The lack of reaction among American Jews to the Passover seder massacre in Netanya has been called the `absenteeism of the Jewish leadership’.

New York – Three days after the deadly Seder night attack at a Netanya hotel, a senior Israeli representative in the United States received an urgent telegram. His counterpart in Jerusalem asked him to report on what the Jewish community was doing. He sent a two-word response: “Not much.” In a conversation at the end of last week, the Israeli officials said: “Today I would respond `almost nothing.'” As evidence, he picked up a document from his table – a faxed invitation to an “emergency meeting” called by the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations. “They set a date for a meeting one week later and call it an `emergency meeting,'” he complained.

The silence of the Jewish community was conspicuous against the background of reports of suicide bombings in Israel, accompanied with horrible pictures that were broadcast almost nonstop in the American media. The few demonstrators participating in demonstrations organized by marginal organizations or activists that were aimed at expressing solidarity with the people of Israel only underlined the lack of massive identification and exposed what the senior Israeli official called the “absenteeism of the Jewish leadership.” Sunday ostensibly marked a turning point: about 10,000 people demonstrated in support of Israel at the United Nations building in New York, a demonstration whose numbers were not impressive for this city or, especially, for New York Jews.

But it was this very demonstration that exposed how disconnected the Jewish community is from its leadership and the ineffectualness of the Jewish leaders. The demonstration was organized by an ad hoc group of right-wing activists – Betar, Rabbi Avi Weiss from the Bronx, Americans for a Secure Israel. Shai Rubinstein, Betar’s central emissary in North America, who was among the organizers, said on Sunday that the demonstration was also an indirect protest against the impotence of the Jewish leadership. The Jewish public waited in vain, so we set out to organize the demonstration, he said.

Bridge holiday

Due to the time difference, when the Jews of New York sat down at their seder tables, they already had heard about the massacre in Netanya. But their behavior, which bordered on indifference, could be summed up in the following words: “The Jews of American are on their holiday vacation; please don’t interrupt.” During his sermon on the concluding festival day before the Yizkor prayer, an Orthodox rabbi in Brooklyn cried out that “the Jews of New York will be called to judgment for their silence during this hour of distress for Israel.”

Israel’s consul general in New York, Alon Pinkas suggests a toned down version: “The situation in Israel weighed down on the holiday vacation of American Jews and their leaders, but not enough to cause them to interrupt it.”

Indeed, while the Jews stretched the holiday vacation to bridge another weekend, thousands of Palestinians and immigrants from Middle East countries took to the streets of New York last Friday and held a series of mass demonstrations. Thousands gathered opposite the Israeli consulate building and at Times Square, carrying placards denouncing Israel, which “is conducting genocide against the Palestinian people,” and shouting derogatory chants about Prime Minister Ariel Sharon.

The silence of the community in Israel also applies to the outbreak of violence against Jews in Europe and the burning of synagogues in France and Belgium. Besides a statement of condemnation issued by the Anti-Defamation League, there was no organized Jewish activity to protest the attacks against Jews in Europe. A Jewish activist who asked the head of a central organization why he didn’t convene a press conference and protest the torching of synagogues in France, received the response: “And what will I say to a reporter who asks for my reaction to the IDF’s actions in Ramallah and Bethlehem?”

Alon Pinkas prefers to maintain his working relations with the leaders of Jewish organizations. Unlike his predecessor, Colette Avital, who served in New York during the first Oslo agreement and debated with and even scolded Jewish leaders who were hesitant tover the passive behavior of the Jewish leadership in the confrontation between Israel and the Palestinians. But lately, in internal discussions, he has spoken harshly against the representatives of the organized Jewish establishment, arguing, “All they know to do is convene meetings and listen to briefings on the situation in Israel.” Pinkas is especially angry that “even in the information campaign directed at the American media, Jewish involvement is not being felt.”

The information effort required from representatives of official Israel in New York is enormous, especially after the attack in Netanya and the beginning of Operation Defensive Wall. During the Gulf War, CNN was the only network to broadcast news 24 hours a day. Today, there are five networks broadcasting non-stop news and commentary. These networks operate independently of their parent networks, producing their own news programs, with special correspondents in Israel.

