You're welcome to read for free, but you can chip in for the cost of the newsletter by clicking here and filling in the amount of your choice. You don't need a PayPal account; the link lets you use a credit card. If you have trouble, let me know. Or you can Venmo @Steven-Sheffey (if it asks, last four phone digits are 9479).

Friends,

To find the right answers, you have to ask the right people. The Democratic Party remains committed to a strong U.S.-Israel relationship; the objective evidence is the voting record, where Democrats continue to overwhelmingly support Israel and condemn antisemitism.

The most recent example occurred in July, when the House barely passed the 2022 State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs funding bill, the bill that provides U.S. aid to Israel, 217 to 212. AIPAC and J Street supported the bill. Every Republican voted "no." The only "yes" votes were cast by Democrats. It was partisan, but Democrats, not Republicans, were on the correct side of the partisan divide.

Yet a perception lingers that the problem is not Republicans, but progressives, in part because the right-wing of the Jewish community has an interest in amplifying anti-Israel voices on campus and in the media, both to raise money and to distract from the real threats facing Israel and our community that emanate from the right.

But we cannot deny that some voices--not all, but some voices--within the progressive community are problematic. We must understand how to make the progressive case for Israel. That's why I spoke with Stav Shaffir on Monday.

Stav is on the Engagement Committee of Heart of a Nation. She was one of the leaders of the Israeli social movement that brought hundreds of thousands of Israelis into the streets in the summer of 2011. In 2013, at 27, she became the youngest Knesset (Parliament) member in history, as a member of Labour. She later founded Democratic Union. She no longer serves in the Knesset and now leads Israel's Green Movement.

She just began a new project, the Shira Center, which is a collaboration between university campuses and centers for autistic adults that will allow autistic adults to grow and flourish by working to their abilities with other university students to make the campuses green. Stav's younger sister is autistic, and "she's an incredible kid and, but the services that are given to people with autism and development problems are very lacking." The Shira Center's philosophy is that "the place for people with special needs is within society. We don't need closed and locked institutions where they are separated from society." The website is now in English and this tweet (click translate tweet) will give you a taste of a project that you should support.

Stav and I were scheduled to talk for 15 minutes, but our conversation lasted 30 minutes. What follows is a summary of what we discussed, which builds on the conversation I had a few weeks ago with Oren Jacobson.

Talking about the Boycott, Sanctions, and Divestment (BDS) movement against Israel: Stav recommends pointing out that "those who support BDS are actually helping the right wing in Israel" because to the extent connections are being cut, the connections are between Democrats and Israel and people on the left from abroad and Israel.

"Those who are losing their connections, losing their support in the academy, in the media and arts and culture, in politics, it's always those on the Democratic side" and those in the "campus fights for peace in Israel are being hurt, we lose the support that we get because amongst more and more people on the progressive side in the U.S. for example, they believe that disconnect from Israel might help the cause of peace. Now that's a complete and a terrible mistake. Because when you cut connections, it's not helpful, it's preventing progress."

Meanwhile, the right wing in Israel, "those who are against peace, have more and more connections, they get enormous support from the Republican American community, from the evangelical American community, they get more and more resources, more and more help, but those on the left are being cut." Netanyahu's decision (under pressure from Trump) to bar Reps. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) and Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) from visiting Israel was a gift to BDS.

In addition, "the other way [BDS and other one-sided pressure on Israel] helps those on the right is because it's creating a notion amongst Israelis in general that the world doesn't understand our [legitimate] security interests" and ignores the reality that "the Palestinian leadership refused [to make peace] and keeps operating with violence."

And when the Israeli public perceives that the world is not simply against settlements, but against Israel's right to exist and refusing to acknowledge Israel's legitimate security concerns, "that's scary. And with that fear, more and more people move to the right." Indeed, as Stav wrote in 2019, "Netanyahu and others like him exploit BDS to paint a picture to Israelis that the entire world is against us. They use BDS to spread an ideology based on isolation and fear, arguing that the movement itself is evidence that a solution to the conflict is impossible."

Finally, boycotting only one side of a two-sided conflict is not progressive. "Both Israelis and Palestinians have the right to live here. Both of us have the right for independence, for all of our basic and equal rights for equality, for the ability to fulfill our potentials and live life in security. When some parts of the left, very small parts I have to say, in the U.S., don't recognize or don't see our side of the story, the Israeli side, it's not very progressive seeing just one side."

That's why it's important for us in America to "tell the story of the democratic Israel to show that Israel is not just Netanyahu, or those that don't want peace. It's mostly people who do want peace and are looking for more ways to try and achieve that." If you want an example of how to talk to progressives about BDS, watch Stav's short video message to Democrats, which uses the language of real progressives to speak to other progressives.

Pressure should not be placed only on Israel. "In the last decades, every time we got into negotiations, it was also the Palestinian leadership that refused to sign the agreement and refused the many different offers that were given to them in the past 30 years."

To be clear, Stav believes Israel has steps it needs to take: "I think that settlement building should stop immediately. I think we should stop funding settlements and invest all the money inside Israel. We should start putting facts on the ground in the terms of creating a two-state solution and stop building in places that we know will be part of the future of Palestine, and focus on just areas that are going to be part of Israel.

