It is widely agreed that Donald Trump won last week's Republican primary debate by not showing up. But his absence also allowed us to hear more from the other candidates and therefore get a glimpse of how the GOP might approach its post-Trump future. For those of us who care about the strength and reliability of the US-Israel relationship, the result was unsettling.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram

Over the course of the evening, two possibilities emerged as a potential Republican foreign policy after Trump leaves the building. The first, personified most visibly by former Vice President Mike Pence and former UN Ambassador Nikki Haley, sounded like a restoration of the pre-Trump GOP's vision for America on a world stage, an assertive and interventionist global presence that supports our allies and protects them against potentially harmful foreign aggression.

The alternative, represented by technology entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy and Florida governor Ron DeSantis, echoed a populist and isolationist brand of conservatism that had been largely dormant until Trump's election in 2016 and has been building support within the party ever since.

The two sides clashed on Ukraine and China, but their most notable dispute was over Israel, where Haley attacked Ramaswamy for his proposal to end US aid to the Jewish state by 2028. Ramaswamy tried to change the subject by proclaiming his admiration for Israeli immigration and crime policy and his opposition to Iran's nuclear aspirations. But Haley was relentless, blasting him for what she characterized as the abandonment of a loyal friend.

Ramaswamy exhibited a similar hands-off attitude toward Ukraine and Taiwan, reflecting a growing sentiment in the Republican Party that is more suspicious of an American global presence than at any time since shortly after World War II. But the grassroots conservative shift away from US international engagement has always exempted Israel, primarily because of the influential bloc of evangelical Christians within the GOP. DeSantis is an apt example of this dynamic, combining vocal support for Israel with a more ambivalent attitude toward Ukraine and other global hotspots.

But Ramaswamy, who like Trump possesses unusually acute instincts as to the passions of the most ardent Republican activists, appears to be willing to include Israel as a part of his broader disregard for the United States' obligations to longtime allies. His argument is that expanding the Abraham Accords will provide such economic and security benefits that US financial support will no longer be necessary, an analysis which is either breathtakingly optimistic, hopelessly naive or intentionally oblivious. But Ramaswamy would not be taking such a position if he did not believe there would be a sizable audience for it.

For most of the last 30 years, the bipartisan threats toward Jews and the Jewish state came from predictable places on the furthest points of the political spectrum. The ultra-conservative extremists who surfaced in Charlottesville and elsewhere voice an ugly nationalism that gave voice to "Jews will not replace us" epithets. Equally extreme activists on the far left have asserted a "river to the sea" anti-Zionism so virulent that it oozes into antisemitism. This has left American Jews to balance an uncomfortable equilibrium, recognizing that Republicans may be more ardent in their support for Israel but that Democrats are more natural allies in domestic politics and culture.

But suppose that Ramaswamy's sense of rank and file Republicans is accurate? What if he is correct in believing that the growing isolationism among conservatives no longer automatically exempts Israel? If he is right, then Israel and its supporters will soon be facing bastions of anti-Zionism at the ideological far left and right, with pockets of anti-Israel votes on both sides of the aisle in Congress.

Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!

If that's where we're headed, then many of the 70 Republican votes against increased aid to Ukraine this summer could manifest themselves against Israel as well, joining with a comparable number of Democrats in opposition to funding, military support and other expressions of American solidarity for Israel.

Ramswamy's assertive debate performance means he is about to receive his media moment; we'll see if he uses it to revise, deny or stand by his pronouncements on Israel.

Featured on JNS.org, this article was first published by the Jewish Journal. 

The post GOP tension over Israel appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

For most of American history, our vice presidents received little attention and were given no real responsibilities. Theodore Roosevelt did not even have a vice president for his first term in office, and several 19th century presidents never got around to filling the position at all. It wasn't until Walter Mondale took the job under Jimmy Carter that the second-ranking official in government was entrusted with identifiable duties.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram

Similarly, the spouses of presidents in this country have generally maintained low profiles on public policy matters, preferring to offer their advice to their husbands in private. Eleanor Roosevelt was the first and most obvious exception, and Hillary Clinton famously took on a historic role for her husband's healthcare agenda, with mixed results. But since then, first ladies have been content to limit their public roles to decidedly non-controversial matters.

