The Flotilla fallout
The Flotilla fallout
For our take, please go here.
Plus two more ships, and more in the Flotilla news
• The U.N. Security Council condemned “acts” resulting in the nine “Freedom Flotilla” deaths, in a statement watered down at U.S. insistence from the Turkish original. [NYT]
• Two more ships affiliated with the flotilla—including an Irish vessel called the “Rachel Corrie”—are apparently still out there. “This is not the end,” the flotilla organizer pledged. [Ynet]
• “We’re the only ones who believe them,” a U.S. official says regarding the Israelis’ insistence that their soldiers were attacked. “And what they’re saying is true.” [Politico]
• Israel is still detaining hundreds of activists. And with Israeli border security on high alert, two infiltrators from Gaza were shot and killed Tuesday morning. [NYT]
• A general Arab Israeli strike was called for today, with some warning of a “new intifada.” [JPost]
• A helpful round-up of international reaction shows Arab countries, China, Britain, and more condemning Israel’s violence and demanding an end to the blockade. The U.S. statement is by far the least harsh. [WSJ]
• Yet the fallout is widely seen as likely to increase the U.S.-Israeli strain. [NYT]
Plus Gingrich is both sorry and not a Nazi, and more
Tablet Magazine and The Scroll will be dark Monday in honor of Memorial Day.
• A Hezbollah camp in Syria is a transit point for missiles that are trucked into Lebanon. This is not promising for the prospect of a peaceful summer. [Times of London]
• An Israeli journalist points out that the Israeli military’s hyperactive, loud, and at times asinine response to the Gaza-bound “Freedom Flotilla” is probably not as wise as just quietly diverting the completely non-threatening boats or letting them through the blockade. [Ynet]
• Progressive political group Democracy for America said it will continue to back Marcy Winograd, who is challenging staunchly pro-Israel Rep. Jane Harman (D-CA) in the primary, despite Winograd’s support for a one-state solution and her demand that Harman and others “pledge allegiance to this country.” [Ben Smith]
• Brandeis University will try to manage its financial difficulties without selling off parts of its art collection, as it had planned. [NYT]
• Am I the only one who thoroughly enjoys it every time some public figure who says something stupid or worse has to prostrate himself in front of the ADL and insist he is not a Nazi? Anyway, it’s Newt Gingrich’s turn. [ADL]
From our Irish friends, have a happy Memorial Day. Please think of those who protect us and then do not return home.
Also, dog bites man
Point One: The President of Jewish Funds for Justice, Simon Greer, is essentially a Nazi, says Glenn Beck.
(Specifically, according to Beck, Greer’s philosophy of prioritizing the common good “leads to death camps. A Jew, of all people, should know that. This is exactly the kind of talk that led to the death camps in Germany.”)
Point Two: Everyone is a Nazi to Glen Beck, says Lewis Black.
Who’s right? We report, you decide.
Hebrew U goes after GM
The fierce protectors of Albert Einstein’s reputation—a.k.a. the good folks at Hebrew University in Jerusalem, which owns the rights to Einstein’s image—are suing General Motors over an advertisement that shows a shirtless and admirably cut Professor Albert. The graphic graphic is part of a GMC Terrain ad that is slated for the September issue of People that will reveal the magazine’s choice for Sexiest Man Alive (we’ve got money down on Idris Elba).
“Dr. Einstein with his underpants on display is not consummate with and causes injury to [the university's] carefully guarded rights in the image and likeness of the famous scientist, political activist, and humanitarian,” a Hebrew U. lawyer says. Though we will agree: Ideas are sexy too!
The university owns the rights to Einstein’s image and guards them vigilantly—most of the time. Several years ago, it tangled in court with California-based Electronic Arts over a video game that imagined Einstein dueling with Hitler. On the other hand, it has been willing to sell Einstein’s image to help hawk computers, cameras, and, of course, Coca-Cola.
Full ad below the jump. Warning: It’s utterly ridiculous. (more…)
Over context of Israeli actions
Abraham Foxman of the Anti-Defamation League has responded to Peter Beinart’s New York Review of Books essay in the NYRB—a classy move, doing it in the same venue.