"But damaging Israel's security is not going to be a part of the solution. We will have to continue and protect ourselves, no matter what. It's part of our responsibilities for our people. So that's going to continue. If we want to promote peace we need to make the Palestinian leadership willing to accept an agreement with Israel, and we need to push [leadership in Israel], as the stronger side, to be the leader of a future peace agreement; there are many many things to do--it should not touch our security."

While both Israeli and Palestinian leaders should be pressured to make peace, cutting or conditioning aid to Israel is not the way to peace because Israel needs U.S. aid to defend against genuine security threats.

"My generation is the third generation growing up with suicide bombings. So many people of our generation live in trauma from what they had to experience. Nobody wants that world to continue. Nobody. But Israel is still under threat, it's under threat from Hamas rockets, it's under threat from Hezbollah, it's under threat from Iran. I wish we would not need to continue to defend ourselves but sadly, we still do. And therefore, we do need the continuation of the collaboration with the U.S. on defending ourselves."

Stav responded to my question about opposition to a two-state solution from within elements of Israel's current government by pointing out that 60% of Israelis support a two-state solution. In her view, simply managing "the conflict basically means an ongoing condition of lack of security and [an] ongoing condition of terror attacks coming from Gaza, of getting into another new operation every few years and losing lives of people to that conflict, so there needs to be a different way forward. Sometimes it's easier for us to ignore the conflict and try to pretend like doesn't exist. But once in a while we get a reminder for why it exists and when it comes to an end, usually it's a very sad reminder which we don't want to see, we don't want to experience anymore."

She believes that Israelis support a two-state solution based on a combination of values and morality--Palestinians deserve to have their own state and Jews understand what it means not to have independence--and security reasons: Israel needs a clear border. "Having settlers in the West Bank is not helping our security" but harms security "because our soldiers need to protect illegal outposts in hostile environments."

As she wrote in 2018, the two-state solution is "the only formula that will keep Israel secure, Jewish and democratic. Any solution that doesn’t, in an official and final way, separate the two populations sentences both sides to many more decades of unnecessary bloodshed...When two nations fight each other, it’s better to separate them and not chain them together in a utopian federation. Reconciliation? First let’s try a few decades of quiet."

Stav believes that the "way to push forward a peaceful solution is to have more and more collaboration between businesses on the two sides between people" and that the increased collaboration resulting from the Abraham Accords is a model that could be applied to relations between Israel and the Palestinians.

But will Bennett support a two-state solution? It's a question of political will. "Most Israelis understand that if Bennett will have the courage, he has in his government the support to move forward. But to make it happen, like most other things, takes activism, and activism can work: In the past year, very powerful movements happened on the street by people who said, ‘we have to stop this corruption. This man [Netanyahu] has to go.’"

There is hope. "There is so much potential for better lives on both sides. I just came back from a conference with young people. It was very unique because all we did in the conference was not just to argue about the different narratives we all have about the conflict was, but to try and imagine what a future based on peace looks like" and the better future for all of us that collaboration can bring. "Our life will look so much better after we'll have peace with the Palestinians."

If last week's newsletter inspired you to think about the future of Zionism and how Israel should approach the conflict with the Palestinians, you owe it to yourself to read these articles from Donniel Hartman and Yuval Noah Harari.

ICYMI. We must make an alliance of the sane.

Tweet of the Week. Norm Macdonald.

Video Clip of the Week. The Moth Joke and With Courtney Thorne-Smith.

I guess this is a good problem to have: This list is now so large that while many people are local, even more live outside the Chicago area and have no interest in local news. If you want to be on a list that will receive infrequent newsletters about local issues and events, reply to this email and I'll add you.

Did someone forward this newsletter to you? Why not subscribe? It's free! Just click here. 

Donations are welcome (because this costs money to send). If you'd like to chip in, click here and fill in the amount of your choice. You don't need a PayPal account; the link allows you to use a credit card. If you'd rather send a check, please reply and I'll send you mailing information (please do NOT send checks to the P.O. Box). Venmo to @Steven-Sheffey (last four 9479) is fine too.

You’re reading this. So are other influentials. If you want the right people to know about your candidate, cause, or event, reply to this email to discuss your ad.

The Fine Print: This newsletter usually runs on Sunday mornings. If you receive it as an ICYMI on Wednesday it's because you didn't open the one sent on Sunday. Unless stated otherwise, my views do not necessarily reflect the views of any candidates or organizations that I support or am associated with. I reserve the right to change my mind as I learn more. I am willing to sacrifice intellectual consistency for intellectual honesty. Smart, well-informed people may disagree with me; read opposing views and decide for yourself. A link to an article doesn't mean that I agree with everything its author has ever said or that I even agree with everything in the article; it means that the article supports or elaborates on the point I was making. I take pride in accurately reporting the facts on which I base my opinions. Tell me if you spot any inaccuracies, typos, or other mistakes so that I can correct them in the next newsletter (and give you credit if you want it). Advertisements reflect the views of the advertisers, not necessarily of me, and advertisers are solely responsible for the content of their advertisements. I read, value, and encourage replies to my newsletters, but I don't always have time to acknowledge replies or to engage in one-on-one discussion. Don't expect a reply if your message is uncivil or if it's clear from your message that you haven't read the newsletter or clicked on the relevant links. © 2021 Steve Sheffey. All rights reserved.