Pushing aside competition and even hostility, Jewish leaders sat together last weekend for the first time and discussed what they agree is the unclear future of their people.
WASHINGTON
- The following disparity tells us more about human nature than about the
future of the Jewish world: The executive branch - the heads of the large
Jewish organizations, on the whole - are optimistic and believe Judaism has a
glowing future, while the intellectuals and thinkers are much more pessimistic
and insist on mentioning the pitfalls and obstacles the coming years hold in
store. Those who are entrusted with carrying out affairs must be convinced
there is a point to what they do - and what is the point if there is no future?
Two
groups of Jews gathered together last weekend at Wye Plantation, Maryland for a
long discussion on the situation of the Jewish people. The first group, which
met Wednesday and Thursday, consisted of the heads of 15 Jewish organizations
such as the Presidents' Conference, the American Israel Public Affairs
Committee (AIPAC), the Anti-Defamation League, the Union of Orthodox Jewish
Congregations, the American Jewish Committee and others. In the second group
were the "thinkers," as the organizers termed them: Natan Sharansky
from Israel, Charles Krauthammer from The Washington Post, former Canadian
justice minister Irwin Cotler, former Jewish Agency head Sallai Meridor and
many others.
The
Institute for Policy Planning of the Jewish People had organized this
gathering. It had a somewhat ambitious aim - a strategic debate about the
future of the Jewish people. In actuality, it focused on three issues: the
challenge posed by Islam, the situation in Israel, and the weighty question of
whether the Jewish people are on the rise or on the wane.
Their
conclusions, in brief: The future is unclear. And in greater detail: There are
many risks, and it is time to roll up our sleeves. The institute and its heads
- Dennis Ross, Prof. Yehezkel Dror, Avi Gil, Avinoam Bar-Yosef - are already
doing their homework.
One
of the papers that was prepared in advance and presented to the participants in
the conferences was that written by Dr. Shalom Wald. He chose 14 well-known
historians, from Thucydides to Gibbon, Spangler, Toynbee and Kennedy, and
examined their theories concerning the circumstances in which civilizations
flourish or collapse. Then he tried to examine how these theories can be
applied to the context of the Jewish people.
Several
of his conclusions provoked disagreement. For example: "Getting all Jews
into the same shape and country, even if it is Israel, as recently advocated by
an Israeli [writer, A.B. Yehoshua - S.R.] is not the best survival
strategy." Some of the Israeli participants did not like that idea. Granting
official legitimacy to the Diaspora would be a mistake, Meridor said, according
to some of those who participated. That would be the end of Zionism as we know
it.
The
fear expressed that "a real decline of the West, particularly the United
States, would have dramatic consequences for the Jewish people," also led
to controversy. Brandeis University president Jehuda Reinharz agreed that this
type of decline can be expected "in the coming two decades" - but
Stuart Eisenstadt was less emphatic about it. He believes the United States
will remain the leading power. In all events, it was agreed the Jews
"should strengthen cultural links with non-Western civilizations,
particularly China and also India," powers that are on the ascent. This is
not a question of preference or closeness; it is a question of survival, of
readiness for the future. How should this be done? That will have to be the
topic of discussion in the next gatherings already being planned.
Working together
Abraham
Foxman of the ADL says he came to the conference full of skepticism but left
satisfied at its conclusion. That was the feeling of most of those who
participated in the first gathering. They agree about one thing: The very
gathering itself is the achievement. It is the first time the heads of Jewish
organizations have sat down round the same table and sought ways to cooperate,
pushing aside the competition, suspicions and sometimes even latent hostility.
"If there were barriers in the beginning, they were removed," says
Malcolm Hoenlein of the Presidents' Conference. "There is a commitment to
continue working together," says Rabbi Tzvi Weinreb of the Orthodox Union.
It also was possible to sit at the same table without provoking conflicts. One
of the participants said Weinre b, an Orthodox rabbi, had no problem calling
the Reform rabbi, David Ellenson, up to the Torah - even though President Moshe
Katsav refuses to attach the title of "rabbi" to his name.
