Correspondence between Uri Bank (National Union) and Prof. Eidelberg
(Herut): Taking responsibility for the National Camp

[Distributed with permission from both parties]

Uri Bank's letter to Prof. Eidelberg.

Monday, January 13, 2003

Dear Prof. Eidelberg,

I hope this letter finds you well.

A neighbor of mine heard you speak recently at the Israel Center, and he
claims that he heard you say that the reason (or, at least, one of the
reasons) one cannot vote for the National Union is because "Uri Bank
supports the seperation of Church and State". If this is a misquote on my
neighbor's part, please ignore item number one and skip directly to item
number two:

1. I absolutely and unequivocally do NOT support the seperation of Church
and State! What I DO strongly support is a seperation of Religion and
POLITICS. This means that in my (our) opinion, it is actually detrimental to
Jewish values to have specifically orthodox parties (Mafdal, Shas, Aguda).
Not only is it stupid on the real-politic level - because with the framework
that we advocate you get non-religious individual's support for Jewish
values as well (Gandi hy"d, Lieberman, Eldad, Stern, Nudelman, Cheeta,
Tartman) - but it is also the only way to attain true Keruv and Achdut Am
Yisrael. Otherwise, the non-religious learn learn to despise Judaism,
because of the political blackmail that is used by these parties. The bottom
line is this: In the Jewish State of Israel, there can be no seperation of
"Church" and State, but there HAS to be a clear seperation of "Church" and
politics.

I made it very clear that this is our position in reply to your previous
attack on this issue:
"AS A PARTY THAT REPRESENTS BOTH RELIGIOUS AND NONRELIGIOUS VOTERS, ALL OF
WHOM RECOGNIZE AND VALUE THE IDEAL OF THE JEWISH STATE FOR THE JEWISH
PEOPLE, WE ARE PROUD OF THIS POINT. YES, THERE SHOULD BE SEPARATION OF
RELIGION FROM THE GOVERNMENT. NO PARTY, REPRESENTING ONE SECT, SHOULD HOLD
INFLUENCE OVER ANOTHER GROUP OF PEOPLE, BY VOTING INTO LAW ISSUES THAT
AFFECT THE GENERAL POPULATION. FOR EXAMPLE, SHABBAT IS SHABBAT FOR ALL, AND
THE KNESSET SHOULD NOT BE ABLE TO SLIP A LAW INTO THE BOOKS THAT ALLOWS
BUSES TO RUN EVERYWHERE, NOR FOR DISCOS TO BE SET UP IN RELIGIOUS

NEIGHBORHOODS. CERTAINLY, THE LAWS OF THE JEWISH STATE ARE STEEPED IN JEWISH
TRADITION, FROM TORT LAW TO MARITAL LAW. BUT WE MUST PROTECT THE PUBLIC'S
RIGHT TO RELIGION, ON BOTH SIDES OF THE COIN, FROM MISUSE BY THE LEGISLATIVE
BODY.

FURTHERMORE, THE ISRAELI POLITICAL SYSTEM HAS TO RID ITSELF OF THE SECTARIAN
RELIGIOUS PARTIES. THEY DEFAME THE VERY CHARACTER OF JUDAISM IN THE EYES OF
THE NON-RELIGIOUS, WHO PERCEIVE THESE PARTY'S POLITICAL BLACKMAIL AS
SOMETHING THAT IS SUPPOSEDLY JEWISH. AN EARNEST EFFORT HAS TO BE MADE IN
ORDER TO TRULY BRIDGE THE GAP BETWEEN RELIGIOUS AND NON-RELIGIOUS IN ISRAELI
SOCIETY. THIS IS WHAT THE NATIONAL UNION PLEDGES TO DO.

I am attaching a piece of official National Union literature which I wrote,
that addresses this and the next subject.

Assuming that you misunderstood our position on this, I would ask that you
now do the honest and fair thing and undo the harm you did by
misrepresenting what we stand for in the public's eye. Furthermore, I expect
that you will not repeat this mistake in the future.

2. In the 1992 elections the following votes were thrown away by National
Camp parties:

Hatchiya = 31,957 votes (they were roughly 6,000 votes short of the
threshold, which has rised considerably since...)

Mizrachi = 12,851 votes

Harav Levinger - 3,708 votes

If you feel that Herut is justified in taking this risk in these elections
because one of the current polls shows that you will pass the threshold,
please recall that Hatchiya also had polls showing they were going to
receive 4 seats right before the '92 elections, in which they were
eliminated from the Israeli political scene (consequently throwing away
close to 32,000 votes and handing the victory to Rabin which, in turn,
brought about Oslo...)

