JERUSALEM, THE MUNDANE CITY

As we get ready to commemorate the 43rd Anniversary of the reunification of Jerusalem on May 12, Martin Raffel, in an article in the New York Jewish Week published on May 4, 2010, provides a sobering analysis of the city of Jerusalem over the last years. Mr. Raffel is senior vice president of the Jewish Council for Public Affairs. To read the entire Op-Ed, click on the title above.

Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu received a standing ovation at the recent AIPAC conference when he declared, “Jerusalem is not a settlement. It’s our capital.” Pronouncements about Jerusalem as the united, eternal capital of Israel have long served as guaranteed applause lines in virtually every Jewish audience. Israel and world Jewry devote a great deal of attention to the city’s current and future political status.

But what of the day-to-day Jerusalem, a living, breathing entity, the country’s most populous city with almost 800,000 residents?

Here are some sobering facts, as we mark Jerusalem Day (May 12), commemorating the unification of the city in 1967.

Demography: In 1967, when Israeli jurisdiction was extended over greater Jerusalem following the Six-Day War, Jews made up 74 percent of the city’s population. As of 2009, the Jewish share had dropped to 66 percent. Given birthrates and migration flows out of city, assuming the city’s boundaries remain the same as today, it is projected that Arabs will comprise 50 percent of the city by the year 2035. The haredi, or ultra-Orthodox, percentage of the Jewish population is 34 percent, which means that 57 percent of Jerusalem’s population today is either Arab or haredi — if not already, there soon will be an anti- or non-Zionist majority.

ISRAEL-HAMAS PRISONER SWAP NEGOTIATIONS IN STANDSTILL

Below is a portion of an article written by Avi Issacharoff that was published in Haaretz on May 5, 2010 about the status of talks to release Gilad Shalit, an Israeli soldier being held hostage since June 2006. To read the entire article, click on the title above.

A senior Egyptian official involved in mediating talks between Israel and Hamas in the Gilad Shalit prisoner swap said yesterday that the negotiations have been completely frozen over the contentious issue of releasing Palestinian prisoners from Israeli jails.

The talks were stopped in their tracks after the Israeli cabinet refused to make further compromises on a list of Hamas demands, while the Islamist group in turn rejected the possibility of easing its demands for the release of prisoners involved in attacks that have claimed the lives of dozens of Israelis.

The Eyptian official told Haaretz that he did not think an agreement would come to fruition so long as Israel refuses to release the most well-known prisoners, who are viewed by Hamas as national symbols.

According to the official, many Hamas figures, particularly those based in Damascus, have expressed an unwillingness to show further flexibility in their demands. The official did state, however, that the political leadership of the Gaza-based Hamas is ready to compromise with Israel on this matter.

PROXIMITY TALKS: TWO STEPS FORWARD, ONE STEP BACK

The Washington Institute for Near East Policy published the following analysis written by David Makovsky on May 5, 2010 about the status of peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians that has been facilitated by the U.S. Mr. Makovsky is the Washington Institute's Ziegler distinguished fellow and director of the Project on the Middle East Peace Process. To read the analysis in its entirety, click on the title above.

U.S. special envoy for Middle East peace George Mitchell is currently in Jerusalem amid wide expectation that on Saturday the Palestinians will approve proximity talks with Israel. For its part, Israel has already agreed to the talks.

Following a phone conversation this past Monday between President Obama and Israeli prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu, the White House said it had urged proximity talks with the Palestinians as a means of transitioning to direct talks as quickly as possible. Indirect talks are a departure from the more direct format that has defined Israeli-Palestinian negotiations since the landmark Madrid peace conference in 1991. As late as 2009, during the final months of the Olmert government, Israeli and Palestinian leaders were meeting directly almost every week. But in 2010, it appears that George Mitchell will be shuttling between Netanyahu's office in Jerusalem and President Mahmoud Abbas's office in Ramallah.

Although Israel has been willing to hold direct talks for months, Abbas has convinced himself and others that face-to-face meetings would leave him politically exposed if they do not prove to be serious. But while expectations on all sides are modest, the proximity approach has emerged because alternative proposals -- such as a statement of U.S. principles -- seem even more problematic and fraught with risk.

REMARKS BY DENNIS ROSS TO THE ADL NATIONAL LEADERSHIP CONFERENCE

On May 3, 2010, The Anti-Defamation League Leadership Conference heard remarks from Dennis Ross. Mr. Ross is a special adviser for the Persian Gulf and Southwest Asia (which includes Iran) to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Below are a portion of his remarks. To read them in their entirety, click on the title above.

