We welcome your comments to this and any other CIJR publication. Please address your response to: Rob Coles, Publications Chairman, Canadian Institute for Jewish Research, PO Box 175, Station H, Montreal QC H3G 2K7 –
Contents:
No Peace Any Time Soon, But Not Because of Bibi: Charles Krauthammer, National Review, Mar. 19, 2015 — Of all the idiocies uttered in reaction to Benjamin Netanyahu’s stunning election victory, none is more ubiquitous than the idea that peace prospects are now dead because Netanyahu has declared that there will be no Palestinian state while he is Israel’s prime minister. Israel's Ballot Box Is a Melting Pot: Daniel Gordis, Bloomberg, Mar. 17, 2015— My plane landed at Tel Aviv's Ben Gurion International Airport just a few hours ago.
Canada's Ambassador to Israel: Rabbi Shraga Simmons, Aish, Mar. 15, 2015 — After 25 years of practicing law and raising two daughters, Vivian Bercovici (pronounced Berkovich) was living comfortably in Toronto, Canada, serving as adjunct law professor at University of Toronto and writing pro-Israel op-eds for the Toronto Star.
Murry Sidlin’s ‘Defiant Requiem’ Returns to Avery Fisher Hall: James R. Oestreich, New York Times, Mar. 6, 2015 — Can there be more than one way to think and feel about “Defiant Requiem,” the concert-drama based on musical activity in the Nazi concentration camp at Terezin during the Holocaust, conceived by the conductor Murry Sidlin?
America, Wake Up!: Jerusalem Post, Mar. 19, 2015
For Washington, This is as Bad as it Gets in the Middle East: J.L. Granatstein, National Post, Mar. 18, 2015
An All-Seeing I: A Closer Look at the AGO’s Sombre Lodz Ghetto Photo Exhibit: James Adams, Globe & Mail, Feb. 18, 2015
Who Will Save Our History?: Boris Johnson, National Post, Mar. 16, 2015
NO PEACE ANY TIME SOON, BUT NOT BECAUSE OF BIBI
Charles Krauthammer
National Review, Mar. 19, 2015
Of all the idiocies uttered in reaction to Benjamin Netanyahu’s stunning election victory, none is more ubiquitous than the idea that peace prospects are now dead because Netanyahu has declared that there will be no Palestinian state while he is Israel’s prime minister.
I have news for the lowing herds: There would be no peace and no Palestinian state if Isaac Herzog were prime minister either. Or Ehud Barak or Ehud Olmert for that matter. The latter two were (non-Likud) prime ministers who offered the Palestinians their own state — with its capital in Jerusalem and every Israeli settlement in the new Palestine uprooted — only to be rudely rejected.
This is not ancient history. This is 2000, 2001, and 2008 — three astonishingly concessionary peace offers within the last 15 years. Every one rejected. More Israel Election Israeli Voters: Bibi Yes, Barack No! Netanyahu Won Because He Moved Right The fundamental reality remains: This generation of Palestinian leadership — from Yasser Arafat to Mahmoud Abbas — has never and will never sign its name to a final peace settlement dividing the land with a Jewish state. And without that, no Israeli government of any kind will agree to a Palestinian state.
Today, however, there is a second reason a peace agreement is impossible: the supreme instability of the entire Middle East. For half a century, it was run by dictators no one liked but with whom you could do business. For example, the 1974 Israel–Syria disengagement agreement yielded more than four decades of near-total quiet on the border because the Assad dictatorships so decreed. That authoritarian order is gone. Syria is wracked by a multi-sided civil war that has killed 200,000 people and that has al-Qaeda allies, Hezbollah fighters, government troops, and even the occasional Iranian general prowling the Israeli border. Who inherits? No one knows.
In the last four years, Egypt has had two revolutions and three radically different regimes. Yemen went from pro-American to Iranian client so quickly the U.S. had to evacuate its embassy in a panic. Libya has gone from Moammar Qaddafi’s crazy authoritarianism to jihadi-dominated civil war. On Wednesday, Tunisia, the one relative success of the Arab Spring, suffered a major terror attack that the prime minister said “targets the stability of the country.” From Mali to Iraq, everything is in flux. Amid this mayhem, by what magic would the West Bank, riven by a bitter Fatah–Hamas rivalry, be an island of stability? What would give any Israeli–Palestinian peace agreement even a modicum of durability?
