Mahzor

New York Public Library

Churches

Sarajevo Haggadah

Mah Nishtanah

Sarajevo haggadah

Antaea Darom

Israeli women's art

Action

Torah as music

Ben Heine

Action

ceramic bowl

Mohammad Said Kalash, "Offering Reconciliation" exhibit (photo: Ilan Amihai)

Action

Punch and Judy/Pinchas and Jamila

Avi Katz

Action

David Grossman

Ben Heine

Action

Eldrige Street shul

Lower East Side

Action

Dove

Ben Heine

Action

Two birds

Hoda Jamal

Action

Israeli and Palestinian boys

from documentary, Promises

Action

Cat in the Hat

Yiddish version

Action

Daylight through the Wall

Banksy: graffiti art on Separation Wall

Action

Maurice Sendak's Brundibar set

New Victory Theater (photo: Nan Melville/NYT)

Action

Daniel Barenboim, West-Eastern Divan Orchestra

Palestinian-Israeli musical ensemble (photo: Kerstin Joensson/AP)

Action

Great Day on Eldrige Street

N.Y.'s klezmer greats celebrate shul rededication (photo: Leo Sorel)

Action

Joint Appeal for Peace

(Avi Katz)

Joint Appeal for Peace

Ketubah, Ancona, Italy (1772)

(Jewish Theological Seminary library)

Ancona ketubah

Posts Tagged ‘Kadima’

Barak Leaving Labor: Rats Leaving Sinking Ship

Sunday, January 16th, 2011

Put this under the category: the Mystifying Doing the Inscrutable.  Ehud Barak will announce that he and four other members of the Labor Knesset delegation will leave the party and form a new faction to be called–get this–”Independence” (other suggested names, “The New Center,” the “Jewish Democratic Zionist Center,” what a mouthful!).  This is the same guy who is the current chairman of the Party!  Two other prominent Labor Party leaders, Amir Peretz and Eitan Cabel, are about to jump to Kadima.  This, at long last, is the final gasp of the once illustrious party.  It’s a Party that Shimon Peres really killed off when he deserted it for Kadima at Ariel Sharon’s behest.  Perhaps it was brain dead even before then.

But until Barak finally drove a stake through its heart Labor was walking, zombie-like (sorry for mixing my monster metaphors) through the Israeli political landscape.  Now it is dead or will be shortly.

The Labor Party chief seems to have foreseen a vote within the Party to withdraw from the ruling coalition, which would’ve forced Barak to give up his coveted defense ministry portfolio.  He made clear that he feels he was driven from the Party by leftists who had no interest in advancing the peace process represented (!) by the current government.

Barak’s betrayal will further splinter the liberal center.  In the next election he will be lucky if he saves his own seat.  The other three MKs who jumped ship with him don’t have a hope in hell of earning enough votes to get them back into the Knesset.

The death of Labor will strengthen Kadima numerically.  But it will most help the Likud, since there will be no principled liberal alternative to it.  It will also strengthen Hadash, since it will assume the mantle of the last viable truly progressive Israeli party (I won’t even talk about Meretz, another zombie party–dead party walking).

I would say Barak is like a rat fleeing a sinking ship except that this rat gnawed through the ship’s hull and caused it to sink.  Now, he’s only confirming what everyone but him knew all along.

Seattle Jewish Community 2004 Derech Eretz Statement

Friday, July 31st, 2009
Derech Eretz Israel 2004 statement

Derech Eretz Israel 2004 statement

In the midst of the controversy over the Seattle Jewish federation letter sent to Kadima denouncing its hosting of Palestinian anti-Occupation cleric Canon Naim Ateek, Rainer Waldman Adkins referred in a JTNews interview to a “community protocol” that required those who created this letter to follow a path other than the one they chose.

When challenged by Rob Jacobs, StandWithUs’ Seattle director, who claimed my characterization of this document as an Israel Accord was a fiction and that the document didn’t exist–I decided to dig the document up. And guess what, the document that never existed was signed by none other than Rob Jacobs! Must be a case of severe memory loss. Or perhaps Rob only remembers those things it’s convenient for him to remember?

At any rate, here is the text of the Derech Eretz Israel Statement 2004 (pdf). You may click on the image to open the full sized version:

We represent a broad spectrum of opinion within the Jewish community. We frequently disagree on issues relating to Israel, including the best path towards security and well-being for Israel and the Jewish people.

Especially in trying times, such as during the upcoming Gaza disengagement, we expect vigorous debate and disagreement in Israel and between Jews everywhere, including here in Washington State.

