by Isi Leibler
Visiting New York this
week, I sought to assess the broader implications of the recent
International Advocate for Peace Award bestowed on former U.S. President
Jimmy Carter by Yeshiva University's Cardozo Law School. This unsavory
display of groveling by a major Jewish institution to a committed foe of
the Jewish people is not merely a stain on the entire Jewish community
but highlights a dramatic erosion of Jewish values and Jewish dignity.
Many consider it a
wake-up call and believe that alarm bells should be ringing in the
conference rooms of major Jewish organizations.
Yeshiva University,
created 127 years ago, is the crown jewel of America's modern Orthodox
establishment. Its rabbinical seminary was headed by the revered Rabbi
Joseph Soloveitchik. Its Cardozo Law School has evolved into the one of
the most pre-eminent legal educational institutions. Although it caters
for all Americans, Cardozo prides itself on being a Jewish institution,
serves only kosher food and is closed on Shabbat and the Jewish
holidays.
Since his electoral
defeat, Carter has emerged as one of the most vicious opponents of the
Jewish state, whose vile bias appears to stem from traditional Christian
anti-Semitism. His theological approach even retains the odium of
Jewish deicide and he is on record stating that Jews hate Christians
because they are "unclean, uncircumcised" and view them as "dogs."
He was one of the
principal architects of the campaign to demonize Israel as an "apartheid
state" which led to 14 members of the Carter Center including his
former close adviser, Kenneth Stein, resigning and unequivocally
accusing him of maliciously lying about Israel. Carter meets and
embraces Hamas leaders, urging the U.S. to negotiate with them. He also
opposes efforts to deny Iran nuclear weapons.
Alan Dershowitz said
that he could not "imagine a worse person to honor for conflict
resolution." He accused Carter of being "significantly responsible for
the second intifada … He just prefers terrorists to Israelis" and
"encouraged terrorism and violence by Hamas and Hezbollah." He accused
him of having "more blood on his hands than practically any other
president" and could not understand how such a person who "never met a
terrorist he didn't like" could become the recipient of such an award.
Yet the administrators
of Yeshiva University refused to rescind or even condemn the award to
Carter. Their principal concern was to display political correctness and
avoid being accused of restricting "academic freedom" or infringing on
the rights of their students.
Chancellor Richard Joel
declined to endorse the decision and unlike the dean of Cardozo,
Professor Matthew Diller, Joel "courageously" announced that he would
absent himself from the proceedings. But he stressed that "Yeshiva
University both celebrates and takes seriously its obligation at the
university to thrive as a free marketplace of ideas, while remaining
committed to its unique mission as a proud Jewish university."
Needless to say, it
would have been highly unlikely for Yeshiva University authorities to
have stood aside and mumbled clichés about academic freedom had one of
their student affiliates sought to honor a racist or right-wing
extremist.
The event was announced
only four days in advance because the organizers knew that honoring
such an inveterate anti-Semite would enrage many members of the Jewish
community.
There were major
protests from Yeshiva University alumni and students. But the Jewish
leadership establishment itself was incredibly restrained. Other than
the Zionist Organization of America, no Jewish organization of substance
called on the authorities at Yeshiva University to intervene or rescind
the award.
Anti-Defamation League
head Abe Foxman remarked that the award was wrong, it was inappropriate
to honor Carter and that there was a need to "instill values" to ensure
that "future mistakes like this will not be made." But he stressed that
"the university responded properly" by not intervening.
Even the outspoken
Simon Wiesenthal Center, while blaming the students for failing to
"exercise due diligence," avoided calling on the university authorities
to rescind the award.
In contrast, when a
Jewish institution invites or honors controversial personalities on the
radical political Right or anyone out-of-favor with the liberal chic,
there are invariably widespread protests and condemnations. This was
exemplified by the recent histrionic pressures and threats employed
which led to the cancellation of the invitation to Pamela Geller, the
outspoken campaigner against Islamic fundamentalism, to address Jewish
organizations. Had the students at Yeshiva University invited her, it is
highly unlikely that the authorities would have been as accommodating
as they were to Carter.
Regrettably, when it
comes to those demonizing and delegitimizing Israel, the trend is for
mainstream leaders to bury their heads in the sand, babble about freedom
of expression and the need for dialogue and avoid confrontations. They
rationalize this by insisting that the overriding objective must be to
create a "big tent" encompassing the widest possible range of
viewpoints, including those previously considered beyond the pale of the
mainstream Jewish community.
During the Cold War,
Jewish communists served as apologists for Stalinism and even applauded
the execution of Jews on trumped up charges. But they were deemed rogue
elements. In contrast, their successors who today engage in vicious
anti-Israeli rhetoric; promote boycotts, divestment and sanctions; and
campaign to persuade the American administration to exert pressure on
Israel, are becoming integrated as legitimate components of the
mainstream Jewish community or simply regarded as just another facet of a
"pluralistic" Jewish community.
Yeshiva University is
one of the most committed bastions of the Jewish community. When its
management declines to overrule the unconscionable decision of its
students to honor an anti-Semite, it highlights the extent to which the
rot has already advanced and penetrated organizations purportedly
promoting Jewish values and Jewish interests.
Thus one should not be
surprised to learn that Hillel branches on some campuses host disgusting
groups demonizing Israel like "Breaking the Silence" and engage in
kumbayah with Muslims hostile to the Jewish state.
Even a number of Jewish
community federations have set aside funds for anti-Israeli
institutions and initiatives. Increasingly, radical rabbis, synagogues
and Jewish cultural organizations are hosting speakers who shamelessly
defame Israel.
Most current Diaspora
Jewish religious, political and cultural leaders were molded during an
era when the Holocaust and the struggle to create a Jewish state still
dominated public consciousness. Now, many of these are reaching the age
of retirement. If they are loath to speak out when such degradation of
Jewish values takes place on their watch, the situation may worsen
dramatically when the next generation of leaders emerge whose background
is likely to make them even less sensitive to these issues.
When Jewish leaders
stand aside or remain silent as elements hostile to the Jewish people
and Israel are hosted or honored within the Jewish community, this
invariably impacts on their core values. It will also legitimize and
embolden Israel's adversaries to intensify efforts to impose boycotts,
divestment and sanctions as exemplified last week when University of
California, Berkeley student senators carried a resolution to that
effect.
Jewish leaders
committed to Jewish continuity who proclaim their love for Israel must
agree upon certain codes of conduct. This has no bearing on freedom of
expression. Nobody seeks to deny anyone the right to say what they
please. But if a community fails to draw red lines for its constituents,
it will face chaos and anarchy and undermine the shared values that
enabled the Jewish people to survive throughout the ages.
Isi Leibler's website can be viewed at www.wordfromjerusalem.com. He may be contacted at ileibler@leibler.com.
Source: http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_opinion.php?id=4101
Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.
No comments:
Post a Comment