There was a time when Arafat commanded the Palestinian movement the way Qaddafi commanded Libya. Abbas commands no one. Why do you think he is in the eleventh year of a four-year term, having refused to hold elections for the last five years? Because he’s afraid he would lose to Hamas. With or without elections, the West Bank could fall to Hamas overnight. At which point fire rains down on Tel Aviv, Ben Gurion Airport, and the entire Israeli urban heartland — just as it rains down on southern Israel from Gaza when it suits Hamas.
Any Arab–Israeli peace settlement would require Israel to make dangerous and inherently irreversible territorial concessions on the West Bank in return for promises and guarantees. Under current conditions, these would be written on sand. Israel is ringed by jihadi terrorists in Sinai, Hamas in Gaza, Hezbollah in Lebanon, Islamic State and Iranian proxies in Syria, and a friendly but highly fragile Jordan. Israelis have no idea who ends up running any of these places. Well, say the critics. Israel could be given outside guarantees. Guarantees? Like the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, in which the U.S., Britain, and Russia guaranteed Ukraine’s “territorial integrity”? Like the red line in Syria? Like the unanimous U.N. resolutions declaring illegal any Iranian enrichment of uranium — now effectively rendered null?
Peace awaits three things. Eventual Palestinian acceptance of a Jewish state. A Palestinian leader willing to sign a deal based on that premise. A modicum of regional stability that allows Israel to risk the potentially fatal withdrawals such a deal would entail. I believe such a day will come. But there is zero chance it comes now or even soon. That’s essentially what Netanyahu said in explaining — and softening — on Thursday his no-Palestinian-state statement.
I believe such a day will come. But there is zero chance it comes now or even soon. That’s essentially what Netanyahu said in explaining — and softening — on Thursday his no-Palestinian-state statement. In the interim, I understand the crushing disappointment of the Obama administration and its media poodles at the spectacular success of the foreign leader they loathe more than any other on the planet. The consequent seething and sputtering are understandable, if unseemly. Blaming Netanyahu for banishing peace, however, is mindless.
ISRAEL'S BALLOT BOX IS A MELTING POT
Daniel Gordis
Bloomberg, Mar. 17, 2015
My plane landed at Tel Aviv's Ben Gurion International Airport just a few hours ago. When I had realized earlier in the week that I would be doing a lot of flying for a meager 28 hours in the U.S., I wondered whether it really made sense to return home just to vote. (Absentee ballots are not an option for most Israelis.) But I wasn’t alone, it turned out; the plane was full of people coming home for the same reason.
Israel is a country where the very existence of a democracy still feels like a miracle; many of us refuse to take it for granted. The vast majority of country's immigrants came from societies with no democratic tradition. When Israel declared independence, North African Arab states summarily evicted almost all their Jewish citizens, and some 700,000 of them arrived on Israel’s shores. The Jewish state had no resources for absorbing a population of that size, but it took them in nonetheless. Unlike Jordan and Syria, which have never given Palestinian refugees a chance to become citizens, Israel gave all those Jewish refugees citizenship and taught them how to vote.
In my neighborhood, different ethnic groups all vote in the same elementary school. As I stood in line, there were North African Jews waiting who were older than the state itself. It took just a brief look in their eyes to see that though we might vote too often here, they understand that waiting in that line is a rare privilege in this region.
A million Russians came to Israel a few decades ago when the Soviet Union first opened its gates and then collapsed on itself. They, too, came with no experience of a genuine democracy. Under Natan Sharansky, they formed their own political party, but abandoned it a few years later when they realized they no longer needed it. They’d become Israelis, and today, they stood in line, chatting in Russian, just as my wife and I spoke in English and another recently arrived couple conversed in French.
It’s extraordinary, this smoothly functioning democracy, but not really surprising. The Zionist Congresses, beginning in 1897 in Basel, Switzerland, were all democratic. From the Second Zionist Congress, in 1898, women could vote and be elected — long before any other major European parliament gave women that opportunity. The Yishuv, the pre-state community in Palestine, created democratic institutions, all of which seamlessly morphed into Israel’s democratic government. For all its rough and tumble rhetoric, the democratic impulse in Zionism has never missed a beat. Imagine our region if even one of our neighbors had done the same thing.
When my turn came, I took a ballot from one of the many piles arrayed for me to choose from. With a sense of reverence, I placed it in an envelope, and dropped it in the blue ballot box. Obviously, I hoped that the party I had voted for would win. But as I looked at the multicolored and multilingual line of people still waiting for their turn, it struck me that all of us Israelis, given what we’ve built here against all the odds, have already won.
