Sunday, September 27, 2015

The Outcome for Israel and the Palestines


What will the land of Israel (or Land of Palestine if you prefer) look like when the problem between Israel and Palestine is resolved. Who knows? Whatever happens will most likely happen gradually rather than in one gulp. It will take time for the people on each side to trust the other. For the Israelis that means trusting that the Arabs will not make a violent  intifada whenever a glitch occurs in the process (and glitches are bound to occur). For the Arabs it means trusting that Israelis will treat them with respect and will not use the security issue as a cover to allow encroachment on what little land they still have. There are zealots on both sides who have committed crimes (including murder) against the other side. They must be dealt with equally. Israel has at times destroyed the houses of terrorists, thereby punishing the families of terrorists as well as the terrorists themselves. OK if that's what it takes. But by the same token, when zealous Jewish settlers commit crimes against their Arab neighbors on the West Bank, the punishment should be equally harsh. In addition to punishing the criminals themselves, the settlements in which they live should then be reduced in size.
Let me suggest an answer to my above question. Perhaps cantonization temporarily or permanently could provide a possible path. To some extent it already exists. It needs some tweaking to make it more equitable and acceptable to the parties involved. Since Hamas in Gaza and Fatah on the West Bank do not see eye to eye, there would have to be 3 cantons (states) at least temporarily. Israel will have to continue to have the predominant security role for a long time. That will allow trust to build up on the Israeli side, and not having to worry about an expensive defense will help build the economies on the Palestinian sides.
Eventually it could evolve into a situation where Israel complains to the Palestines that they are not contributing enough to the common defense. Wouldn't that be something! I could see cantonization happening sooner with the West Bank Palestine. Gaza would be a harder nut, but a West Bank not responsible for Gaza could progress much faster economically and politically. Eventually the Gazans might realize that they are leaving themselves out of things and force Hamas to soften. Israel has to react to attacks from Gaza with counter-attacks as any nation would do, but it always must be ready to talk with them.
Whatever the outcome, it will be slow and a work in progress, as long as it moves in the right direction.

Monday, September 21, 2015

Israel's Challenge

I am concerned for the people of Israel because 1/3 of the Jewish population in the world live there, and I am concerned for their welfare just as I am concerned for the welfare of all my fellow Jews everywhere. I am less concerned for the shrines and land, and who owns what piece of real estate. Although the history of the Jewish people in ancient Judea certainly explains our interest in the location of the Jewish State, the real justification for Israel's existence is the fact that it exists and has done so for generations.
Herzl's dream was for a normal country at peace with its neighbors. Israel is part of the way there, but there are still challenges to reach that goal. The Palestinian Arabs resent the existence of a predominantly Jewish nation on land that was once predominantly inhabited by Arabic speaking Moslems. The Israelis are scarred by years of intifadas and bombings which made normal life impossible. They see chaos, danger, and war in the surrounding neighborhood, and fear that it would engulf them if they allowed that world into their space.
Both sides have their differences, but they also have common interests (for example economic development for the region). They also have common enemies (for example ISIS and the hardliners in Iran).
So what can the people on the ground (Jews and Arabs, Israelis and Palestinians) do to meet their common interests and minimize their differences?

What can the Palestinian Arabs do:
1. Accept the existence of a predominantly Jewish Hebrew speaking state in Israel.
2. Accept the fact that there are 2 separate Palestinian states with separate governments at least for the time being. Fatah on the West Bank can not negotiate for Gaza if it can not control the belligerent actions of Hamas. The separation does not have to be permanent, but they can only be united when they can make a united peace. It is not Israel's responsibility to bring them together.
3. Drop their insistence on the right of return of Palestinian Arabs to Israel. 1948 was 67 years ago. Generations have come and gone. There was a migration of Arabs out from Israel and a migration of Jews into Israel (including a large influx of Jewish refugees from the surrounding Moslem states). A massive immigration of Arabs into Israel could change the character of Israel and destroy Zionism.
4. Stop preaching hatred of Jews and Israel to their children.

