The UN Insecurity Council
The upshot of last week’s UN Security Council vote condemning Israeli settlements has caused a great deal of insecurity in the American Jewish community. Too often, hurried statements from Jewish organizations (fueled by the Israeli government) increase the heat when what we need is light.
FB posts and tweets in response to events seem reckless, especially in comparison to the hour-long oration by Secretary of State John Kerry on Wednesday.
Listening to the entire speech on Wednesday, I found Kerry’s rebuttal to the claims made by Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and his followers in the US comprehensive and thoughtful. Giving the background to the vote, as well as an historical perspective on the all the previous Security Council resolutions and the US continued condemnation of settlements, Kerry’s words were balanced, honest, and based in both Israeli and American values. One headline in Haaretz today even called his remarks “superbly Zionist.”
It’s time for the leadership of the American Jewish community to pay attention to the power imbalance, the economic disparities, and the inequitable systems of justice applied to Palestinians on the West Bank. It’s time for American Jews to meet Palestinians, to visit their villages, and to see, in contrast, how well-developed bedroom communities for Israeli settlers are choking off Palestinian life and establishing what currently looks like a one-state solution.
This assessment does not ignore the challenges from the Palestinian leadership. The Palestinian Authority is considered corrupt by the average Palestinian. The PA has not succeeded in stemming terror attacks on settlers. The peace process has stalled for lack of leadership—on both sides.
Yet, short of signing a peace accord, the government of Israel could relieve much suffering. Instead, they have stifled the Palestinian economy, limiting Palestinian control over their own land, their own towns, and their own destinies. While Israelis build on land that they do not legally own, and are protected by the Israeli army, Palestinians are refused permits to build and their homes are demolished on a regular basis. Israeli powers prevent Palestinian entrepreneurs from establishing businesses that will create jobs. Roads that connect Israel and the West Bank, extending well into Palestinian-controlled areas, ease travel in and out for Israelis while Palestinians are stymied from traveling daily from home to work or school (often in their own neighborhoods) by closures and checkpoints.
While respecting the concerns of Israeli citizens and settlers for their safety, I find the current blind responses extreme and short-sighted. Thankfully, groups that support the voices of opposition within Israel, including Ameinu, Americans for Peace Now and JStreet have given American Jews a different way of looking at the situation, a middle way that supports the long-standing commitment to a 2-state solution while decrying tactics like boycott, divestment, and sanctions.
My personal position is most aligned with T’ruah, whose statement reflected what Kerry subsequently stated. The full text is also included below.
I offer a few other links to thoughtful posts to help us all move past the rhetoric and come to a deeper understanding of the Obama Administration’s decision to allow the Security Council resolution to pass 14-0. These posts probe both sides of the argument and raise interesting questions for us all to consider.
T'ruah Statement on UNSC Resolution
תניא, רבי אומר: איזו היא דרך ישרה שיבור לו האדם - יאהב את התוכחות, שכל זמן שתוכחות בעולם - נחת רוח באה לעולם, טובה וברכה באין לעולם,ורעה מסתלקת מן העולם
Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said, “What is the correct path that a person should choose? Love tokhecha (rebuke/correction), for as long as there is rebuke in the world, comfort comes to the world, good and blessing come to the world, and evil departs from the world.”—Talmud Tamid 28a
Over the past few days, we have heard significant pain and anger from the Jewish community and from the State of Israel regarding the recent UN Security Council Resolution and the decision by the United States to abstain, thus permitting it to move forward. It is true that the UN has a history of paying disproportionate attention to Israel. In the past, T’ruah has spoken up against problematic resolutions, including the UNESCO resolution this fall that ignored the Jewish historical connection to Jerusalem and to our holiest sites there.
In this case, however, the tokhecha contained within this resolution simply reflects decades of U.S. and international policy that affirms the goal of “two democratic States, Israel and Palestine, liv[ing] side by side in peace within secure and recognized borders,” and decries settlements as an obstacle to achieving this vision. We encourage those concerned about this resolution to read it in full before responding.