In his essay, Beinart cites the ADL as one of the prime American Jewish groups that, in its all-but-unquestioning support for Israel, has enabled Israel’s least liberal elements and forced many liberal American Jews—particularly younger ones—to abandon their Zionism. But, echoing critics like David Frum, Foxman argues that Beinart fails to understand Israel’s actions and policies in the proper context: Namely, decades of Palestinian rejectionism and terrorism. Most Israelis and American Jews, according to Foxman,
understand that continuing to sit in the West Bank is not good for the country. So at Camp David in 2000 they tried a solution of ending the conflict, which included withdrawing from 90 percent of the territories and eliminating the majority of settlements. They got a big no and suicide bombs.
In 2005, they withdrew unilaterally from Gaza with the intent to do likewise in the West Bank because they saw no partner for peace. They got Hamas and rockets against their civilians. In 2008, with a different Palestinian interlocutor, they went back to a full and better offer for a Palestinian state and got nothing again. So after all that, is it surprising that the public in the last election said, nothing works, let’s hold on until there’s real change on the other side?
What Beinart diagnoses as chronic Israeli illiberalism is actually, Foxman adds, “a justified cynicism about the willingness of the other side to end the conflict and a confusion about what real options Israel has regarding its dilemma of how to withdraw and still have security.”
In his response, Beinart, while acknowledging that the Palestinians are “not blameless,” argues that Palestinian actions cannot fully explain the most revanchist elements of Israel’s society and indeed government. Hinting at something he said in his interview with The Scroll, he concludes, “the ADL too often ignores the interconnectedness of Jewish and non-Jewish dignity. After all, the same sort of settler fanatics who burn Palestinian olive groves also assassinated an Israeli prime minister.”
New nonproliferation push
Might the Obama administration’s calls for stricter nonproliferation efforts find Israel in its crosshairs? Probably not, but it’s still an issue worth watching.
Israel practices “nuclear ambiguity”: It has not signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty …but has pledged not to become “a nuclear power” … but is basically known for certain to possess nuclear warheads, though it has not declared it. (By contrast, India, Pakistan, and North Korea are non-signatories that have in effect declared their nuclear statuses; all other nuclear powers are signatories.) Israel’s status has rarely been any sort of issue, but one of the few times it has been is, well, just now. President Obama’s recent nuclear summit brought out some anger out of Mideast states like Egypt over the fact that their ostensibly “nuclear-free zone,” which they are trying to prevent Iran from spoiling, actually already has a de facto nuclear power. In fact, it was reported yesterday that some NPT signatories, led by the Phillipines, have introduced a U.N. draft resolution that would call on “all states in the Middle East that have not yet done so to accede to the treaty as non-nuclear weapon states so as to achieve its universality at an early date.” Hint, hint.
Meanwhile, perhaps the policy most emphasized by the Obama administration’s new National Security Strategy is nonproliferation. “Our efforts to contain these dangers are centered in a global nonproliferation regime that has frayed as more people and nations break the rules,” it states. “We will pursue a broad, international consensus to insist that all nations meet their obligations,” it declares. “And we will also pursue meaningful consequences for countries that fail to meet their obligations under the NPT or to meet the requirements for withdrawing from it.”
North Korea, which has developed nuclear weapons in violation of the NPT, and Iran, which is widely believed to be developing them in violation of the NPT, are frequently cited. But could this include Israel too?
Definitely not, nonproliferation expert Jeffrey G. Lewis emails. “This refers to Iran and North Korea (which it does by name), and not Israel, which strictly speaking has no obligations under the NPT,” he explained to me. “I do not believe that this statement, even in a veiled manner, in any way is supposed to refer to Israel.”
The real test, it seems to me, would be if some sort of resolution with strong bearing on Israel ever makes it to the Security Council. At which point we could expect a U.S. veto.
So much hummus, fuzzy numbers, and more
Today in Tablet Magazine, Etgar Keret has some thoughts on the new hummus world record. Two political scientists take issue with Peter Beinart’s use of statistical data purporting to show declining American Jewish identification with Israel in his big essay. In an excerpt from his new history of Commentary magazine, Benjamin Balint shows how the magazine was integral to the remarkable postwar Jewish invasion of the American literary canon. In his weekly haftorah column, Liel Leibovitz tries to be his own prophet. The Scroll thinks that would be a pretty cool skill to have.