What can Israel do?
1. Accept the fact that 1/4 of the population within Israel is not Jewish and most of those non-Jews are Arabs. Arabs and other non-Jews are equal before the law. Some have positions of prominence in the government and private sector. Many are educated and live like other Israelis. But there are problems on a personal level. Many Jewish Israelis do not trust their fellow Arab citizens. So to improve things on a personal level, politicians have to stop playing on those fears (like Netanyahu did before the most recent election). Schools need to promote kinship and tolerance between Jews and Arabs. The Palestinians might actually be partially descendants of Jews who did not leave when Judea was destroyed by the Romans 2000 years ago, but instead stayed and accepted whatever religion came along in order to remain, first paganism, then Christianity, then Islam. Perhaps believing that we are genetically related might bring us more together (maybe not). The more Israeli Arabs are brought into the mainstream of Israel, the more it will strengthen Israel. This is already happening. It needs to be a priority.
2. Settlements on the West Bank need to be curtailed. There are some Jews in and outside of Israel who believe that all of the land between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River (the Land of Israel as opposed to the State of Israel or the Land of Palestine as opposed to the Palestinian Territories) should be Jewish. The radical religious ones believe God said so in the Bible. The others claim the Balfour Declaration. They reality is that things happened as they happened. The West Bank and the Gaza Strip are inhabited by our cousins who worship the same God differently and speak a different language. But they live there and do not plan to go away any more than the Jews of Israel plan to go anywhere else. It is too late to create new facts on the ground. To do otherwise will give the Arabs no hope, and without hope conflict will continue.
3. Make the most of present common interests. Iran and ISIS threaten Israel, the Palestinians, and the surrounding Arab nations. Include the Arabs nations and Palestine as much as possible in the economic development and scientific development happening in Israel. This is happening already. It needs to be maximized.
4. Cooperation with Arab leaders and governments is good, but more important is inclusion of the Arab people in Israel, in Palestine, and in the surrounding Arab region in the economic and scientific progress that is happening in Israel. Governments and leaders come and go, but people stay.



Thursday, September 3, 2015

The Least Bad Outcome

It looks like the US Government will have barely enough votes in Congress to enable the President to veto a move by Congress to scuttle the Iran nuclear deal. This will probably be the best possible outcome. If Congress were to scuttle the deal, Iran would go ahead and develop nuclear bombs while the other nations in the coalition would feel free to start trading with Iran, effectively breaking the embargo and making a continued pressure by the US almost meaningless. It would put Israel in an even more precarious position. On the other hand by passing the deal by a very narrow margin requiring the President to use his veto power to prevent the deal from being scuttled, it showed the Iranian government how precarious their position is. It forced Secretary Kerry to publicly state how tough we will have to be with Iran and to say publicly that we do not trust their government. It may very well be the least bad of all possible outcomes.

Sunday, August 30, 2015

Perusing the Jewish Journal

I had occasion to pick up the latest edition of the Jewish Journal (Los Angeles) today. There were a number of articles about Israel, Jews, Moslems, and the nuclear deal with Iran. The articles had various points of view. One by Gina Nahai pointed out that the Shah of Iran promoted the rights of women while the mullahs (including the supposedly more liberal Rohani) of present day Iran suppress women. I agree, but nonetheless at the moment those are the guys who have the power in Iran and with whom we have to deal. A number of articles opposed the deal to various degrees. Dennis Prager is opposed to the deal and criticized American Jews who support it. David Suissa disagrees with the deal, but is against allowing disagreement to split the Jewish people apart. Rob Eshman points out that not all Israelis are opposed to the deal. A number of Israeli security experts find it a good deal. My opinion is that it is not a good deal but it is the possible deal, and there is no better alternative. The brightest article in the Journal was one by Haissam Hassanein, a Moslem Egyptian-American student at Tel Aviv University. After hearing bad stuff about Israel before going there, he found Israelis to be a diverse normal friendly people of various religions and opinions. Promoting this sort of image of Israel in the Middle East may very well be the solution to achieving Herzl's dream.