The wives of vice presidents have been even less noticeable. Tipper Gore and Lynn Cheney were both lightning rods for their work on polarizing issues during their husbands' tenures, but the undoubtedly laudable projects that Barbara Bush or Jill Biden took on before their husbands were promoted, or to which Muriel Humphrey, Marilyn Quayle or Karen Pence devoted themselves, were largely overlooked.

But for the first time, the US has a Second Gentleman, and for reasons having nothing to do with his gender, it appears that Doug Emhoff is breaking new ground in a position that has previously received little attention from the nation's political ruling class, news media, and voters. And it couldn't have come at a better time. In addition to the history he has made as the first male spouse in this role, Emhoff is also the first Jewish spouse of either a president or a vice president. As such, he has chosen to prioritize the fight against antisemitism as his signature issue, stepping into an urgent and contentious debate that has taken on greater political relevance given the unacceptable level of rhetoric and violence against Jews in this country and elsewhere around the world.

Last month, Emhoff hosted a high-profile White House event designed to draw public attention to the dramatic spike in the number of antisemitic incidents that have occurred in recent years. He has hosted other, less visible meetings and strategy sessions, has written on the topic, and has spent time privately with survivors of the Pittsburgh Tree of Life synagogue attack. Later this month, he will visit Germany and Poland to speak out against antisemitism in countries where the worst atrocities of the Holocaust occurred in order to raise the issue to a global audience.

But as acts of antisemitism have continued to rise, Emhoff's profile as the Biden administration's most visible surrogate on this issue has drawn far more public and media notice. Late last year, Biden established an interagency task force to combat antisemitism and Islamophobia that will be led by National Security Council and Domestic Policy Council staff. And there has been talk of establishing a domestic counterpart to Deborah Lipstadt, the Biden administration's special envoy on antisemitism to highlight the challenge in this country.

But Emhoff's role is different. He is not a government employee or a trained academic expert in this field. By his own admission, he is not even a particularly devout Jew. But he cares enough about his heritage, our culture and our religion to devote his time and energy to making sure that the ongoing fight against antisemitism receives the attention it deserves. If nothing else, that is an admirable example for the rest of us and represents an important step toward defeating this menace and its sponsors.

Featured on JNS.org, this article was first published by Jewish Journal.

Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!

The post The rise of Doug Emhoff appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Now that Joe Biden has returned from a largely uneventful Middle East trip, where his fist bump with Prince Mohammed bin Salman received more attention than anything the American president said or did during his two-plus days in Israel, it's an appropriate time to assess the sentiments of his constituents in this country toward the Jewish state.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram

First, the continuing transformation of Israel into a partisan issue among this country's voters is accelerating. Recent polling from the Pew Research Center shows that only 44% of Democratic voters and independents who lean toward the Democratic Party hold positive feelings toward Israel, while 53% hold unfavorable opinions. Among self-described liberals, the numbers are even worse. Only 36% of liberal Democrats think favorably of Israel, while 62% hold unfavorable opinions. By contrast, 71% of Republicans and independents who lean toward the GOP feel positive about Israel.

Just as the far left of the Democratic Party is increasingly becoming the home of anti-Zionist sentiment, there is a growing number of anti-Semitic activists in the most extreme conservative fringes of the GOP. So the ideological activists of both major parties present serious problems for most American Jews. But the growth in the anti-Israel sentiment among Democrats, and the immense amount of time and money that AIPAC, J Street and other groups are pouring into Democratic primary campaigns, has led to a level of internecine warfare that is starkly dividing the party.

Most American Jews will continue to vote Democratic on the basis of domestic policy, but the growing anti-Israel sentiment among progressive voters and officeholders (coupled with the continuing influence of pro-Israel religious conservatives in the GOP) may turn Zionism into a partisan football in the not-too-distant future. That trend bodes poorly for Israel, for the broader Middle East and for the United States.

The other major takeaway from the Pew survey is the ongoing deterioration of pro-Israel sentiment among young Americans. While feelings about Israel among all voters has remained fairly consistent in recent years (55% positive vs 41% negative), the generation gap that has emerged on this question is alarming. 18- to 29-year-olds hold almost the exact opposite attitudes as the overall electorate, with only 41% feeling favorably toward Israel and 56 feeling unfavorably. Contrast the leanings of older voters (ages 65 and over), whose support for Israel is 69% versus only 27% against.