While we have differences of opinion, we hope with this statement to make it very clear that Israel is always close to all our hearts and souls. Further, we are united in our commitment to respectful, constructive and civil dialogue concerning Israel. Such behavior strengthens our collective support for Israel and our community.

Therefore,
•We commit to practice Derech Eretz, exhibiting and nurturing respect and communication, trusting in each other’s good intentions, and rejecting personal or malicious attacks, as we debate issues pertaining to Israel, the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, peace in the Mideast, and the wider Jewish community.

Further, in spite of our differences, together we publicly state that we agree on several core principles:

• Israel has the right to exist, in peace, as the Jewish State.
•We support Israel’s efforts to maintain itself as a democratic and pluralistic society, despite the pressures faced both within and without.
• Israel has the right, as a sovereign nation, to secure and recognized borders, to defend itself, and to protect its citizens.
•We support Israel’s efforts to find a peaceful solution to the conflict in the Mideast.
•We fervently hope and pray for peace within Israel, among Jews everywhere, between Israelis and Palestinians, and between Israelis and all peoples of the region.

We therefore pledge ourselves to do all in our power to assist Israel in every way at this difficult time.

This is the pertinent phrase which Rainer referred to in expressing his disappointment with the federation’s attack on Kadima:

We commit to…exhibiting and nurturing respect and communication, trusting in each other’s good intentions, and rejecting personal or malicious attacks

A reasonable person would read that and imagine that the federation’s Israel committee, finding fault with Kadima’s hosting of Ateek would communicate that to the group in a timely and respectful way that would allow an exchange of views on the subject. The statement makes no mention of grandstanding or scoring propaganda points, which is clearly what Rob Jacobs and those who spearheaded the letter but who did not sign it, sought to do.

In fact, if I didn’t know better I might think that the letter might be an opening salvo in a campaign to delegitimize groups like Brit Tzedek and Kadima and prohibit them from participating in the deliberations of the Israel committee.

In Rob’s twisted interpretation of this document it was Kadima’s obligation to come to the Israel committee before it agreed to host the event. It’s incumbent on the Jewish progressive community to get a heksher to host events that might be controversial for Rob and other local Israel lobby groups.

Would you care to admit your error, Rob?

In the Israeli Elections It’s…Livni (or is it Netanyahu)?

Tuesday, February 10th, 2009

With 98% of the vote counted it appears that the exit polls were accurate for a change and Kadima gained 28 votes, Likud 27, Yisrael Beitenu 15, Labor 13, Meretz 3 and Hadash 4. There is big news here. Up to a few days ago, a Haaretz poll predicted virtually the opposite result between Likud and Kadima. It appears Livini has pulled a few irons out of the fire and Bibi did his usual campaign fizzle as Assaf Oron predicted. Proto-fascist Avigdor Lieberman is the big news of this election as he absorbed almost all the votes that deserted Likud and doubled his previous number of mandates.

Shmuel Rosner noted that every Israeli election seems to provide a flavor of the month party whose “new message” turns it into the “new, new thing.” Voters flock to it and give it 10 to 15 mandates (Shinui, Pensioners Party, etc.). Before the ink is dry on the invitations to the Knesset opening, the party sells out whatever single issue it was formed to promote. By the next election, it has receded into the woodwork. Lieberman’s single issue this election was the loyalty oath for Israeli Arabs.

The difference between Yisrael Beitenu and those other parties is that Lieberman is the strong man of this party with a well-rounded rightist ideological message, and the others actually focussed more on an idea than a personality. Parties based on strong personalities (Sharon, Ben Gurion, etc.) tend to do better and last longer in Israel. So it is possible that Lieberman and his party will play a kingmaker role not just in this Knesset but future ones as well.

The big news on the left is that Meretz has imploded as almost anyone who followed their deterioration could have predicted. It waffled on the Gaza war and lost over half its mandates as a result. Even a prominent endorsement by Haaretz publisher Amos Schocken couldn’t revive it from the dead. Hadash, the former Communist party, was a winner and its steadfastness in opposing the Gaza war was rewarded by voters looking for a truly progressive (as opposed to waffling) party.

Labor is another loser which has progressively receded with each recent election. It’s 13 votes will not guarantee Barak a major portfolio even if he chooses to join a Likud-led coalition along with Lieberman.

The coalition math looks bleak for Livni. The only way she can form one is if she gains the support of Shas. Which is ironic considering that Shas was precisely the stumbling block in her forming the previous government and the reason she chose to go to the polls rather than accept their deal.

The only good result here is that whoever forms a government will have an exceedingly weak coalition. If Netanyahu leads the goverment he is hostage to the far right and Lieberman. If Livni forms a government she is hostage to Shas (if she can even gain their support in the first place). It is another recipe for political stasis, a status Israel can ill afford.

