Unfortunately, an American Jewish organization, the OU, with close ties with the Obama administration
Even when apparently asked point-blank by dismayed former supporters to clarify that it does not support Palestinian state, OU continued to waffle:
Kindly consider contacting the OU to protest this. Example letter (if you don't enjoy writing your own):
Dear OU Management,
It is unthinkable to me that an Orthodox Jewish organization should support a Palestinian state. This notion means an additional hostile, anti-Semitic Arab-Moslem state immediately overlooking Jerusalem, Tel-Aviv and Israel's sole international airport. It also exposes the Jewish people as a population willing to give away forever, crucial assets to which they are far more entitled than the Palestinians are. This is an extremely damaging image to have, considering the many powerful enemies who constantly aspire to test the Jewish people's resolve. Sincerely, (name)
OU addresses are as follows; if you wish, bcc us at:
rabbiweil@ou.org; execthw@ou.org; burg@ou.org; shlomoschwartz@ou.org; frankeld@ou.org; besslerl@ou.org; davido@ou.org; davidovics@ou.org; steiners@ou.org; rabbidave@ou.org; ipadc@ou.org; aberman@ouisrael.org; posners@ou.org; rakalinsky@ou.org
Please feel free to pass this letter on to other friends of Israel and particularly Orthodox American Jews. If you receive a response from the OU managers, kindly forward to us4israel@gmail.com.Thanks for helping Israel.
US4Israel
1. Write us at us4israel@gmail.com about any aspect of supporting Israel's rights and overcoming anti-Semitism toward Israel and Israelis
by Hillel Fendel November 25, 2010
For instance, the National Council of Young Israel (NCYI) has urged American political leaders to reconsider its "two-state solution" policy. The NCYI also initiated a grass roots effort aimed at “enlightening” U.S. leaders regarding the dangers of pushing for an independent Palestinian state alongside Israel.
In late 2007, when the future of the Jerusalem appeared to be on the table at the Annapolis talks, a broad coalition of Orthodox organizations wrote a letter to 2,000 American rabbis, stating: "This is not the time to discuss the dangers of a terrorist Palestinian State as a neighbor to Israel. Today, we must raise our voices at the thought of losing our united capital of Jerusalem…” The coalition included the National Council of Young Israel, the Orthodox Union, the Rabbinical Council of America, Emunah Women of America, AFSI, Hineni, AJOP (Outreach), NCSY, Poalei Agudath Israel of America, ZOA, and more.
Just this month, the Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) criticized plans reportedly being pushed by the Obama Administration to turn Judea and Samaria into a Palestinian state, with parts of eastern Jerusalem and the Jordan Valley to be “leased” by Israel from said state. The organization asserted that such a state “in which there is incitement to hatred and murder against Jews in PA-controlled media, mosques, schools and youth camps; terrorist groups not outlawed; terrorists not arrested; a Palestinian society that supports terror against Israel and doesn’t accept Israel as a Jewish state – would likely become another anti-Israel terrorist state.”
The ZOA also called upon the Obama Administration to publicly declare that it will veto any attempt by the Palestinian Authority and its allies to have the UN Security Council pass a resolution to unilaterally establish a Palestinian state.
Similarly, the OU (Orthodox Union), at its last international convention, adopted a resolution that stated, "The Orthodox Union feels an historic obligation to preserve for the Jewish people the right to live and travel freely and safely in the land of our heritage, including the territories of Yehuda and Shomron [Judea and Samaria]... Thus, while we strive for security and peace, we are skeptical of any policy that relinquishes part of Eretz Yisrael without obtaining both."
A Crack?
This week, however, a slight crack in this strong Orthodox policy alliance against a Palestinian state was opened, even if not very noticeably. It occurred in an op-ed written by Nathan Diament, the Public Policy Director of the OU, for the New York Daily News, entitled, “Jerusalem Must Remain Undivided.”
While making a solidly compelling case for keeping Jerusalem wholly under Israeli sovereignty, Diament allowed that the OU actually supports the two-state solution. “While we support a two-state solution that guarantees Israel's security and Jewish character,” he wrote, “the choices required to bring us to that point must be grounded in reality.” Contacted by Israel National News, Diament responded that the OU “hasn't changed its position,” that a “passing phrase in my op-ed is not a reversal or change in that position,” and that it was just “an unfortunate articulation.” He did not offer to retract it, however.
Opposition to Palestinian State
Opponents of the two-state solution have cited many concerns regarding the formation of yet another Arab state specifically in the heart of the Land of Israel, including:
- the cession of Jewish land to a foreign sovereignty, including religious, historic, political and security ramifications;
- the fate of the 320,000 Jews who live in Judea and Samaria - whether they reside in “settlement blocs” that the PA has never agreed will remain Israeli, or in the dozens of other towns that much of the world feels “certain” will come under PA rule;
- security dangers on many planes;
- the gradual militarization of the state, even if it starts out demilitarized;
- fear that Judea and Samaria will be taken over by Hizbullah-Hamas-Iranian elements, as has occurred or is occurring in other areas relinquished by Israel;
- the future of the holy sites;
- the ramifications of yet another Israeli diplomatic collapse;
- and more.
