Jewish Gathering Says "No" to Shamir

By Rachelle Marshall

When two Jews get together they are certain to come up with three different opinions, according to the old saying. So it was all the more remarkable that when close to a thousand Jewish men and women gathered in San Francisco on Nov. 12 to discuss a range of political and social issues, they turned out to be virtually unanimous in rejecting the policies of the current Israeli government.

The conference was organized by Tikkun, a magazine of liberal Jewish opinion, as part of its ongoing effort to challenge the conservative Jewish establishment by providing a voice for progressive Jews. With his full beard, blazing eyes, and neat sport coat, Tikkun's editor, Michael Lerner, resembled a well-groomed biblical prophet as he exhorted audiences throughout the day to "say 'no' to Shamir. " Opening the first of three panel discussions on Israel and the Palestinians, Lerner said, "This event is an opportunity for American Jews to tell Shamir: 'Your policies are morally offensive. They are politically self-destructive. They are a disgrace to the Jewish people. "' He accused Shamir of deliberately stalling the peace process and thereby "undermining the survival of the people of Israel."

A growing number of American Jews are declaring their independence from the government of Israel and its policies.

An open letter to Shamir, signed by many of the conference participants, contained equally strong language and called on Shamir to recognize "the right of the Palestinians to choose their own leaders and to exercise) national self-determination." Lerner arraigned for the signed letters to be delivered to Shamir in Cincinnati on Nov. 16, during the Israeli prime minister's US visit.

With few exceptions, a succession of speakers echoed the message expressed by Jerome M. Segal, president of the Jewish Peace Lobby, during the first panel: "There can be no peace unless Israel is prepared to reconcile its security needs with the right of Palestinian self-determination in the West Bank and Gaza."

As one speaker after another called for a positive response to the PLO, more open debate within the Jewish community, and an end to Israeli occupation, however, they also made unmistakably clear their commitment to Israel and to its future as a Zionist state. It was a commitment obviously shared by the audience, which applauded when Lerner referred to Israel as a haven for the Jewish people after 2000 years of persecution.

Despite the strong emphasis of the conference on doing what was best, in the long run, for Israel and the Jewish people, there was a warm response to the single Palestinian speaker, Khalil Barhoum. Barhourn, who teaches in the linguistics department at Stanford University, described specific examples of oppression in the occupied territories and referred to the Palestinians as "victims of victims."

He pointed out that residents of the West Bank and Gaza had succeeded in neutralizing Israeli military power. Since nuclear bombs, planes and artillery are useless against stone throwers and tax resisters, he said, the Palestinians have in effect forced the Israelis to confront them at their level. "And, they will win," he concluded, "because the more repressive the Israelis become, the more determined the Palestinians are to resist."

Only two panelists braved the tide by defending Israeli policy. Uri Dromi of the World Zionist Organization brought forth snickers when he drew an elaborate comparison between the intifada and a hypothetical movement of Mexicans demanding to be given California as an independent state.

Ironically, it was the other supporter of the Israeli government, Naomi Lauter of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, who gave the audience a chance to express, en masse, the spirit of the conference. At the final, plenary session, Mrs. Lauter was preceded by David Biale, director of the Center for Jewish Studies at the Graduate Theological Union in Berkeley, who bitterly denounced the censorship within the Jewish community of those who criticize Israel. He called the occupation "a cancer, whose price is the progressive disintegration of the American Jewish community."

Mrs. Lauter began by denying firmly that dissent was silenced within the Jewish community. Then she stepped off a cliff. "Can criticism from Jews possibly be helpful to the state of Israel?" she asked. "Yes! " the audience roared. That roar, like the Tikkun conference itself, suggests that a growing number of American Jews are declaring their independence from the government of Israel and its policies. Soon, perhaps, Congress will have the courage to follow suit.

Rachelle Marshall is a free-lance editor living in Stanford, CA. She is a member of New Jewish Agenda and frequently writes on the Mideast.