Reconciliation Attempt Backfires at Beilin, Jewish Agency Session

An effort by Deputy Foreign Minister Yossi Beilin and leaders of the Jewish Agency for Israel to find common ground for cooperation may have backfired this week.

A meeting Monday night apparently concluded with both sides thinking they had reached an understanding of where each side stood.

But a front-page report on the meeting in the Israeli daily newspaper Ha’aretz this week – and the brouhaha it created – suggested that the gap remained wide.

Beilin has been criticizing the Jewish Agency and the World Zionist Organization for being outmoded and undemocratic. Leaders of the established bodies retort that Beilin fails to understand what the bodies do and the reality of Diaspora fund raising.

The Jewish Agency is the primary recipient of funds raised for Israel by the United Jewish Appeal in the United States. The WZO undertakes Jewish educational efforts in the Diaspora and provides a mechanism for Diaspora Zionist organizations to participate in Jewish Agency decisions.

According to the Ha’aretz headline, the Jewish Agency had agreed to Beilin’s suggestion that it close up shop. Apparently that wasn’t quite the case. The article sparked a flurry of denials by all meeting participants.

“I burst out in such laughter that I thought I would die,” Jewish Agency Acting Chairman Yehiel Leket told Israel Television, describing his reaction to the news account.

Beilin similarly termed the newspaper headline “totally nonsense.”

Beilin did apparently, as the paper reported, reiterate his vision of a new international Jewish organization, which he dubs Beit Yisrael.

But, as Beilin said in phone interview from Jerusalem on Thursday, “the Agency people were of course not ready to consider the idea of this organization replacing the current organization.”

According to Beilin, the major accomplishment of the meeting was an agreement with the Jewish Agency to attempt a pilot program in one American Jewish community to provide Jewish teens with vouchers for free trips to Israel.

According to the Jewish Agency version of the meeting, there was less concrete agreement on this issue.

The Ha’aretz article also prompted a memo to Beilin from Moshe Nativ, the Jewish Agency’s director-general. In an effort to contain some of the damage caused by the newspaper report, the memo was distributed to the leadership of American Jewish federations.

Beilin characterized Nativ’s memo as “much closer to the reality” than the Ha’aretz report.

In his letter, Nativ wrote, “We agreed that a joint staff team would analyze only the feasibility of a pilot project that would involve one or two communities in the United States.

“Their mandate would be simply to determine if interest and funding could be available to increase the number of unaffiliated youth in Israel Experience programs, and if it may be possible to do so without any cost to the participant,” the letter continued.

Leket also said that during the meeting, Beilin had withdrawn his suggestion that Diaspora Jews should stop making donations to Israel. He added that Beilin was convinced of the need to continue raising funds abroad for immigration, absorption and Jewish education.

Beilin stirred controversy earlier this year when he suggested that the booming Israeli economy should no longer be dependent on “charity” from abroad.

Beilin confirmed that he supports Diaspora fund raising for certain issues.

But Beilin and the Agency remain divided over whether Jewish contributions from abroad should be used for social programs. Beilin says those should be the responsibility of the Israeli government alone.

More ambiguous were Leket’s comments on Beit Yisrael, the proposed international, democratic Jewish organization that Beilin has proposed to replace the World Zionist Organization.

“I told Beilin, and not for the first time, that if he wants to form another Jewish organization, then he should turn to those people who are not involved in any other Jewish group,” Leket told Israel Radio.

“I had the impression at the end of the meeting that he accepted the idea,” Leket said.

According to Nativ’s account of the discussions, “If Beit Yisrael’ is to be established, it was to be understood that its defined purpose would be to enhance Jewish identity and to increase the number of Diaspora youth from the unaffiliated sector in Israel Experience programs.

“In this context, it was agreed that if such an effort is to be undertaken, the Youth and Hachalutz Department (of the WZO) could organize the entire program,” Nativ said. The youth department currently organizes a wide range of programs for Diaspora youth in Israel.

Beilin, however, said in the interview that he was not convinced that Beit Yisrael should reach out only to the unaffiliated.

“I generally think we need a democratic organization, not an oligarchic and plutocratic one like the Jewish Agency,” he said.

The effort to find common ground may have been fatally damaged by the erroneous press report and its aftermath.

Nativ concluded his letter to Beilin saying that he would advise the Jewish Agency “not to continue further discussions.”

Beilin, who denied planting the story for political purposes, said he lamented the erroneous report and the furor it created. “The truth is that the meeting itself was a very good one,” he said.