Another thing that should be kept in mind is the fact that in the 1999
elections a party needed at least 64,000 votes in order to past the
threshold. There is no way anyone can be sure that Herut will get anything
close to this. Instead you will probably just throw away around 50,000
National Camp votes. Just to illustrate the point - if the Ichud Haleumi is
now teetering around the 10 seat mark (as Yediot's weekend polls predicted),
your insisting to run is what will keep our number 11 out of the Knesset...
This is just what your party did to Moledet in '96. Meshulam Amit, Moledet's
#3 at the time, was 300 votes short of getting into the Knesset, while Yamin
Yisrael got only 1,300 votes - which we all know would have gone to Moledet
had they not selfishly insisted on running. And this is after we all pleaded
with Guttman and Lapid and they PROMISED us that if they weren't passing the
threshold in the polls the week before the elections, they would drop out.
Also, keep in mind that in our political system, the lost votes don't
necessarily go to one of your party's ideological sisters. Instead of
Meshulam Amit from Moledet, the left (I forget if it was Labor, Meretz or
the Arabs) got another MK. Do you really want to see another Arab in the
Knesset instead of one more MK for the National Union?! This is EXACTLY what
you are doing. With all due credit to you, Kleiner and Marzel - and I do
respect all three of you - I question whether you really understand this
very basic political reality.

I urge you to reconsider this harmful run for Knesset. It will only cause
the National Camp to lose 1-2 precious seats in the next Knesset.

All the best (on the personal level!)
Uri Bank

==========

Prof. Eidelberg's reply to Uri Bank.

Monday, January 13, 2003

Dear Uri:

I am at a loss to understand how one can separate religion and politics
without separating religion from those who make the laws. When you say we
must "rid Israel of its sectarian religious parties," I fail to see how this
can be done without separating religion from public law. Also, your
disparaging remarks about the religious parties - and I too have been
critical of them in various articles -- is quite unbalanced and unjust. You
know very well who controls the wealth in this country, and who robs the
public treasury to bail out failed secular corporations and institutions.
What the religious receive is peanuts compared to the secular establishment.
The education budget for religious education is about 20% of what it should
be on a per capita basis. So the religious parties are forced to play the
dirty game of politics. Your description of them is grossly unfair. If they
were not in the government, they would receive even a smaller fraction of
what they justly need and deserve.

Still, I think you need to examine the clear implications of your language.
I think you also need to consider my criticism in the light of your party's
leader, Avigdor Lieberman, who opposes amendment of the "grandfather
clause," which - more than your words - will hasten separation of religion
and public law and Israel's demise as a Jewish state.

I will be happy to desist from criticizing your party's platform if its
leaders declare unequivocally (!) opposition to the grandfather clause of
the Law of Return, (2) opposition to territorial compromise in Judea and
Samaria, and (3) opposition to separation of religion and public law.

Please convey my warmest regards to your lovely wife.

Sincerely,
Paul Eidelberg

=========

Uri Bank's reply to Prof. Eidelberg.

Thursday, January 16, 2003

Dear Prof. Eidelberg,

You write: I am at a loss to understand how one can separate religion and
politics without separating religion from those who make the laws.

I reply: I would be doing that only if I said that we have to get rid of all
the religious law-makers. I said nothing of the kind!

You write:When you say we must "rid Israel of its sectarian religious
parties," I fail to see how this can be done without separating religion
from public law.

I reply:It is done by having Rabbi Benny Elon, Zvi Hendel, Uri Ariel, Rabbi
Michael Malchior and Rabbi Yehuda Gilad all intentionally working within
MIXED frameworks. This is the ONLY way to further Jewish, religious
law-making in a way that is not detrimental to the way our religion is
perceived by those who are not religious. Our list in its entirety is
committed to doing so, because we ALL believe that it is essential in order
to strengthen the JEWISH character of Israel. Also, this is the only smart
way to go about it politically, because it insures we get non-religious
votes as well when religious issues come up in the Knesset (something that
cannot be done by such parties as Mafdal, Shas and Aguda).

You write:Also, your disparaging remarks about the religious parties - and I
too have been critical of them in various articles -- is quite unbalanced
and unjust. You know very well who controls the wealth in this country, and
who robs the public treasury to bail out failed secular corporations and
institutions. What the religious receive is peanuts compared to the secular
establishment. The education budget for religious education is about 20% of
what it should be on a per capita basis. So the religious parties are forced
to play the dirty game of politics.