Good afternoon, everyone, and thank you, Robert [Sugarman], for your kind words and your outstanding leadership. Your commitment to the Anti-Defamation League, a commitment which has spanned four decades, inspires us all.

I also want to thank you, Abraham [Foxman], for your extraordinary contributions to this organization – and to our country. You lived through World War II in Poland – and endured forced migration into a ghetto. And when you came to the United States, you transcended – though never forgot – the hate you witnessed as a child. From this experience, you’ve worked to make our country a better place. And you’ve succeeded. All of us are deeply grateful for your decades of service.

Finally, I would like to thank all of you for joining me this afternoon. It’s good to be among so many friends. I have known, and had the privilege of working with, many of you for years – and some of you for decades. In the early nineties, when I served as D.C.’s U.S. Attorney, I first began convening meetings with your members like Jess Hordes. And I continued to work with many of you during my tenure as Deputy Attorney General in the Clinton Administration. I was struck then, and am impressed now, by your determination to steer our nation toward fair treatment for all – despite unprecedented challenges and stubborn resistance. I am now, and always have been, proud to count you as allies in our shared work to achieve and to ensure justice for all Americans, regardless of religion, race, sexual orientation, background, gender, or creed.

(top)

SOCIAL ACTION/PUBLIC POLICY

THE LATEST NATIONAL SECURITY THREAT: OBESITY

The following is a portion of an Op-Ed that was written by John M. Shalikashvili and Hugh Shelton that was published in the Washington Post on April 30, 2010 about how military recruits are being turned away because they are obese and how a restructured child nutrition bill can help kids be healthy and stay healthy. Gen. Shalikashvili served as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff from October 1993 to September 1997and Gen. Shelton served as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff from October 1997 to September 2001. To read the entire Op-Ed, click on the title above.

Are we becoming a nation too fat to defend ourselves?

It seems incredible, but these are the facts: As of 2005, at least 9 million young adults -- 27 percent of all Americans ages 17 to 24 -- were too overweight to serve in the military, according to the Army's analysis of national data. And since then, these high numbers have remained largely unchanged.

Data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention show obesity rates among young adults increasing dramatically nationwide. From 1998 to 2008, the number of states reporting that 40 percent or more of young adults are overweight or obese has risen from one to 39. While other significant factors can keep our youth from joining the military -- such as lacking a high school diploma or having a serious criminal record -- being overweight or obese has become the leading medical reason recruits are rejected for military service. Since 1995, the proportion of potential recruits who failed their physical exams because of weight issues has increased nearly 70 percent, according to data reported by the Division of Preventive Medicine at the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research.

A SPILL OF OUR OWN

On May 1, 2010, The New York Times published the following Op-Ed written by Lisa Margonelli about why she feels pushing oil production away from the U.S. does not help make oil drilling safer. Ms. Margonelli, the director of the New America Foundation’s energy initiative, is the author of “Oil on the Brain: Petroleum’s Long, Strange Trip to Your Tank.” To read the Op-Ed in its entirety, click on the title above.

The history of American oil spills is the history of the environmental movement. The 1969 blowout of an oil platform off Santa Barbara, Calif., gave rise to Earth Day as well as President Richard Nixon’s National Environmental Policy Act, and led to a moratorium on new drilling off the Atlantic and Pacific Coasts. Twenty years later, the spill from the Exxon Valdez tanker near Alaska quashed the first Bush administration’s ambitions for drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, and ushered in the laws that made oil shippers liable for damage caused by their cargo.

Now 5,000 barrels of oil a day are apparently spilling from the wrecked Deepwater Horizon rig off New Orleans, and ghastly floating pads of emulsified oil are reaching the sensitive marshlands and coastline of the Gulf of Mexico, coating birds and fish. On Thursday, as the scent of fuel hovered over New Orleans, residents joked online that they should eat fish now, because they might not be able to again for a while. One longtime offshore oil worker told me this looked like a “game changer,” and he was thinking about finding another line of work.

It seems likely that the oil company that holds the lease on Deepwater Horizon, BP, will finally have to abandon its Orwellian “Beyond Petroleum” marketing campaign. This slogan has been so perversely successful that, in 2008, British marketers voted BP’s brand more “green” than Greenpeace. Factually ludicrous, the slogan does accurately reflect drivers’ desire to buy unlimited gasoline while remaining “beyond” all the mess.

