Letters to the editor, April 19, 2021: Missing Isi

The Jewish world has suffered two monumental losses in the past several months: the death of the great spiritual leader Rabbi Jonathan Sacks in November and now the passing of Isi Leibler (“Courageous and principled Jewish leader Isi Leibler dies at 86,” April 14). 

Leibler led a remarkable life in his leadership roles for Australian Jews and the World Jewish Congress, and his fight for Soviet Jewry. I always looked forward to reading his perceptive columns in The Jerusalem Post. May his activism be an inspiration for future generations of Jews.

Prof. Oded Goldreich had the Israel Prize denied to him. The headline “The Israel Prize is a privilege, not a right” (April 16) is incorrect in a number of aspects. A privilege is a benefit enjoyed by an individual or group beyond what is available to others. That would not fit Goldreich. That he is academically brilliant is unquestioned but he is not alone in his brilliance and there are many who could therefore be chosen for this accolade.

Neither was the denial of the prize an attempt to silence him, as in a democratic state he is entitled to express his opinion. What is totally wrong is to exhort foreign powers to withhold support from institutions in Israel. Clearly his knowledge and appreciation of the worldwide BDS movement is flawed. To exhort foreign funders to boycott Israeli institutions goes well beyond expressing an opinion and deserves retribution by having the coveted Prize withheld from him which is granted by the very country he is trying to punish because it is not being run on the political lines that he approves of.

In Israelis, Palestinians hold joint memorial” (April 14), actor Richard Gere opines, “Until the Palestinians have a home, the Israelis won’t have a home.” 

Oh, really? It seems to me that the Israelis already have built a fine home for themselves. Considering the source, I can infer from this comment that it is the responsibility of the Israelis to “give” the Palestinians a “home” regardless of any other considerations. The Israelis already “gave” them Gaza and we can all see that result. 

I am reminded of the comment by prime minister Golda Meir, “When the Palestinians love their children more that they hate us (Jews), then we will live together in peace.” There is nothing that the Israelis can “give” that will result in peace. 

Here is a novel concept that I wish people like Gere would preach: Insist that Palestinians renounce terrorism and violence against Israelis and Jews and agree that the Jews have a right to exist as a country in the land of their ancestors. Within a day of such an announcement by the Palestinian leadership, a land/peace deal between the two parties could be negotiated. 

The Biden administration reveals its inner Neville Chamberlain by regarding the attack on Natanz as “dangerous” and “embarrassing” (“US pressing Israel to stop commenting on Iran”). 

Israel, aware that since 1979 Iran has publicly and repeatedly proclaimed that its primary foreign policy goal is the annihilation of the Jews of Israel, is simply following the Talmudic command of preemptive self-defense: “If someone comes to kill you, rise up and kill him first” (Sanhedrin 72:1).

It is no surprise that the Biden administration, having filled the State Department with antisemites like Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Hady Amr (“I was inspired by the Palestinian intifada”), criticizes Israel for defending itself against existential annihilation. Amr, who was “inspired” by the slaughter of Jews at the Park Hotel In Netanya where 30 Jews were murdered and 140 maimed for life – part of the Palestinian intifada that author Giulio Meotti labels “A New Shoah” – is a member of a of a cadre of similar Jew haters appointed to the US government since January 21, 2021.

Another is Maher Bitar, Senior Director for Intelligence on the National Security Council, and formerly an executive of the Georgetown Students for Justice in Palestine, a documented front group for Hamas, whose charter in Article 7 mandates every member and supporter – including Bitar – to murder every Jew on earth. It is Amr, Bitar and their antisemitic ilk that are leading the Biden administration to acquiesce in Iran’s planned nuclear annihilation of Israel.

The opening line of “Blinken flies to Kabul in show of support after pullout announcement” (April 16), is a journalistic oxymoron of the highest caliber.

For Blinken to state that the United States needs to show support to the country that killed thousands of Americans on US home soil because President Joe Biden is pulling out all US forces should have been a day of remembrance back in the States. 

Why does he care to “advance efforts to secure a peace agreement between Kabul and the insurgents?” If anything should be done there, it should be for troops to blast the so-called insurgents to another world and then finally come home to all their families.

The Taliban has reiterated time and again that their fighters would continue with their goal to “establish a pure Islamic system.” Hence the oxymoron: a deep difference in the governing that would be established in a true peace agreement with Afghanistan; al-Qaeda is alive and well there.

 Still the US is pulling out, with State Department officials worried that the US would have less access to intelligence. My take on this is that insufficient intelligence was the crux of the whole operation to begin with. Let’s hope I’m wrong.

Herb Keinon’s “Every politician is a king?” (April 16) gave me the impression that Israel is headed toward a phenomenon described a couple of years ago in a Jerusalem Post Purim spiel issue – a Knesset in which 120 parties each had one seat! While it is too much to expect that Israel will have major electoral reform before its next national election (likely less than six months in the future), steps can be taken now to ensure that the next election will see fewer parties being seated and that those who do pass the election threshold will have been voted in by a knowledgeable electorate.

The plan is simple. Parties need to form their coalitions prior to the election. Each coalition needs to prepare a single list and develop a platform. Each party needs to publicize its platform and obtain a specified number of signatures of registered voters before receiving permission to stand for election. Those coalitions that reach a specified level of voter interest, as determined by pre-election polling, would be invited to participate in pre-election debates. The election threshold would be adjusted so that no party is seated unless it wins 10 or more seats. The goal is to have stable parties, with known goals that will be accountable to the people who elected them.