I reply:Agreed. The world of politics is a jungle and one must know how to
play the game in order to make headway for one's constituency and ideology.
But when the thing that is at risk by this behavior is the very way Judaism
is perceived by the majority of Israeli society, and it only increases the
hatred between the religious and the non-religious - anyone who holds
Judaism and Achdut Am Yisrael dear HAS to find another way of making headway
in the Israeli political system. Any gains that these party make for Torah
institutions is totally outweighed by the torah-hatred that their political
behavior breeds. If there were no other viable political option, than maybe
we would have no alternative to this, but Ze'evy hy"d and Elon in Moledet,
and now the Ichud Haleumi have proven that there IS an alternative to these
sectarian parties.

You write:Your description of them is grossly unfair.

I reply:I will not mince harsh words about those who are doing irreparable
harm to Yahadut and to Achdut Am Yisrael!

You write:Still, I think you need to examine the clear implications of your
language. I think you also need to consider my criticism in the light of
your party's leader, Avigdor Lieberman, who opposes amendment of the
"grandfather clause," which - more than your words - will hasten separation
of religion and public law and Israel's demise as a Jewish state.

I reply:This is an issue that is currently being taken under advisement
within our faction. ALL of our members, including Lieberman, are leaning
towards making some kind of ammendment to this clause. The beauty of our
faction is that we don't see these very delicate issues as black or white.
There is an ongoing diologue between the religious and non-religious sides
of the faction, each probing the other to see where and how a compromise can
be worked out. I would suggest that Herut stop spreading the blatant lies
and heresay about Lieberman's positions. Concentrate on your own platform if
you think you deserve the public's support.

You write:I will be happy to desist from criticizing your party's platform
if its leaders declare unequivocally (!) opposition to the grandfather
clause of the Law of Return, (2) opposition to territorial compromise in
Judea and Samaria, and (3) opposition to separation of religion and public
law.

I reply:I'm not asking that you "desist from criticizing" my party's
platform. I am respectfully demanding that you do not spread disinformation
about what we stand for with no basis whatsoever.

I have made it my policy not to defame your representative's characters in
any way. The opposite is true - I tell all my audiences that you, Kleiner
and Marzel have proven your Mesirut Nefesh for Eretz Yisrael over the years.
But this harmful run for Knesset proves that you are willing to gamble with
50,000 National Camp votes. Based on our experiences in past elections, this
amounts to recklessness - especially on Yamin Yisrael's part. Again I ask
that you take responsibility for the National Camp and drop out of the race.
Don't give Likud, Labor, Shinuy, Meretz or the Arabs the chance to get the
1-2 precious seats that you will cause the National Camp to lose in the next
Knesset.

Sincerely,
Uri Bank
=====
Prof. Eidelberg's reply to Uri Bank.

Thursday, January 16, 2003

What Nationalist Camp?

Don't Waste Your Vote on a Big Party

* In 1992 you voted Labor and you got the suicidal Oslo agreement.

* In 1996 you voted Likud and you got the deadly Hebron and Wye agreements.

* In 1999 you voted Labor and you got the current war.

* In 2001 you voted Likud and you got daily massacres and the

Road Map to a Palestinian state!

So don't waste your vote! Vote Herut

Last word:

Dear Aaron:

Perhaps Uri does not fully appreciate the implication of his party program's
words as well as his own words. The party program states: "The National
Union believes in the separation between religion and politics." Obviously
such separation can't be done without separating religion from those who
make the laws, i.e., the government. Uri then offers this gloss: "The
Israeli political system has to rid itself of the sectarian religious
parties"! Whatever Uri may intend by these words, they clearly denote
separation of religion and state - which was already implied by the words of
the party program, to repeat, "separation between religion and politics."
If Uri wants to retract his gloss, then I for one will welcome his doing so.
But then he must also renounce the related words of his party platform.

Going further, just how does one go about eliminating Israel's religious
parties from the political system? And while we are going about doing
this, how about eliminating the Arab parties - or would this offend Mr. Bank
's or National Union's democratic principles? And while we are at it, why
not eliminate the anti-religious parties, which distort Israel's image as a
Jewish state?

I think Uri has put his foot in his mouth, but I wonder about the motives of
other members of his party.

Best wishes,

Prof. Eidelberg