The Jewish Chronicle is to be congratulated for its coverage last week of a significant article by one of the most impressive leaders of British Jewry, Mick Davis. The article was entitled, “Open debate is our best way of defending Israel in the Diaspora.” Less than a month ago, even before the Gaza flotilla incident, I said that now is the time to adopt a policy of constructive and critical engagement with Israel.
I also observed that the British Jewry has yet to cross the Rubicon, and be more open and honest about its concerns, while not feeling it is letting down its own side. Of course we cannot help but take sides: but “taking slides” is plural- there is more than one side to any argument. Yes, we need to support Israel, but we will be more effective if we relate at a human level to what is going on, and not lose ourselves in abstractions. That is why I have nothing but praise for Israel’s ambassador to the UK, Ron Prosor, in his interview with the Today Programme, when he took the trouble to strike – and keep- the right tone and acknowledge the sadness of the loss of life. His counterpart in Dublin did just the same when he held an impromptu news conference at the time. These were heartfelt positions – not bullet-points in a statements handed down from the Prime Minister’s Office. There is a time for robust defiance in press releases, and forensic factual defence of a position – but there is also a time – which is most of the time- to acknowledge our shared values. Respect for humanity is the core one. Without it, we cannot access God, let alone anybody –or anything- else. Israel only harms itself in the battle for hearts and minds by just accentuating its machine-like ruthlessness instead of emphasising its common humanity.
Mick Davis leads both UJIA and the Jewish Leadership Council, of which I am a member. The JC also carried two other reports- one on a visit to London of Ido Ahorani, an ideas-led man of action who is rethinking the development of Israel’s brand, and another on a speech by the President of the New Israel Fund, Professor Naomi Chazan. Naomi spoke of World Jewry undergoing a “progressive surge”. “I see it very strongly in the US and I feel it in Europe, “ she notes.
One of our senior vice-presidents drew my attention to Christopher Caldwell's article in the Financial Times, which, briefly summed up, argues that Israel had no choice.
It is a different point of view, and one of the more thoughtful pieces I have read. It can form part of the jigsaw that we are trying to piece together on how we as a movement can give expression to our concerns, be progressive and influence positively the debate within Jewry and with the wider public. This is an opportunity for Liberal Judaism to go beyond a sterile historic debate in its ranks about whether we are mainstream, maverick or marginal. The fact is we exist, we’re not going away, and we want to live up to universal values.
I particularly appreciated the line "If there is one attitude that some of Israel's sincerest friends share with the extremists... it is that perfection and omniscience are both to be expected from the Jewish state." If we are to move forward, we need to get beyond black-and-white assumptions about the other.
The core of the article makes a useful point that one needs to distinguish between the principle of the blockade and its enforcement. It is not surprising that sovereignty will be enforced. This is separate from questioning the merits of the blockade.
Its conclusion resonated with me, "That Israel has lost the battle for public opinion is unfortunate. More troubling is that the battle was lost before the facts of the case had even emerged".
I am engaging with the Israeli embassy to ensure that Israel taps the breadth and depth of perspectives available. When under siege, it is not surprising that a siege mentality can develop, but it makes good strategic and tactical sense not to perpetuate isolation but build constructive engagement.
Danny Rich, our Chief Executive, and I are very keen that we should create the opportunity over the next year both to highlight our ongoing commitment to Israel and to explore as a movement the more difficult issues. As a member of the Jewish Leadership Council, I want to support British Jewry to take a more strategic position. Mick Davis and its full-time supremo Jeremy Newmark understand this better than most.
A more strategic approach would in my view enable us to focus on the positive, be honest about our concerns yet engage constructively with Israel and the Diaspora.
Israel's strength and potential as a vibrant democracy and economy risk being overlooked if we unduly focus on the unresolved conflict. There is no escaping the politics, but there is a bigger picture. Israel as a brand should equal creativity and energy, not conflict.
What we need to do is ensure that this generation of leaders connects with Jews and non-Jews and does not become one that failed to take a lead when times were the most difficult and turbulent. So silence and British reserve are not the solution.
I am very concerned that we risk losing the interest and therefore the commitment of the "floating" supporter, and before we know it, Israel ends up sleepwalking into an even worse position that could have been avoided had we built bridges earlier. We have to act with both the head and the heart, and though these days it seems less fashionable to say so, with the soul. In his collection of essays and lectures, "On the Idea of Zion", Martin Buber spoke of the spiritual and political dimensions of Zion and the key relationship between God, humanity and land. It is time that we reconnected at so many more levels than the eye can see.
Posts