However,
on the substance of the agreement to "work together" there are
various opinions. Some of the participants believe it was agreed that a
mechanism would be set up for "joint work in the future" while others
told Haaretz that "not too much came out of it." Nevertheless, they
managed to define aims and goals. First and foremost - investing in education
for the young generation. The philanthropist Michael Steinhardt put great
emphasis on this point, as well as on "lowering the price of Jewish
life" in America. This means lowering the price of access to synagogues,
Jewish schools, cultural centers and other activities.
Last
year the institute held similar strategic conferences, but with slightly
different participants. Then, too, in general, agreement was reached on more
than a few topics. For example, that it was necessary to draw those on the
fringes of Jewish civilization inward. This year, at the opening of the meeting,
Bar-Yosef, the institute's director, presented a general report on the
situation of the Jewish people. One sentence from that survey can sum up the
results of that agreement better than any other - "The Jewish people:
worldwide zero growth."
The
better-known historians mentioned in Wald's review, particularly the earlier
ones, also agreed for the most part that "the Jews will survive as a
people and civilization." But there was nevertheless one who dissented -
Oswald Spangler. What kept the Jews together as a people, he stated, was
"magic consensus" but, he added, this is vanishing with the years.
The Jews of the Western world have assimilated into general Western culture and
will disappear with it. The Jews will disappear from a historical perspective;
that is inevitable, he said.
There
were several interesting arguments. One was over whether the Jews of America
have to worry about the social welfare of the Jews of Israel. The Americans
said yes - "All Jews are responsible for one another." The Israelis said
no way; leave the social problems in Israel for us to deal with. Yisrael
Maimon, the government representative, proposed a partnership with the
Americans in technology, education, "brain investments." But the
improvement of the lot of the poor, he said, must be left to the Israeli
government.
Prof.
Dror also stressed the importance of investing in improving the situation of
education in Israel. One of the central aims he presented was "to develop
Israel into a learning-knowledge society." Those present discussed the
level of the universities in Israel and some of them even proposed the level of
at least one of these institutions be raised sufficiently to attract students
from abroad in higher numbers.
Reinharz
of Brandeis is among those who are concerned about the situation of Jewish
education. The main conclusion from the conference, he told Haaretz, was that
Jewish education "is the most important element both in Israel and in the
Diaspora." But an important corollary of this is that "it would be
worthwhile thinking about education that is carried out in coordination."
He terms this a "core curriculum" - that is, a study program whose
basic content would be taught to every Jew no matter where he or she is.
Real challenge
That
is a real challenge, but its difficulty can be clearly seen: Who will decide on
the program, who will provide the contents, how will they be agreed upon?
Israel has many urgent problems, Reinharz says, and it is hard to see how it
will find time to seriously deal with the future of the Jewish people. Other
participants were of the opinion that the proposal would lead to quarrels and
disputes.
Reinharz:
"Let us say we have decided there are certain chapters of the Bible that
every Jew must know - how exactly will we decide which chapters these should
be? Every decision of this sort takes into account values, and there will be
tremendous differences of opinion between the preferences presented by the
Israelis and those the Jews of the Diaspora would like, as well as divergences
of opinion between the different streams of Judaism. The Reform Jews will want
to stress universal and humane prophesies while the Orthodox will want to focus
on particular prophesies."
The
Jewish schools in America are currently undergoing renewed popularity. An almost
30 percent growth in the number of those registering - but those, as Bar-Yosef
pointed out, are "mostly those who are already affiliated." The
schools have to become a center of attraction for others as well.
And
in all events, the question must be asked - what do these schools teach?
Reinharz is concerned that the Jews of the Diaspora do not know enough about
Israel. In the Jewish schools today, they concentrate on studying the prayer
book and stories from the Bible, with less emphasis on history. He feels pupils
both in Israel and the Diaspora should study the history of Zionism and the
State of Israel more thoroughly.
https://www.haaretz.com/1.