T’ruah has long advocated for an end to occupation, which violates the human rights of Palestinians while threatening the safety and security of Israelis. The expansion of settlements involves land theft, as well as the blocking of access to land and of freedom of movement for Palestinians. Within Area C of the West Bank, where the settlements sit, Palestinians and Israeli citizens living side-by-side are governed by two different systems of law, in contradiction of international law and of the biblical principle, “You shall have one law for citizens and strangers alike.” (Leviticus 24:22)
The settlements and the entrenched occupation also threaten the well-being of Israelis, including those soldiers who risk their lives to defend an ill-fated policy; the Israelis who see their tax dollars diverted from needed health, education, and welfare programs in order to allocate disproportionate funding to those living in settlements; and Israelis and Jews around the world who face increasing isolation as a result of the policy of occupation. No less a figure than Rabbi Ovadia Yosef ruled that the return of territory may be permitted--or even obligatory—for the sake of pikuach nefesh—saving life.
Despite accusations that the resolution is one-sided, we welcome the call to the Palestinian Authority for “confronting all those engaged in terror and dismantling terrorist capabilities, including the confiscation of illegal weapons” and the condemnation of “all acts of violence against civilians, including acts of terror, as well as all acts of provocation, incitement, and destruction.” T’ruah has always condemned terrorism and rejected any claims that political aims justify violence against civilians.
The capture of East Jerusalem during the Six-Day War restored Jewish sovereignty over our holiest sites for the first time in modern history. We pray and work for a two-state solution that will preserve Jewish access to these sacred sites. However, the continued policy of demolition of Palestinian homes; the lack of permits for Palestinians to build in the East Jerusalem neighborhoods where they live; the expansion of settlements in these neighborhoods, often by shady legal tactics; and the failure to provide basic city services to East Jerusalem Palestinians living on the wrong side of the wall that cuts through the “eternal undivided capital of the Jewish people” simultaneously violate human rights, fly in the face of Jewish law and values, provoke anger among the Palestinian population, and make the goal of peace harder to achieve.
The rhetoric on the part of the Israeli government and some segments of the Jewish community that caricatures the UNSC resolution as an erasure of Jewish history or as a rejection of our connection to Jerusalem only blurs the distinction between Israel and the occupied territories, and reinforces the perception that standing up for Israel requires defending occupation. In fact, we should celebrate the resolution’s distinction between Israel within the Green Line and the occupied territories, and its rejection of the one-state solution increasingly called for by many in the BDS movement. Standing up for the future of Israel and for the safety of Israelis and Jews around the world requires distinguishing between our commitment to Israel and the current policy of occupation, and working toward a two-state solution.
We affirm the call by the UNSC resolution for “all parties to continue, in the interest of the promotion of peace and security, to exert collective efforts to launch credible negotiations on all final status issues.” The expansion of settlements, including so-called “natural growth” changes the facts on the ground before territory can be negotiated. Even the areas that, according to most maps, will end up in Israel must be negotiated as part of a final status agreement. We also affirm the call to Palestinians to end the terrorism and incitement that frightens Israelis from taking bold steps toward peace, as well as rejecting “Price Tag” attacks and other violence and incitement on the part of Jews.
Much of the Israeli and Jewish communal response to the UNSC resolution, as well as to all tokhecha regarding settlement growth, has emphasized the failure of Palestinians to accept past agreements, or focused on terror as the primary obstacle to peace. While there is certainly reason to find fault with both sides—as the UNSC resolution does—Zionism, ultimately, is about taking our future in our own hands, rather than waiting for someone else to determine our future. This means both accepting responsibility for the misguided and dangerous policy of settlement expansion, and taking it upon ourselves to do what is necessary to bring about peace.
In permitting the hotly contested peace agreement with Egypt, including relinquishing land captured in war, Rabbi Chaim David Halevy wrote:
We have great doubts regarding this peace agreement. That is to say—it’s possible that it will be temporary until the Arab world gathers the strength necessary for another round.
But it’s also necessary to remember that it’s possible that it will continue for a long time. . .Therefore, it is incumbent on us, without considering their ultimate intentions, to cultivate this peace, and to do whatever is in our power that it should develop and set down roots, out of hope and faith that time will heal all wounds, and that a new generation will rise that has not personally suffered the defeat of war and the humiliation that follows. (Aseh L’kha Rav 4:1)
The obligation to pursue peace weighs especially heavily as we approach the momentous fiftieth anniversary of the Six Day War. Just as the biblical yovel year—the fiftieth year of the agricultural cycle—brought liberation and a fresh start, we commit to using this moment to move forward toward peace, a two-state solution, an end to occupation, and a better future for both Israelis and Palestinians.