Monday, August 10, 2015

Who is Netanyahu and Who are We Jews?

Recently on the Fareed Zakharia show, Thomas Friedman was interviewed. He pointed out that that despite Netanhyahu's bluster, he has actually acted in a cautious manner. So who is Netanyahu? He talks like a war monger but does not act like one. I think Netanyahu's problem is that he is a politician more than a statesman. that is why he has such difficulty with President Obama who is a statesman more than a politician. But it also brings into question who are we as Jews and who are the people of Israel? After all a political leader in a democracy is elected by the people. Many of the military and intelligence leaders in Israel have spoken more dovishly than Netanyahu because they do not have to be elected and therefore can say what is real. Netanyahu has to pander to the mob and actually can stir up fear in the mob when it is needed to get elected. When the election is over he then regains his sanity. The Jewish people have had much to fear during the last 2 millennia since the end of the Kingdom of Judah. The people of Israel are particularly exposed and therefore willing to follow a demagogue like Netanyahu when it suites his purpose to be one. We Jews in the diaspora as well as in Israel have more than our share of intelligent people and people who do good for the world, but we also have our mishegooyim (maybe more than our share). We are the product of our history which was molded by the Christian and Moslem world.

Monday, July 27, 2015

Edry

Congratulations to Ronny Edry. He is the Israeli who used social media to reach out to ordinary Iranians to say that Israel loves Iran and received a similar response from ordinary Iranians. Of course Israel must maintain a strong military power, but people liked Edry will eventually win Herzl's dream of a secure Israel at peace with its neighbors, not Netanyahu's bluster.

Tuesday, July 14, 2015

The Nuclear Deal with Iran

So the US and the major nations have made a deal with Iran to curtail Iran's ability to make a nuclear bomb in return for decreasing the economic sanctions on Iran. The opponents of the treaty, say Iran can't be trusted to keep their part of the bargain. On the other hand it does include safeguards. It's not that it's a wonderful deal, but it's the least bad of the options. The Republicans who oppose the treaty are not necessarily doing a bad thing. I think they might actually have helped the Obama administration reach the best deal they could accomplish by letting the Iranian hard liners know that the president could not make a bad deal even if he wanted to (which he didn't). The reality is that the problems are complex. We are at odds with Iran as well as their clients like Bashir Assad and Hezbollah. But we are also their sort of allies against ISIS. Iran is the enemy of our allies, both Israel and its Arab neighbors. A nuclear Iran would stimulate some of the Arab countries to respond by trying to develop their own nuclear weapons. Unfortunately, Pandora's box opened 70 years ago with the unveiling of the first atomic bombs. The salvation of the world won't come from only military power or from only treaties either. Getting the people of the world (not just governments) to get along, to solve problems of poverty, food and other necessities, and getting religions to tolerate each other are all parts of the solution. Technology that deters offensive weapons instead of creating more offensive weapons will help. In other words mostly common sense.

Monday, June 8, 2015

Is a United Iraq Necessary?

Yesterday Farid Zakharia interviewed General Mc Chrystal on his show, Global GPS. Essentially the general said that defeating ISIS will involve not just a military victory but also winning over the population. That is no small order. The original Iraq war started by the Bush Republican administration gummed up the situation by exposing the limitations of US power and breaking up the humpty dumpty Iraq which we are now trying to put back together. If ISIS could be replaced by a secular Sunni country in Wetern Iraq and possibly eastern Syria along tribal lines without the barbarism of ISIS, friendly to the USA, Israel, Kurdistan, and the West, that would not set well with the Shiite government in Bagdad but they have had more than a decade to get their act in order. It would not set well with Iran. It would set well with the Sunni countries like Saudi Arabia and Egypt. Perhaps just the threat of it might make the central Iraqi government more central rather than just Shiite. Every solution seems to create new problems. Which of the bad solutions is the least bad? Is a united Iraq necessary?