Voters under 30 also maintain somewhat more positive feelings toward the Palestinian people than toward Israelis (61%-56%), in marked contrast to their parents and grandparents, whose feelings toward Israelis are much more positive. Younger Americans have equally low regard for the Palestinian and Israeli governments (35%-34%), while older voters give much higher marks to the Israeli government. (Pro-Israel advocates should recognize the political benefit of differentiating between the Palestinian people and their leaders.)

Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!

But demography is destiny. As millennials and Gen Z-ers move into leadership positions in politics, business and society, their anti-Israel sentiments will steadily gain influence on the campaign trail and in government. Democrats maintain huge advantages with these younger voters, and so it's not difficult to see a future in which a younger and more progressive Democratic Party continues to become more skeptical – if not downright confrontational – toward Israel. At the same time, older and more religious Republicans will become more adamant in their Zionism – while simultaneously driving away most Jewish voters on social and cultural matters.

The combination of these partisan and demographic trends paints a bleak picture for the future of American Zionism. Next week we'll talk about how to reverse them while we still can.

Featured on JNS.org, this article was originally published by the Jewish Journal.

The post Where Israel support is fraying appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

For more than half a century, the once-robust relationship between the American Jewish and Black communities has gradually withered. Growing doubts about Israel among minority voters have created one of the most significant divisions within the Democratic Party and therefore one of the greatest challenges to bipartisan support for the Jewish state.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram

Stories about the Freedom Riders and Jewish leaders in the civil rights movement, as well as the coalition that the communities formed on behalf of then-Los Angeles Mayor Tom Bradley in the 1970s and '80s, have grown musty with age, and sporadic efforts to recreate those relationships with other underrepresented communities have met with mixed success at best.

That's why it's worth paying attention to the Urban Empowerment Action PAC, a new political action committee organized by Jewish and Black leaders to support candidates who are "dedicated to the educational empowerment and economic uplift of black communities." This is the type of language that we've heard periodically over the years as similar partnerships have occasionally been attempted, usually without much lasting impact.

But this group has something different that could help it succeed: It has a target.

The new super PAC has made it clear that it is committed to defeating congressional incumbent Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) in her primary campaign for reelection this summer, and it has promised to raise $1 million on behalf of fellow Democrat Janice Winfrey, the Detroit city clerk who has filed to run against Tlaib. In stark contrast to Tlaib, a charter member of the so-called "Squad" and an anti-Israel firebrand, Winfrey has outlined a strong Zionist agenda that is attracting broad Jewish support.

Urban Empowerment Action is supporting other candidates too, including Rep. Nikema Williams (D-Ga.), an incumbent facing no credible opposition in her own reelection campaign. But their financial involvement in those other races is much smaller. Their most important priority by far is the defeat of Tlaib.

The campaign against Tlaib isn't solely about Israel. Longtime Democratic civil rights and political activist Bakari Sellers, who is advising the PAC, points to Tlaib's vote against President Joe Biden's bipartisan infrastructure bill last year and other criticisms of the president. Sellers also noted that the retirement of Rep. Brenda Lawrence (D-Mich.), Michigan's only Black congresswoman, would leave the state without a black representative in Congress. But Sellers has long been active on behalf of pro-Israel causes and has stated that Winfrey's support for Israel was a key reason for the group's backing.

Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!

Tlaib's strident anti-Israel language has made her the country's harshest critic in Congress. She is the only member who has stated that Israel should not exist as a Jewish state and recently introduced a resolution in the House to formally recognize the "nakba," the Arabic term for "catastrophe" that many Palestinians use to describe the establishment of Israel in 1948. Even while the Squad continues to grow its membership, defeating Tlaib would send a strong signal of the political ramifications of such ardent anti-Zionism.

There are several other organizations that have supported pro-Israel candidates in key Democratic primaries in Ohio, North Carolina and other states this year. But the collaboration with the black community under Urban Empowerment Action's banner is unique. Electing more allies of Israel to Congress – from both parties – is critically important, but these first steps toward rebuilding relationships between Jews and other minority communities are just as necessary. Accomplishing both tasks simultaneously is even better.

