Ain Breira, and There Ain't No J Street
by Lenny Ben David -Wednesday, May 28, 2008 - I*Consult
http://lennybendavid.com:80/2008/05/ain-breira-and-there-aint-no-j-street.htmlDemocracy is wonderful but sometimes it needs restraints. For years, Israelallowed every political party that secured one percent of the popular voteto send a representative to the Knesset. The low-priced entry ticketattracted some unusual and unsuccessful parties such as a Marijuana Party, aTaxi Drivers Party, and my favorite, a Convicts Party. You see, in Israel,unlike the United States, convicts do not lose their right to vote. This wastruly a unique party where its politicians started their careers in prison.Finally, Israel raised the "threshold" for securing a Knesset seat, butIsrael still suffers from a plethora of small parties who often link theircoalition support to partisan demands. Too much democracy can distort thepublic will and public interest - in the United States as well as Israel.An example of such a distortion took place in a Senate Foreign RelationsCommittee some 30 years ago. S
en.
George McGovern, never known for hisaffection for Israel, had invited two witnesses to testify on Middle Eastpolicy. They were seated side-by-side, given equal standing in the augusthearing room. One witness was the Chairman of the Conference of Presidentsof Major American Jewish Organizations, the veteran and respected Jewishleader, Rabbi Israel Miller. Next to him sat a representative of "Breira," atiny fringe organization representing a few hundred leftist activists. Theflash-in-the-pan organization arose to challenge the traditional pro-Israelconsensus of the organized Jewish community, and McGovern sought to inflatetheir importance and amplify their message.In Hebrew "breira" means "alternative." Over the decades, Israel oftendefended itself against attackers, explaining, "ain breira" - it had noalternative. But along came these activists claiming, as explained by one ofits founders, "our desires for an alternative to the intransigence of boththe PLO and the several gov
ernments
of Israel." Putting Breira into ahistorical context, Breira was demanding negotiations with the PLO at thesame time it was hijacking planes, launching rockets and terrorist raidsfrom Lebanon against Israel's north, and sending a pistol-packing Arafat tothe United Nations.As described by one of Breira's chroniclers, the organization "seemed tothrive as an alternative to AIPAC," and McGovern and some members of thepress were eager to grant them that role. "What ultimately did theorganization in," the writer concluded, "were meetings that some of itsmembers held with two Arabs who had ties to the PLO... When the JerusalemPost broke the story, Breira was finished."Today, many of the press paeans to the new "J Street Project" read likere-writes of the Breira accolades. The J Street Project, named for anon-existent street in Washington, is the underdog facing the "formidable"AIPAC lobby, according to the New York Times. Quoting one J Streetfundraiser, the Times explained "the grou
p's aim
was to undo the notion that'AIPAC speaks for American Jews on issues affecting Israel and the MiddleEast.'" J Street "will try to erode AIPAC's strength," said a Ha'aretzreport. J Street leaders said "the goal is to take on the pro-Israel giants,particularly AIPAC," the JTA wrote.Presumably, J Street will attempt to avoid some of Breira's fatal mistakes.It will "rein in more dovish participants - a concern that led one pro-peaceprocess group, the Israel Policy Forum (IPF), to maintain an arms lengthrelationship with the new group," according to one account. Billionairecritic of Israel George Soros was involved in "early talks about forming" JStreet, according to the National Journal. But he "is reportedly no longerinvolved, in part, sources say, because of concerns that his participationmight be a lightning rod for critics."Nevertheless, J Street is almost destined to fail. The straw men they sculptand fight against do not exist. AIPAC, the organized Jewish community, andAme
rican
Jews are not opposed to peace nor to a two-state solution. But theydid learn the lessons of unrequited concessions to the Palestinians. They donot agree with J Street's director who echoes the 30-year-old Breira line onthe PLO when he says that there should be attempts "to engage Hamas and tofind dialogue with them."An appeasement lobby will not succeed.The New Republic's James Kirchick recently pointed out just how out of touch"the miniscule group of writers and activists involved with J Street" arewith the majority of American Jews. "Nearly three-quarters of American Jews"Kirchick wrote, "do not believe that Israel can 'achieve peace with aHamas-led, Palestinian government,' as J Street's founder advocates. . Awhopping 82 percent agree with the following statement: 'The goal of theArabs is not the return of occupied territories but rather the destructionof Israel.'"The Breira historian cited "moderate American Jews" who resigned from Breira30 years ago. One of them, a rabb
i and
son-in-law of Rabbi Mordechai Kaplan,explained in the pages of the Reconstructionist magazine, "There is aserious question whether safe and fairly prosperous American Jews, fromtheir comfortable armchairs in the USA, have the moral right to urgepolicies upon Israelis which could well involve their lives and the life ofthe State."In the interest of Israeli democracy that's a statement that many cansubscribe to. And frankly, it makes no difference if the "safe andprosperous" American Jews come from the Appeasement Left or the Hard-lineRight.-------------Bio note: The author, Lenny Ben David is a former diplomat, Washingtonconsultant to foreign embassies, lobbyist, writer and editor.