Regarding Yaakov Katz’s Editor’s Notes (“Beating the war drums for personal gain,” April 16), speculation is indeed rife as to why Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would be engaged in a new tactic to feed “Western sources” with leaks on Israeli actions against Tehran. Indeed, Katz correctly writes that everything seems to be out in the open on “purpose.” Whether Bibi is trying to provoke Iran, to encumber President Joe Biden’s efforts to return to the nuclear agreement with it, or to achieve political advantage by further hyping the real Iranian threat, the essential question remains as to what the strategic end-game for such tactics should be.

Since Biden’s election and his appeasement overtures, all-out conflict with Iran is becoming more plausible, whether by default or design. It is essential, therefore, to think and rethink now what should be targeted there. The usual response is, “Iran’s nuclear military facilities, of course.” Unfortunately, such targeting would not answer the strategic imperative of always setting a clear end-game for war. This has not always been evident in Israel’s strategic planning.

As a retired US Foreign Service Officer involved in strategic planning, I would hazard to see little sense in setting back Iran’s nuclear designs by a few years at the cost of a major initial military effort when the entire area would likely erupt into war anyhow. Under such circumstances, the best end-game would be to go directly for regime change in Iran by obliterating the ayatollah regime’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC). The nuclear facilities can be targeted at any time later in such process – they are stationary ducks in a shooting gallery once the country’s air defenses are destroyed.

The military and economic stranglehold on the country is held not by its regular military, but by the IRGC. Since the latter is officially designated a terrorist organization, there should be few qualms in America about its demise once hostilities have erupted.

Iran’s regular military should thus be spared, except for its air defenses, given the simple reason that it is the guarantor for Iran’s survival as a unitary state, but not of its regime. At the head of a new government of national survival, it is the best hope to free Iran from the Ayatollahs’ yoke, but only after the IRGC’s stranglehold on it is removed.

Such an end-game presupposes that Israel and its Arab allies have the will and the might to accomplish such a task for the future security of all. Being able to do so would hold the best chance to see regime change in a country and for people long sacrificed on the altar of radical Shia expansionism.

Toward a more mod God?

The “Negative Judaism” editorial (April 18) reveals a basic misunderstanding of the approach to Judaism of the Chief Rabbinate, and the vastness of the divide between the view of the Orthodox and the view underlying the editorial writer’s complaints.

The Orthodox regard Judaism as Divinely revealed and not subject to changes in the societal concept of morality. Their view is that the Almighty is interested in the way we act and has revealed how we should conduct ourselves. Hence the religion is based on the belief has content that comes from Above and is not man-made. 

The editorial’s view is that belief in the Almighty does not have these consequences and requirements of conduct must agree with what is currently thought to be proper. As such, it has stripped the belief in the Almighty from any practical application and left it to us to decide what the Almighty wants us to do. This is shown today in the insistence of the Reform on tikkun haolam, which is their substitute for the laws of Sabbath and kashrut in the Bible.  The editorial’s plea to the Chief Rabbinate to change – fundamentally founded on the approach that religious laws should be altered to match what it considers right – is coming from the stand-point of a very different religion, one that has elevated man to be the arbiter of what religious requirements are. It therefore expects the Chief Rabbinate to alter the Shulchan Aruch to accord with the prevalent social standards, an attitude which is anathema to Orthodoxy.

We have a fundamental question to resolve: If Israel is to any degree to respect Judaism, which religion is that to be? The editorial’s argument is in fact that the Chief Rabbinate should disappear and Israel should adopt the Reform view, no matter what that may lead to.

Nailing down Zionism

 

Gil Troy’s excellent article “I am a Zionist” (April 14) deserves to be framed and pinned to the wall in the home of every Jew who loves and supports Medinat Yisrael. It filled me with pride as it represents the reality of being a true Zionist.

Gil Troy left out the most important reason for being a Zionist. I am a Zionist because ki mizion tezei Torah (for out of Zion shall go forth the Torah).

Words in support of MK Bezalel Smotrich are few and far between, and in “Smotrich’s question” (April 16) Dr. Moshe Dann nicely describes why. Praising the leader of the Religious Zionist Party requires a creative use of vocabulary and convolution of ideas and principles. Arguing that the minister is no more than asking that Israeli Arabs to cooperate and work together with Israel’s Jewish population is indeed laughable; Smotrich – and Dann, too, I suspect – would like anything but.

Although the historian uses the term “reconciliation,” what he truly means is the more politically incorrect word “subservience.” Smotrich, I’m sure, will use the Knesset plenum to promote “apartheid-lite” legislation with the goal of encouraging the twenty-some percent of Israel’s population to seek greener pastures. Indeed, are such actions consistent with Jewish values?

And speaking of which, Smotrich, according to Mann, is requesting that the Arabs accept the notion that Israel is a Jewish state that is founded on Jewish values – overlooking the fact that those values are based on a body of literature that is not part of the Arab tradition. Moreover, peaceful protest, public expression of disagreement with enacted legislation and policy and the use of litigation are the very of tenets of democracy. Until such time as the earth will open and swallow up rebels and rabble-rousers, they must be adhered to.

Readers, I’m sure, will take note that Mann somewhat cavalierly admits that some Jews, too, are unable to accept Zionism as Israel’s national ethos, but makes nothing of it. We dare not rile up potential coalition partners, right?

In your July 1, 2020, issue, you published our letter about COVID-type maternal infections and autism in the child. In it, we explained the putative role of IGF1 (insulin-like growth factor), as supplied by a full year of exclusive postpartum breastfeeding, in reducing the chance of the child developing autism. It is anticipated that any source of IGF1 (such as you reported about yogurt on April 16, 2021) would provide a similar benefit, especially after a cytokine storm during pregnancy. 

The results from BGU would seem to support this conclusion, as we have reported in several of our scientific publications since 2013 from Hadassah Hospital.