The result doesn’t bode well for Barack Obama’s peace efforts. Netanyahu has absolutely no interests in any serious negotiations with the Palestinians and will stall like hell if the U.S. attempts to pressure him. Livni might want to play ball with Washington but even if she tries, Shas will severely constrain her.

Of course, there are all sorts of bizarre possibilities: Likud could join with Kadima and even Labor in a national unity government which would politically look like a cross between a camel and an elephant and function just as smoothly. At least this might exclude Lieberman from a governing coalition.

Olmert Resigns

Wednesday, July 30th, 2008
Olmert's resignation bowed to the inevitable

Olmert's resignation bowed to the inevitable

Ehud Olmert bowed to the inevitable yesterday and resigned as Israeli prime minister effective September 17th, the date of the next Kadima party leadership primary.  Beset on all sides by up to six separate corruption investigations, the most serious of which involved accepting several hundred thousand dollars in cash and gifts from U.S. businessman Moshe Talansky, Olmert realized that his continued leadership was untenable.  In addition, he had little political credibility or traction with the nation because of both his ethical lapses and his failed prosecution of the 2006 war in Lebanon.

There were several options that Olmert could have chosen in resigning and the one he picked will send the Kadima party into a flurry of political jockeying before the primary elections.  The leading candidate is centrist foreign minister Tzipi Livni, who has made a name for herself as a political pragmatist, though she comes from a prominent rightist political family.  She pointedly departed from Olmert during the Lebanon war and refused to participate in promoting or defending it, a surprisingly independent move for a sitting foreign minister.  Her chief challenger is transportation minister, former IDF commander in chief and hawk Shaul Mofaz.  It was Mofaz who single-handedly caused a multi-billion dollar rise in the international price of oil a few weeks ago, with his statement that Israel faced no choice but to attack Iranian nuclear installations.  The latest polls (which are inherently unstable in Israeli politics) show Livni with a significant but falling lead over Mofaz.

The political instability Olmert caused with his resignation portends well for the possible political comeback of perennial prime minister candidate Bibi Netanyahu, leader of the rightist Likud opposition.  Should the Kadmina-led coalition falter, Netanyahu eagerly waits in the wings for his second opportunity to lead the nation.  His first prime ministership was marked by a hardline approach to the Israeli-Arab conflict and an unwillingness to negotiate over major issues dividing the parties.  He also has a reputation as a fiscal hawk willing to restrain spending on Israel’s safety net for its large population of poor, unemployed and ultra-Orthodox Jews.  When he served as finance minister his policies were known for fiscally punishing the most vulnerable of Israel’s citizens.  Current polls show that if a new election were held now Netanyahu would become prime minister.

Naturally, this is something Kadima and its junior coalition partner, Labor, seek to prevent at all costs.  But the current government is a fragile reed including multiple parties each with its own separate social and political agenda.  It remains to be seen whether the new party leader can hold together these disparate elements.

The biggest casualty in Olmert’s downfall may be his various peace initiatives initiated as his political career entered its most unstable phase.  He began third party peace talks with Syria brokered by Turkey several months ago.  With great willingness by both sides to compromise, it appeared that such talks might bear fruit in a relatively short period of time.  More complicated and less productive have been U.S.-mediated talks with Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas.

If there are national elections and Netanyahu wins, each of these negotiating tracks may fall victim to his assumption of the reins of power.  He is known as a deep skeptic regarding the possibility of peace with the Arabs and as a booster of military power as the key to national security.

Olmert’s downfall marks the end of the career of one of Israel’s veteran political operatives whose own career began in the early 1970s.  He helped end the career of beloved long-time Labor party Jerusalem mayor Teddy Kollek and used the mayoral perch to launch himself into national political leadership.  After joining the Knesset, he became Ariel Sharon’s chief political aide and enforcer.  When Sharon wanted to lower the boom on then Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat, it was Olmert who told the Jerusalem Post that Israel was prepared to assassinate him.  A later report by a journalist-confidant of Sharon’s published in Haaretz, claimed that Sharon, and Israeli intelligence, had indeed been responsible for Arafat’s death.

Olmert was known throughout his career as a wily, but pragmatic political survivor willing to compromise his rightist principles for either his own advancement or achieving political goals.  His supporters and critics, for example, could never tell whether his recent peace initiatives toward Syria and the Palestinians were the product of principle or an attempt to save his prime ministership.  For this reason, he leaves a mixed legacy of a man who seemed to have some vision of compromise with Israel’s enemies, but who allowed his penchant for the good life to interfere with, and ultimately topple him.

