IJV Interview

Alex Doherty — Sun, 25 Feb 2007 22:13:48 +0000

The following is an interview with Donald Sassoon Professor of Comparative European History at the University of London and one of the original signatories of the declaration of Independent Jewish Voices.

Why has IJV arisen at this moment? Why has a British organisation of this type not developed before?

There is no doubt that the deteriorating situation in the Middle East in the 40th anniversary of the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza and the war in the Lebanon in the summer of 2006 have been a catalyst for our initiative. We were particularly perturbed by a statement made in August 2006 by the Israeli PM, Ehud Olmert to an American audience: ‘I believe that this is a war that is fought by all the Jews.’

However, we were not the first symptom of a deep malaise among Jews. There have been a plethora of organisations of Jews dissenting from the official support offered to Israeli policies. I am thinking of organizations such as Jews for Justice for Palestinians which has been active for a few years. Some of the signatories of Jews for Justice for Palestinians formed a small group (Writers against the Occupation) which later joined forces with members of the Jewish Forum for Justice and Human Rights -a more broadly based group whose focus was not exclusively the Middle East. This informal group constituted the steering committee of Independent Jewish Voices, prepared a declaration, gathered signatures and money, bought space in The Times and the Jewish Chronicle, and launched the initiative with an article in the Guardian and a week-long debate in The Guardian Comment Is Free (links can be found on our website www.ijv.org.uk ).

What are the principal goals of IJV?

At this stage the main goal consists in expressing the view that the spectrum of opinion among British Jews is not reflected by institutions –such as the Chief Rabbi or the Board of Jewish Deputies- which are seen to represent all Jews. In particular we wished to disassociate ourselves from the automatic support that many Jewish institutions offer the government of the State of Israel, whether it is the de facto occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, the erection of a separation Wall, the constant infringements of the human rights of the Palestinian population, the disproportionate reprisals for terrorist acts, and the resort of military force over diplomacy and a sincere effort to promote peace. We particularly resent the fact that, only too often, those who express such views are accused of disloyalty or worse, of being ‘self-hating Jews’.

Have the organisers of IJV been surprised by the level of interest there has been in the project?

Yes, we did not expect the massive coverage we have received. The series of articles published on the Guardian’s Comment is Free provoked over 2,600 posts; we have received around 1,500 emails – over 90% supportive – and widespread media coverage both at home and abroad including a thoughtful piece in The Hindustani Times. We were particularly delighted with the front page in the Jewish Chronicle (with the banner headline ‘The Rebellion Goes Global’) and eight pages of coverage. Our website has been accessed by more than 13,000 unique visitors and the number of signatories of our declaration trebled to 400.

IJV’s launch has been cited by critics as being an example of the “New Anti-Semitism”. What is IJV’s view on this alleged phenomena? Is the concept purely a means to silence dissent?

Uncritical supporters of Israel –particularly those in the USA- are finding it increasingly difficult to offer a reasoned defence of the policies currently pursued by the Israeli government and so they use the Holocaust and the spectre of anti-Semitism. They hope in so doing to silence both Jews and non-Jews. Organizations such as the Anti-Defamation League, whose job should be that of fighting anti-Semitism, act as the supporting arm of the Israeli Foreign Office. Last year pressures were successfully exercised on the Polish consulate in New York to withdraw facilities for a lecture by the historian Tony Judt – a critic of Israel. In reality the equation Israel=Jews plays also into the hands of real anti-Semites who exploit the dismay caused by Israeli policies and turn it into an attack on all Jews.

IJV have been rather critical of the Jewish board of deputies. Why is this? what has been the historic role of the JBD?

The Jewish Board of Deputies is the oldest extant Jewish organisation in the UK (it claims to have been in existence since 1760). The ‘deputies’ are elected by a number of synagogues and communal organizations. Since there is no record of all the Jews in this country (those who take no part in ‘recognized’ communal or religious organizations cannot be counted) it is difficult to estimate how many Jews the Board does represent. Current guesses suggest 40 to 50 per cent. The leading expert on British Jewry, Prof. Geoffrey Alderman, an orthodox Jew, scathingly claims that neither the Board nor the Chief Rabbi are representative of a deeply divided community.

So far as I know, the Board does good works in the field of Jewish welfare and education (but then so does Hamas in the occupied territories and Hezbollah in the Lebanon) and it stands up robustly to any whiff of anti-Semitism, but it also acts on the assumption that an attack on Israel is an attack on all Jews. It even organized a demonstration last summer in support of Israel’s disastrous war in Southern Lebanon. A survey conducted by the United Jewish Appeal in 2004 (published in the Jewish Chronicle of 18 June 2004) showed that only a minority of Jews supported the Israeli government then led by Ariel Sharon. The survey was conducted among Jews who sent their children to Jewish Sunday classes, in other words Jews who had a degree of commitment to Jewish traditions (most of the Jews I know personally do not send their children to cheret). Yet only 8 per cent of them declared to support Israeli ‘hawks’ against 30 per cent who were ‘pro-doves’; half described themselves as Zionist but over one quarter did not, and 31 per cent agreed to the statement ‘I am often very critical of Israeli government policies’ (against 28 per cent who disagreed). So while we do not claim to represent a majority of Jews and do not aim to be an alternative to the Board of Jewish Deputies, we believe that at least a significant (and unrepresented) minority would agree to the principles expressed in our Declaration.

Does IJV have a fixed view of what would be a reasonable solution to the conflict?

Any solution meeting with the wholehearted approval of both Israelis and Palestinians.

What is IJV’s view of the Gaza “pullout”?

Our ‘view’ is encapsulated in our declaration which is a declaration of principles not a set of policy proposals. The signatories, by adding their name, have signified their approval of the main principles set out. They have not been canvassed on each and every policy pursued by the Israeli government. Personally I think it is evident that the Gaza ‘pullout’ was not the first step of a generalised pullout from the occupied territories. What happened was the eviction of a relatively small number of illegal settlers (‘illegal’ by the definition of the Israeli authorities). In reality this was no real withdrawal. Israel has maintained effective control of Gaza since it controls the air space, the sea, all external borders as well as the border crossings. In practice Gaza is a prison camp.

What difference would it make were IJV’s position on the Israel/Palestine conflict adopted by a UK government? How significant is the UK’s role?

We hope that the British government will understand that it cannot assume that the Jews of the United Kingdom are a monolithic mass supporting the State of Israel. This does not mean that the government will automatically change its policies for these are determined by a range of considerations extending beyond favouring this or that local group. Ideally we would like to see the government exercising, directly or indirectly through its role in the ‘Quartet’ (the USA, the EU, the UN and the Russian Federation) more determined pressure on the State of Israeli to moderate its policies. Right now all the pressures exercised by the Quartet are on Hamas.

It is clear, however, that the UK government has a relatively marginal role to play in the dispute compared to that of the USA. Pressures exercised by the USA over Israel would have a real impact. One of the main reasons why the USA is so supportive of Israel is the power and energy deployed by the pro-Israeli lobbies in the USA. But cracks are beginning to appear in the hitherto seemingly monolithic voice of American Jewry. Any big change is more likely to come from the other side of the Atlantic than from Europe. We in Europe must be conscious of the limits of our influence while not refraining from exercising what little influence we have.

Donald Sassoon | ukwatch.net

IJV Interview