|
June 18, 2023
Key Takeaways:
- President Biden's plan to counter antisemitism prioritizes the antisemitic threats that most Jews prioritize--and our right-wing friends feel left out in the cold. Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL) made clear last week that the IHRA definition is about labeling ANY criticism of Israel as antisemitic.
- It logically follows that if we oppose a one-state solution to the Israel-Palestinian conflict then we must support a two-state solution and oppose policies (such as settlement expansion) that make a two-state solution less likely.
- Trump's decision to withdraw from the Iran Deal, which none of his opponents for the 2024 nomination have criticized, resulted in Iran moving closer to acquiring nuclear weapons and did nothing to stop Iran's nefarious non-nuclear activities--the worst of all worlds. A diplomatic understanding that might de-escalate tensions might be underway. Congressional Republicans should let the adults handle this.
- The facts provided in Trump's indictment prove not only that he broke the law but that he endangered U.S. and Israeli security.
Read to the end for corrections, what you may have missed last week, fun stuff, an upcoming event in-person in Highland Park and on Zoom with Rep. Elissa Slotkin (D-MI), candidate for U.S. Senate, and the dumbest argument against prosecuting Trump.
You're welcome to read for free, but if you want to chip in to help defray the cost of the newsletter, click here to pay by credit card or PayPal. Just fill in the amount of your choice. Or Venmo @Steven-Sheffey (last four phone digits are 9479).
Hi Steve,
President Biden's National Strategy to Counter Antisemitism is good news for everyone who is serious about fighting antisemitism, which is why it has received broad support from the center/right to the left of the Jewish community. But as David Schraub explains, "because they are used to playing a central role in setting national narratives about antisemitism, Jewish conservatives were put in an unfamiliar situation. It is the center and left, now, who are conducting the preeminent national campaign to combat antisemitism. Meanwhile, the right can’t decide whether to even climb aboard."
Until now, despite polls showing that Jewish Americans are more concerned about right-wing antisemitism — "the sort that shoots up synagogues and vandalizes cemeteries, the type whose tentacles influenced mass murderers from Pittsburgh to San Diego to Buffalo to El Paso," says Schraub--our friends on the right have tried to divert our attention from right-wing antisemitism because it is emboldened by the Republican Party (left-wing antisemitism cannot and should not be ignored but it is marginalized and condemned within the Democratic Party). Any Jew who understands this is not going to vote Republican.
But now, writes Schraub, the Biden administration is providing "a focal point where the Jewish community can fight the antisemitism that it actually finds most dangerous. While not ignoring antisemitism on the left by any means, the National Strategy also refuses to let it eclipse all other threats."
Proponents of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s non-legally binding working definition of antisemitism (the IHRA definition) love to talk about how many countries and jurisdictions have adopted the IHRA definition. Yet they can't answer these two questions: In all those countries and all those jurisdictions, is there any evidence that antisemitic speech or violence declined following the adoption of the IHRA definition? Are there any examples of where the IHRA definition has been used in real life to successfully combat antisemitism? (By "used," I don't mean "misused.")
Speaking of misuse, last week, Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL) introduced a resolution embracing the IHRA definition. Scott said the quiet part out loud: "This resolution makes clear that ANY attacks or hateful rhetoric about Jewish people or State of Israel is labeled what it is: antisemitism."
Scott, whose statement criticized the Biden administration for not codifying the IHRA definition, put "ANY" in all caps. In his view, ANY criticism of Israel is antisemitic and that's why he backs the IHRA definition.
Imagine how insecure you must be about your ability to defend Israel on the merits if you have to label ANY attacks on Israel as antisemitic (and put it in all caps to show you really mean it). If you support the IHRA definition as the sole definition or if you want to codify it, this misunderstanding of antisemitism is what you are supporting, and it's neither pro-Israel nor helpful in fighting real antisemitism.
The Biden administration made the right decision by declining to move beyond prior policy on the IHRA definition, declining to codify or adopt the IHRA definition, and welcoming the Nexus Document. No wonder our right-wing friends feel left out in the cold.
If a substantial majority of Jews are more concerned about right-wing antisemitism then maybe we should listen to them. Those guards at our synagogues are not there to protect us from students who make offensive statements about Israel. And if we work together to make Biden's plan a success, one day those guards won't be there at all.
Enjoy your one-state reality. Michael Koplow wrote last week that "two things can be true at the same time: it is offensive to say that Jews cannot or should not live in the historical and biblical Land of Israel, and the settlements that Israel builds deep inside the historical and biblical Land of Israel are an obstacle to peace. It is not a question of rights, but a question of consequences and outcomes. The only way to counter the reality of one state is to make two states the thrust of U.S. policy and judge outcomes by that metric above all else."
What I said on March 18 remains true: "a two-state solution is not politically possible now. Israel’s current government doesn’t want it and whether current Palestinian wants it or not, the Palestinian Authority is too weak. But Israel needs a two-state solution for its own sake, let alone to realize the aspirations of the Palestinians, which is why those of us who support Israel should oppose steps by Israel’s government that make a two-state solution less likely.
