DuBow Digest is a newsletter on American Jewish - German relations

1. GERMANY EDITION
March 6, 2011
Dear Friends:
A NOTE FROM YOUR EDITOR
What follows below is an opening article which I originally wrote for my American
Edition of DuBow Digest. Even though both editions, Germany & American, are
on the Internet for all to read at www.dubowdigest.typepad.com , I almost always
open each with a different paragraph of introduction and quickly go to writing
about what appears in various newspapers and journals. With what I see as a
serious growing cleavage between Israel and Germany, I decided this time I
would share my own feelings and thoughts about this vitally important subject. for
my mostly American Jewish readers
While thinking and writing, I further decided that there was no good reason why I
should not share it with you as well, my mostly German & non-Jewish audience.
So, what appears directly below is what I have been cogitating over…
In my newsletters I try to maintain an upbeat, at times humorous, edge in
reporting and commenting on situations that have no real humor in them. In
writing what follows I find myself void of any jocular feelings. In fact, I am rather
down in the mouth about what I see as a growing and serious disconnect
between Germany and the State of Israel. Considering that Germany is Israel’s
most important friend in Europe, it poses a very big problem
It actually began to be apparent about a year and a half ago when the European
Union decided to establish an all-Europe international relations section with a
British subject, Lady Catherine Ashton as the EU High Representative for
Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. This new agency is enormously important
and will eventually have 13,000 people working in it. Since High Representative
Ashton’s appointment she has been nothing but critical of Israel at every turn.
Her Palestinian leanings are quite obvious. Warning lights went on.
It became obvious to me that this new EU body would be a genuine voice on
Middle East policy. I raised questions with my German friends about Germany’s
independent foreign policy especially as it pertained to Israel. I didn’t get any
satisfactory answers. Some said an overall European policy was more important
than a singular German one. I didn’t agree and still don’t.
On top of that, in late 2010, the Bundestag passed a unanimous resolution
condemning Israel over the Turkish flotilla to Gaza incident. I felt that if Germany
was unhappy with Israel’s actions there were many other sorts of diplomatic
1

2. moves (letters, statements, diplomatic meetings, etc.) they might have utilized.
Instead they decided on a Bundestag resolution which was passed unanimously.
Very strong medicine indeed!
More recently, at the UN Security Council, Germany went along with 13 other
nations condemning Israel’s settlement policy. It was left to the U.S. to veto the
resolution. I’m sure they “voted their conscience” but in its support, Germany and
the others gave the Palestinians a sense of empowerment and feeling that they
will gain more through the UN process than in sitting down with the Israelis for
face to face negotiations. It drove a stake right through the heart of a negotiated
settlement at least for the foreseeable future.
Even more recently, Haaretz and other journals carried a story about a heated
phone conversation between Chancellor Merkel and Prime Minister Netanyahu
(see story below) wherein the Chancellor accused The P.M. saying, “You haven't
made a single step to advance peace." It was leaked by a German source.
These sorts of things don’t get leaked without a purpose.
Whether that statement is true or not, the German vote at the Security Council
helped torpedo any chance to “advance peace” any time soon.
I’m not the only one who thinks that. Click here to read Richard Boudreaux’s
article which also appeared in The Wall Street Journal.
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.israel/browse_thread/thread/ea8faf0
183bdc0e9/caf0ed886098bc2a?lnk=raot
A growing feeling among some German leaders is that, while claiming friendship
for Israel, they are now free to say that Israel had better make peace (at any
price?) before the chances of a two state solution are gone. Perhaps they
legitimately and honestly feel that way. Maybe they even have a point. However,
are these increasingly open critical statements and actions helping the
movement toward a peace settlement? I would argue in the negative.
I hope that I am viewing things clearly. When I add up all the above and try to
see whether there is some guiding principle, it seems to me that Germany is
slowly but surely cutting itself loose from Israel, at least from an Israel
government they do not like. Forget about the “special relationship”. Germany
has learned to live with its history; they are handling it to the satisfaction of most
and now feel free to be critical of Israel when they see it in their own interest to
do so. Anyone who expects a positive eternal political link between the two
countries is dreaming.
I don’t think Germany is any kind of enemy. There are many facets of the
relationship that are still excellent. Actually I believe there is a deep reservoir of
friendship in the hearts of many Germans toward Israel and the Jews – including
that of the Chancellor. However, I think the government leaders see their
2