RELEARNING OIL SPILL LESSONS

The following is a portion of an Op-Ed written by Charles Wohlforth that was published in the LA Times on May 4, 2010 about why it is important for each generation to learn a new lesson about limitations when it comes to drilling for oil. Mr. Wohlforth is the author of the forthcoming book "The Fate of Nature: Rediscovering Our Ability to Rescue the Earth." To read the entire Op-Ed, click on the title above.

Each news update from the BP oil blowout in the Gulf of Mexico tightens a hard knot in my stomach. Alaskans who lived through the Exxon Valdez oil spill feel dark memories resurfacing. We talk about our sadness for the people in the way, people who don't know what's about to hit them.

"They still seem to think they'll be able to contain this and stop it, and they just can't," said Rick Steiner, a former University of Alaska fisheries extension agent whose life was irrevocably upset by the Exxon Valdez, which spilled at least 11 million gallons of oil in Prince William Sound 21 years ago.

"Not much oil is going to be recovered; they're not going to save much wildlife; they're not going to be able to restore damaged ecosystems."

I remember experts saying the same things when I was a much younger man and Exxon's oil still smelled fresh on the water. But at 26 I couldn't really comprehend the predictions that oil would remain in sheltered shores, poisoning marine ecosystems, for at least 20 years. Now I understand. Steiner and others have shown it to me.

5 MYTHS ABOUT IMMIGRATION

The following is an Op-Ed written by Doris Meisner that was published in The Austin American-Statesman on May 4, 2010 about common misconceptions about immigration. Ms. Meisner is senior fellow at the Migration Policy Institute, and served as commissioner of the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service from 1993 to 2000. To read the entire Op-Ed, click on the title above.

Myth Number 1: Immigrants take jobs from American workers.

Although immigrants account for 12.5 percent of the U.S. population, they make up about 15 percent of the workforce. They are overrepresented among workers largely because the rest of our population is aging: Immigrants and their children have accounted for 58 percent of U.S. population growth since 1980. This probably won't change anytime soon. Low U.S. fertility rates and the upcoming retirement of the baby boomers mean that immigration is likely to be the only source of growth in what we call the "prime age" workforce — workers ages 25 to 55 — in the decades ahead. As record numbers of retirees begin drawing Social Security checks, younger immigrant workers will be paying taxes, somewhat easing the financial pressures on the system.

Myth Number 2: Immigration is at an all-time high, and most new immigrants came illegally.

The historic high came more than a century ago, in 1890, when immigrants made up 14.8 percent of our population. Today, about two-thirds of immigrants are here legally, either as naturalized citizens or as lawful permanent residents, more commonly known as "green card" holders. And of the approximately 10.8 million immigrants who are in the country illegally, about 40 percent arrived legally but overstayed their visas.

(top)

THE IRAN REPORT

September 2007, the JCRC began a special section entitled “The Iran Report”.  Due to the looming serious nature of Iran and its politics within the global world, JCRCs across the country are providing community leaders with updated materials and articles concerning Iran, which will include political matters, divestment information, etc.  Both the United Jewish Communities (UJC) and the Jewish Council for Public Affairs (JCPA) have issued joint statements indicating that the subject of Iran should be on the top of the agenda for local Jewish communities. 

The JCRC will continue to bring the community updates on the situation with Iran and its implications throughout the Middle East and the world.

JCPA RESOLUTION ON IRAN’S NUCLEAR WEAPONS PROGRAM

Adopted by the Board of Directors of the Jewish Council for Public Affairs (JCPA) on March 27, 2007.

GET READY FOR A NUCLEAR IRAN

The following is a portion of an Op-Ed written by John Bolton that was published in the Wall Street Journal on May, 2, 2010 about why he feels Iran will soon be nuclear if the UN and the U.S. do not pick up the pace in trying to dissuade them from going nuclear. Mr. Bolton is a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. To read the entire Op-Ed, click on the title above.

Negotiations grind on toward a fourth U.N. Security Council sanctions resolution against Iran's nuclear weapons program, even as President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad arrives in New York to address the Non-Proliferation Treaty review conference. Sanctions advocates acknowledge that the Security Council's ultimate product will do no more than marginally impede Iran's progress.

In Congress, sanctions legislation also creaks along, but that too is simply going through the motions. Russia and China have already rejected key proposals to restrict Iran's access to international financial markets and choke off its importation of refined petroleum products, which domestically are in short supply. Any new U.S. legislation will be ignored and evaded, thus rendering it largely symbolic. Even so, President Obama has opposed the legislation, arguing that unilateral U.S. action could derail his Security Council efforts.