On a single day, March 29, Pinkas appeared in 14 interviews broadcast on national and international networks. “As long as I am confronting Palestinian representatives, I have no problem,” he explained. “When I’m invited to appear opposite an American Arab like James Zogby, the head of the Arab American Institute in Washington, I ask myself why there is no American Jewish leader to appear opposite him.” On the other hand, when the television broadcasts show lines of tanks in the streets of Ramallah and IDF soldiers with their guns cocked in the streets of Bethlehem, the leaders of Jewish organizations call to complain about the deficient Israeli information campaign.

With notice of only half a day, the Satmar Hasidim in Brooklyn can mobilize 5,000 ultra-Orthodox Jews to demonstrate against Israel opposite the consulate building in Manhattan. It took great efforts by three Jewish umbrella organizations to convene about 500 Jewish leaders for a special meeting during the week before Passover. The address by the head of the Conference of Presidents, Mortimer Zuckerman, was broadcast remotely from Las Vegas, where he was vacationing.

Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, who addressed the participants at the meeting via a videotaped speech, outlined a vision of a million immigrants coming to Israel. When Sharon said that he wants Jews from France, Argentina and South Africa to immigrate to Israel now, the leaders of the Jewish organizations responded with applause. When he mentioned that he would also like to see U.S. Jews make “aliyah,” the sound of chuckles could be heard in the audience. “The prime minister spoke about a million immigrants at a time when the Jews of America avoid setting foot in Israel, even as tourists,” said an Israeli observer.

When the meeting ended, a conversation developed between Pinkas and one of the heads of a large Jewish organization. “Why doesn’t your solidarity take expression in three jumbo jets taking off for Israel full of Jews?” Pinkas asked. One of the Jews responded, “It’s a logistical nightmare.” Pinkas did not let this go unanswered. “The establishment of the State of Israel was also a logistical nightmare, and it’s good that you weren’t among those advising Ben-Gurion what to do.”

Sharon’s lack of tact

Since September 2000, the community has acted passively, with the organized leadership preferring to lay low. It’s not an exaggeration to state, as several Jewish spokesmen here have already said, that the period since the eruption of the Al-Aqsa Intifada will be remembered as one of the ugliest hours of the local Jewish community; in a metropolis which is home to about a million Jews, it could have been expected to see 100,000 take to the streets and demonstrate their support for Israel.

The passive behavior of the Jews and their leaders in the face of Israel’s distress is generally attributed to the lack of an authoritative leadership. But recently, another argument has been added: “The contradictions in the policies of Prime Minister Sharon makes it difficult to formulate an accepted public response by the organizations,” contends Seymour Reich in a conversation with him. According to Reich, a former head of the Conference of Presidents, “The Jews in America are in a tough position. They support Israel’s war against terror but are taken aback by Sharon’s lack of tact in his public declarations, such as his statements about spilling Palestinian blood.” Nonetheless, Reich believes that the main factor blocking the full mobilization of the community in expressing support and solidarity with Israel is “the feeling common among Jews that Sharon is not aiming for a political-diplomatic solution.”

The director of the ARZA organization of the Reform movement, Rabbi Ami Hirsh, speaks about “mixed feelings in the community.” He argues that the moral perspective in the current struggle is not clear enough. Jews oppose terror and support a war against terror, but at the same time, there is an increasing awareness among them of the injustice of occupation and the acts of humiliation against the Palestinians.

Abraham Foxman, the director of the Anti-Defamation League, admits: “In regard to the question of what to do and how exactly to respond, the Jewish leadership has become paralyzed.” But, he adds, “This doesn’t mean that the American Jew doesn’t care.” Foxman notes that after September 11, there has also been a concern about large gatherings, and this is another reason for not holding a mass demonstration in support of Israel. “The police and other groups advise not to bring together a large number of people in one place,” he says. But it seems that on Sunday, this argument was not longer valid, especially after the sight of thousands of Palestinians streaming toward Times Square.

While the main umbrella groups showed the full extent of their confusion, quiet activities were afoot among groups outside the recognized establishment. A new movement is expressing solidarity with reserve soldiers refusing to serve in the territories. A full-page advertisement was published in the New York Times last week, the first of its kind, which listed the names of rabbis and Jewish activists who support these “refuseniks.” The advertisement was the initiative of Rabbi Michael Lerner, the editor of Tikkun magazine.