"Some argue that it doesn't matter what Israel does because the Palestinians want not an end to the occupation of the West Bank but an end to Israel itself. Some probably do, just as some Israelis want a Jewish state from the river to the sea. The reality is that millions of Palestinians aren't going anywhere. Millions of Jews aren't going anywhere. Palestinians see the rebirth of Israel as a catastrophe, a nakba that conflicted with their national aspirations and led to displacement and worse. Jews see the rebirth of Israel as a modern miracle that realized 2,000 years of national aspirations and provided a needed safe haven from centuries of antisemitic persecution.
"Neither side has to give up its narrative or accept the other side's narrative, but both sides must realize that the only path forward, a two-state solution, requires both sides to give up sovereignty over land that they believe should be theirs and both sides to accept that previous sins of the other side may never be fully redressed. And everyone who cares about Israel has a duty to speak up, whether for or against the policies of whatever government is in power. "
Progress on Iran? Trump walked away from the Iran deal May 8, 2018, while Iran was still in compliance. Then his “maximum pressure” strategy failed, his efforts at the UN to continue the arms embargo against Iran failed, and his efforts at the UN to snapback sanctions against Iran failed. Trump accomplished nothing, and now Iran is far closer to nuclear weapons than when Trump left the deal. On the non-nuclear front, Trump's ramped-up sanctions did not stop Iran's other nefarious activities. Trump's stupidity endangered both the U.S. and Israel.
The New York Times reports that "the Biden administration has been negotiating quietly with Iran to limit Tehran’s nuclear program and free imprisoned Americans" via an informal agreement that would address--but not solve--the main issues of contention, leaving the U.S. and Israel in a better position.
Prospects for returning to the Iran Deal are dim. But Kelsey Davenport reports on an opening for de-escalation and writes that "limited measures to enhance transparency will not solve the Iranian nuclear crisis in the long term, but de-escalation now decreases the risk of conflict and creates time and space for diplomacy to work." If we don't take advantage of this diplomatic window, writes Joel Rubin, we will likely face "an Iranian nuclear program that is much more advanced and much more dangerous."
Congress has an important role to play: not to screw this up by passing legislation that would make diplomacy more difficult. Kevin McCarthy & Co. should let the adults handle this.
Corrections. I'm entitled to my own opinions but not to my own facts, so I appreciate it when readers bring errors to my attention. No one brought any mistakes to my attention last week, so it looks like last week's newsletter was perfect.
In Case You Missed It:
- It's not just that Trump broke the law and damaged U.S. national security. Israeli defense and intelligence officials are concerned that Trump damaged Israel's security by his mishandling of these secret documents.
Tweet of the Week. Middle Age Riot.
Twitter Thread of the Week. Heath Mayo.
Dumbest Argument of the Week: The argument that the Justice Department should not investigate and prosecute Trump because if Republicans regain power, they will launch frivolous investigations against Biden and Clinton. That's an argument against electing Republicans because it's a concession that if given power, Republicans will use it irresponsibly. If you don't understand the gravity of Trump's crimes then you owe it to yourself to read the indictment. Still confused? Read this.
Video Clip of the Week. John Cooper Clark. You have to listen carefully because he has a strong accent but it's worth it.
Upcoming Event. Politics with Dana and Steve was the first Jewish group in the Chicago area to back Elissa Slotkin when she initially ran for Congress in Michigan. Other groups said "no" or "maybe later" or "we are not sure if she is viable." But we knew she would never be viable unless someone gave her a chance. She beat the odds, she won, and now she is running for the U.S. Senate.
Join Dana Gordon and Steve Sheffey for an in-person and Zoom reception with Rep. Elissa Slotkin (D-MI) in support of her Senate campaign in Highland Park, Illinois, on Monday, July 24 at 6:00 pm CT. Our co-chairs are Stephanie Jacobs, Jacki Parmacek, Linda Schottenstein Fisher, Lynn & Skip Schrayer, Harvey & Janice Silverstone, Amy Small, Jill Zipin, and Democratic Jewish Outreach of Pennsylvania (DJOP). You must RSVP to attend.
This is the newsletter even Republicans have to read and the original home of the viral and beloved 2022 and 2023 Top Ten Signs You're At a Republican Seder. If someone forwarded this to you, why not subscribe and get it in your inbox every Sunday? Just click here--it's free.
My most popular Times of Israel posts are How Not To Define Antisemitism and Pro-Israel Or Pro-Bibi? I periodically update my Medium posts on why Democrats are better than Republicans on Israel and antisemitism. You can read my most recent effort to define "pro-Israel" here (it's a work in progress, as am I).
I hope you enjoyed today's newsletter. Donations are welcome (this takes time to write and costs money to send). If you'd like to chip in, click here and fill in the amount of your choice. The link lets you use a credit card or PayPal. If you'd rather pay by check, that's fine too. Or you can Venmo to @Steven-Sheffey (last four phone digits are 9479).
I accept advertisements. Let me know if you're interested.
| 