At the same time as these outreach efforts move forward in national politics, the California Jewish Legislative Caucus has been making similar progress in state government. The caucus has dramatically increased its involvement with its colleagues who represent other ethnic and racial groups, both helping those members to better understand the challenges faced by Israel and American Jews, and demonstrating their commitment to helping these communities achieve their goals.

It took many years for Black-Jewish relations to deteriorate to their current state of disrepair. Those bridges will not be rebuilt overnight, but these are early and important steps in the right direction. They deserve our applause, our admiration and our support.

Featured on JNS.org, this article was first published by Jewish Journal.

The post A new Black-Jewish coalition appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Republicans put the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) in a delicate position. Then Democrats made the worst of it. The most likely loser is Israel.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram

From its creation in the early 1960s, AIPAC has been a focused organization that works with elected officials of both parties and all ideologies to promote the safety and security of Israel and strengthen the US-Israel relationship. Their philosophy was summarized in a letter last week from the organization's leaders:

"We have friends who are pro-choice and pro-life, those who are liberal on immigration and those who want to tighten our borders, and yes, those who disagree strongly on issues surrounding the 2020 presidential election… This is no moment for the pro-Israel movement to become selective about its friends."

The rationale for such a self-evident message was the outcry from some progressive Jewish leaders over AIPAC's new political action committee's first congressional endorsements. The list was almost evenly split between Democrats and Republicans, but 37 of the GOP endorsees voted against the certification of Joe Biden's election after the Jan. 6 Capitol riots last year.

The criticism against those endorsements was based on the premise that members of Congress who refused to uphold the outcome of a legally-determined election are not deserving of support. Fair enough. Many Americans agree wholeheartedly with that premise. My hunch is that many Jews, including individual AIPAC employees and donors, share similar sentiments.

But as an organization, AIPAC exists for one strategic reason – to advocate for Israel and its relationship with America. The reason they have been so successful over the years is that they work with elected officials on both sides of the aisle. As the letter referenced above states: "We can never let the things that divide Americans politically determine whether the United States will support Israel. We must be willing to stand with those who stand with Israel."

AIPAC's critics argue that those politicians who opposed Biden's certification – and therefore also opposed a fundamental principle of democracy – have created an exception to AIPAC's one-issue policy and no longer deserve the organization's backing regardless of their positions on Israel. In other words, these 37 Republicans crossed a "red line."

But there are many red lines in American politics, and deciding that this is the only transgression that should require AIPAC to abandon its bipartisan approach will create some tricky challenges when advocates for other issues decide that their red lines deserve the same consideration.

 Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!

There are those in the Democratic Party, for example, who passionately argue that no issue, even election certification, is more essential than climate change. For them, supporting pro-fossil-fuel politicians is an unforgivable transgression. Those who devote themselves with equal moral fervor to issues such as abortion or marriage equality (on either side) could similarly assert that those who oppose them on these matters should be eliminated from consideration.

And Democrats do not hold a monopoly on this type of line-drawing. At the same time AIPAC was being attacked from the left for supporting these three dozen Republicans, they were under assault from conservatives because 27 of their Democratic endorsees had supported the 2015 nuclear arms agreement with Iran.

Those who opposed this endorsement point out that unlike the debate over a US presidential election, the Iranian nuclear deal endangers Israel's existence, and threatens not just the region but America itself. But AIPAC, which fiercely led opposition to the accord, determined that these Democratic members were otherwise sufficiently strong in their support of Israel that even this fundamental disagreement does not merit violating its bipartisan approach.

It's understandable that partisans on both sides would be happier if every supporter of Israel also shared their views on every hot issue. But AIPAC is unique in its ability to work with those from across the ideological spectrum. Creating even one exception – no matter how tempting and well-deserved – would unravel their bipartisan efforts, putting Israel's security at risk, destabilizing the fragile geopolitics of the Middle East and weakening the US-Israel relationship.

Featured on JNS.org, this article was first published by the Jewish Journal.

The post AIPAC stays on task appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

So maybe Naftali Bennett knows what he's doing after all.

