Boneh, the portion of Habonim Dror's gap year program I was coordinating this fall, is over. Last week I led a seminar for the same chanichim about the history of Habonim, in which we visited kibbutzim founded by movement graduates, examined the widespread privatization of kibbutzim, and looked at some of the urban kvutzot that have sprung up in the past decade or so.
From now through January, I'll be preparing for the next machzor of Boneh, which begins in February and will include around 20 Australians and possibly New Zealanders. I might go to Europe in January, but my plans aren't finalized yet.
I wrote on this blog about the role that people who place halakha above Israeli law played in Rabin's assassination, and I wrote about the settlement freeze. It turns out there are two explicit connections in the news.
Last week Rabbi Eliezer Melamed called for soldiers to refuse orders to enforce a construction freeze in West Bank settlements on the grounds that it would violate halakha. Defense Minister Ehud Barak responded by revoking the status granted to Melamed's yeshiva, which has been a hesder yeshiva. Other rabbis at hesder yeshivas responded to Barak by sending letters to students saying essentially the same thing as Melamed. Today Melamed agreed to "denounce political demonstrations by Israeli soldiers in uniform". Haaretz characterized Melamed's statement as a capitulation. Because he had initially refused to sign any statement at all, his agreement to sign a letter could be interpreted as a capitulation. However, I doubt that he has budged in his principles. Last week he compared Barak's treatment of his yeshiva to the propagation of a blood libel.
A few weeks ago, Justice Minister Yaakov Neeman said that "step by step, Torah law will become the binding law in the State of Israel." Here's an article which quotes him explaining himself, and here's a really interesting article which criticizes him and then sort of supports the idea as a means of recognizing the value of Jewish legal precedent.
Sunday, December 20, 2009
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
irreverent continuity programming
For hilarious satire on what occupies Jewish leaders today, check out Eli Valley's new cartoon, Metamorphosis, which made me spit milk on my laptop.
Saturday, November 28, 2009
news analysis
Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu announced a settlement freeze this week. Obama has been asking for this for at least six months. What prompted Netanyahu to make this announcement? Why now?
At first I thought maybe Netanyahu's announcement had something to do with the White House's appointment of an envoy on antisemitism. But this was an implausibly small concession for Obama to make in exchange for a settlement freeze.
On Friday the answer revealed itself:
Why did Russia and China give this "rare backing"? Obama visited Russia and China about a week ago.
It seems likely to me that Obama and Netanyahu made a deal in May. Obama said he'd push Russia and China to support an IAEA censure of Iran over its uranium enrichment. Netanyahu said that if the IAEA censures Iran with support from Russia and China, he'd announce a settlement freeze.
A censure is just a censure and this settlement freeze is only partial (construction in progress will continue, and the freeze excludes East Jerusalem, which Israel annexed). Will the Palestinians see Netanyahu's announcement as a legitimate concession or as an empty gesture? I expect that Obama recognizes that it is a significant step for Netanyahu to take, and that his foreign policy energy will soon be focused on prodding the Palestinians to make a reciprocal concession.
I hope reports of Gilad Shalit's imminent return are true, but we've heard this tune before. Even if he does return, I am not sure that could be considered a Palestinian concession, given that Israel will probably be releasing hundreds of prisoners in exchange for Shalit.
Maybe Hamas's announcement of a deal with Gaza factions regarding rocket fire could be considered the reciprocal concession:
Will Israelis see this as a legitimate concession or as a self-interested pause allowing Hamas to prepare for the next barrage? Probably the latter.
At first I thought maybe Netanyahu's announcement had something to do with the White House's appointment of an envoy on antisemitism. But this was an implausibly small concession for Obama to make in exchange for a settlement freeze.
On Friday the answer revealed itself:
The International Atomic Energy Agency's board of governors voted 25-3 to censure Iran for developing a uranium enrichment site in secret in a motion that gained rare backing from Russia and China, which have in the past blocked attempts to isolate Iran, a trade partner for both. (Haaretz)
Why did Russia and China give this "rare backing"? Obama visited Russia and China about a week ago.
It seems likely to me that Obama and Netanyahu made a deal in May. Obama said he'd push Russia and China to support an IAEA censure of Iran over its uranium enrichment. Netanyahu said that if the IAEA censures Iran with support from Russia and China, he'd announce a settlement freeze.
A censure is just a censure and this settlement freeze is only partial (construction in progress will continue, and the freeze excludes East Jerusalem, which Israel annexed). Will the Palestinians see Netanyahu's announcement as a legitimate concession or as an empty gesture? I expect that Obama recognizes that it is a significant step for Netanyahu to take, and that his foreign policy energy will soon be focused on prodding the Palestinians to make a reciprocal concession.
I hope reports of Gilad Shalit's imminent return are true, but we've heard this tune before. Even if he does return, I am not sure that could be considered a Palestinian concession, given that Israel will probably be releasing hundreds of prisoners in exchange for Shalit.
Maybe Hamas's announcement of a deal with Gaza factions regarding rocket fire could be considered the reciprocal concession:
According to the announced deal, rocket fire will only be allowed in retaliation for Israeli military offences within the Strip. (ynet)
Will Israelis see this as a legitimate concession or as a self-interested pause allowing Hamas to prepare for the next barrage? Probably the latter.
jordan and new apartment
I moved into an apartment in Ramat Gan. I love the new place. It has plenty of space, decent furniture and lots of light. As of yet, it does not have internet, which is partially why its taken me so long to post these pictures from my trip to Jordan with my family earlier in November. The highlights were Petra and Wadi Rum. The people in the pictures are my parents, my aunt and uncle, my dad's cousin and her husband, and two Brits (Steve and Emma) who were on the tour with us.
