The Diaspora Lag Labor Supporters in U.S. Face Task of Re-educating Jews About Israel

For 15 years, most Israeli government officials insisted that land was too high a price to pay for peace.

Now Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin says the opposite and is staking his policies, and his government, on the principle of territorial compromise.

Is it any wonder that some American Jews are confused?

At a recent Jewish gathering in Washington, a woman overheard someone talking and approached a pro-Israel activist with concern.

“Who is this guy? What’s this crap about land for peace, about territorial compromise? Why is he spouting that?” the woman asked, according to the activist, who requested anonymity.

The activist replied, “I believe that’s what the prime minister is spouting.”

“Oh. Does he agree with the prime minister?” she asked.

“Yes, yes he does,” said the activist.

The woman calmed down.

But for Tom Smerling, the man whose remarks initially upset her, the incident serves as an example of the difficulty that segments of the American Jewish community are having in accepting the policies of the new Israeli government.

“Some people call it the time warp factor. Or Diaspora lag,” said Smerling, who heads Project Nishma, a 5-year old Washington-based organization dedicated to promoting the idea that territorial compromise is in Israel’s security interest.

PROBLEM OF ‘COGNITIVE DISSONANCE’

“There’s this cognitive dissonance, and it’s really kind of comical,” said the activist who defended Smerling.

“Land for peace is still considered a heresy, but supporting the prime minister of Israel, and his position on territorial compromise, is OK somehow.

“In some people’s mind, what Rabin is doing, and the land-for-peace formula, is separate and distinct,” the activist said.

For Israeli officials, this disparity bespeaks the need for “re-educating” American Jews about the new government’s policies and about what is best for Israel.

For Smerling and the leaders of other American Jewish groups who tried to rally the community -around dovish positions when they were out of favor in Jerusalem, the Labor Party’s present struggle to get its views across to the American Jewish community is bitter reassurance that they do not have to close up shop.

Now that Israel’s peace camp is in power, it needs their support as much if not more than when it was in opposition, these leaders say.

Somebody has to help American Jews understand “that what they were taught was best for Israel by the government of Israel for a decade and a half is not necessarily best for Israel,” said Jonathan Jacoby.

Jacoby headed Americans for Peace Now until recently, when Rabin’s Labor Party tapped him to create an American organization to support the party’s ideas.

While the nascent group’s nature and function — not to mention its name — have yet to be defined, the decision to put Jacoby on the payroll speaks to the perceived need in Jerusalem to do more to gain American Jewish support.

The “Diaspora lag” was visible most recently during the recent debate over whether to accept Americans for Peace Now into the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations.

APN’s application to join the mainstream organization aroused strong opposition from the Zionist Organization of America and other groups.

TAKES TIME TO ABSORB NEW PERSPECTIVES

Opponents argued that the acceptance of APN would give the Jewish community’s imprimatur to the group’s policies, some of which, such as dialogue with the Palestine Liberation Organization, have long been anathema to the Israeli government.

But APN’s supporters emphasized that the group’s positions, while not fully accepted by Rabin and the government policy guidelines, reflect those of a third of Israel’s Cabinet ministers and Israeli President-designate Ezer Weizman.

In fact, the Zionist Organization of America’s views are far more outlandish from the perspective of the Rabin government.

Under the rubric of “Support for the Government of Israel,” in late 1991 the ZOA endorsed the idea that “Jordan is Palestine” and supported the notion of “peace for peace,” rather than territorial compromise.

Both concepts were recently mocked by Rabin in an address to the Conference of Presidents.

“There’s still this notion that on the scale of one to 10, the people who are most pro-Israel are the people who say Israel shouldn’t have to give up anything. But what kind of standard is that? Where would the prime minister of Israel fall on that standard?” said the pro-Israel activist who asked not to be identified.

Nonetheless, that standard seems to hold. APN escaped having its application sent back to committee by a narrow 21-17 vote. And the question of whether to vote yes or no was hotly debated within the leadership even of those organizations that ultimately joined the 27-10 majority that admitted APN.

Gail Pressberg, president of APN, is not surprised by the “Diaspora lag.”

“I think it takes time for people to absorb new perspectives, different perspectives,” she said. “The fear level still exists with a lot of people, that if people make concessions, will Israel’s security be harmed?”

A NEED TO INTRODUCE LABORITES

Jacoby acknowledges that one important task facing him is introducing the new generation of Labor Party leaders to American Jews and the American public, who are more familiar with Likud politicians like Benjamin Netanyahu than with his Labor counterparts.

“Jews need to be taught, and in a serious fashion, about the intellectual underpinnings of the policies of the present government of Israel,” said Jacoby.

“This is not simply a time for propaganda; there’s no more room for propaganda. It’s a time for seriously answering people’s questions, taking into account their concerns,” said Jacoby.

“And, I hope, showing them that what the prime minister and his government are trying to do is what is best for Israel,” he added.