Rabbi Shraga Simmons
Aish, Mar. 15, 2015
After 25 years of practicing law and raising two daughters, Vivian Bercovici (pronounced Berkovich) was living comfortably in Toronto, Canada, serving as adjunct law professor at University of Toronto and writing pro-Israel op-eds for the Toronto Star. So Vivian never expected the call inviting her to become the next Canadian Ambassador to Israel. The government of Prime Minster Stephen Harper – deep and loyal supporters of Israel – was, Vivian says, "looking for someone who would well-represent their policies and their views." When the shock wore off, Vivian realized, "For me this is perfect. My Cinderella moment."
Yet for her family, it remained a big decision. "I'm a very involved, hands-on mom to my two daughters," Bercovici told Aish.com from her office at the Canadian Embassy in Tel Aviv. "They've lived in a familiar house and neighborhood in a little corner of Toronto. My younger daughter was about to begin her senior year of high school, so she was concerned about the adjustment and about leaving her friends." In the end, "It was clear to everyone, my kids included, that Mummy had to do this." So began a 4-year term that commenced in January 2014. In the early 1980s, Vivian spent a year studying at Hebrew University in Jerusalem. The experience reinforced a deep pride and passion for Israel. She penned numerous pieces for the Toronto Star – speaking out strongly against moves to sell Israel short internationally ("Iran Nuclear Deal: West Appeasing the Aggressor"), and noting that the Palestinian Authority “and just about every government in the Middle East make no secret of their collective ideological commitment to the total destruction of the state of Israel, which they regard as a blasphemous blight on the Arab and Muslim worlds.”
During the second Palestinian Intifada, her article, "Making Terrorists Pay," appeared on Aish.com. Bercovici's appointment as Ambassador to Israel generated some flak. Bercovici's appointment as Ambassador to Israel generated some flak. One critic said that her writings "qualify her more as Benjamin Netanyahu's envoy to Ottawa, rather than as Ottawa's envoy to Tel Aviv." Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird, the one who hand-selected Bercovici, was asked by a prominent CBC anchor: “Vivian Bercovici is Jewish, so there are going to be some questions. Why not appoint someone who doesn’t even have the perception of any kind of bias?"
Actually, it was precisely Bercovici's views that earned her the appointment. In recent years, Canada has exceeded virtually every country in exhibiting moral clarity and standing strong with Israel. For example, when Canada lost a bid for a seat on the UN Security Council, Prime Minster Harper acknowledged it was due to his pro-Israeli position, later adding that he would "take a pro-Israeli stance, no matter what the political cost to Canada." What is the root of this strong Canadian-Israeli alliance? "Canadians take very seriously the values of freedom and democracy," Bercovici says. "A country like Israel is in many ways an anomaly in the Middle East: democratic, liberal, Western-oriented, and singularly besieged. For Canada, it's a matter of principle to stands up and say: 'We support Israel'." Bucking worldwide trends, Canada voted against the Palestinian bid to join the United Nations; more recently Canada opposed the Palestinians' ascension to the International Criminal Court at The Hague…
Becoming an ambassador to Israel is a plum position, given the exciting times in the Mideast region, and with so much attention focused on Israel. "It's the gift that keeps on giving," says Bercovici. "Every day is amazing. Every day I meet different, incredible people, and challenges. The office is always lively, with stuff coming out of left field. Some of it's good, some of it unfortunate But it sure does make for an interesting life." What does the Ambassador like most about living in Israel? Israel is a beautiful, vibrant country, full of variety. The people are fabulous.
"I love the weather," she says with a chuckle. "Israel is a beautiful, vibrant country, full of variety. The people are fabulous. Israelis have a reputation for being a bit brusque, but they really aren't. Just below the surface, they have a great sense of humor and warmth." What has been a difficult part of the adjustment? "Obviously the conflict is a distressing part of life, and it's a constant. I think everyone in the region wishes it wasn't there. But we figure out how to manage day-to-day, and I'm very happy here."
And what about the daughter who agreed to move halfway across the world for her senior year of high school? "My daughter loves it here. She's happier here than she has ever been. She's in a school with kids from all over the world, in a very accepting environment, living a wildly interesting life. A journey like this opens up the world." As for this turn of events in her professional career, Bercovici could not be happier. "One friend told me: 'It's not every little girl's dream to become Canadian Ambassador to Israel. But it's yours."
