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