3. national interests in the Middle East as being very different than those of Israel.
Lord Palmerston, the 18th Century English statesman is quoted as saying,
“Nations have no permanent friends or allies, they only have permanent
interests.” 325 million Arabs vs. 6 million Jewish Israelis (plus one third of the
world being Muslim), a sense that they are right about Israel’s intransigence and
the importance of oil supplies for Europe obviously trump the increasingly distant
connection to Israel and the Holocaust.
However, let’s not go off the deep end. Germany is critically important to Israel. It
is the engine that drives the European Union and both are critical to Jewish
interests. There is still a great store of positive feeling in Germany toward Israel.
We should try to build on it while explaining the difficult position Israel finds itself
in and the support that it needs from Germany and the EU. It would be suicidal
for us to turn our backs and burn our bridges.
There are no easy fixes. However, increased dialogue focusing on Israel’s
vulnerable situation, its security needs, the efforts it has made and is now
making to affect a peace and the intransigence of the Palestinians should be
stressed. American Jewry’s most important tool in this case is enlightened
discussion. We should not give up on that. Germany is too important!
Those are my thoughts. I’d be very interested in your comments. Click here to
directly contact me via e-mail.
IN THE REST OF THIS EDITION
PEACE IS FAR OFF – Perhaps further than in a very long time.
INSECURITY – The Arab uprisings impact Israel.
ARAB ANTI-SEMITISM – Even with peace, hate is bound to remain.
QARADAWI – If he was popular in a country next door what would you think?
A HEAVY PRICE TO PAY – Iran’s blackmail
THE LAW OF RETURN – The battle over who determines “Who is a Jew?” heats
up.
ISRAEL: AN INSIDE LOOK – A political evaluation by a great evaluator.
WE DIDN”T DO IT! – So sayeth the Pope. It’s official!
PEACE IS FAR OFF
3

4. I want to add some thoughts about Middle East peace being quite far off. Again,
I’m not the only one who thinks that. Amy Teibel of the Associated Press writing
in The Washington Post writes, “Israel has concluded that a final peace deal with
the Palestinians cannot be reached at this time and is weighing alternatives to try
to prove that it is interested in keeping peacemaking with the Palestinians alive”
Privately, officials say Netanyahu is considering a phased approach to
peacemaking, but contrary to published reports, it is not clear if he is open to the
concept of a Palestinian state within temporary borders.
Without even waiting for Netanyahu’s thoughts to jell, the PA announced that an
interim agreement would not be acceptable
http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?id=210513
As I said above, the Palestinians are headed to the UN no matter what, hoping
that the wave of changes in the Middle East will rub off on them and that
somehow they will accomplish their goals without direct negotiations. Maybe
they’re right – but I doubt it.
INSECURITY
When a major political upheaval such as the one taking place in the Middle East
currently erupts, it affects a wide range of nations in and out of the region. The
relationships which nations have with their neighbors such as military
agreements, economic connections and, generally, almost everything else are up
in the air waiting for the dust to settle. Governments, if they’re sensible, bide their
time and wait to see what sort of a new world emerges.
No country, outside of those actually being battled over, is expecting huge
changes more than Israel. Will democratization (if that is the final result) be good
or bad for Israel? One thing is for sure – anxiety and insecurity are bound to reign
in both Israel itself and the American Jewish community for quite a while. .
I am not enough of a political seer to even begin to lay out the possibilities.
However, an excellent article by New York Times political writer Steven Erlanger
takes a first stab at it. He writes, “The old certainties of the Middle East have
been upended, and Israel finds many of its most reliable partners buffeted or
blown away by popular agitation from below. Egypt was long one of Israel’s most
important allies, and ties were quietly close to Tunisia. With demonstrations for
change also in Jordan, Bahrain and Morocco, Israel finds itself floundering.
Rather than trying to summarize Mr. Erlanger’s findings, I think you owe it to
yourself if you have any interest at all in the subject, to read his article. You will
not have wasted your time.
4