Shimon Peres: “No Choice But War With Iran”

Sunday, May 7th, 2006
shimon peresShimon Peres: Growing delusional in his old age?

When the supposedly dovish Shimon Peres tells Ynetnews the world will ultimately have no choice but to go to war with Iran, you have to wonder why the world continues to see him as a distinguished elder statesman:

The conversation with Peres also touched on the hot security subjects at hand. Regarding the Iran crisis, Peres said: “In the end there will be no choice but war with Iran,” referring to the international military option against Iran’s nuclear program, not a war between Israel and Iran.

Often when I read such statements from Israeli politicians I have to ask myself: “What are they smokin’?” How in heaven can this guy believe that anyone except Dick Cheney, Don Rumsfeld and George Bush want this option? How can he not understand that this would be a demented policy option. Sure, it would solve a few problems for Israel by perhaps knocking out one of its more dangerous adversaries, but at what price? Eternal war between east and west? Perpetual conflict between Muslim and Christians and Jews?

Statements like Peres’ also give Israel a bad name here in the United States where no one but the Bush hardliners and Pentagon war planners are talking in such martial terms. The fact that Aipac and Israel are the ones beating the drums loudest for such an outcome looks bad to Americans who’re sick and tired of Mideast war and not eager to start another one.

Peres also issued another provocative, but slightly less delusional call for Kadima and Labor to unite as one party:

The Knesset is “as split as it was before. Therefore, the most proper thing to do now is unite Kadima and Labor.”

Peres…is convinced that such unity could rescue Israeli politics and stabilize the Knesset. Peres, however, made no comment about his rival Labor leader Amir Peretz.

Speaking to Ynet…Peres explained how he interprets the proposal: “What are the differences today between Labor and Kadima? Nothing. In the previous government there was a prominent different between the two large parties because of (Likud Chairman) Benjamin Netanyahu, whose economic policy neither Olmert nor Ariel Sharon liked, and certainly I didn’t either. But now? There is no difference. The right thing is for the two parties to unite.”

Again, the guy is in cloud cuckoo land: no difference between Kadima and Labor? What a laugh. What he means to say is that if HE were leading Labor instead of that Mizrahi-jerk Peretz that there’d be no differences between the two parties. But the problem with Peres previous leadership of Labor was precisely that there appeared to be no differences between Sharon and himself. This in turn gave Labor voters nothing, in effect, to vote for. And if the two political leaders were so similar, why cast a vote for Peres’ Labor when you could vote for Sharon directly?

The whole point of the leadership battle which Peres lost is that Labor voters rejected the latter’s vision of an eternal bedding-down with Sharon. So why should Labor be interested in what it rejected earlier?

Binyamin Ben-Eliezer, not someone I often agree with, in this case has things precisely right when he says:

“It’s too early to talk about such things. I understand Peres’ anxiety, because he knows that he is part of a party without any political structures, without roots and without any organization.”

“This party [Kadima] was only founded for the sake of the convergence, and there is nothing in it beyond the convergence. That’s why Peres talks about a future unity. These dreams are too early,” he added.

Peres is thinking about his political legacy and doesn’t want to be remembered for his betrayal of Labor before the last election. If he can engineer a realignment by which the two parties unite, then he can resume his grandfatherly image as uniter and peacemaker. I hope the Labor party doesn’t allow Shimon to assuage what may be a guilty conscience. It should not be the party’s job to disband merely so its former leader can sleep better at night. A union with Kadima would be profoundly ill-advised.

Kadima Slipping in Polls

Wednesday, March 22nd, 2006

Robert Rosenberg reports the hopeful news that Kadima seems to be slipping in the polls. Just before Israel attacked the Jericho jail to kidnap Ahmed Saadat and his PFLP colleagues (accused of assassinating Rehavam Zeevi), Kadima was polling its highest numbers of the election campaign, 42 seats. Now, they’re showing a major erosion in the latest polls:

Six days to the elections and there is movement in the polls — perhaps not enough for an upset, but perhaps enough that when the dust settles, Kadima will have a much more difficult time forming a government than previously believed. A Haaretz poll showed Kadima slipping to 36 seats, Labor at 17 and the Likud sinking below 15 seats, to 14. A Jerusalem Post poll showed Kadima dropping to 34-35 seats, Labor rising from 18-19 to 20-21 and like the Haaretz poll, the Likud at 14 seats.

What is hopeful about this development is that it means that Olmert may be more likely to choose a center-left coalition than a center-right one. The more seats Labor wins the more likely this event might happen. Unfortunately, Labor’s campaign doesn’t seem to have won hearts and influenced voters though in this security obsessed climate it’s hard to say whether any Labor politician could have done better than Amir Peretz.

