American Jewish Groups Express Concern about
the Apparent Abandonment of a “Two State”
Solution
Allan C. Brownfeld, Editor
Special Interest Report
April 2017
At his meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in February,
President Trump abandoned decades of bipartisan U.S. policy and declared
that the U.S. would no longer insist on the creation of a Palestinian state
as part of a peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians.
If Mr. Trump is serious about pursuing a peace agreement, those with
experience in the region say that he must inevitably return to a two-state
solution. “If you do a system¬atic analysis of the situation, there is no
other option,” said Daniel C. Kurtzer, former U.S. ambassador to Israel and
Egypt. “There are Israelis who believe they could get away with giving the
Palestinians minimal political rights, but they are fooling themselves.”
Those in Israel and the American Jewish community who want a genuine and
just peace between Israel and the Palestinians have expressed concern. Peace
Now called the Trump-Netanyahu press conference “terrifying.” It declared:
“The two leaders are not only depriving Israel of the very possibility of
reaching peace but also undermining Israel’s own future as a democracy and a
Jewish state. They are delivering a huge victory to extremists on both
sides.”
J Street, which describes itself as “pro-Israel and pro-peace,” stated: To
be clear there is no one-state configuration that leads to peace. There is
no resolution to this conflict without full political rights and
independence for both peoples. All so-called ‘one state solutions’ are
recipes for more violence that will ultimately threaten Israel’s identity as
a democracy and a Jewish homeland.”
The Union for Reform Judaism declared: “Only a two-state solution can
achieve the goals of the Israelis and Palestinians. We see President Trump’s
abdication of the long-time, bipartisan support for a two-state solution
darkly. It is potentially devastating to the prospects for peace and
Israel’s Jewish, democratic future.”
The appointment of David Friedman, Mr. Trumps’ bankruptcy attorney and
supporter of West Bank settlements, who has called for Israel to annex the
occupied territories, has also stirred much controversy. He has referred to
Jews who support a two-state solution as “kapos,” Jews who assisted the
Nazis during World War II. He charged former President Barack Obama with
“blatant anti-Semitism.” (At his Senate confirmation hearing, he apologized
for such statements).
Jewish organizations that have never before opposed anyone named to be U.S.
Ambassador to Israel embarked upon a campaign to thwart Friedman’s
confirmation. These groups include Americans for Peace Now, Ameinu, the New
Israel Fund and Jewish Voice for Peace. Hundreds of rabbis and cantors
signed petitions opposing his confirmation, as did Rabbi Rick Jacobs, who
heads the Union for Reform Judaism.
Daniel Sokatch, whose New Israel Fund advocates for civil rights in Israel,
said that Friedman holds views directly in opposition to the organization’s
values of tolerance and mutual respect: “Here’s a person with no diplomatic
experience, who’s been put in a position to be the ambassador to one of our
most important allies and who holds extreme views. It’s like throwing a
lighted match into a tinderbox.”
Five former U.S. ambassadors to Israel circulated a letter describing
Friedman as unqualified because of his “extreme” and “radical positions.”
Writing in Washington Jewish Week (Feb. 16, 2017), Rep. Jaime Raskin (D-MD)
notes that, “Friedman’s relentless denunc¬iation of Democrats and liberal
Jews mark him as a polemicist unfit to represent the American people as
ambassador anywhere, above all to Israel where he is a partisan actor in the
conflicts of the day … He is no diplomat … but a firebrand activist openly
contemptuous of the two-state solution … Friedman’s selection is a wrecking
ball in American politics and specifically the Jewish community, which needs
reconciliation and dialogue, not more division and polarization. … Now is a
moment that calls for maximum prudence and diplomacy in office, cultural
bridge-building and creative political action to break the brutal logic of
hatred and war …”
Writing in Mondoweiss (Feb. 28, 2017), Philip Weiss argues that the 50th
anniversary of the occupation will “rock the Jewish establishment.” He notes
that, “...the American Jewish community is going to hit an iceberg called
the Jubilee, the 50th anniversary of the occupation/Six Day War. The
collision is going to change the Jewish establishment. The fractures that
have been developing for years over Israel are going to break out in public
agony. The anniversary will change the American Jewish relationship to
Israel for a long time, as the Six-Day War did fifty years ago. Young Jews
will take charge, young anti-Zionists will be welcomed into some synagogues,
and some will speak up for BDS (boycott, divestment and sanctions) against
Israel … There is a great positive movement afoot in the Jewish community …
The ’67 war married American Jews to a militant state as their primary form
of identity in the shadow of the Holocaust; but the Jubilee year is going to
mark the divorce.” •
|