At the last moment, a group of Jewish activists decided not to send a personal letter to Sharon. The letter was signed by 11 men and women who charged that “the refusal of 313 officers and combat soldiers is an act of conscience and moral courage that should be respected.” The letter ended by declaring: “Prime minister, we stand behind these officers and soldiers who are demanding moral integrity.”

The heads of Jewish organizations do not attribute much importance to such expressions of support for these “refusenik” soldiers. In their view, the refusal issue provided the extreme liberal branch of the community with an easy excuse for criticizing Sharon. But some Jewish officials believe that these quiet protest efforts are liable to proliferate.

The assessment is that the rightward swing identified among wide parts of the community in recent months, including among those known as moderates, has been halted. According to this assessment, the continuation of the conflict with the Palestinians will strengthen the liberal segment of the community.

This article ran in Ha’aretz on April 9th, 2002

The IDF entered Bethlehem on March 29th following massive missile, mortar and machine gun attacks upon the Jerusalem Gilo neighborhood that emanated from Bethlehem, Beit Jala, and the UNRWA refugee camps in and around Bethlehem.

Instead of firing at the IDF from Palestinian military positions throughout Bethlehem, the PLO dispatched 150 trained sharpshooters to take cover and fire from the safe haven of the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem while holding more than 100 Christian clerics hostage over the weekend, using the world’s major Christian shrine as an armed refuge and firing sporadically at Israeli troops, while the IDF issued straight orders not to respond with fire on holy places.

IDF officials said that these men are armed with automatic weapons and that a number of them are highly wanted terrorists. Meanwhile, the PLO armed forces holed up in the church rejected the IDF’s offer to evacuate the wounded and to allow the armed men to turn themselves in, if their safety was assured.

Over the weekend the IDF evacuated five priests and three nuns from the Church of the Nativity. Security sources said that Franciscan and Catholic patriarchates claim that the armed Palestinians had treated them violently and had caused damage to the church. The impasse continues, with the Catch-22 situation which prevents the IDF initiating any action to free the hostages and capture the terrorists because they are located within a Christian holy site. Vatican officials presented a plan for solving the crisis: The Palestinians would lay down their arms and leave the church premises, while Israel would lift its siege on the site.

However, the Palestinians rejected the offer.

Meanwhile, the Vatican Ambassador to Israel, Msgr. Pietro Sambi, vehemently denied the rumor spread by the PA and reported on in Palestinian PA media, which claimed that the IDF had murdered a priest in Bethlehem.

The military successes of the operation have been largely ignored by Western media.

Kaes Adwan, the most senior of the wanted Hamas operatives was killed on Friday.

In the course of the fighting, the forces noticed a suspicious car parked at the entrance to the house where the wanted men were hiding. The force fired at the car and it exploded. It was discovered that this was a car bomb which had already been prepared for detonation. The IDF believes that Adwan planned to sneak the car into Israel in order to perpetrate a massive terror attack.

“The killing of Adwan is a tough blow to Hamas, said a senior figure in the IDF. Dr. Abed al-Aziz Rantisi, a Hamas leader who sits in Arafat’s cabinet, expressed his sorrow at the killing of Adwan.

He promised that the response would be “tough and extremely painful”. However, Rantisi said that the assassination would not harm Hamas activity. “Kaes Adwan is no more then one percent of the people at his level who operate in the Izzadin Kassam troops”, he said. He said that Hamas’s revenge would be “a serious operation against Israel that would undermine the stability of the Zionist state”.

Kaes Adwan was responsible for the murder of 77 Israeli. Palestinian sources agreed that his killing is a harsh blow to the military branch of Hamas. Adwan, 25, was a senior figure in Izzadin Kassam, Hamas’s military branch. with Hamas. Adwan was wanted in Israel over the past few years for his involvement in many terror attacks. He was responsible for:

• The terror attack at Mei-Ami, in which the terrorist Zayid Kilani detonated a bomb he was carrying, killing an Israeli civilian.
• The terror attack at Sbarro’s in Jerusalem in August, 2001. Adwan recruited and dispatched the terrorist who blew himself up, killing 15 Israelis and injuring dozens more.
• The terror attack at the Nahariya train station in September, 2001.

  Adwan recruited and dispatched the suicide bomber, Shaker Hibeishi, an Israeli Arab from Abu Snan, who murdered three Israelis and injured dozens.