The following op ed was written by Nathan J. Diament, OU Director of Public Policy for the NY Daily News:
Jerusalem, the historic capital of Israel, should not be an impediment to Mideast peace. But thanks to the current intransigence of Palestinian leaders, that is precisely what it has become.
When Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced a 10-month moratorium on settlement construction in November 2009 to coax Palestinian leaders back to the negotiating table, Israel stated clearly that construction in Jerusalem would continue. Despite this important caveat, Special Envoy George Mitchell lauded the move as "substantial" and Secretary of State Clinton called it "unprecedented."
Even now, as the Obama administration described the recently announced building projects in the Har Homa and Ramot neighborhoods as "counterproductive" through Clinton, it acknowledges that more construction in Jerusalem is inevitable. It has done so by exempting Jerusalem from a proposed 90-day extension of Israel's prior settlement freeze.
Yet the Palestinians demand a total freeze in Jerusalem as a precondition for talks. This is a new demand. Construction in Jerusalem has never been an impediment to peace or peace negotiations. Historic agreements were reached with both Egypt and Jordan despite ongoing construction in the city. While cement trucks rolled through Jerusalem, indirect talks were held with Syria in 2008. More than 15 years of construction in Jerusalem went on while Israel held meaningful peace talks with the Palestinian Authority.
The simple reason is that previous Arab negotiators understood reality. Jerusalem is not a settlement and will forever remain the undivided capital of Israel - every prime minister dating back to 1967, including Golda Meir, Yitzhak Rabin and Ehud Barak, has held to this policy. This also happens to be the policy and goal of the United States, as described by multiple measures and resolutions passed by Congress.
Jerusalem enjoys this status for historic and religious reasons, but also because dividing a city never works. No city in all of recorded history has been cleaved into two halves without damaging the whole. This is the assessment of experts in the fields of public planning and urban design. Their scholarship indicates that a divided city faces daunting challenges from a social, civic and economic perspective.
Without fail, divided cities suffer either intense economic stagnation or general atrophy. It is frankly unimaginable that this prime minister, or any responsible prime minister for that matter, would allow the city to falter in such a way on his watch.
And a divided capital would not only be worse for Jews, it would be worse for the Palestinians. Today, the Palestinians living within Jerusalem's municipal area enjoy the benefits of free movement and access to Israeli work and services. Such rights would likely disappear under Palestinian rule. Indeed, in a July 2010 poll by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research, only 52% of Palestinians living in Jerusalem support Palestinian sovereignty over eastern portions of the city.
While we support a two-state solution that guarantees Israel's security and Jewish character, the choices required to bring us to that point must be grounded in reality. To keep Jerusalem growing socially and economically in the 21st century and beyond, the city must be unified under a single flag that recognizes and guarantees the rights of all its citizens.
It is time for the U.S. government to make that point clear - rather than continuing to equate building in Jerusalem with building elsewhere in disputed land.
For the Palestinians, relenting on Jerusalem will be a painful compromise, but no more painful than the litany of compromises the Israelis are already willing to make. At some point during any successful peace negotiations, the Palestinian leadership will have to choose between an opportunity to build a Palestinian state, or pursuing a weak and unrealistic claim to Israel's capital.
Along the way, the op ed states:
"While we support a two-state solution that guarantees Israel's security and Jewish character, the choices required to bring us to that point must be grounded in reality."
The following is the text of the governing policy Resolution of the Orthodox Union that elaborates on what I tried to encapsulate (in the limited space of an op ed) in the phrase "...that guarantees Israel's security and Jewish character":
"The Orthodox Union feels an historic obligation to preserve for the Jewish people the right to live and travel freely and safely in the land of our heritage, including the territories of Yehuda and Shomron. We believe that there is no part of Eretz Yisrael from which Jews should be prevented from living by any other human being absent the most compelling of circumstances.
We are sensitive to prevailing geopolitical realities and the potential that compromise and accommodation could one day bring true security and real peace. Yet, since the Oslo process began, security has not followed from territorial concessions or reliance upon foreign forces to preserve it. Thus, while we strive for security and peace, we are skeptical of any policy that relinquishes part of Eretz Yisrael without obtaining both."
Posted by Nathan J. Diament
President Obama has named leaders of the Orthodox Union and the National Council of Jewish Women to his Advisory Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships.
Nathan Diament, public policy director of the O.U., and Nancy Ratzan, president of NCJW, both were appointed to one-year terms on Monday, joining Religous Action Center of Reform Judaism directeor Rabbi David Saperstein who was appointed to the panel in February.
The 25-member advisory council is designed to identify best practices, suggest improvements and make recommendations on the delivery of social services. The council was established earlier this year as part of Obama's revamping of President George W. Bush's faith-based initiative. The full White House release, with the entire list of members of the council, after the jump:
President Barack Obama today announced additional members of the President’s Advisory Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships. The Advisory Council is part of the White House Office of Faith Based and Neighborhood Partnerships and is composed of religious and secular leaders and scholars from different backgrounds.
Each member of the Council is appointed to a one-year term. The members of the Council are: .....
Posts