Sunday, May 17, 2015

Us and Not Us

I would like to commend Prime Minister Netanyahu for taking a strong stand against the discrimination which Ethiopian Jews have experienced in Israel. I can't say I have always been his fan. He certainly can speak like a boor at times. But in this matter he has been right on.
When I was a young man I once asked my mother just out of curiosity, "would you rather I marry a girl who is Black and Jewish or one who is White and Gentile?" Her answer was "Black and Jewish because she would be one of us." It was not just a matter of religion. It was a matter of usness (identity). Although today most Jews live in North America where we are free of the worst excesses of anti-Semitism and in Israel where Jews are the majority, this feeling of Jewish identity was hammered into us by 2 millennia of being an outcast minority of us to a surrounding majority which did not accept us as part of their us.
I am sure that the time will come when all Jews in Israel will assimilate as one Jewish people. It is also important for the security of Israel that the feeling of usness will extend to all the citizens of Israel, Jewish or not.

Wednesday, May 13, 2015

The Question and the Answer


The results of the recent elections in Israel indicate that the Right knew the question but had the wrong answer while the Center and Left had the right answer but didn't know the question. What I mean is the Right knew that the major issue facing Israel is security. The internal issues pale in comparison. However they offered the wrong answer. Security is not served by alienating the very people you need to bring over to your side. On the other hand, the Center and Left are better prepared to do what needs to be done to make the compromises needed to maximize Israel's allies and therefore its security, but instead they tangled themselves up in a number of less important internal issues.

Friday, May 1, 2015

Netanyahu is the Jewish Arafat

Yasser Arafat screwed up when he was offered an opportunity for an independent Palestine by Ehud Barak, and he rejected it without even negotiating. He did it because he did not have the courage to go against his hardliners. In the last Israeli election, Netanyahu said he would not allow a Palestinian state under his watch and maligned the Israeli Arabs who make up 1/5 of his citizens to appease his hardliners and play on the fears of undecided Israeli Jewish voters. After the election, he said that he just meant that a non-militarized Palestinian state would be OK to appease the international community and sane American Jews who support Israel but not the new fanatics who have a brand of Zionism that differs from the democratic one that Theodore Herzl envisioned. Mr. Netanyahu's cowardice (and the sheep who follow him) put Israel at risk just as Arafat's cowardice destroyed Palestinian independence.
The fact is that the second Netanyahu (the one who allowed for a non-militarized Palestine) put forth an idea that is in sync with that of the USA under President Obama and probably with the international community if they could trust that Bibi is serious and not just blowing gas out of his mouth that should be coming from the other end. Although they would not openly admit it out of their own cowardice, I suspect that many in the Fatah leadership secretly think the same way. Palestine really needs economic development, and militarization would only be an unnecessary expense. But how can you expect courage from the Palestinian leadership when Israel elects leaders who are too chicken to oppose the settlers.

Wednesday, April 1, 2015

Bibi, Radical Rightists, and other Anti-Obamaists

Bibi Netanyahu and his Republican friends claim that they see the Iranian nuclear threat clearly and President Obama does not. They claim they are saving Israel from catastrophe by urging the US to keep ratcheting up the sanctions without negotiations whether the other major powers go along with it or not. The reality is that the US under Obama has maintained strong sanctions and has led the International Community in doing so. If the US were to go along with Bibi and the Republicans to go it alone, the sanctions would not work because without the  cooperation of the International  Community the sanctions would have gaping holes in it and therefore be not effective. Unfortunately nuclear technology, like all other technologies, has been growing and the danger of it falling into the wrong hands keeps getting greater. Our best hope of containing it is by keeping technologically ahead of the bad guys and uniting the world community against the danger.
As for a 2 state Israel/Palestine solution. Bibi says no Palestine during the election to win over his base and then a demilitarized Palestine after the election for damage control. One does not know which is the real Bibi, but  contrary to what one hears from the Radical Right, the damage control Bibi is not so different than Obama. Neither the real President Obama or the Damage Control Bibi demands an immediate militarized Palestine. Both the real president Obama and the possibly fictional Bibi see a gradual evolution of the status of Palestine. However the real Bibi seems to want no progress at all. The only action of Netanyahu is to authorize settlement expansion which creates facts on the ground which interferes with a solution, makes it difficult for neighboring Arab states who need good relations with Israel to bring those relations out from under the table without fomenting domestic rebellion, and gives cover to Iran to demonize Israel and move toward a nuclear bomb as well as helping anti-semites all over the world.