5. Click here to read it.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/24/world/middleeast/24arabs.html?_r=2&hpw
ARAB ANTI-SEMITISM
If by some stroke of good fortune or Devine intervention peace should come to
the Israel-Palestinian dispute, what kinds of thoughts would Palestinians have
about their Israeli neighbors or, on a wider scale, all Jews through out the world?
Given the history of turbulence and war during the last 100 years or so, they
would certainly not be on the positive side.
Richard Cohen, writing in the Washington Post notes, “During World War II, the
leader of the Palestinians lived in a Berlin villa, a gift from a very grateful Adolf
Hitler, who clearly got his money's worth. Haj Amin al-Husseini, the grand mufti
of Jerusalem and as such the titular leader of Muslim Palestinians, broadcast
Nazi propaganda to the Middle East, recruited European Muslims for the SS,
exulted in the Holocaust and after the war went on to represent his people in the
Arab League. He died somewhat ignored but never repudiated.
Husseini might have been a Nazi to his very soul, but he was also a Palestinian
nationalist with genuine support among his own people. The Allies originally
considered him a war criminal, but to many Arabs, he was just a patriot. His
exterminationist anti-Semitism was considered neither overly repugnant nor all
that exceptional. The Arab world is saturated by Jew-hatred.
Some of this hatred was planted by Husseini and some of it long existed, but
whatever the case, it remains a remarkable, if unremarked, feature of Arab
nationalism. The other day, for instance, about 1 million Egyptians in Tahrir
Square heard from Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, an esteemed religious leader and
Muslim Brotherhood figure whose anti-Semitic credentials are unimpeachable.
Among other things, he has said that Hitler was sent by Allah as "divine
punishment" for the Jews. His al-Jazeera program is one of that TV networks
most popular.
I have read the assurances of scholars and journalists alike that the Muslim
Brotherhood has mutated into the Common Cause of Egypt (Jordan, too) and
that its anti-Semitism is merely an odd and archaic quirk, like the anti-fluoride
positions of some American conservatives. I hope this is the case. But in truth, I
put more faith in the staying power of anti-Semitism than I do in the forecasting
gifts of my colleagues. If they are right, wonderful. If not, we all have something
to worry about.
There are nearly no Jews in Arab lands - they were kicked out after Israel was
established in 1948. Nowhere in the Middle East is peace with Israel popular.
Nowhere in the Middle East is anti-Semitism considered aberrant or weird. It is
5

6. inconceivable to me that Arab politicians will not attempt to harness both
sentiments, combining nationalism with anti-Semitism - a combustible and
unstable compound. History instructs about what follows.
Israeli leaders are well aware that they face a new reality in their region.
Whatever regime arises in Egypt, it is likely to chill even further what is already
called a cold peace. The same might hold for Jordan. King Abdullah is secure for
now - the Bedouin tribes need him to avoid chaos - but he, too, will have to listen
to popular sentiment.
Consequently, now would be the propitious time for Israel to settle with the
Palestinians. I am aware that resolution of the Palestinian issue will not satisfy
anti-Semites or extreme Arab nationalists - Israel is not going to give up all of
Jerusalem nor, for that matter, disappear - and both Hezbollah in Lebanon and
Hamas in Gaza have only been emboldened by recent events. Still, the creation
of a Palestinian state - the lifting of all the onerous restrictions on Palestinian
movement - will take some air out of this particular balloon and, possibly,
improve Israel's deteriorating moral standing in Europe and elsewhere. This is no
small matter.
Israel's critics have a case. Yet they make no case when it comes to Arab anti-
Semitism. The prominence of Qaradawi cannot be reassuring to Israelis. They
know that words can be weapons and hate is a killer. Nonetheless, since the
days of Husseini, a true Hitlerian figure, Arab nations have shamefully been
granted an exception to the standards expected of the rest of the world, as if they
were children. If I were an Israeli, I'd be worried. If I were an Arab, I'd be insulted.
If I were a critic only of Israel, I'd be ashamed.
Perhaps it’s only politics that stands in the way of an Israeli-Palestinian peace.
However, when the hatred is religious then we have a situation that is much
harder to deal with. Granted, most Jewish Israelis do not have very positive
feelings about their Arab neighbors. But that is caused by politics and war.
Whatever hate exists is not religion based. Arab anti-Semitism which is wrapped
in their most basic belief system is not so easily dealt with. It takes generations
for it to exorcised.
Yes, “…now would be the propitious time for Israel to settle with the
Palestinians.” But…Sorry Richard! Peace is not just around the corner.
QARADAWI
I don’t want to dwell too long on Sheikh Yusuf Qaradawi but I think a little more
information on this tremendously important anti-Israel and anti-Semitic religious
leader is called for to explain what we’re up against
6

