Ittrigrallitilill111110WWW410**04- EDITORIAL The Hands Of Esau Israel is to be excused for not embracing Yassir Arafat and his declaration of Palestinian statehood, even though the PLO leader appears to have recognized Israel, at least implicitly, for the first time. For Israel has a collective memory that goes beyond this week's statement. And there is pain when she recalls the scores of PLO- inflicted terrorist incidents against Israeli men, women and children over the last two decades, Arafat's avowals as recently as last month never to tolerate a Zionist racist state, and the PLO charter's rejec- tion of Israel and the very history that led to the founding of the Jewish state. After all, the PLO charter says: "Claims of historical or religious ties of Jews with Palestine are incompatible with the facts of history and the true conception of what constitutes statehood." The Palestine National Council, the PLO and Arafat seem to be looking past Israel towards the United States for a positive response, after affirming UN Resolution 242 and proclaiming a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza. But what Israel seeks — and has sought ever since she became a state — is a negotiating partner. And the PLO's unilateral move, an effort to avoid dealing directly with Israel, will not suffice. To date, the Palestinian declaration has not even mentioned that dirty little word, "Israel." Still, while there is no reason for Israel to embrace Arafat now, she must not shut the door on the possibility of peace negotiations. It is too easy to simply dismiss any PLO move as insincere and a political tactic to undermine the Israeli position. That may very well be the case, but Jerusalem should respond by preparing to deal with the challenge of peace and encouraging a climate of diplomacy, even while pointing out the fact that the Arafat initiative has gone only half way. Israel should call on the PLO to take the plunge: accept UN Resolution 242 in unequivocal terms; make an explicit statement recognizing Israel's right to exist; and clearly renounce terrorism. Finally, this very week's Torah portion raises forth a powerful echo from the past'and offers a lesson regarding the value of action over words. We hear the words of our forefather Isaac as his younger son Jacob approaches him for the blessing of the first-born. Jacob had dressed in the furry clothes of his brother Esau, and when Isaac, now blind, reaches out to touch him, he says in confusion, "The voice is the voice of Jacob but the hands are those of Esau." It is up to Israel to decide whether Yassir Arafat is still the bloody hunter Esau or is sincere in his voice of the peacemaker Jacob. Preserving Unity Politics appears to be winning out over common sense in Israel these days as Prime Minister Shamir, under pressure from the religious parties, promises to seek an amendment in the next Knesset that would change the definition of who is a Jew in the Law of Return. What he either fails — or refuses — to realize is that such a change may also affect the unity of the Jewish people and the strong sup- port that Israel has always received from Diaspora Jewry, particular- ly from the U.S. The issue is complex and confusing, and touches more on sym- bolic issues than legal ones. All in all, it is the wrong issue at the wrong time, but let us first understand what it is all about. The Law of Return automatically confers Israeli citizenship on any Jew who seeks to emigrate to Israel. A Jew is defined as one born of a Jewish mother or one who has converted to Judaism. The proposed amendment would add the phrase, "according to Halacha" 6 FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 18, 1988 (traditional Jewish law) in referring to conversions, thus excluding those converted by Reform and Conservative rabbis or the children of women converted by such rabbis. On a practical level, the amendment would affect less than a dozen people a year (since it would only apply to Reform or Conser- vative converts making aliyah). But on a symbolic level, the leaders of the Reform and Conservative movements, who make up 9 0 per- cent of the American Jewish population, vigorously oppose the amendment because they say it reduces their standing and ques- tions their legitimacy. While some Orthodox groups, particularly Lubavitch, approve of the amendment, arguing that Halacha has always been the foun- dation of Judaism, the Rabbinical Council of America and other Orthodox groups have opposed the amendment on the grounds that this is a religious rather than a political issue and should not be determined by the Knesset. Indeed, when the amendment was nar- rowly defeated last year, the swing votes were those of seven Arab Knesset members. So in effect the very definition of who is a Jew was determined by seven Arabs. Is this any way to settle a basic religious issue that speaks to the foundations of Judaism? We urged at that time, and now urge again, that this matter be taken out of the political arena and be determined by religious authorities. As for the religious parties in Israel now seeking greater in- fluence in the government, we suggest that they, and the people of Israel, would be far better served by inclusive rather than exclusive religious efforts. For instance, instead of merely seeking ways to fur- ther distance religious and secular Jews — by legislating strict Sab- bath'observance or ensuring army deferments for rabbinical students -= the religious parties should seek to offer more instruction of Jewish laws and traditions in the schools and particularly in the army. Imposing religious standards on those who do not want them only creates hostility and widens the divide. Voluntary programs that highlight the beauty and rationale of Jewish customs and beliefs can narrow that dangerous division and bring Jews closer together. The legal aspects of who is a Jew should be decided in a religious context; the moral and ethical issues of what it means to be a Jew, how and why Jewish values have meaning in Israeli society, cannot be legislated. Amending the Law of Return can only divide the Jewish people. But the religious parties can serve a vital purpose in the new government by emphasizing the kind of tolerance and education that can help make us Am Echad, One People. .