Friday, March 27, 2015

Fiction and Reality

In the Land of Israel/Palestine (the land situated between Egypt and Jordan), fiction seems to trump reality on all sides. The fiction of Hamas is that they can defeat Israel militarily. The fiction of Abbas and the leadership of the West Bank (at least publicly although I don't know what they think privately) is that the West Bank and Gaza Strip are one country called Palestine, and that Palestine can become one state if the UN wills it. The fiction of the Radical Right in Israel is that the Arabs don't exist. Netanyahu promotes that fiction when he expands settlements in the West Bank. And of course there are many Arabs who think that the Jews don't exist. There are anti-semites in the world who also hold a similar idea, that Jews should not exist in Israel or anywhere. The reality is that Israel exists and is inhabited by the Israeli people who consist of 75% Jews, 20% Arabs, and 5% others. The West Bank and Gaza Strip are inhabited by mostly Arabs but also pockets of settlement Jews. East Jerusalem has Jewish neighborhoods which exist on land which Israel acquired after 1967. The Arab neighborhood in East Jerusalem exists and the inhabitants have not been made into Israeli citizens and therefore are Palestinians.
So the reality is that both Jews and Arabs inhabit the land of Israel/Palestine, and neither are leaving because neither has anywhere else to go. They can kick the can down the road, but the present situation can not last forever. The resolution can not occur immediately, but it has to start somewhere. Palestine might never be one country or maybe it will some day. Maybe the ultimate solution will be 2 or more completely separate states, or maybe one bi-national state, or maybe some kind of confederation. But there has to be some movement to show that there is hope. Expansion of settlements is contrary to the interests of everyone, least of all Israel. Realism is a necessity.

Monday, March 23, 2015

J Street, I Can't Follow You

After Netanyahu opened his big mouth to speak to his base in the recent Israeli elections, I was ready to switch some of my contributions this year to J Street. Then I read in the Forward that J Street is now moving to the left of where I stand and going to the UN to force Israel to change. There is enough anti-Semitism in the UN already, they don't need me to help them..

Sunday, March 22, 2015

Palestinian State or No Palestinian State?

Bibi,
So during the election you told your base among the Settlers and Radical Right that you won't see a Palestinian state on your watch with no qualifications. Now when you speak to us in the World, you say that's not what you meant, a Palestinian state is OK, but a demilitarized one. Now, I agree with you on that, for now. It's true that a completely militarized Palestine so close to Israel is not acceptable today given what's going on surrounding you in the Arab world. But what are your thoughts about the future? It's true that the Palestinians have made impossible demands on Israel to kill any agreement, like demanding the return of descendants of Palestinian Arab refugees to Israel proper. Also they haven't gotten their act together to make peace. And its true, there are 2 Palestine's on the West Bank and Gaza, and Abbas can't speak for Gaza when he can't control Hamas. It's also true that compared to the neighborhood there is a de facto relative peace in Israel and in the West Bank and maybe for the moment even in  Gaza. But this kind of peace is temporary. Perhaps Abbas and the Palestinian leaders are not so anxious to move forward toward statehood themselves and prefer playing the role of victim. But why must you throw the ball back into Israel's court, making the Palestinians look like the good guy victims they want to be, justifying the mullahs in Iran who pretend to be the defenders of the Palestinians, helping them to justify their nuclear ambitions, and putting Israel in greater danger. Also, Bibi, you even alienated your own Arab Israeli citizens, questioning their right to vote, dividing Israel and weakening it. 
The future Palestinian state can not happen overnight and must start demilitarized. But when you expand settlements, you are saying the occupation will never end. Israel needs creativity in dealing with it's existential problem. I think creativity is a quality that you, Bibi, lack.