7. Granted, what I will quote below comes from an Israeli source. However, the Meir
Amit Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center is reputable and its research
is certainly open if anybody wants to dispute it.
Among other beliefs Qaradawi “opposes Al-Qaida and its methods, he
enthusiastically supports Palestinian terrorism, including suicide bombing attacks
targeting the civilian Israeli population. In the past he also supported “resistance”
(i.e., terrorism) to the occupation of Iraq. He issued fatwas calling for jihad
against Israel and the Jews, and authorizing suicide bombing attacks even if the
victims were women and children. He regards all of “Palestine” as Muslim
territory (according to Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas ideology), strongly
opposes the existence of the State of Israel and rejects the peace treaties signed
with it, and opposes the Palestinian Authority. (In the past, he called for the
stoning of Mahmoud Abbas.)
With so many Arabs being open and accepting of this sort of rhetoric, what kind
of peace is possible? I believe, as I’ve said many times, the best we can hope for
is an agreement of “no war”. If that could be achieved, it would be a great step
forward. Peace? I think it’s generations in the future. Read the Qaradawi story by
clicking here.
http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?id=210424
A HEAVY PRICE TO PAY
The trip that Foreign Minister Westerwelle made to Iran to get the two reporters
back to Germany required paying a heavy price. While those that know how
these sorts of things work in the world of “realpolitik”, it certainly gave off the
wrong sort of a message as far as what Germany’s relationship with Iran is
advertised to be. One recognizes blackmail when one sees it. One also
recognizes the weakness of the paying of the ransom – especially by a nation
that is supposed to strong and independent. It’s certainly not the first time it has
happened but that certainly doesn’t make it any better.
7

8. The picture of Westerwelle and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at
the “official” meeting looked like a get-together of old friends. My Berlin
AJC colleague, Deidre Berger wrote on Feb. 21, “In the dramatic sweep of
events in the Mideast the past few weeks, little attention has been focused on
Iran. Yet two photos dominated the front pages of German newspapers this past
weekend. One showed Guido Westerwelle, Germany’s Foreign Minister, shaking
hands with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad; the second showed cast
members of the Iranian film Nader and Simin, A Separation, accepting the
Golden Bear award of the Berlinale Film Festival.
These images could easily create the impression that Iran is making giant leaps
toward acceptance in the democratic world. On the political front, Iran’s president
was able to greet a high-level German official for the first time in seven years,
while culturally, a film produced in Iran swept the top honors at one of the world’s
leading film festivals.
These two events seem to sanitize Iran and give the impression that freedom of
expression is growing there. (Berger) In 2010, Reporters without Borders’
country ratings for freedom of speech listed Iran as 172nd out of 175 countries.
Those who transgress the bizarre ideological code imposed on Iranian society
suffer severe consequences, ranging from a ban on work to imprisonment and
torture.
She concludes by saying, “As the democratic surge sweeps the region, this is
surely the time to increase pressure on the bellicose Iranian regime and stop the
hypocrisy of trading and negotiating with a country that eschews civil and human
rights and threatens its neighbors.
Here is an historic opportunity to stand up to a regime that is fundamentally anti-
democratic, anti-Western, anti-Christian and anti-Semitic.”
I think you owe it to yourself to read the entire piece written by a person who
knows and appreciates Germany but also see the pitfalls faced by not focusing
on the truth about Iran. You can read it by clicking here.
http://www.ajc.org/site/apps/nlnet/content2.aspx?
c=ijITI2PHKoG&b=1531915&ct=9134787
THE LAW OF RETURN
Israel, the traditional home of the Jewish people, allows all Jews, under its Law of
Return citizenship in the State. In deciding who should be allowed citizenship an
on-going question, actually it’s two questions, presents itself. First, who is a
Jew?, and, secondly, who is a rabbi?
8