Our dispatch from the White House party
Of all the guests at yesterday’s first-ever reception for Jewish American Heritage Month, only one got a shout-out in President Obama’s formal remarks. “Sandy and I actually have something in common,” said Obama, directing his attention to the reclusive, legendary pitcher Sandy Koufax, who sat in the front row. “We are both lefties.” But, the president added, the similarities end there: “He can’t pitch on Yom Kippur; I can’t pitch.”
You know the old saw about how it’s always really hot on Jewish holidays? Apparently it applies to secular celebrations, too: A late-spring heat wave blanketed Washington, D.C., and while a few lucky guests bypassed the sidewalk security queue—Diane Sawyer and Mike Nichols, we’re looking at you—for most of the 200 or so honorees, the weather turned out to be a great equalizer that left everyone just as damp as everyone else. New York Times columnist Tom Friedman panted his way down 15th Street, jacket slung over his shoulder, trailed by J Street head Jeremy Ben-Ami. Chabad emissary Chaim Bruk, in from Montana, sweated it out with former Dallas Cowboys lineman Alan Veingrad. A lucky few clustered beneath the shade of umbrellas, which were originally packed for the predicted thunderstorms. (more…)
Plus the futile Flotilla? and more in the news
• Prime Minister Netanyahu said he wants to move “as speedily as possible” from the current U.S.-mediated proximity talks to direct talks. [AP]
• Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas will meet with President Obama at the White House in early June, three days after Netanyahu does. [Laura Rozen]
• Israel has alternately condemned and mocked the “Freedom Flotilla” now making its way toward Gaza, where it will attempt to breach the IDF’s blockade. The IDF has pledged to prevent the up to nine vessels from reaching Gaza. [NYT]
• Israel is set to announce its formula for compensating West Bank settlers hurt by the current six-month construction moratorium. [JPost]
• Syrian President Bashar Assad defended (to Charlie Rose) his backing of Hamas and Hezbollah, while also asserting that Iran supported informal Syrian-Israeli talks. [Haaretz]
Plus how Israel doesn’t relate to the oil spill, and more
• Chief-of-staff Rahm Emanuel’s family met with Shimon Peres; the Israeli president gave the bar mitzvah boy
a pocket watch a Kiddush cup and a book of Psalms. [Ynet]
• Shmuel Rosner wonders why many magazines—he singles out Foreign Policy—give disproportionate attention to Israel. [Rosner’s Domain]
• Cyprus denied permission for the Gaza-bound “Freedom Flotilla” to mass in its waters. Though the practical effect will be minimal, Israel lauded the island nation. [Ynet]
• A conservative organization is pushing one American Christian minister’s line that the oil spill in the Gulf is retribution for President Obama’s tough line on Israel. [Religion Dispatches]
• The White House’s Jewish Heritage reception is going on right now. Allison Hoffman will file a dispatch tomorrow, but for now, it’s streaming live!
Makhoul denies working with Hezbollah
An Arab Israeli community leader arrested earlier this month, initially under a gag order, was indicted today on charges of spying for Hezbollah. Ameer Makhoul is accused of meeting with an operative of the Lebanon-based, Iran-backed terrorist group in Denmark in 2008; passing along information on Mossad, Shin Bet, and other security facilities; and trying to recruit other agents. He is the head of Ittijah, or The Union of Arab Community-Based Associations; his brother is a former Knesset member.
Makhoul denied the charges, and his lawyers—to which he was only recently granted access—assert that he was interrogated unlawfully. (The police deny this.) Some see the prosecution as political.
A second Arab Israeli was indicted separately for the lesser charge of meeting a Hezbollah agent.
This seems like one more thing that could make it a hot summer on the northern border.
Controversial ‘presumed consent’ will have to go
Four years ago, Richard Brodsky, a Democratic Assemblyman from Westchester County, New York, abandoned his bid for state Attorney General after his ailing teenage daughter needed a kidney transplant. Last month, Brodsky (again trying to be New York’s top cop) stood with his daughter to announce his plan to significantly alter the state’s organ donor laws in a way that would dramatically increase the number of donors. But his proposal met swift opposition from several influential Orthodox organizations that, along with the Catholic League, are already working to squash the proposal.