Thursday, March 19, 2015

Speak Softly and Carry a Big Stick

Theodore Roosevelt once said, "Speak softly and carry a big stick." Bibi Netanyahu speaks loudly with a little shvantz. To be even handed, it is true that the leaders of the Palestinians also have little shventzlach. That's why Bibi and Abbas can't come to an agreement. Bibi, you can't expect the US government, whether run by President Obama or your Republican handlers, to spoon feed you. In regard to Iran, your blustering won't force President Obama to do whatever you say because you are asking the impossible. Even if the US made stronger sanctions on Iran as you so loudly demanded, the US would turn off our partners in the international community leaving big holes, and the sanctions would then not do bobkes. The same can be said for the Republican congressmen who also spoke loudly with little shventzlach. It's easy to talk when you are not able to deliver.

Wednesday, March 18, 2015

Bibi, What Do You Want?

So Bibi, you say you won't see a 2 state solution while you are prime minister. So what is your alternative? It must be a binational state. What else is there if you want to Israel to stay democratic?
So Bibi, you oppose the international community's negotiating with Iran to control their nuclear development? So what's your alternative? I haven't heard it?
So Bibi, you don't want your Israeli Arab citizens to vote in the election? Do you want to further divide your country?
So Bibi, you don't want to listen to your own intelligence community and military leaders? Is your election more important than Israel's security?
So Bibi, you want us American Jews to vote Republican? Sorry, Bibi you don't own me, and you don't speak for me.

Saturday, March 14, 2015

Israeli Election

Israel will have an election in a few days. The news reports tell us that at this moment the center-left Zionist Union Party of Herzog and Livni seems to have lined up more votes than Netanyahu's Likud or any other party. That should give them the opportunity to try to form a coalition government. Netanyahu as always stands for doing as little as possible towards finding an agreement with the Palestinians and appeasing the extremists on the right including support for West Bank settlement expansion and giving the impression of looking tough. A potential coalition of parties that are amenable to moving forward on coming to terms with the Palestinians actually represents the majority in Israel. The problem is that a number of those smaller parties have interests other than the security needs of Israel that conflict with each other. But at this point in time, those parties need to at least temporarily reach compromises on those issues for the sake of the larger issue on which they agree, namely the time is ripe to move forward on offering the Palestinians a path to a fair arrangement. The surrounding Arab countries that invaded Israel in 1948 because they saw it in their interests to do so at that time, now see that cooperation with Israel is in their greater interest at this time. But the problem between Israel and the Palestinians keeps this new cooperation under the table. Movement toward accommodation will give the Arab nations the opportunity to move cooperation to the top of the table and would also take the wind out of Iran's sails in regard to Israel. A Zionist Union victory would immediately repair the difficulties between Israel and the USA created by Netanyahu. It would also repair Israel's relations with the American Jewish community. Netanyahu's speech in the US Congress put us in an awkward position by intruding in our politics. We will not abandon our support of our fellow Jews in Israel because of Netanyahu, but we might do it with less enthusiasm. So let us hope that the politicians in Israel will put things into perspective and make the painful compromises needed to promote the security of their constituents.

Sunday, March 1, 2015

Isaac Herzog

Isaac Herzog was interviewed by Farid Zakaria on CNN this morning. If I were an Israeli, I would vote for Herzog. He seems to have a reasonable approach to Israel's relations with the world around it. It is safer for Israel to be part of the coalition of sane nations. It is not in Israel's interest to side with one US party over another. It is foolhardy for Netanyahu to put Israel's security at risk for his political ends before the upcoming Israeli elections. Herzog, Netanyahu, and Obama (also most Arab leaders) agree that Iran should not develop a nuclear bomb. It could lead to a nuclear arms race that would threaten all the countries in the region. But Netanyahu makes off like he is the only one who cares and has the right path to make it happen. It's not true. Israel needs to continue negotiating with the Palestinians toward resolving their problems, and Israel needs to be as inclusive as possible toward the 25% of its population that is not Jewish. But the Arabs also need to discourage hatred toward Jews among their population to give the Israeli people the confidence to make concessions. It has to start in schools, both Jewish and Moslem, in Israel, the West Bank, and the surrounding Arab countries, to teach the advantages of friendship and discourage hatred toward each other. Israel and its neighbors have common interests that potentially are greater than their differences.