There is one ominous note–a big winner coming down to the wire seems to be the far-right Avigdor Lieberman of Yisrael Beitenu whose support has risen from 5 seats at the beginning of the campaign to the current 10. He’s angling for the Interior Ministry portfolio in the future government which means he gets the right to call the dogs off if they sniff around him (as they have been doing) a bit too vigorously. Such a development would be worrisome for the Israeli judicial system which he wants to “reform” (which in this case is not necessarily a good thing).

Ariga.com on Kadima’s ‘Shallow’ Electoral Support

Thursday, March 9th, 2006
Robert RosenbergRobert Rosenberg (photo: ariga.com)

Polling today at 37 seats, it seems doubtful that anyone can dent Kadima’s lead in the three weeks remaining before Israeli elections. My heart is with Amir Peretz and Labor. But they’re holding steady at 20 seats, a small improvement over their current representation. Today’s Robert Rosenberg column at Ariga.com analyzes Kadima’s overwhelming, but shallow support:

Still, there is something mysterious about these elections, which are unprecedented in Israel in the way a new self-declared Centrist party has appeared out of nowhere to grab not only the center of the political map but parts of the Right and Left. Every other centrist party that appeared on the eve of elections either faded by the time the vote came around or broke up within weeks of the elections. Kadima is not yet fading, but there does not seem to be any gravity holding its membership together other than a tautological conviction that together they deserve being the ruling party by virtue of the fact that they are the ruling party. That a third of the electorate has accepted that at face value is not a sign of Olmert’s popularity, but more likely tied to the strange circumstances of Ariel Sharon and Israeli society’s need for some kind of cathartic moment — a state funeral — that would once and for all might lay the ‘Sharon legacy’ to rest.

I think that italicized passage is very insightful analysis and it doesn’t bode well for Kadima as a long-term player on the Israeli political scene (though it still will probably win the next election).

Olmert’s First ‘Decisive’ Move as PM? East Jerusalemites Can Vote…But Not For Hamas

Thursday, January 12th, 2006

Sometimes it seems that Mideast merry go round just keeps spinning round going nowhere fast. Witness, Ehud Olmert’s first ‘bold new’ initiative toward resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. For weeks, Sharon’s minions have threatened to refuse to allow East Jerusalem Palestinians to vote in the upcoming national elections under the ruse that they live in sovereign Israeli territory (albeit illegally annexed by Israel) and therefore have no right to vote in Palestinian elections (of course they have no right to vote in Israeli elections either since they are not Israeli citizens–talk about Catch 22s!). Olmert has taken the ‘decisive’ step of offering a compromise. The Palestinians may vote in the elections, just not for Hamas. This is from Robert Rosenberg’s Ariga.com:

Ehud Olmert has apparently made his first substantive decision since becoming the acting premier last week, telling Condoleezza Rice that East Jerusalem Palestinians will be allowed to vote in East Jerusalem’s five post offices as polling stations, but only if Hamas is not on the ballot.

Hey, that makes perfect sense. Let’s have an election here in the U.S. in which George Bush removes the Democratic party from the ballot. Seems fair doesn’t it (I know–we shouldn’t put it past him)? How the hell can you have an election you call democratic in which you exclude the only viable opposition party (one which could easily become the majority if Fatah continues to discredit itself as the dominant political player)? Olmert tried to sell this approach to Condi Rice. I wonder if she bought it. If she did, she’s an utter fool (and while there’s a lot I don’t like about her, she’s been pretty sharp and tough lately regarding these two wayward partners). Robert notes that the U.S. response is not yet known:

It’s still not clear if the Americans will accept the Olmert compromise between what had been Sharon’s adamant refusal to countenance any Palestinian voting in East Jerusalem, and the American insistence that Israel not do anything to give the Palestinians an excuse to cancel or postpone the elections.

I note with disappointment that the NY Times’ Greg Myre got the story completely wrong in today’s paper when he wrote:

Israel now appears likely to allow Palestinians to vote in East Jerusalem in parliamentary elections this month, a move that would resolve a pressing dispute with the Palestinians.

What’s missing from this picture? No mention whatsoever of Israel’s onerous, deal-breaking condition preventing Hamas from the ballot. Olmert has got to know that neither Abbas nor any Palestinian will stand for it. It will appear to them (and rightly so) and more Israeli double-dealing in which it paints a picture of reasonableness which conceals a cynical portrait underneath.

Performance Optimization WordPress Plugins by W3 EDGE