Israel's still-new prime minister has received credit from many quarters for the way he has maintained a fragile governing coalition since taking office last summer. But despite a lengthy military career (and a few short months as defense minister), Bennett has been a much less known quantity on the international stage. And when tensions at the Ukraine-Russia border – between two strong allies of Israel – rose to new levels last fall, it was difficult to predict how Bennett would handle such a complicated geopolitical challenge.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram

When those tensions turned into outright warfare, many observers (myself included) wondered how Israel would maintain its neutrality as a condemnation of Russia's aggression spread across the globe. Despite the close coordination that has developed between the Israeli and Russian militaries in Syria in recent years – a relationship that has provided valuable security benefits to Israel in the region – it seemed inevitable that U.S. pressure on the Jewish state to join the international coalition would be impossible to resist.

But it now looks as if Bennett has emerged as a key interlocutor with Russian President Vladimir Putin, and may even end up playing a critical role in brokering a peace deal at some point. And Bennett's new role at the center of the tensions has also given him greater influence in the ongoing Iranian nuclear negotiations.

Just two weeks ago, Putin dismissed Bennett's offer to mediate between the two sides. But because the international coalition against Russia's aggression came together so quickly, and because Ukrainian resistance to the invasion seems to have been much stronger than he anticipated, Bennett's suggestion has now become much more appealing to the Russian leader. Bennett and Putin spent three hours together last weekend, discussing the safety of the Ukrainian Jewish community and the broader state of the conflict and potential paths forward, but Bennett was apparently also making his case against a future nuclear agreement with Iran.

After leaving Putin, Bennett then spoke to Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, and had meetings planned with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz and other Western leaders with key roles both in the anti-Russia coalition and in the Iran negotiations. For years, Israel's lobbying efforts against an Iranian deal have largely fallen on deaf ears. But now Bennett is not just pleading for his country's security, but may be playing a role with Putin that will force Western leaders to take his warnings more seriously.

It's difficult to see how a new nuclear agreement with Iran is to be prevented at this point. But unlike his predecessor Benjamin Netanyahu, whose vociferous opposition to the entire deal left him sidelined as it was finalized, Bennett has been focused on making sure negotiators understand that some aspects of the potential agreement will be more damaging than others. This may allow Israel to have more of an impact as an influencer of a final deal than would have been the case with a more absolutist approach. And Bennett will now be in the room with the key players for the foreseeable future as the war in Ukraine continues to worsen.

Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!

It's impossible to guess what Putin's ultimate goals are in Eastern Europe, but he doesn't seem to be interested in allowing the violence to subside anytime soon. That means Bennett will be a rare trustworthy point of contact for the United States and Western Europe with a direct line to Russia's leadership. And when Putin does decide that negotiations with the West are in his best interest, Bennett's presence will become even more important.

The best possible outcome for Israel would be to maintain its relationship with Russia, continue to protect its own interests in Syria, provide for the safety of Ukrainian refugees, strengthen its ties to Western Europe and enhance its stature on critical global matters outside the Middle East – all without endangering its enduring ties to the United States. There's no guarantee this is the way matters play out, but in the midst of a worldwide tragedy, it wouldn't be such a bad place to be once the dust finally settles.

Featured on JNS.org, this article was first published by the Jewish Journal.

The post Bennett's gamble appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

When it comes right down to it, Vladimir Putin is still a Soviet. The former KGB agent has been the leader of Russia in some form or another since 2000, making him the longest-serving Kremlin leader since Joseph Stalin.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter

Putin has called the breakup of the USSR the "greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century," and while taking questions a few years ago, the Russian leader was asked what event in his nation's history he would have liked to change. "The collapse of the Soviet Union," he responded.

Putin is also savvy enough to recognize that sizable portions of his constituents feel the same way. Polling of Russian citizens since the early 1990s has shown that strong and consistent majorities regret the fall of the USSR, and when Putin ordered the takeover of the then-Ukrainian province of Crimea in 2014, his approval numbers shot up almost 20 points.

He enjoyed similar popularity boosts earlier in his career after forays into Chechnya and Georgia. Putin clearly sees transnational military incursions as a useful crowd-pleaser.

He understands the domestic political benefits he gains from an aggressive nationalist and expansionist agenda but also dreams of restoring Russia as a world power.