The further pursuit of sanctions is tantamount to doing nothing. Advocating such policies only benefits Iran by providing it cover for continued progress toward its nuclear objective. It creates the comforting illusion of "doing something." Just as "diplomacy" previously afforded Iran the time and legitimacy it needed, sanctions talk now does the same.

Speculating about regime change stopping Iran's nuclear program in time is also a distraction. The Islamic Revolution's iron fist, and willingness to use it against dissenters (who are currently in disarray), means we cannot know whether or when the regime may fall. Long-term efforts at regime change, desirable as they are, will not soon enough prevent Iran from creating nuclear weapons with the ensuing risk of further regional proliferation.

THIEVES TARGET STATUES OF NATIONAL HEROES, OTHER SECULAR ARTWORKS IN IRAN

On May 6, 2010, The Washington Post published the following article written by Thomas Erdbrink about large art works that have been stolen from their pedestals in parks and squares across Iran. To read the article in its entirety, click on the title above.

It is the case of the missing statues.

Over the past few weeks, nearly a dozen bronze busts and abstract sculptures have been taken from their pedestals in parks and squares across Tehran, apparently with the use of heavy lifting equipment and trucks.

It would be an unusual but not necessarily buzz-worthy series of heists -- but for one thing: The thieves are targeting artworks that explicitly depict national, as opposed to Islamist, heroes. An abstract work representing a mother and daughter and another of a man's bare chest also have gone missing.

Here in the Islamic Republic of Iran, the meaning is not lost.

"Some groups and individuals who believe that statues are against faith and cultural principles are involved," said Morteza Talaee, a former Tehran police commander who is a member of the city council, according to the Islamic Republic News Agency. "These were statues of national, artistic and culturally influential personages that have been stolen," he said. "This is obviously not a normal theft."

U.S. IS PUSHING TO DETER A MIDEAST NUCLEAR RACE

Below is a portion of an article written by William J. Broad and David E. Sanger that was published by the Washington Post on May 2, 2010 about how the Obama administration has been mounting a country-by-country campaign to go beyond the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and ensure that Iran’s push toward atomic mastery does not ignite a regional nuclear arms race. To read the entire article, click on the title above.

The opening Monday of a month long United Nations conference to strengthen the main treaty meant to halt the spread of nuclear arms is likely to be dominated by Iran’s president denouncing the West and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton warning that if Tehran gets the bomb, the rest of the Middle East will soon follow.

But far less visibly, the Obama administration has been mounting a country-by-country campaign to go beyond the treaty and ensure that Iran’s push toward atomic mastery does not ignite a regional nuclear arms race. In recent months, diplomats have been holding meetings in Washington and shuttling to the Middle East in pursuit of agreements that will let countries develop nuclear power while relinquishing the right to make atomic fuel that could be turned into bombs.

Since the 189 signatories of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty last gathered in New York five years ago, many of the world’s oil-rich nations have begun thinking about or ordering nuclear power plants, arguing that the reserves that made them rich will not last forever. But the United States worries that their fear of an Iranian bomb could lead them to use the same nuclear-fuel technology to develop weapons of their own.

(top)

CRISIS IN DARFUR

February 2009 marked the sixth anniversary of the beginning of the violence in Darfur, Sudan.  For six years a government-backed militia known as Janjaweed (which in Arabic means, “evil men on horseback”) has continued to engage in a systematic program of expulsion, rape and murderous violence in Darfur, Sudan.  Millions of people now live in displacement camps lacking adequate food, water, shelter, healthcare, and sanitation. Attacks on \civilians continue.  As Jews, we have a particular moral responsibility to speak out and take action against genocide.  

The JCRC remains committed in its fight to end this battle and will continue to bring you facts and articles about this ongoing genocide. (For further information on Darfur, visit the JCRC web site “International” section at www.jcrcdallas.org.)

SUDAN IN CRISIS

Explore the history, people and politics behind one of the world's bloodiest conflicts in this interactive web site by The Washington Post.  Click the title above to be connected to this site.

SUDAN NOW CAMPAIGN CALLS ON SECRETARY CLINTON AND AMBASSADOR RICE

Save Darfur published the following news release on April 27, 2010 about human rights groups who are calling on Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and United Nations Ambassador Susan Rice to increase their oversight of the faltering U.S. policy on Sudan. To read the entire news release, click the title above.

