyalty.” It didn’t take long for Trump’s inanity to be called out on Twitter by the head of the American Jewish Committee, who Tweeted Mr. President, the Prime Minister of Israel is the leader of his [or her] country, not ours. Statements to the contrary, from staunch friends or harsh critics, feed bigotry'; by the head of the Anti-Defamation League :Mr. President, words matter. As with all elected officials, it's critical for you to avoid language that leads people to believe Jews aren’t loyal Americans.; and by Rep. Eliot Engel, the Jewish chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee: I somehow doubt the president would say 'Your Taoiseach' to a roomful of Irish-Americans." ) (n.b. Taoiseach - pronounced Tea-schock - is Irish for “Prime Minister”).

It just so happens that today, April 9, 2019, the Israelis go to the polls to elect another government. Because they have a parliamentary form of government, voters cast ballots not for candidates, but rather for parties. As such, it can take several weeks to figure out who won, who lost, and who will be the next P.M. Most of the intervening time is spent not in counting votes, but rather in the political chess moves required to put a coalition together. In other words, Israeli voters aren’t choosing between Bibi Netanyanu and former Israeli Chief of Staff Benny Gantz but rather between Likud (Netanyahu’s party, which itself is a coalition) and Kachol Lavan (“Blue and White”), Gantz’s party which includes both Labor, Meretz (“vigor”), which is both leftist and green and the centrist Yesh Atid (“There is a future”) parties.

So if, as ‘45 says, Benyamin Netanyahu is “our” prime minister, does that mean he would be the overwhelming choice of American Jews . . . if we were voting?

Highly, highly unlikely.

In an opinion piece published yesterday in Haaretz, writer Jonathan S. Tobin noted that “Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s critics are right to argue that the cheers he always gets at AIPAC conferences shouldn’t mislead us. If American Jews could vote in Israel’s election, most of them wouldn’t think of casting a ballot for the Likud or its allies.” Bibi has his fans on the American Jewish right as well as within the Orthodox community. But there is no question that among the overwhelming majority of those U.S. Jews who identify as liberals, as well as with those who are affiliated with the non-Orthodox denominations or consider themselves unaffiliated ("Jews of no religion"), the prime minister and the right wing and religious parties that back him have precious little support. For a large majority of American Jews, Netanyahu - like every Likudnik P.M. since Menachem Begin was elected in 1977 - has always been considered out of touch with the liberal sensibilities of the majority of Democrat-voting American Jews. The unabashed Jewish nationalism of Begin and his successors has never gone down well among Americans who conform to writer Cynthia Ozick’s quip that "universalism is the parochialism of the Jews."

Then too, Netanyahu’s openly antagonistic relationship with former President Barack Obama and his close friendship with Donald Trump puts him at odds with American Jews, who loyally supported the former and despise the latter - exactly the opposite of Israeli opinion about the two American leaders. This is perhaps best born out by how American Jews responded to ‘45 calling Netanyahu “your Prime Minister.” People who attended the Republican Jewish Coalition in Las Vegas applauded the statement with great gusto; a clear majority of the American Jewish public was deeply shocked and troubled at what sounded like the age-old canard about “dual loyalty.” When such a charge - made either tacitly or directly - comes out of the mouth of a person like Rep. Omar, it is the height of Antisemitism; when coming from the mouth of the President of the United States, it is a laudable truism.

I just don’t get it.

Benjamin Netanyahu is not my Prime Minister. My country has no P.M. It is Israel, which I love, admire and support (והוא יכול להתמודד עם מימין לשמאל או משמאל לימין) despite whatever disagreements I may have with its current administration - that is the country with a Prime Minister.

Shame on you Mr. President. Whether knowingly or not, you have sent out a message which is both dangerous and impolitic . . . and all for the sake of your political future.

575 days until the next election.

Copyright©2019 Kurt F. Stone

How Do You Say "Witch Hunt" in Hebrew?