9. Under Orthodox law (Halacha) to be a Jew one is either the child of a Jewish
mother (matrilineal descent) or one who has converted to Judaism. In Israel and
other countries that adhere to Halachic law, there is no argument about the first
category. However, one must document and prove that one’s mother is/was
Jewish. When I applied for membership in the Berlin Jewish community, I had to
produce a letter from the rabbi who officiated at my mother’s funeral attesting to
the fact that she was, indeed, Jewish. Jews emigrating from the former Soviet
Union have a much greater problem in securing “legal’ proof.
It is the second category, the one that deals with converts, where most of the
problems arise. There are questions about the authenticity even of Orthodox
conversions outside Israel. Recently, according to JTA, “Dozens of North
American Orthodox rabbis protested to Israel's Interior Ministry following reports
that Diaspora converts under Orthodox auspices are being denied the right to
immigrate.
The Chief Rabbinate has become the defacto central body in determining the
validity of Orthodox conversions, and it only recognizes about 20 religious courts
in North America, mostly affiliated with the Rabbinical Council of America.
Conservative and Reform converts are certified as Jewish by the central bodies
of their respective movements.
In response to the letter, the plenary of the Jewish Agency's Board of Governors
adopted a resolution brought by the Unity of the Jewish People Committee
calling on the Israeli government to confirm the Jewish Agency's role in
determining the eligibility of new immigrants.
The resolution passed Tuesday on the last day of the Jewish Agency Board of
Governors meeting in Jerusalem and was initiated by Chairman Natan
Sharansky, who told the board that Israel's Chief Rabbinate should not be
involved in determining who can be allowed to immigrate to Israel.
"I want to separate the argument about conversion from the recognition of
Judaism for the sake of citizenship-eligibility under the Law of Return,"
Sharansky told Haaretz. "It’s so important that a person who undergoes
conversion according to the tradition of his community and who the community
accepts as a Jew be eligible to make aliyah under the Law of Return."
Needless to say, the Jewish Agency which oversees immigration desperately
wants a more liberal point of view to rule so as to maximize the inflow Jews
coming into Israel. The Orthodox rabbinate wants to hold on to control and
certainly not give up any power to even Orthodox rabbis from the outside.
So the battle goes on. The argument between Jewish purity and the need for
increased Jewish population will not be decided any time soon.
9

10. Jews do not need outside non-Jewish opponents to satisfy their need to be
disputatious. We’ve got enough of that sort of thing internally.
ISRAEL: AN INSIDE LOOK
Since I mentioned disputatiousness just above, there is no arena worldwide that
has more of it (short of civil war) than the Israeli government. Like many other
parliamentary governments the Israel parliament, the Knesset, is made up of a
coalition of political parties. In Israel’s case, however, there seems to be greater
battles within the coalition than on the outside with its opposition.
My AJC colleague in Israel, Ed Rettig, who I consider a political analyst par
excellence, has written an incisive piece for AJC about the inside struggles
between and among the leading political leaders in the nation.
Ed concludes his short, but very interesting piece by saying, “The most stable
component of the coalition seems to Prime Minister Netanyahu himself. As his
two strongest coalition partners face potentially career-ending challenges, the
test Netanyahu faces is to strengthen his hold on the coalition, giving him the
time and the clout to determine the still unclear legacy his second government
will leave behind.
With that, I promise you a very interesting minute or so if you click on the article
and read it. You understand more about Israel politics than you did before and
see Jewish disputatiousness at its height. Click here.
http://www.ajc.org/site/apps/nlnet/content2.aspx?
c=ijITI2PHKoG&b=2818289&ct=9143357&notoc=1
WE DIDN’T DO IT!
The Haaretz headline (in large black letters) noted, “Pope exonerates Jews for
death of Jesus” followed by “Benedict XVI's theological analysis contradicts
traditional Catholic interpretations which have been used throughout history to
justify anti-Semitism.”
I thought the question was previously settled in 1965 by Nostra Aetate, which, as
Rabbi David Rosen of AJC said,” (it) revolutionized the Catholic Church's
relations with Jews by saying Christ's death could not be attributed to Jews as a
whole at the time or today”.
Perhaps in some minds there still remained a question. In 'Jesus of Nazareth'
excerpts released Wednesday, Benedict uses a biblical and theological analysis
to explain why it is not true that the Jewish people as a whole were responsible
for Jesus' death.
10

11. Frankly, speaking for myself, I never felt any personal guilt for the death of Jesus.
If there was any guilt to be felt surrounding the question I always thought that
those using the canard of Jewish responsibility as a reason for violence or killing
should be the ones to bear that weight.
There is no question that the Pope should be congratulated for making his
thoughts crystal clear. For that he is entitled to “Three cheers”. .
********************************************************************************************
See you again in late March
DuBow Digest is written and published by Eugene DuBow who can be contacted
by clicking here.
Both the American and Germany editions are posted at
www.dubowdigest.typepad.com
Click here to connect
11