Monday, February 23, 2015

Keywords: Religion and Science

I think there are 3 keywords in reconciling religion and science: search, what, and why. Science is the search for what. Religion is the search for why.

Monday, February 16, 2015

Religion and Reality

There is a view of things that considers only hard material realities and there there is a view that considers only the meaning of things without regard for hard realities. Religion began as an attempt to give meaning to an ultimately tragic reality. Religion and reality are not necessarily incompatible, but they are when one uses religion to justify a material gain. The most extreme examples today are seen when ISIS and Al Qaeda commit murder and mayhem and use religion to justify it.

Wednesday, January 21, 2015

Netanyahu and the Republicans

I read that Netanyahu was invited by Boehner to speak to the Congress about greater sanctions on Iran without discussing it with the White House. It is no secret that there is a personal dislike between Netanyahu and President Obama. The move is political by Boehner and Netanyahu. Netanyahu thinks appearing tough will give him points with his base in the Radical Right in Israel. Boehner thinks putting Netanyahu on a pedestal might help the Republicans win over some of the Jewish votes. Mr. Boehner, we American Jews think for ourselves and are not so easily swayed. Mr. Netanyahu, you do not represent us American Jews, and your policies seem to benefit your political interests more than the safety and welfare of Israel. As to how to approach the problem of Iran developing nuclear weapons, there is no sure fire iron clad cure for the problem. Bluster and swagger won't do it. Contrary to what the Radical Right has been claiming, President Obama has been applying pressure on Iran. At some point an intelligent leader has to close the deal, unless we want to be in a constant state of turmoil.
Technology is and will be continually advancing, both for good and evil. The human race will have to figure out how to deal with it before some screwball pushes the wrong button and we all go up in smoke.

Thursday, January 15, 2015

Are We Chosen?

Are we Jews the Chosen People? This is something that seems to occupy the thoughts of gentiles more than our own. Whoever wrote the dialogue of Fiddler on the Roof stated best our attitude toward the idea when Tevye says to God, "I know we are supposed to be the Chosen People, but next time maybe you could choose someone else." Chosen is not a gift but an obligation. If we are chosen, what are we chosen for? The simple answer is chosen to bring the idea of monotheism to the world. If that is all there is to it, then we did our job a few thousand years ago. Most of the people in the world today follow one of the monotheistic religions. So why can't the world leave us alone? Why are we still scrutinized like goldfish in a bowl.
Somehow we have been given among us a pool of people who stand out. We have more than our share of scholars, of physicians, of lawyers. We have more than our share of people who stand up for the rights of others.
Israel, the one nation with a Jewish majority, has built itself from a poor country into a financially successful country with a number of first rate universities. Israel  certainly could do better in many of the things it does and many people in its Jewish majority are challenged in how they interact with the Israeli Arabs and the Arabs in the Palestinian territories, as I have repeatedly said in many of my previous blog entries, but what nation is perfect? Certainly hypocritical Europeans who lay blame on Israel are the same Europeans who drove most of us out of Europe. Somehow we Jews are held to a higher standard to which we often do not adhere. If only God or the world could answer Tevye's question and choose someone else.

Wednesday, January 7, 2015

Terror in Paris

We hear today of an attack by terrorists on freedom of speech. I have not previously heard of Charlie Hebdo. Now "I am Charlie." I don't know when it will happen, but let us hope that one day reason will prevail over stupidity. True belief in God is to search for meaning in life. These fundamentalist terrorists pervert religion and have no real purpose other than terrorism for its own sake.