Without question, there has been a budding “bromance” between between Israeli P.M. Bibi Netanyahu and President Donald Trump for quite some time. Netanyahu greatly admires the current American president, and sees him as a bipolar improvement on his predecessor, Barack Obama. We all remember Netanyahu’s unique, distinctly partisan political address to Congress, in which he warned against the Iranian anti-nuke deal, as well as his hyper partisan support of Trump over Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential election. We all are aware of his praise for the American president’s executive decision to move our Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem - which convinced many American Jews to label ‘45 “the greatest friend Israel ever had in the White House.” But this was just the beginning. With every passing week, Bibi Netanyahu has become more and more a Trump clone, and less and less a political scion of Ben Gurion, Meir, Peres or Rabin. Unlike Trump, Netanyahu is a totally political animal; unlike his American counterpart, he has spent virtually his entire adult life engaged in this singularly ego-laden pursuit - sometimes masterfully, other times maladroitly. Where ‘45 has shown himself to have a particular fondness for “autocrats” (a cleaned-and-pressed synonym for “dictator”), Netanyahu has a fancy for living a life of luxury. For much of his business and now political career, ‘45 has been hounded by the legal system; now suing or declaring bankruptcy, now being sued or staring down the barrel of indictment. Likewise Netanyahu who, throughout much of his political career, has been dogged with scandals involving such emoluments as pink champagne, Cuban cigars, jewelry and even tickets to a Mariah Carey concert — in exchange for political favors to billionaires. The latest charges against the Israeli P.M., his wife Sarah and son Yair - which will likely end with multiple indictments - concerns their receiving gifts worth more than $280,000 in return for promoting policies that benefited powerful allies. To Trump, $280,000 is mere chump change (or at least is until Congress gets a handle on his real net worth); to Bibi, it’s a vast fortune. Like the POTUS - whose position pays $400,000 a year plus a rather large residence - the Israeli P.M. - whose job pays $168,210 per annum, plus a residence and expenses - has been spending an increasing amount of time dealing with both the legal and political ramifications of all the scandals hovering over their heads.  Both have charged ad nauseum that they are piteous victims of a “witch hunt” (that’s ציד מכשפות - pronounced tzayed m’kashefote in Hebrew). Unlike the vast American public, which to a large extent is politically illiterate, sadly gullible and sees things in black and white, the Israeli public is deeply political and loves nothing more than engaging in full-throated debate. Nonetheless, despite this generalized differences, both ‘45 and Bibi abide by pretty much the same political/campaign strategy: keeping their base happy while denigrating and designating the opposition as members of a vast, unpatriotic conspiracy. For Trump, this involves equal measures of fear and flattery, of outrageous boasts and outlandish lies, and slogans to beat the band. Unlike Trump, who operates in a two-party (though somewhat fragmented) political system in which Democrats control the House, and Republicans both the Senate and White House, Bibi is faced with a semi-parliamentary, multi-party system in which even the tiniest faction has a shot at becoming part of a coalition government. As a result of the incredible אַנְדְרָלָמוּסִיָה (ahndra-lamoosia - “utter chaos”) which is threatening to destroy Netanyahu’s governing coalition, he has been making concessions with - and promises to - some pretty unsavory elements in the world of Israeli  politics .Facing national elections next month (April 9), Netanyahu has given his הַסכָּמָה (hahs-kahma  - approval) for a far-right party, עוצמה יהודית (Otzma Yehudit - “Jewish Power”) to be part of a mainstream list.  This is an obvious political sop to the most nativist element in Israeli Society . . . pretty much like ‘45 dog whistling and offering political cover to white nationalists, neo-Nazis and racists, as he did after Charlottesville.

The leaders of Otzma Yehudit are self-identified disciples of U.S.-born Rabbi Meir Kahane, who preached a radical form of Jewish nationalism that promoted unabashed and virulent anti-Arab racism, violence and political extremism. While he was alive, ADL and the vast majority of American Jewish organizations and leaders roundly condemned Kahane and the organizations he founded including the Jewish Defense League (JDL) and Kach, seeing his extremism and hate as anathema to Judaism and democratic values. 

Gen. Benny Ganz

It was the same in Israel. For example, upon Kahane’s election to the Knesset, Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir and his Likud party rejected Kahane’s bigotry and made it a point to leave the parliament hall when Kahane rose to speak. Ultimately, Kahane’s racist activities led to the banning of his Kach Party from the Knesset and it was made illegal under Israeli law, which remains in effect to this day.  Already, a member of the current Knesset, the Meretz Party and Labor MK Stav Shaffir (one of my favorite Israeli politicians) petitioned the Central Elections Committee to disqualify Otzma Yehudit from running in the upcoming election. Then too, as an additional move on Israel’s  political chessboard, Benny Ganz, the 20th Chief of Staff of the IDF (Israeli Defense Forces) announced the formation of a new centrist political party - “Blue and White” - after the colors of the Israel flag.  In his first press conference, Ganz thanked Netanyahu for his “10 years of service” stating “No Israeli leader is king . . . . We will continue from here.”  Army Chief of Staff is the probably one of the most important, if not the most important, public positions.  According to a leading Israeli think-tank, 78% of the public trust the IDF, while only 30% trust the government to the same extent. Although many of his policies remain a mystery, Ganz is already polling a couple of points ahead of Netanyahu. 

At the moment, no one knows for certain what the forthcoming indictments of the Netanyahus will mean for the upcoming Israeli elections — in much the same way that no one truly knows what the Mueller report will mean to America’s 2020  presidential election.  If the political parallels between Netanyahu and Trump carry any meaning, both men should watch their backs . . . for, to misquote Donne: No man is an island/entire of himself . . . send not to know for whom the bell tolls/it tolls for thee.

611 days until the next election.