The combination of those two goals has led to a pronounced acceleration of his efforts to reestablish control over the remainder of Ukraine, and his recent buildup of Russian troops at the border between the two countries has led to a fusillade of gradually escalating warnings from US President Joe Biden's appointees and NATO leadership about the consequences of any military action.

To date, the only results have been an equally bellicose rebuttal from Putin's advisers and a marked increase in the number of Russian troops deployed to the region.

Biden has made the rebuilding of this country's international alliances one of the early hallmarks of his presidency. After a problematic withdrawal from Afghanistan and halting efforts to construct an anti-China alliance on the Pacific Rim, convincing Western Europe to stand with him against potential Russian aggression becomes an imperative not just relating to Ukraine but more broadly with regard to reestablishing the United States in its longtime leadership role on the world stage.

That's why Biden confronted Putin directly on the matter this week, and why his national security and diplomatic advisers have stepped up their efforts to enlist our allies in the cause.

Putin has clearly calculated that the United States will not go to war to protect Ukraine. He has determined that American presidents are much more likely to draw red lines against international military threats than to actually enforce them.

He is gambling that Biden's efforts to rebuild relationships with Western Europe in the aftermath of Donald Trump's presidency have been sufficiently harmed by the Afghanistan withdrawal and ongoing trade tensions to make it harder for the US to build a unified front at the Russia-Ukraine border. And he is happy to collaborate with China and Iran to complicate Biden's global challenges on multiple fronts.

Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!

Russia does not represent the same type of economic competitor to the United States as China, and Putin is not interested in the cultural and religious warfare that the Iranian mullahs regularly threaten. He just wants his empire back, and he is developing a post-Trump strategy he thinks can work.

Nor is Putin particularly subtle. When he talks of the Soviet Union's disintegration, he emphasizes how many Russian citizens wound up outside of Russian territory.

"As for the Russian people, it became a genuine tragedy," Putin says. "Tens of millions of our fellow citizens and countrymen found themselves beyond the fringes of Russian territory."

The term "fringes" implies borders that are neither particularly sturdy nor enduring. In addition to Ukraine and his puppet regime in Belarus, Putin also could easily scale up his saber-rattling toward nervous neighbors such as Georgia, Moldova, and Kazakhstan. Or if he were feeling even more confident, NATO members Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania could become targets as well. The challenge for Biden is where to draw the red line – and how to hold it.

Featured on JNS.org, this article was first published by the Jewish Journal.

The post Understanding Putin appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

One of the most frustrating challenges in the ongoing fight against antisemitism is that the hate comes from so many different directions. When Reps. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) and other far-left progressives allow their anti-Zionism to morph into antisemitism, Democratic Party leaders face deserved pressure to condemn and disavow their most unacceptable statements and actions. Of course, antisemitism flows from the right, too, in the form of the type of blood-and-soil nationalism that has found an increasingly comfortable home among ultra-conservative Republicans.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter 

Sadly, the GOP's leaders have been no better at disciplining their most extreme members than the Democrats. They were given a pair of gold-plated opportunities recently to denounce two Republicans who displayed a repulsive intolerance toward the Jewish people and the Jewish faith. But at the time this column was filed, no leading Republican had publicly declared that such sentiments were unwelcome in their party.

First came Ohio GOP Senate candidate Mark Pukita, whose campaign has been running a radio advertisement that has targeted one of his primary opponents, former State Treasurer Josh Mandel. Mandel is Jewish, a fact that seems to greatly anger Pukita. In an ad targeted at religious conservative voters, an actor asked: "Are we seriously supposed to believe the most Christian-values Senate candidate is Jewish? I am so sick of these phony caricatures."

That commercial was enough to convince an organization called the Center for Christian Virtue to uninvite Pukita from a candidate forum they were hosting. But in a primary debate two weeks ago, Pukita was asked by the moderator to respond to charges that he is "antisemitic and intentionally divisive and inflammatory."

Pukita's response?

"In terms of antisemitism, all I did in an ad was point out that Josh is going around saying he's got the Bible in one hand and the Constitution in the other. But he's Jewish. Everybody should know that though, right?"

Pukita seems to believe either that the Christian Bible is the only acceptable version, or that there is something inherently contradictory between the Torah and the Constitution. In either case, he never got around to denying that he was an antisemite.