MURRY SIDLIN’S ‘DEFIANT REQUIEM’ RETURNS TO AVERY FISHER HALL
James R. Oestreich
New York Times, Mar. 6, 2015
Can there be more than one way to think and feel about “Defiant Requiem,” the concert-drama based on musical activity in the Nazi concentration camp at Terezin during the Holocaust, conceived by the conductor Murry Sidlin? On the surface, at least, the production seems to represent only good — noble intentions, spiritual uplift and redemption — and it unquestionably holds profound meaning for many who are connected with it or have witnessed it. It has been performed more than 30 times since its premiere in Portland, Ore., in 2002. It played in Avery Fisher Hall in 2013 and returns there on Monday evening, with Mr. Sidlin conducting the Orchestra of Terezin Remembrance, the Collegiate Chorale and vocal soloists.
“Defiant Requiem” commemorates and partly re-enacts 16 makeshift performances of Verdi’s Requiem by a chorus of prisoners with piano accompaniment given in Terezin, a town some 40 miles northwest of Prague in what is now the Czech Republic. The production includes not only historic film clips and roles for actors — in this case, Bebe Neuwirth and John Rubinstein — but also a complete performance of Verdi’s Requiem, with full chorus and orchestra. In addition, there is a 2012 documentary film, “Defiant Requiem,” based on a Sidlin performance of Verdi’s Requiem at Terezin and narrated by Ms. Neuwirth. “This was one of those stunning events where every single story is compelling and profound,” Ms. Neuwirth said in a recent telephone interview. “I try to put myself in the prisoners’ unimaginable world, in hell and making music.”
So what moved the historian James Loeffler to condemn “Defiant Requiem,” in a 2013 article in Tablet, a magazine devoted to Jewish life, as an example of a new form of “Holocaust Music”? Such efforts, he wrote, “represent a tragically misconceived approach that distorts the memory of the Holocaust and slights the very musicians that they purport to honor.” More on that later. Better first to explore some of the meanings “Defiant Requiem” has for its supporters. A good place to start is at the very beginning of the Terezin events, with Edgar Krasa, who is featured prominently in the documentary. Mr. Krasa, now 94 and living with his wife in Boston, was transported from his home in Prague to Terezin in 1941. There he was for a time a bunkmate of Rafael Schächter, the hero of the story, who arrived soon after.
Schächter was a pianist and conductor, and among the few things he had been able to take with him to Terezin were several piano-vocal scores, including that of Verdi’s Requiem. Once there, he started an informal music program to help maintain the spirits of his fellow inmates, an extraordinary number of whom were musically or otherwise artistically inclined. He eventually adopted the Verdi work as a cause, since many lines in its text could be read as defiance of the Nazi captors. (“Therefore when the Judge takes His seat, whatever is hidden will be revealed: Nothing shall remain unavenged.”) Mr. Sidlin, in a telephone interview, quoted Schächter to the effect that “we can sing things to them that we can’t say to them.”
Schächter assembled a chorus of 150 and taught them by ear to sing their parts by rote, a complex and difficult task. Few of his singers were trained musicians, and most were coming off hard days of labor. He had to restock and retrain the chorus repeatedly, as members died or were sent to Auschwitz. By the time of the last performance, in 1944, the chorus numbered 60. The audiences for the performances consisted mainly of prisoners, but the listeners to that last performance included representatives of the International Red Cross, as part of the Nazis’ effort to pass Terezin off as a model Jewish community where life was good and the arts thrived. To a remarkable extent, the arts did thrive in Terezin, with no thanks to the Nazis.
Schächter was strongly upbraided by the council of Jewish elders in Terezin for using a Roman Catholic Mass, in Latin, as a vehicle for the edification of Jews. And the very fact that the performances could be construed as defiance, they argued, put the singers’ lives in jeopardy. Now here is what Mr. Loeffler, the historian, writes about Mr. Sidlin’s project: “By celebrating Jewish musicians for their performance of a Catholic Mass (written in homage to an Italian nationalist leader), the ‘Defiant Requiem’ propagates the persistent anti-Semitic trope, albeit unintentionally, that Jews can only express themselves artistically by borrowing and corrupting European Christian music.” (The Italian nationalist referred to was Alessandro Manzoni, the author of the historical novel “The Betrothed.”)