Copyright©2019 Kurt F. Stone

The House at 18 Rehov Agron

                            18 Rehov Agron, Jerusalem

Despite the fact that more than 70% of American Jews voted for Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential election, Donald Trump continues receiving the strong support of about a quarter of that community.  And for two reasons: 1) he is perceived as being "the best friend Israel ever had in the White House," and 2) he is neither Barack Obama nor HIllary Clinton, whom a strong majority of those polled continue believing are profoundly anti-Israel. Indeed, so absolutely central is Israel to the politics of Trump's Jewish supporters that they are more than willing to overlook '45's questionable ethics, personal boorishness and relationship with the truth in exchange for what they perceive as his unfaltering support for the Jewish State.  Throughout the 2016 presidential primary and general election, the one-time television star promised that if elected, his very first day in office would see him officially move America's embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.  It should be noted that just about every Republican who ran in the 2016 primary made the exact same promise.  And although '45 did not announce the move on his very first day in office, he did eventually make it official - on December 6, 2017.  

Even before the December announcement, '45 had drawn praise from Israeli P.M. Benyamin Netanyahu for delivering what he termed "the most bold and courageous  and forthright speech" delivered by an American President at the United Nations. In that September speech, '45 roundly and loudly called the Iranian nuclear deal the worst, most disgraceful pact ever signed by an American president.  Coupled with his officially recognizing Jerusalem as Israel's capital, '45's stock with his Jewish supporters became even stronger.  It should be noted that 23 years ago - during Bill Clinton's first term in office - Congress passed the "Jerusalem Embassy Act," (Public Law 104-45) which officially recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, and called for the relocation of the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.  Every six months from November 1995 (when the law was enacted) until December 2017 (when '45 made his announcement) presidents Clinton, G.W. Bush and Obama signed waivers putting off the relocation, fearing that it would be an impediment to Middle East peace talks.  

The United States has had a diplomatic presence in Israel - and before that, Palestine - since 1844. From 1857 to the late 19th century, the American diplomatic "mission" was located in a building just inside the Jaffa Gate in the Old City.  In 1912, the mission relocated to its present location on 18 Rehov Agron, a substantial home built by a German Lutheran missionary in 1866. The mission was officially designated a consulate in 1928. The United States, along with 85 other countries currently, have their embassies in Tel Aviv.  (Before 1980, a number of countries, including the Netherlands and Costa Rica, maintained embassies in Jerusalem; for the past 37 years, that number has been zero.) In 1989, Israel began leasing to the US a plot of land in Jerusalem for a new embassy. The 99-year lease cost $1 per year. To this day, the plot has not been developed, and remains an empty field.  If, when and for how much the new embassy will be built is still a matter of gross speculation - despite the December 6 announcement. (The other day, speaking with P.M. Netanyahu, '45 boasted that the cost of a new facility would be $250,000.  Actually, he was citing a ballpark figure for renovating and adding to an existing facility at 14 David Flusser to use as a temporary embassy.  Cost of a newly-constructed embassy has been estimated at anywhere between $500 million and $1 billion.)

What is definitely not a matter of speculation is the monkey wrench the president's announcement has thrown into the future of any and all future peace talks.  As a result of taking this preemptive, unilateral step, the United States has lost its diplomatic edge.  It will be increasingly difficult - if not impossible - for America to bring opposing factions to the table for serious discussions.  To the rest of the world, America has already cast a major point of contention - the status of Jerusalem - in case-hardened concrete, so why even negotiate? '45 once described the prospect of a peace pact between Israelis and Palestinians as the “ultimate deal,” a foundational diplomatic breakthrough that could burnish his presidency and help restore America’s standing in the world. With the December announcement, the United States has become diplomatically isolated and toothless, the president something approaching a sideshow oddity.

While from a point of pure idealism it is both proper and fitting that the United States should be the first country to recognize Jerusalem as Israel's capital; one democracy standing in support of another. From a point of realpolitik it creates an international path underlain with political IEDs.  America's decades-long role as the undisputed, evenhanded, leader in Middle East mediation efforts has been dangerously and significantly undercut. Already, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas has turned to other world leaders, including Russian President Vladimir Putin and Jordan's King Abdullah, to help pressure Trump to change his mind. The chances of their having any influence over the American president are slim to none. The fact that the President's unilateral action has made Israel into even more of a pariah nation will likely have little if any effect on Donald Trump; so long as he is lionized by the likes of Netanyahu, Sheldon Adelson, as well as his hardcore Jewish and evangelical Christian supporters  that should be sufficient.

One of the most maddening aspects of all this is the ever-widening gap being created within the American Jewish community itself.  For in the opinion of many of the most vocal, even the slightest disagreement over how Israel carries out its political mission is tantamount to an excommunicable  offense (חֵרֶם - cherem).   In a time in which antisemitism is growing at an alarming pace, it is indeed disgusting that some of it should be coming from the Jewish community itself.  Just because an individual does not agree with, say, the Israeli government increasing the number of settlements, does not make them a self-hating Jew or worse, a traitor.  But that is what many of us are being accused of with regards to the latest disagreement over moving the American embassy to Jerusalem.

If there will ever be a workable solution to the crisis between Israel and the Palestinians, it will take a strong, steady hand at the helm.  Ever since the December 6, 2017 announcement, just whose hand that will be has become anyone's guess. 

Please Mr. President: you've made a steady habit of changing your position on a whole host of issues.  Why not keep up your record?

415 days down, 1,142 days to go.

Copyright©2018 Kurt F. Stone