One candidate on the debate stage, businessman Bernie Moreno, laudably pushed back against Pukita's bigotry, saying, "We're better than that, guys." But neither the Ohio Republican Party nor the Republican National Committee has addressed the matter, nor have any of the state's leading GOP elected officials.

A few days later, an equally abhorrent display of antisemitism took place at a rally in San Antonio, Texas, where former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn told his audience that the United States should allow only one single religion.

"If we are going to have one nation under God, which we must, we have to have one religion," said Flynn. "One nation under God, and one religion under God."

This belief, of course, directly contradicts the First Amendment and its guarantee of freedom of religion. It also suggests that some (most) religious faiths are unacceptable and should therefore be banned. Once again, there has been no criticism of Flynn's intolerance from Republican leaders. (Although oddly, Mandel, the Jewish candidate who was targeted in Ohio, has endorsed Flynn's comments.)

Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!

The loyal Democrats who read this column will be justifiably furious both at Pukita's and Flynn's statements, and at the shameful lack of reaction from the GOP. Of course, those same Democrats will either overlook or minimize the outrages voiced regularly by Omar and Tlaib. And hypocrisy does not recognize party boundaries, for those Republicans who are infuriated by the refusal of Democratic leaders to call out their antisemites will find a way to excuse or ignore the equally embarrassing inaction from conservatives toward their own anti-Jewish bigots.

There will always be hatred and prejudice in the world: antisemitism will never completely go away. But maybe the leaders of our two major political parties can make more of an effort to help us push back against it.

Featured on JNS.org, this article first appeared in the Jewish Journal.

The post Hypocrisy does not recognize party boundaries appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

The greatest threat to the survival of the Jewish community is neither Iran nor intermarriage. Rather, it is our increasing political and cultural isolation, and the resulting hostility that we face from both ends of the ideological spectrum.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter 

The fringes of the nationalist hard right continue to traffic in Charlottesville-style blood-and-soil anti-Semitism, and such ugly racism will always constitute an intolerable threat to Jews around the world. But the growing anti-Zionism of the far-left fringe represents a less obvious but equally dangerous menace, when hostility toward the Jewish homeland expands into hatred of the Jewish people.

The most recent front in the latter of these two battles is reflected in the argument over whether to impose mandated ethnic studies classes in California's public schools. The vast majority of ethnic-studies supporters see such a requirement as a helpful way to teach students from underrepresented communities about their own heritage and to expose young people from varying backgrounds to each other's traditions, histories and perspectives. These people are prospective allies for the Jewish community. Right now, most are not.

Unfortunately, a small but vocal faction of ethnic studies advocates see such programs as a means through which to disseminate reprehensible anti-Zionist and anti-Semitic falsehoods. The initially proposed curriculum included numerous examples of objectionable language and ugly stereotypes against Jews. It was fiercely opposed not only by the Jewish community but by Governor Gavin Newsom as well. A second effort was only marginally less odious. To his credit, Newsom vetoed that bill.

The legislative Jewish caucus has since been working with other stakeholders to fashion a solution that could highlight the experiences of a range of communities, both those customarily included in ethnic studies research (African Americans, Latinos, Asian Pacific Islanders and Native Americans) as well as other ethnic groups whose stories are an integral part of California's diversity (Sikhs, Armenians, Jews and others). The caucus fought successfully to remove the distasteful language from the original proposal and to ensure that the Jewish experience was included in lesson plans. They ultimately helped forge a compromise that included an imperfect but vastly improved model curriculum. Earlier this month, Newsom signed this new version into law.

The final legislation still has significant shortcomings, most notably allowing local school districts to ignore the proposed model curriculum and instead use the earlier, uglier version. Already, proponents of the original proposal are aggressively moving to convince principals, teachers and school administrators to adopt their alternative – anti-Semitic tropes and all.

But while the final version is flawed, it's difficult to see how a better outcome could have been achieved. Had the Jewish caucus continued to fight the bill, the result would have been the already strained relationship between Jewish Americans and other minority communities becoming even more difficult. A scorched-earth battle over ethnic studies would not have prevented the bill from passing, and would likely have led to even worse relationships – and subsequently to even more troublesome legislation.

Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!