Joined by representatives of the Orthodox communal organization Agudath Israel, Brodsky’s fellow Democrat, Dov Hikind, an Orthodox Assemblyman from Boro Park, Brooklyn, voiced his concerns to Brodsky in a congenial and productive discussion, according to both legislators. By meeting’s close, Brodsky made it clear that he would not push for the bill’s passage.
All the meeting participants, Hikind told Tablet Magazine, agreed that organ donation is “a huge mitzvah, a good deed.” The primary concern of the Orthodox community, he said, are “situations where the onus is put on the individual citizen.” And the bill’s proposal for “presumed consent” would do just that: Require a state resident who is opposed to being a donor to affirmatively indicate so, most commonly on a driver’s license. The legislation, Hikind said, “was tantamount to entrapment.”
For Brodsky, “presumed consent” is the point: It is a necessary step to reform and expedite the organ donation process. He cited the gap between those who are willing to donate, and those that are registered donors. The concern from the Orthodox community, Brodsky said, centered on the “opt-out” provision and its potential “unintended consequences.” (more…)
The Forward’s Yiddish edition has debuted what may be the first Yiddish cooking show on the Internet. In the pilot episode of Eat in Good Health (Ess Gezunterhait), which is hosted by two of the paper’s writers, Rukhl Schaechter and Eve Jochnowitz, we learn how to make sour cherry varenikes, a kind of dumpling (the recipe is borrowed from The Molly Goldberg Jewish Cookbook). Did you know that Yiddish distinguishes much more sharply between sweet and sour cherries than English does? Can you tell a varenike from a varnishke? (The former’s dough is made from potatoes, while the latter’s is kasha-based.) The varenikes look great. I won’t spoil the rest.
D.C. theater head bowed to Wiesel’s request
The always excellent Washington City Paper has a big feature all about Theater J’s cancellation, at Elie Wiesel’s request, of the world premiere of Imagining Madoff, a play that featured a fictional jailhouse meeting between Bernard Madoff and Wiesel.
The central irony is that the head of the theater (which is funded by the Washington, D.C., Jewish Community Center) has been known for pushing the envelope—he staged a controversial play about slain pro-Palestinian activist Rachel Corrie, for example. Additionally, a rewrite of the script, in which Wiesel’s character was slightly altered (and no longer called Elie Wiesel), probably removed all grounds for legal action. Still, fear of the hassle that a lawsuit brings—as well as, just maybe, Artistic Director Ari Roth’s personal relationship with Wiesel—led Theater J to nix the world premiere, which will now take place this summer in upstate New York. (Roth has also pledged to stage the revised version of the play next year.)
As originally written, the play had only three characters: Madoff; Wiesel; and Madoff’s secretary. Yet, according to playwright Deborah Margolin, these figures, and particularly Wiesel, were primarily allegorical. Madoff stood for, well, all the bad stuff Madoff stands for; Wiesel stood for moral force. “A recurring element in the play,” WCP notes, “is Wiesel’s insistence that Madoff handle his personal assets as well as those of the foundation; by play’s end, Madoff has yet to agree, a poignant ellipsis that mirrors Madoff’s desire and inability to confess his sins to Wiesel.”
However, having received an advance copy of the script, Wiesel—whose foundation lost $15 million to Madoff, and who personally lost over $1 million—called it “obscene” and “defamatory,” prompting Margolin to change his character’s name. In the new version—which is the one being produced upstate—the character, a Long Island rabbi, is described as “Novelist, holocaust survivor, humanitarian, professor, lifelong witness,” which should sound familiar.
“Wiesel is part of the family,” Roth told WCP. He meant this figuratively, of course, except maybe not exclusively: His mother, who was hidden from the Nazis during World War II, has been friends with Wiesel for half a century. Though the altered version of the play almost certainly removed the chance that a court would find for Wiesel, “that wasn’t enough for Roth, who felt,” the paper reports, “that the gray areas of the law could land him in court—a place he’d willingly go to defend some sorts of creative freedom, but not the right to offend Elie Wiesel.”