It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to realize that these are especially turbulent times in Israel. Deadly terror attacks in Israel’s south have prompted retaliatory strikes into Gaza, generating a regrettable resurgence of cross-border violence that has an uncertain end. RELATED:After September comes OctoberBut before this latest flare-up occurred, many of us in the US were watching spellbound as thousands of protesting Israelis demanded greater equity and social justice. While stasis in the peace process or the ramifications of 44 years of occupation in the West Bank have not been the focus of these ongoing protests, many quietly acknowledge the great sucking sound – financial and otherwise – attributable to the settlement enterprise. var ord = window.ord || Math.floor(Math.random() * 1e16);document.write('');Meanwhile, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s government has continued to cement "facts on the ground," having recently granted another 930 building permits in a disputed section of East Jerusalem and 277 in the Ariel settlement. In response, the Quartet – the United States, Russia, the EU and the United Nations – expressed "great concern." On the other end of the spectrum, the Palestinian "street" is growing increasingly anxious to see an end to the occupation and establishment of a state of their own. On 20 September, The Palestinian Authority will seek to capture a UN vote on statehood. Much of the global community – in the General Assembly and beyond – hears its cry and sympathizes.How should the American Jewish community respond to these events?This depends, of course, on what its objective is.While with each passing day the window for a two-state solution – a safe, secure and democratic Israel living in peace with a viable Palestinian state – diminishes, a large percentage of American Jewry still agree that that should be the goal. If that’s the case, then it’s only fair to ask what actions the leading organizations of the American Jewish community should undertake to most effectively help both sides attain that goal.In answer to that question, the US’s largest Jewish advocacy group, the American Jewish Committee (AJC), has decided to launch a major campaign to oppose the expected UN vote on Palestinian statehood. There are, indeed, legitimate reasons as to why that vote is problematic for Israel, for the US – which has vowed to use its veto in the Security Council – and for the Palestinians themselves. But is pulling out all stops to stifle the Palestinian move the most effective means to help the parties reach that ever-elusive two-state goal? At this point we simply cannot afford to waste any more time or resources on campaigns that serve anything other than our sole objective: how best to help the parties reach a negotiated resolution.If American Jews are serious about getting a "yes," there are more effective strategies than waging a losing battle in the UNGA. How about pressing our government to join with the other Quartet players in laying out the terms of a comprehensive resolution, along the well-known lines of the Clinton parameters and the Geneva Accord? Rather than treating the Palestinian Authority as an adversary that bears the blame for the ongoing impasse, shouldn't our Jewish communal organizations be spearheading a campaign for the kinds of difficult mutual compromises that are most likely to result in a sustainable end to the conflict?It would also behoove our communal leaders, when they speak with those holding the reins of power in Israel, to echo the words of Gabriela Shalev, Israel’s former ambassador to the UN. Interviewed in The Los Angeles Times on 8 August, Shalev asserted that in order to move forward, “Israel could show by gestures that when Netanyahu talks about negotiations without preconditions, there really are no preconditions; that we are not only willing to speak about painful concessions, but show that we are willing to do it by not going on with building settlements; and by not putting new things on the table, like the requirement that Palestinians recognize Israel as the homeland of Jewish people.” Those sentiments reflect the views of many leaders who, like Shalev, love Israel and who believe that a two-state peace should be championing.In a 7 August editorial on this topic, The New York Times concluded: “We see no sign that Washington or the Israelis are thinking beyond the incremental.” Likewise, it’s fair to ask whether the AJC’s anti-UN vote campaign is anything more than incremental. The current situation – the current crisis, really – cries out for needed compromises that will effectively deliver two states for two peoples. Blocking, finger-pointing and “incremental” simply won’t do. It’s time for the AJC and the broader American Jewish community to step up, boldly, and help make peace.The writer is an attorney and President of Boston Workmen’s Circle, a 110-year old communal organization dedicated to secular Jewish education, culture and social justice. This article first appeared in the Common Ground News Service (CGNews).
