views

point

A Path Portman Can’t Follow

Editor’s Note: Oscar-winning actress Natalie Portman backed out of a major award ceremony
meant to honor her in Jerusalem, with her representatives citing her distress over “recent
events” in Israel. She later issued a statement saying that her objection was to the scheduled
presence of the Israeli prime minister at the ceremony.

W

Evan Gottesman

hatever one thinks of
Israeli-American actress
Natalie Portman rescind-
ing her participation in the Genesis
Prize ceremony in Israel, there are
a number of important differences
that separate her decision from
other celebrities who have chosen
to distance themselves from the
Jewish state.
For those who find Portman’s
non-attendance at the ceremony
frustrating, it is easy, even tempt-
ing, to dismiss her out of hand. But
Portman is no rabid anti-Zionist,
and her actions speak to the con-
cerns many in the political main-
stream share about Israel’s present
course.
Firstly, Portman walking back on
the Genesis Prize presentation is
not the same as a boycott-inclined
European or American artist skip-
ping a show in Tel Aviv. While the
money for the Genesis Prize is col-
lected from a private donor, the
award is put out in partnership
with the Israeli Prime Minister’s
Office. Contra a number of mis-
leading headlines, Portman has
not declared she is refusing to visit
Israel (or even accepting the prize
itself), but that she is uncomfort-
able participating in a major public
ceremony.
She is not even the first to make
such a decision. Amos Oz — Israel
Prize-winning writer, one of the
Jewish state’s most prolific authors
— informed the foreign ministry in
2015 that he would no longer par-
ticipate in the government’s public

diplomacy efforts while clarifying
that this does not signal support for
the boycott, divestment and sanc-
tions (BDS) movement.
There would be a world of dif-
ference between not traveling to
the United States and deciding not
to appear on stage with Donald
Trump, but somehow the distinc-
tion seems to have been blurred in
the case of Natalie Portman and
Israel. It is more akin to players on
the Philadelphia Eagles or members
of the U.S. Olympic team deciding
not to take President Trump up on
his invitation to the White House.
From the perspective of Portman,
just like her Eagles and Olympian
counterparts in the Trump case,
sharing a platform with Netanyahu
lends him and his policies undue
credibility.
Sadly, there is more than one
reason today that someone might
not want to be associated with the
Israeli prime minister or the gov-
ernment he represents. Perhaps
Netanyahu’s backtracking on a deal
to resettle African asylum seekers
pushed the actress over the edge.
Maybe it was the premier’s inciting
against left-wing NGOs. It could
also have been the Gaza situation,
the slide toward annexation and
one state, the general climate or any
combination of things. Portman’s
spokesperson has been fairly vague,
simply citing “recent events” and
without further clarification it is
impossible to pass definitive judg-
ment on the entire affair. But the
fact that so many factors could have

Portman and Peres

driven her decision speaks volumes
about the current Israeli govern-
ment and progressive-minded
Israeli and American Jews’ percep-
tion of it.
This brings me to Natalie
Portman’s politics and background
with Israel. Portman was born
in Jerusalem and speaks fluent
Hebrew. She has made no bones
about openly associating with
Israeli culture. In 2015, she directed
and starred in a Hebrew-language
adaptation of Amos Oz’s A Tale of
Love and Darkness. But Portman
has been rather mum about Israeli
politics. As a student at Harvard
University, she defended the Israel
writ large against the apartheid
accusation and she helped research
for Alan Dershowitz’s The Case
for Israel. But in recent years, she
has only offered passing criticism
of Benjamin Netanyahu and cam-
paigned for Hadassah, the major
American women’s Zionist organi-
zation and a mainstream pillar of
the U.S. Jewish community.
Unlike Roger Waters or Brian
Eno or Lorde, Portman is herself
Israeli and intimately connected
to the Jewish state. Her choice will
likely complicate her relationship
with friends and family in Israel and

supporters in the American Jewish
community, so it was doubtful that
it was a decision taken lightly.
Portman effectively had one
opportunity to take a critical stand
on Israel and, tellingly, she has
reserved it for the current govern-
ment. Now that she has spoken out,
she will forever be tarred by the
right as an anti-Zionist and claimed
as one by the radical left.
What Portman’s precise motiva-
tions were and how she handles her
relationship with Israel going for-
ward will be essential in determin-
ing whether the publicity generated
by her decision on the Genesis Prize
can be an engine for change and
a wake-up call for Israel and the
Diaspora.
To quote Natalie Portman in
2005’s Star Wars: Episode III, speak-
ing to a newly minted Darth Vader,
“You’re going down a path I can’t
follow.”
It’s a sentiment many who care
deeply about the Jewish state certain-
ly share when it comes to the Israeli
government’s current direction. •

Evan Gottesman is a communications associ-
ate at Israel Policy Forum where this essay
was first published.

counterpoint

Natalie Portman’s Act Of ‘Love’ (And Darkness)

W

Morton A. Klein

Liz Berney

hen you truly love a person or
a country, you are extremely
grateful for those people who
help and protect that person; you appreci-
ate the brave young soldiers who protect
the country you love.
But for Natalie Portman — like others
on the extreme, frightened left — “loving”
and “caring for” Israel means vilifying and
demonizing those who risk their own lives
and leaders who work and worry day and
night protecting the Israeli people.
It’s especially painful to see Portman-
type attacks on Israel when Israel is fight-

ing against Nazi-like Hamas, which calls
for the murder of every Jew and the Jewish
state’s destruction. And, meanwhile,
Palestinian Arab leaders continue to pro-
mote murder and hatred against Jews and
Israel in their speeches, schools, media and
mosques, and they continue their heinous
practice of paying Arabs to murder Jews.
Natalie Portman and the rest of the
frightened left almost never condemn
Israel’s monstrous Arab/Islamist enemies,
who shoot and stab and ram cars into
Israeli citizens and visitors every day.
The Portman version of “loving” Israel

means saying on the one hand, “I treasure
my Israeli friends and family, Israeli food,
books, art, cinema and dance”— and then,
in the very same statement (as well as in
her original statement) viciously insulting
and demonizing Israel, Israel’s democrati-
cally elected prime minister and Israel’s
Defense Forces with obscene, false accusa-
tions.
Doesn’t she realize that without Israel
defending its border against Hamas
assaults, and without Israel defending its
people from the deadly Palestinian Arab
attacks on Jews incited by and paid for

continued on page 10

8

May 3 • 2018

jn