Following this month’s flawed national elections in Sudan, a group of anti-genocide and human rights organizations is calling on Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and United Nations Ambassador Susan Rice to increase their oversight of the faltering U.S. policy on Sudan. The organizations are making the call as part of the Sudan Now campaign, which is running a series of print ads beginning today in the Washington Post and Washington Express, and in Politico on Wednesday. Sudan Now is concerned that the current implementation of the six-month-old U.S. policy on Sudan has not addressed a number of troubling developments, including clear indications that the national election held earlier this month was neither free nor fair, ongoing government attacks in recent months have killed hundreds and displaced thousands, and ongoing obstruction by the Government of Sudan in access for aid workers and UN investigators to Darfur. Meanwhile, the country faces a vote for southern independence in January 2011—a possible trigger to a return to civil war.

“Sudan is entering into a critical period, with the aftermath of the elections still upon us and a referendum on southern Sudan’s independence immediately ahead. Secretary Clinton and Ambassador Rice need to get personally engaged if the United States wants to avoid a return to widespread bloodshed in Sudan,” said Randy Newcomb, president and CEO of Humanity United. “Only high-level engagement can ensure that the 2005 Comprehensive Peace Agreement is fully implemented and the international community acts together to ensure peace in Africa’s largest nation. The administration laid out a promising policy.

THE JEWISH COMMUNITY MUST KEEP ITS ATTENTION FOCUSED ON DARFUR

The Jewish Community Voice of Southern New Jersey published the following Editorial on May 5, 2010 about why the American Jewish community must stay engaged on the issue of Darfur. To read the Editorial in its entirety, click on the title above.

In this era of the 24-hour-a-day news cycle, media outlets are always looking for the next big story. An earthquake happens; there is 24-hour saturation coverage, and then a few days later (if that), it’s on to the next big story. The crisis of today, whether it is a war or a plume of volcanic ash from Iceland, can be gone tomorrow. Some issues, however, must not be allowed to slip away. Some things are just too important.

The ongoing genocide in Darfur is one of those issues. After intense international pressure, a peace agreement was signed to end the conflict in the Darfur region of Sudan. One of the elements of that agreement was the provision for free and fair elections in that country. Those elections took place last month. They were not, however, free or fair.

A WAGER ON SUDAN

Below is an Editorial that was published by the Washington Post on May 2, 2010 about why the United States should refrain from prematurely recognizing Mr. Bashir's new claim to legitimacy. To read the Editorial in its entirety, click on the title above.

To no one’s surprise, Omar Hassan al-Bashir was proclaimed the winner of Sudan's presidential election on Monday, 21 years after his authoritarian government came to power and 14 months after the International Criminal Court ordered his arrest for war crimes. The election was widely acknowledged to be a fraud. Mr. Bashir's principal opponents boycotted the race, and the vote was riddled with what the White House called "serious irregularities."

Still, the reaction from the Obama administration and other Western governments was muted. Before the election, U.S. special envoy Scott Gration offered a low standard, declaring that the vote would be "as free and fair as possible." The reasons for that temperance could be read in Mr. Bashir's victory speech. After claiming his mandate, the strongman promptly promised to "complete the peace process in Darfur," the western region where his regime waged a campaign of genocide; and also to "go ahead . . . on time" with a planned referendum in January that will determine whether southern Sudan becomes an independent country.

The quid pro quo that Mr. Bashir is offering is clear: Accept him as a legitimate president and set aside the war crimes indictment, and he will allow southern Sudan to go peacefully and will preserve the fragile peace in Darfur. For the pragmatic Obama administration, which hasn't hesitated to subordinate human rights principles in other parts of the world, it's a tempting offer. After all, the alternative to a settlement in southern Sudan is another terrible war, like the one that killed 5 million in the two decades before 2005. And if Mr. Bashir can somehow strike a deal with Darfur's myriad rebel groups -- he has a preliminary pact with one -- that could end the region's humanitarian crisis.

(top)

*Click Here to Support the Activities of the JCRC*

The Jewish Community Relations Council of the Jewish Federation of Greater Dallas does not necessarily endorse any political viewpoints expressed in any advertised programs, articles or editorial pieces that appear in this weekly update.

 

JEWISH COMMUNITY RELATIONS COUNCIL
Jewish Federation of Greater Dallas
7800 Northaven Rd., Dallas, TX 75230
(214) 615-5254
JCRCDallas@jfgd.org
www.jcrcdallas.org