Sunday, November 8, 2009
rabin rally
Last night I went to the rally marking the 14th year since the assassination of Yitzchak Rabin. It was well attended by the blue shirt movements. The rally was demoralizing. What has changed in fourteen years? Rabin was a "soldier in the army of peace" who was murdered before he could complete his mission. Weren't there any other soldiers? Why didn't they complete his mission?
The youth movement hanoar haoved v'halomed distributed signs at the rally that said "lo nishkach v'lo nislach" -- we will not forget and we will not forgive. That's a rather uncompromising stance, especially for a leftist group. It would be natural to think that it refers to the assassin, Yigal Amir, but it actually refers to the atmosphere created by right wing groups leading up to the assassination. A few weeks before the assassination, Rabin was called a traitor, depicted in a Nazi SS uniform and burned in effigy at a rally attended by Ariel Sharon and Bibi Netanyahu. Rabbis like Avigdor Neventzal compared Rabin to a rodef, suggesting that it would be halachically permissible (or obligatory?) to kill him. The atmosphere that existed before Rabin's assassination was swept under the rug by public demonstrations of unity, but it would be easy to recreate because the underlying cause still exists: a significant number of Israelis think that civil laws are subordinate to halacha and that halacha permits political violence.
So Rabin's mission is unfinished and the societal factors that contributed to his death still exist. Will it help to listen to the sticker song and sing shir lashalom?
The youth movement hanoar haoved v'halomed distributed signs at the rally that said "lo nishkach v'lo nislach" -- we will not forget and we will not forgive. That's a rather uncompromising stance, especially for a leftist group. It would be natural to think that it refers to the assassin, Yigal Amir, but it actually refers to the atmosphere created by right wing groups leading up to the assassination. A few weeks before the assassination, Rabin was called a traitor, depicted in a Nazi SS uniform and burned in effigy at a rally attended by Ariel Sharon and Bibi Netanyahu. Rabbis like Avigdor Neventzal compared Rabin to a rodef, suggesting that it would be halachically permissible (or obligatory?) to kill him. The atmosphere that existed before Rabin's assassination was swept under the rug by public demonstrations of unity, but it would be easy to recreate because the underlying cause still exists: a significant number of Israelis think that civil laws are subordinate to halacha and that halacha permits political violence.
So Rabin's mission is unfinished and the societal factors that contributed to his death still exist. Will it help to listen to the sticker song and sing shir lashalom?
Thursday, November 5, 2009
siyur
Today I helped lead a trip to the First Aliyah Museum in Zichron Ya'akov and the Pioneer Settlement Museum at Kibbutz Yifat. In the early 1800s a large number of Jews spoke yiddish and lived in eastern Europe -- mostly Poland and Russia. Many Jews left beginning in the 1880s because of anti-Semitic laws and pogroms (riots targeting Jews). Between 1880 and 1910, three million Jews immigrated from that region to the United States. Tens of thousands immigrated from that region to Palestine.
From about 1880 to 1903, the immigrants were mostly religiously motivated. This is labeled the first wave, or the First Aliyah. The second wave was from about 1904 to 1914, these immigrants were mostly motivated by ideology. The third wave was also ideologically motivated, from 1919 to 1923. As far as I can tell the main difference between the so called second and third waves is that one was before World War I and the other was after. In most meaningful respects they were part of the same phenomenon.
That's what I did today. Back to the grindstone.
From about 1880 to 1903, the immigrants were mostly religiously motivated. This is labeled the first wave, or the First Aliyah. The second wave was from about 1904 to 1914, these immigrants were mostly motivated by ideology. The third wave was also ideologically motivated, from 1919 to 1923. As far as I can tell the main difference between the so called second and third waves is that one was before World War I and the other was after. In most meaningful respects they were part of the same phenomenon.
That's what I did today. Back to the grindstone.
Thursday, October 29, 2009
breathalyzer and more misrad hapnim
On Friday night I had dinner with a bunch of friends in Hadera. As I was driving back to Ramat Gan, I got flagged down by another police officer for no reason. He made me take a breathalyzer test, my first ever, which I of course passed. The police officer told me that a foreign drivers license is only good for a month and a half, and that I was therefore driving illegally, despite a clear statement to the contrary on this government website.
In Israel, it is a custom to argue with police officers. I let the other people in the car with me fulfill this obligation, and we went on our way.
I went back to the Interior Ministry this week to change my visa type. I now have a multiple entry worker visa good through July. Cost: 160 NIS. New rule: any day that you get what you want from misrad hapnim in less than 2 hours is a good day. (Tip: always bring extra passport sized photos with you.)
When I boarded a sherut from Herzliya to Afula this week, there was only one empty seat, next to a young religious woman who refused to allow me to sit, presumably because it is her custom not to touch men. It was an awkward situation until another woman switched seats with her so I could sit.
In Israel, it is a custom to argue with police officers. I let the other people in the car with me fulfill this obligation, and we went on our way.
I went back to the Interior Ministry this week to change my visa type. I now have a multiple entry worker visa good through July. Cost: 160 NIS. New rule: any day that you get what you want from misrad hapnim in less than 2 hours is a good day. (Tip: always bring extra passport sized photos with you.)
When I boarded a sherut from Herzliya to Afula this week, there was only one empty seat, next to a young religious woman who refused to allow me to sit, presumably because it is her custom not to touch men. It was an awkward situation until another woman switched seats with her so I could sit.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)