MARCH 12 • 2020 | 37
AIPAC PARTISANSHIP continued
Later in his speech, defend-
ing the Trump administration’
s
recent proposal to give Israel
unilateral control of the West
Bank, Friedman said that “the
Biblical heartland of Israel,
Judea and Samaria, will never
be judenrein.
” It was far from
the only defense of the White
House’
s peace proposal at
AIPAC, but it was the only
one to invoke Nazi slang, as
Friedman had previously done
when he referred to leaders of
the left-leaning pro-Israel group
J Street as “kapos.
”
The ambassador’
s speech
seemed to have unnerved
AIPAC’
s leadership. Minutes
after it ended, the Jerusalem
Post’
s Lahav Harkov report-
ed that the organization was
“unhappy” with Friedman’
s
partisanship and would exclude
his speech from its online video
channel. As of Monday, March
9, however, the video remained
up.
Friedman’
s inveighing against
Trump’
s enemies, real and per-
ceived, played out, while 6,000
miles away, Israelis were vot-
ing once again to determine if
either Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu or his centrist rival,
Benny Gantz, could finally form
a stable governing majority.
When day broke in Washington
on Tuesday, results in Israel
seemed to be tipping toward
Netanyahu, while Democrats
in 14 states headed off to make
their own preferences.
But by then, any sense of
bipartisanship at the AIPAC
conference seemed like more of
a written promise than reality.
Democratic Party leaders could
still be found, as could one hour-
long panel on the current status
of the Israeli left. (The takeaway
was that they’
re largely in the
wilderness, said Rami Hod of
the progressive Berl Katznelson
Center, resigned to throwing in
with Gantz’
s centrist Blue and
White Party.)
It was a conference designed
for dueling political crises, with
turbulent dynamics in both
countries. And, in another
timely twist, AIPAC notified
conference attendees Wednesday
that they had potentially been
exposed to a visitor who tested
positive for the coronavirus.
And yet, as it wound down,
the partisanship continued to
intensify.
“I do not mean this as a
partisan jab, but we must recog-
nize these tendencies are more
prevalent in one party than the
other,
” Senate Majority Leader
Mitch McConnell said, noting
that Bloomberg was the lone
Democratic candidate to make
an in-person appearance. (Joe
Biden and Amy Klobuchar sent
video messages.) McConnell
also criticized House Democrats
for “slow-walking” a resolu-
tion condemning the Boycott,
Divestment and Sanctions (BDS)
movement, despite the House’
s
overwhelming passage of such a
measure last July.
That McConnell’
s Democratic
counterpart, Senate Minority
Leader Chuck Schumer, fol-
lowed him on the AIPAC stage
did little to repair the breach. As
AIPAC’
s 18,000 attendees began
filing out, partisan divisions
were as bare as ever, and the pol-
itics just as tumultuous.
personal enjoyment, I was
there because this conference
also makes me uncomfortable.
I grew up in Young Judaea, a
Zionist youth movement that
prides itself on being plural-
ist. One of my mentors in the
movement, Edana Appel, once
told me that being pluralist
does not mean making every-
one equally comfortable, but
rather making everyone equal-
ly uncomfortable. We do not
learn or grow by seeking out
the comfortable places and sur-
rounding ourselves only with
like-minded people.
Now, I am not suggesting
that AIPAC makes everyone
equally uncomfortable. There
are thousands of people who
attend the conference, and
some certainly find more to
agree with on the main stage
than others. One thing that
stuck out for me this year was
the different tolerance levels
people have for criticism of
Israeli government policy.
I have lived in Israel multiple
times; I love Israel deeply and
I strongly identify as a Zionist.
It is for those very reasons that
I find it troubling when some
politicians and leaders indicate
from AIPAC’
s stage that a lack
of criticism is a prerequisite
for friendship of Israel. James
Baldwin famously wrote, “I
love America more than any
other country in the world and,
exactly for this reason, I insist
on the right to criticize her
perpetually.”
I recognize that it is not
AIPAC’
s mission to critique the
policy of the Israeli government.
But in breakout sessions that
occur throughout the confer-
ence, it is possible to hear a
wide variety of views on Israeli
domestic and foreign policy.
There were sessions offered on
Israeli LGBTQ+ activism and the
rights of minorities within Israel,
among a wide variety of other
sessions. I personally attended
a session on the foundations of
Christian Zionism and one on
how — and whether — to think
of Israel as reishit smichat geu-
lateinu, the first flowering of our
redemption.
Unfortunately, those conver-
sations were off the record, so I
can’
t share more about them. I
can say that I believe that if more
of the content of those conversa-
tions made their way to the main
stage, I — and others — would
feel differently about AIPAC as
an organization.
I am deeply concerned about
the rapid escalation of rhetoric
between the left wing of the
Democratic party and people at
AIPAC who style themselves as
“the most pro-Israel.
” I am dis-
tressed that Sen. Bernie Sanders
felt that he could deliver a speech
at Liberty University, but that
attending AIPAC was some-
how a bridge too far. I am also
disturbed by the name-calling
and insults directed at Sanders
from Israeli officials, as well as
not-so-thinly veiled messaging
from AIPAC CEO Howard Kohr
about who is — or is not — a
“friend of Israel.
”
One of the most impactful
sessions I went to challenged
me to think about the moral
compromises I make myself
and the ones I allow — or don’
t
allow — from others. We make
certain sacrifices — and yes,
moral compromises — to be a
part of a bipartisan gathering like
AIPAC. My fervent hope is that
Americans of all political stripes
will continue to engage in con-
versations at this conference and
back home that will make them
uncomfortable.
Ben Freed is a rabbinical student from
Metro Detroit.
PLURALISM continued