• The terror attack on the bus in Haifa in December 2001, in which 16 Israelis were killed and dozens injured.
• Dispatching a suicide bomber to perpetrate a terror attack in Jerusalem, which did not succeed because the GSS captured the terrorist. The terrorist, Rassan Abu Smada, said during his interrogation that he had been recruited and sent by Adwan.
• The terror attack at the Park Hotel in Netanya in which 26 Israelis were killed and more than 100 injured.
• The terror attack at the Matza restaurant in Haifa. Adwan located and sent the suicide bomber who killed 16 Israelis.

  On a Tangential Note:

  Two companies of reservists serving in Bethlehem were forced to sleep in an apartment adjacent to the Church of the Nativity. The soldiers entered the home, sent the entire family into one of the rooms, and when they received instructions to leave the place early in the morning, they collected a kitty of NIS 1,500 and gave it to the family.

  “We went into their home, used their rooms, and therefore they deserve to be paid, explained one soldier. When the soldiers gave the money to the family, they expressed their regret to the family and added, “This is a time of war”.

  Other reservists in the Nablus sector sent hot meals to families, giving up their own lunches. Avi, a reservist, said, “We encountered an entire Palestinian family, elderly people with their children and grandchildren. They were frightened and thought we were going to kill them. When we received a hot meal, we gave it to them. They were shocked”. The next night, those same soldiers returned to the home and discovered that a member of this family suffers from an ingrown toe-nail and must undergo surgery. They called in the doctor, Dr. Eyal Dekel, who carried out the procedure, ending the pain.

  In Kalkilya, IDF troops entered a home, searched it and before they left, the soldiers made a point to clean the house: they swept up and put the furniture back where it was.

I would appreciate you passing the following note along for me to the Labor Party of Australia, as mentioned in the Age news report below.

My daughter Malka Chana was born in Melbourne in November 1985 and murdered in Jerusalem in August 2001. To the best of my knowledge, her violent and ugly death at the hands of Arab “resistance forces” did not merit any protest — or indeed any attention — from you.

Like Kate Edwards (or Kate Irving), she was an Australian energetically in favour of peace. Entirely unlike Ms Edwards-Irving, Malki engaged in meaningful actions which brought good to the world, chiefly by working with teenagers and children suffering from profound disabilities. Ms Irving-Edwards, in contrast to my sweet daughter, chose to make her grand contribution in the one place which, more than any other, outstandingly exemplifies the hypocrisy and shallowness of logic of Israel’s enemies.

Beit Jala is a hamlet on the edge of Jerusalem. It’s the place from which Arafat’s forces have directed deadly fire into the suburbs of Israel’s capital on a daily and nightly basis for eighteen months. There’s no strategic point to it whatever. Their agenda is pure terrorism. The Israeli army is well equipped and professional, but also civilized and restrained. Had Israel chosen to do to Beit Jala what Arafat’s thugs have done to the Park Hotel in Netanya, to the Matza restaurant in Haifa or to the Sbarro restaurant in Jerusalem — the place where Malki and fifteen other innocents were viciously robbed of the remainder of their lives — it could have solved the problem by making it completely and permanently go away.

But there is no moral equivalence between our side and their side. I don’t know of any actions taken by other governments which compare with Israel’s restraint in the face of the evil emanating from Beit Jala and places like it.

The dangers we face here are real, as my wife and children and I can explain in detail to you, if you’re in any doubt about the issue. Thanks to Arafat, we find ourselves on the battlefront when we’re sitting in our living room, traveling to work, or going out for a coffee. Israelis are entitled to the fullest protection that the government can provide. No “peace” protestor like Kate should ever be allowed to compromise that protection in any way.

I realize the Middle East seems far away to you. But the terrorist evil against which Israel’s citizen army is engaged in these difficult days deserves a healthy degree of respect. The dangers of that evil are real, concrete and international. You may even see them in Australia. If not now, then perhaps in the future.

The foolishness and woolly thinking typified by Ms Edwards-Irving’s presence in suburban Jerusalem, and its political echoes in Australia, bring no credit to her, to her colleagues or to those who confuse right from wrong in the name of partisan politics. With terror on the agenda, you have to pick your side, which is what Kate did.

Thanks,

Arnold Roth

Arnold Roth is Father of Malka Chana, murdered last August by PLO terrorists