Ultimately, the path to better policy must begin with stronger relationships that will allow California Jews to work more closely with these other communities rather than continue to be pitted against them. Newsom's creation of a Governor's Council on Holocaust and Genocide Education and his signature on legislation that authorized a California Commission on the State of Hate create an opportunity for the Jewish community here to join with other marginalized ethnic, racial and religious communities to confront common challenges and look for joint solutions to push back against prejudice regardless of its target.

Strengthening relationships with those minority community leaders who do share our goals through these two projects will also allow us to shape an ethnic studies program that teaches our students productive lessons about the benefits of California's remarkable diversity. Those promoting the divisive and hate-filled alternative ethnic studies curriculum already have a head start. We are much more likely to defeat their challenge if we can bring new allies on our side to the debate – and soon.

Featured on JNS.org, this article first appeared in the Jewish Journal.

The post Jews need more allies appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Winston Churchill famously said that "nothing in life is so exhilarating as to be shot at without result." In the last several days, those of us who are part of the Jewish and pro-Israel communities have been repeatedly reminded of Churchill's maxim. While the bullets flying in our direction are metaphorical rather than ballistic, we've spent a lot of time recently dodging incoming political missiles with the potential to do great damage to the Jewish people and homeland.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter 

Most visible in the latest fusillade was last week's congressional fight over whether the United States should provide financial assistance to help the Israeli military restock its Iron Dome defense system after their war with Hamas earlier this year. A small group of progressive Democratic House members forced their leadership to eliminate a $1 billion earmark from a must-pass government funding bill, and although the spending was later approved in a separate measure, it provided an opportunity for a vocal and growing faction of Israel's congressional foes to air their grievances with the Jewish state's efforts to defend its people against thousands of missiles fired at civilian targets.

In California's state capitol, meanwhile, legislation creating a mandatory ethnic studies course for the state's public schools was awaiting Governor Gavin Newson's signature. The bill is a vast improvement over the original version, which included a curriculum that neglected to mention anti-Semitism as a type of racial or ethnic hatred and uncritically held up the anti-Zionist BDS crusade as a worthwhile social movement. But it still allows for that objectionable earlier draft to be taught in local schools, and there is a well-organized advocacy effort to persuade school districts to use it.

And here in Los Angeles, a faction of United Teachers of Los Angeles (UTLA) union members had introduced a motion to be considered by the organization that would have put them on record in support of the BDS movement, following similar successful efforts by the Seattle and San Francisco teacher unions. The Jewish Federation LA effectively marshalled a broad-based opposition campaign and was able to convince union leadership to indefinitely table the proposal, but the fact that such a fight was necessary provided an uncomfortable reminder of the pervasiveness of anti-Zionist and and-Semitic sentiment in political circles.

Along with the excitement that often accompanies such near-misses, narrowly averted disasters can also provide a false sense of security and safety. But these missives show no sign of abating in the future. A recent poll from the Louis Brandeis Center found that a majority of the Jewish college students surveyed had experienced anti-Semitism on their campuses and more than 60 percent had felt unsafe as Jews during their college experience. Half of the respondents have felt the need to hide their Jewish identity on campus or in virtual campus settings. More than half said they "are somewhat or very reluctant to share their views on Israel."

The Brandeis poll also showed that about a third of Jewish students said they're worried about online harassment or being "marginalized or penalized" by a professor. This means that many of this country's future leaders are actually being taught that demonizing Israel and denigrating Jews is acceptable behavior.

While most of these attacks are not hitting their targets, it is increasingly clear that our community is perpetually playing defense. It is also clear that there aren't many others willing to stand with us, even those who face similar challenges to our own.

Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!

Some of this is our own doing. Compared to previous generations of Jewish-Americans, our outreach to other minority and underrepresented communities is insignificant. We have never found a cohesive way to establish ties with evangelicals and other religious groups that share our commitment to Israel. And as Muslims face abhorrent persecution in Northwest China and elsewhere, Jewish efforts to stand with them against such oppression are sporadic at best.

Jews represent approximately two percent of this country's population. If we want to escape our ongoing exposure to Churchill's definition of exhilaration, then perhaps American Jews should renew our commitment to building alliances with others who are subject to such threats. There are times when even the chosen people need a few more friends.

Featured on JNS.org, this article first appeared in the Jewish Journal.

The post Jews could use more friends appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.