Opinion

OTHER VIEWS

Negotiate Jerusalem

New York/JTA

M

y first visit to Israel was in 1969,
only two years after the Six-Day
War; soon after my arrival, I was
walking through narrow Jerusalem streets
on my way to the Western Wall.
This was without question an emotional
and spiritual encounter with history. Before
our trip back to Rishon LeZion, my host
family took me to Abu Shukri's restaurant,
where I enjoyed what still may be the best
humus in Jerusalem. It was not hard to
see, even as a 17 year old, that there were
more than just Jews inhabiting this holy
city. Three more wars and two intifadas
[Palestinian uprisings] have not
altered the fact that Jerusalem is
the spiritual and political center
for both Jews and Palestinians.
With renewed peace nego-
tiations and a joint Israeli,
Palestinian and American com-
mitment to address the "core
issues" of the conflict, an alli-
ance of mostly Orthodox Jewish
groups and secular right-wing
Zionists staked out their posi-
tion, stating they "oppose any
negotiations which involve
possible concessions of Jewish
sovereignty or control over Jerusalem."
Prime Minister Ehud Olmert responded
by saying that "the Israeli government has
the sovereign right to negotiate on behalf
of Israel," rejecting a role for diaspora Jewry
in the policymaking process.
With this very public conflict between
an Israeli prime minister and selected
American Jews taking place before
actual final status negotiations regarding
Jerusalem have even begun, what is really
going on here?

Debate Is Healthy
In the interest of full disclosure, since
Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir
declared in the early 1970s that "there are
no Palestinians;' I have publicly voiced
opinions on Israeli policies and believe it
is healthy for diaspora Jews to debate such
issues. Engaging other American Jews in
this way creates a higher level of identi-
fication with Israel. As American citizens
we can influence our elected officials
regarding support for Israel.
Despite what others might conjecture,
there is no monolithic "Israel lobby" and
Jewish activists don't always agree on the
best way for the U.S. government to inter-
act with Israel.
For example, in Annapolis, Md., on the

A20

January 10 • 2008

3N

day of the peace conference there were two
rallies — one of an alliance of progressive
Jews supporting the Bush-Rice initiative
and a Jewish-Evangelical Christian gather-
ing opposing any peace negotiations.
American Jews can show direct financial
and moral support for those in Israel with
whom we agree on coexistence, social jus-
tice, religious pluralism and other issues.
We also have every right to share ideas and
analysis with Israeli leaders.
At the end of the day, however, American
Jews must recognize that it is Israelis, not
diaspora Jews, who bear the direct con-
sequences of the actions that Israel takes;
and that is why diaspora Jews should be
circumspect about how they express their
protests against the government
in Jerusalem.
I find it illogical that this new
"Jerusalem lobby" is singling
out Jerusalem as the one issue
on which they must be con-
sulted. When we say in the daily
service, "May Your Presence
dwell there as You promised,
praised are You, Lord who builds
Jerusalem;' is there any indica-
tion of divine demarcation of
borders? In fact, the Israeli gov-
ernment already has signaled by
placing certain Arab neighbor-
hoods on the Palestinian side of the secu-

Jerusalem's Sovereignty

New York/JTA

T

he justification for the modern
State of Israel is Jewish history
both glorious and grim, and
there has long been a compact between
the Jews in Israel and the diaspora.
Israeli Jews were on the front lines and
diaspora Jewry was a vital source of eco-
nomic and political strength. The Jews of
Israel bore the lion's share of the pain, but
also reaped the bulk of the benefits. There
have been rifts — many times in Israel's
history where Jews of one stripe or anoth-
er took issue with a government's policies.
And at times, vulnerable diaspora com-
munities became front-line
victims of terror or violence
from Israel's enemies.
But our bond withstood
all because Israel's lead-
ers ensured it remained a
Jewish state. And perhaps
nothing embodied this
commitment more than
the dedication to preserv-
ing Israeli sovereignty over
Jerusalem, the 3,000-year-
old capital of the Jewish
people reunified in 1967
In recent months, howev-
er, there have been rumblings from Israeli

At Issue

Debate has heated up in recent weeks over
whether Israel should consider a deal to share
or divide Jerusalem with the Palestinians and
what the role of diaspora Jewry should be in
the decision-making process.

rity barrier that they will likely cede those
areas to a future Palestinian state.
The less than one square kilometer (0.4
square mile) that comprises the Old City,
including the major holy sites, ultimately
will be governed under a formula that
provides complete religious and security
protection for all.
As Ephraim Sneh, a senior Labor
Knesset member and a former deputy
defense minister and head of the civil

Deal on page A21

government ministers about negotiations
with the Palestinians on the potential
re-division of Jerusalem. On the eve of
the Annapolis conference, in response to
objections from U.S. Jewish groups about
this alarming trend, Israeli Prime Minister
Ehud Olmert bluntly declared: "The gov-
ernment of Israel has a sovereign right to
negotiate anything on behalf of Israel."
In that, he wasn't wrong; but his for-
mulation missed a corollary truth that no
Israeli government has the unilateral or
unfettered right to negotiate anything on

behalf of the Jews when it comes to the
eternal Jewish verities or heritage, such as
our capital. As such, Olmert's statements
were not merely disappointing to Jewish
sensibilities, they also were dangerous to
Jewish interests.

Jewish Fortitude
As Israeli prime minister of the moment,
Olmert can try to negotiate anything
he wants with Palestinians — includ-
ing whether Jerusalem is a redivided
war zone, and even whether Israel itself
remains a Jewish state or is transformed
into a "democratic state of all its citizens."
He just has no right to expect or demand
that Jews acquiesce.
Nor do Jews in America — the
country whose influence is most
strongly felt in Israel and which
also holds the largest and most
powerful diaspora community
— require Olmert's permission to
exercise our political clout in accor-
dance with our best moral, religious
and political assessments.
Jerusalem unites Jews across reli-
gious and ideological lines as well
as across geographical ones. This
is not a struggle of diaspora Jewry
vs. Israeli Jewry; it is a struggle that
unites Jewry.
Jerusalem's mayor is opposed to divid-
ing the city and is working with American
Jews. A majority of the Knesset opposes
negotiating Jerusalem, and they also are
working with American Jews. Dozens of
Israeli organizations are working with
American Jews.
Contrary to those who characterize this
as a "right-wing religious" or an "anti-
peace" bloc, the groups in the United
States and in Israel range all along the reli-
gious and secular spectrum and are fully
committed to peace and security. They
simply are mindful of the deadly conse-
quences of previous "peace processes" and
current realities, like the unending barrage
of rockets from the Palestinian-controlled
Gaza Strip.
Jerusalem's mayor reports that the talk
of ceding control of parts of the city has
already begun to stir radicalization and
unrest within the city's Arab population.

A Global Challenge
In short, as Ehud Olmert has himself done
many times and is doing even now, Israeli
citizens and leaders are working together
with diaspora Jews for that which affects
us all.

Sovereignty on page A21