This week’s election of Avraham Burg to become the next chairman of the Jewish Agency for Israel and the World Zionist Organization brings to a close a lengthy, complicated — and in the end, quite acrimonious — process.
Burg’s election may also be the swan song a a 25-years-old election process first agreed upon by former Prime Minister Golda Meir and Max Fisher, the veteran fund-raiser who is the Jewish Agency’s founding chairman.
The ascension of the 40-year-old Labor Knesset member may also portend the beginning of profound change in the complicated organizational structure of the $500 million a year agency, which is the primary recipient of money raised for Israel by the United Jewish Appeal.
The WZO undertakes Jewish educational efforts in the Diaspora and provides the mechanism for Diaspora Zionist organizations to participate in Jewish Agency decisions.
Burg will replace Yehiel Leket, who served as acting chairman since last February, when former chairman Simcha Dinitz stepped down after being indicted for fraud and breach of trust.
Dinitz, whose charges related to the alleged misuse of Agency credit cards, is now on trial Jerusalem.
Dinitz indictment had already thrown the Jewish Agency into disarray, say observers, and the process of electing this successors did little to repair the damage.
Burg first came to prominence in 1982 as the founder and leader of the grass- roots protest movement against the war in Lebanon.
In 1984 he was named adviser to Prime Minister Shimon Peres on Diaspora Affairs. Burg is considered a rising star of the Labour Party.
“There can be no Jewish solidarity without a communication system between Israel and the Diaspora,” Burg said in an interview prior to his election.
“And the Jewish Agency is the central communication system, with a vast untapped potential,” he said. “This is a delicate partnership between two different, yet equal societies.”
Burg’s election as acting chairman on Wednesday — with formal approval by the Jewish Agency Assembly and WZO General Council to follow in June — came after a panel of Diaspora fund-raisers last week decided to endorse Burg and reject Leket.
The decision by the panel, the Agency’s Board of Governors’ “advise and consent” committee, in essence put a nail in the coffin candidacy since the committee must approve any candidate.
The Diaspora committee, headed by Mendel Kaplan, chairman of the board, made its decision Feb. 14 after meeting with Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin. Rabin, who had strongly backed Leket, had urged the committee to endorse both candidates and leave the final decision to the Labour Party Central Committee, which was officially charged with nominating a candidate.
With the “advise and consent” committee’s decision, essentially all that was left for the central committee to do the next day was rubber stamp Burg’s candidacy.
The concern among many Israelis over the balance of power in the process was highlighted by a political cartoon in the Israeli daily Ha’aretz.
The cartoon, by the noted cartoonist Ze’ev, showed big truck carrying a smaller truck, which carried an even smaller passenger car. The small car on the top carriers the words “Chairman of the Jewish Agency,” the medium-sized truck, “The Labour Party” and the Israeli flag, and the big truck at the bottom of the Pyramid has “Advise and Consent Committee,” the American flag, and dollar signs on its wheels.
This feelings of resentment was strongly manifested at Sunday’s opening meeting of the Agency’s Board of Governors in Jerusalem.
Chairman of the Board Kaplan opened the session by praising Leket for his performance as acting chairman, and for not being a sore loser.
Leket, who many had praised as a good administrator and had campaigned hard for the position, responded without mincing words.
Speaking in Hebrew, he turned to Kaplan and said: “I have no problem with your words, but with what you did.”
After reviewing the history of the election and selection process, he deemed it anachronistic and undemocratic. “Instead of giving your consent to a candidate, you took away Israel’s right to choose,” he hold the board. “Your decision was one of the greatest mistake the Jewish Agency has ever made. It is a symbol of lack of understanding and lack of partnership.”
Still, Leket said he accepts the decision, will do whatever he can to ease the transition to Burg, and will return to his old job as head of Department of Youth Aliyah.
After Leket’s speech, a seven-point statement of WZO Executive was read, which severely criticized the “advise and consent” committee’s decision.
But the strongest attack came from Uri Gordon, head of the Agency’s Aliyah Department.
“This is the time for a new agreement between us and the leaders of the federations,” Gordon said. “There must be mutual respect in a partnership, but there is none between us, not on your side.
“Your decision has been a slap in the face to Israel’s democracy, to the Labor party, and to Israel’s prime minister, who represent 4.5 million Jews.”
Gordon accused the committee of using charisma as the criteria for choosing Burg over Leket. He also took Kaplan to task, calling for his resignation.
It took Max Fisher, founder of the Jewish Agency, to calm the atmosphere.
“I was the originator of this partnership, and what I hear here today is not useful,” he said. “I was the author of the `advise and consent’ committee 25 years ago. It didn’t work so well this time, but let’s not accuse each other of being unfair or undemocratic.
“Let’s pick up the pieces and look into the future. We have too much to do. Let’s continue with the business we are here for, for the sake of Israel and of the Jewish people,” Fisher said.
For his part, Kaplan concurred that changes are afoot, and mentioned a number of alternative suggestions that would make the process work better.
Speaking of journalists after the meeting, Kaplan complained that Leket and Gordon had personalized what was really a matter of principle.
Kaplan reiterated his position that the Jewish Agency is a partnership and that the Diaspora must have an equal say in selecting the chairman.
Officials the UJA also sought to look to the future. The UJA representatives agreed that the Jewish Agency must undergo some fundamental changes, but they would not go into specifics.
“We are encouraged by Burg’s election,” Joel Tauber, chairman of the UJA’s board to trustees, said in an interview.
Rabin Brian Lurie, UJA executive vice president, agreed that the election process must be reviewed, but he rejected the notion that all Israelis are upset by the “advise and consent” committee’s final decision.
“Avraham Burg is one of the most popular people in Israel. Every opinion poll shows him as running at 5, 6, or 7 to 1 against his rival,” Lurie said.
Sources close to the process pointed out that it was not the “advise and consent” committee who put up the candidates, but the Labor Party.
These sources attributed the crisis to a cultural gap between the Israelis and the American fund-raisers.
Shoshana Cardin, chairman of the United Israel Appeal, the link between UJA and the Jewish Agency, sounded similar sentiments.
In an interview, she said she believed the process was misunderstood by some and should have been better explained.
Cardin, who served on the “advise and consent” committee, said there is a need for changes and reforms in the Jewish Agency, and that the “advise and consent” committee should be reviewed in this context.
“We all have one thing in common, our concern for Israel,” Cardin said. “Let’s heal the wounds, and work together for that goal.”
Burg, who did not attend the Board of Governors’ meeting, declined to comment on the crisis, saying only, “The marriage between us is a Catholic marriage of love, though not always of convenience.”
Burg said last week that Jewish education “will be the No. 1 topic on the agenda” when he takes the helm of the agency. Until then, his hands will be full with repairing the damage and mapping out the changes and reforms he envisions. It will be up to him to put the Jewish Agency back to track.
The Archive of the Jewish Telegraphic Agency includes articles published from 1923 to 2008. Archive stories reflect the journalistic standards and practices of the time they were published.
