J-Street disappointed' by Conference of Presidents rejection

By SAM SOKOL, MAYA SHWAYDER

05/01/2014 16:18
Conference members voted to reject J-Street after critics accused the
group of being anti-Israel.

JStreet Photo: screenshot
J-Street expressed its disappointment on Wednesday after the Conference of
Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations rejected its application for
membership in in a 17-22 vote.

The 50 member organizations of the Conference voted to reject the
controversial organization that describes itself as pro-Israel and pro-peace, but
has been accused of being anti-Israel by critics by a larger margin than
anticipated before the secret balloting.

Calling Wednesday a sad day, J Street opined that such a venerable institution
would choose to bar the door to the communal tent to an organization that
represents a substantial segment of Jewish opinion on Israel.

J Street blamed its failure to gain admission to the Conference on
organizations on the right of the community who it accused of not believing in
a broad tent that represents the diversity of American Jewish opinion.

We are especially disappointed that a minority of the farthest right wing
organizations within the Conference has chosen to close the Conferences doors
to this emerging generation of inspiring and passionate young leaders, J Street
lamented, stating that such a move turns away many Jews who would like to
contribute to the communal dialogue.

The organization also stated that its rejection underscored the reason it had
been founded in the first place, namely to represent the large segment of the
American Jewish community feels that it does not have a home or a voice within
its traditional structures.

Americans for Peace Now, a member of the Conference, expressed
disappointment as well. Ori Nir, a spokesman for the dovish group, stated that
the decision was down to close mindedness and the Conferences leaders
inability to see where the winds of Jewish public opinion are blowing.

Not accepting J Street into the conference is a rejection, perhaps a denial, of
the healthy trends that are taking place within the community, Nir said.

Many members had been very closed-mouthed on how they planned to vote in the
days leading up to the ballot, but confirmed yes votes as of Wednesday
morning included big players such as the Anti-Defamation League, the Union for
Reform Judaism, the United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism and the
Conservative movements Rabbinical Assembly.

The smaller than expected show of support for J Street may be attributable to
the nature of the ballot, believes Zionist Organization of America President
Morton Klein.

Im shocked that more voted against, he told the Post. Maybe because of the
secret ballot, people thought that voting saying they would vote yes would look
good.

The significance of this particular vote happening at a particularly polarized
and emotional moment for American Jews as the latest peace talks seemed to
fail revolves around how big and inclusive of a metaphorical tent the American
Jewish community is willing to pitch.

Every community has its boundaries. The question really is, what is acceptable,
and what are the communal bounds. I think that so many organizations have
already turned out in favor of J Street, to some extent theyve already won,
Brandeis Prof. Jonathan Sarna, an expert on American Jewry, said prior to the
vote.

The vote on J-street occurred at the same time as the Jewish community is
embroiled in a debate over the inclusion of the New Israel Fund -an organization
that spends millions of Dollars funding Israeli NGOs such as Adalah and
Breaking The Silence- in New York's Celebrate Israel Parade. While the NIF
describes itself as advocating for "civil rights, social justice and religious
pluralism," the organization's critics have accused it of funding groups
advocating boycotts and the end of state's Jewish character.

Several of the same organization's that have advocated J-Street's inclusion in
the Conference of Presidents have also come out strongly against the use of a
political "litmus test" for participation in the Zionist march.

While many have painted the vote as a test of the limits of acceptable discourse
within the American Jewish establishment, not everybody agrees with this
interpretation.

Some members of the conference told the Post that what J Street is doing is
exploiting the situation to get visibility.

This is not about the members of J Street, one member of the Conference
who preferred not to be named told the Jerusalem Post on Wednesday. Three
of our current presidents sat on boards of J Street, and they represent the
same views... But they want to exploit this, so that if they get in, they can say
We were accepted so you know were credible, and if they dont get in, then
they get to say We were excluded from the establishment.

Reacting after the vote, the same member said that there had been a serious
and appropriate debate at yesterdays meeting and that it wasnt a right wing
vote.

It was the center that rejected J Street, the source explained, adding that
Things change [and] they could try again. This was really done on their merit. I
think its a real statement.

None of those who spoke to the Post predicted a communal split because of the
rejection and several recalled that a number of current members of the
Conference were initially rejected.

A two-thirds affirmative vote of the member organizations is a significant
threshold, the Conference said in a post-vote statement. Some present
member organizations did not initially achieve the necessary support but
subsequently re-applied and are now members.

Commenting after the vote, Prof. Sarna said that what impressed him was the
sense that they can try again.

This wasnt a stinging rejection of J Street, it seemed to be a way of easing J
street into the group of legitimate organizations, he speculated.

Clearly getting the votes at this point it would be difficult, but presidents and
executives change, and that might make a difference, said Vernon Kurtz, the
President of the American Zionist Movement and the Chair of the conferences
Membership Committee. I dont yet know the ramificiatons of short term or
longer term.

In an interview with JTA, J Streets president, Jeremy Ben-Ami, said the
organization had no plans at this time to reapply.

Asked about the rejection, Anti-Defamation League National Director Abe
Foxman said that while the inclusion of groups like Peace Now indicate a
willingness to entertain views similar to J Streets. However, he added, the
criteria are changing, and maybe thats because of outside pressure on Israel,
and issues of delegitimization of the state, with 20 years ago we didnt have to
deal with.

Foxman added that he believes outside attacks on Israel have impacted the
level tolerance of different views and that he hopes that this trend will not
impact the Conference negatively.

There is a serious difference of opinion in the community on J street, and
whether they are more pro peace than pro Israel, he explained. They have
taken several sides of positions, and their positions have morphed, I would say.
Theres enough of a record on issues of sanction and pushing the American
administration, theres enough of a debate and discussion to disagree as to how
pro Israel they are.

This is certainly the view of Farley Weiss, the leader of the National Council of
Young Israel, a national network of modern orthodox synagogues, who said that
J Streets actions have placed it outside of the pro-Israel camp.

If you have a record, its hard to say that this isnt who we are, he said. By
defending the United Nations Goldstone report, that even Goldstone doesnt
defend anymore, he said, theyre out of the mainstream.

JTA contributed to this report.