Both Schächter and Mr. Krasa were transferred to Auschwitz in 1944 and sent on the great death march out of the camp in January 1945 as Soviet forces approached. Schächter died on the march; Mr. Krasa escaped by plunging into a snow-filled ditch, where he was shot and left for dead. “I’ve devoted my life to extending Rafael Schächter’s legacy,” Mr. Krasa said in a telephone interview. Mr. Krasa sang in the Terezin choir, and on Monday his two sons and a grandson will join the Collegiate Chorale. Mr. Krasa would probably have been there to applaud Mr. Sidlin’s efforts in person if he had not taken a bad fall recently, which has limited his mobility. “I’ve asked Murry,” he said, “ ‘What will happen when you can’t continue?’ ”
To bring matters quickly to the present, another participant in the performance on Monday will be the clarinetist Jon Manasse, a longtime star of the rich New York freelance pool of musicians and a member of the Orchestra of St. Luke’s, the Mostly Mozart Festival Orchestra and the American Ballet Theater Orchestra. Mr. Manasse, 50, learned of “Defiant Requiem” in 2013. Knowing that it was related to the Holocaust, he said in an interview, he would have liked to participate then to represent his paternal grandparents but had prior commitments. Alfred Manasse, his grandfather, was one of the 937 passengers on the “Voyage of the Damned” (as Stuart Rosenberg’s 1976 film called it), the 1939 passage of the ocean liner St. Louis from Hamburg to Cuba, where it was not allowed entry. The ship had to return to Europe, and Alfred Manasse died at Auschwitz, as, apparently, did his wife…
Mr. Loeffler calls “Defiant Requiem” “a virtual multimedia extravaganza,” “replete with factual errors and historical distortions in the name of a theme of spiritual resistance.” “In some versions,” he adds, “actors reportedly wore striped pajamas — though their real-life models in Terezin did not.” But Mr. Sidlin makes no great claims to scholarship. “What I wrote,” he said, “was as close as I could get to what the survivors related.” Besides, he points out, scholars commit inaccuracies, too: “There were never striped pajamas in ‘Defiant Requiem,’ ” he insists, though an illustration on the Lincoln Center website for Monday’s performance shows a conductor wearing them. “Jews are often accused of going like lambs to the slaughter,” he said. “I wanted to show that this was their way of resisting.”
CIJR Wishes All Our Friends and Supporters: Shabbat Shalom!
America, Wake Up!: Jerusalem Post, Mar. 19, 2015—This year, Passover should be a wake-up call for America.
For Washington, This is as Bad as it Gets in the Middle East: J.L. Granatstein, National Post, Mar. 18, 2015 —American policy in the Middle East is in ruins.
An All-Seeing I: A Closer Look at the AGO’s Sombre Lodz Ghetto Photo Exhibit: James Adams, Globe & Mail, Feb. 18, 2015—Have I stayed long enough? Have I paid enough attention? Was I moved? What am I feeling? Did I like it? And if I haven’t liked it, is it still good?
Who Will Save Our History?: Boris Johnson, National Post, Mar. 16, 2015—Perhaps I shouldn’t care as much as I do. These victims aren’t real people, after all.
Contents:
Visit CIJR’s Bi-Weekly Webzine: Israzine.
CIJR’s ISRANET Daily Briefing is available by e-mail.
Please urge colleagues, friends, and family to visit our website for more information on our ISRANET series.
To join our distribution list, or to unsubscribe, visit us at https://isranet.org/.
The ISRANET Daily Briefing is a service of CIJR. We hope that you find it useful and that you will support it and our pro-Israel educational work by forwarding a minimum $90.00 tax-deductible contribution [please send a cheque or VISA/MasterCard information to CIJR (see cover page for address)]. All donations include a membership-subscription to our respected quarterly ISRAFAX print magazine, which will be mailed to your home.
CIJR’s ISRANET Daily Briefing attempts to convey a wide variety of opinions on Israel, the Middle East and the Jewish world for its readers’ educational and research purposes. Reprinted articles and documents express the opinions of their authors, and do not necessarily reflect the viewpoint of the Canadian Institute for Jewish Research.
Rob Coles, Publications Chairman, Canadian Institute for Jewish Research/ L'institut Canadien de recherches sur le Judaïsme, www.isranet.org
Tel: (514) 486-5544 – Fax:(514) 486-8284 ; ber@isranet.wpsitie.com
