Jewish Leaders, Israel at Odds Over Ties With Muslim Group

By Nathan Guttman

Published October 14, 2009, issue of October 23, 2009.
  • Print
  • Share Share

The Muslim World League, an organization emerging as a ubiquitous presence on the interfaith conference circuit, boasts close ties to the Saudi monarchy and produces a magazine that has published antisemitic screeds.

Stayed Away: Rabbi David Rosen of the American Jewish Committee, which heeded the call to boycott the Geneva meeting.
GETTY IMAGES
Stayed Away: Rabbi David Rosen of the American Jewish Committee, which heeded the call to boycott the Geneva meeting.

That dual identity has put Jewish groups in a bind in deciding how to relate to the group and the widely attended, high-profile interfaith forums it is producing on behalf of the Saudi king, Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz.

In September, Jewish groups abruptly withdrew their participation in one of those interfaith conferences after the league’s magazine published an article depicting the world media as under total control of the Jews.

But now, in part at Israel’s apparent behest, one of the Jewish community’s primary umbrella groups for interfaith affairs plans to proceed with an unprecedented trialogue this December involving world Jewry, the Vatican and — representing Islam — the MWL.

The dilemma reflects diverging interests of Israel and the U.S. Jewish community on the issue of ties with Muslim groups. While Jewish organizations focus on their Muslim counterpart’s actions and statements, the Israeli government has also been looking at the diplomatic benefits that can be reaped from tightening ties with a group closely affiliated with the Saudi leadership.

“Israel is sometimes more sensitive to antisemitism and sometimes less sensitive,” said Michael Berenbaum, a Jewish scholar who has been among the leaders of interfaith dialogue. “There is a structural tension between Israel and the Diaspora Jews,” he said, a tension that at times leads to differences of approach toward relations with other religious groups.

The article that catalyzed the current controversy was published in the May issue of the Muslim World League Journal, a Mecca-based English-language monthly distributed worldwide. The publication’s cover depicts a globe covered by a baseball cap with the Star of David symbol under the title: “Control of World Media.”

“One might conclude that the sheer number of different newspapers across America would provide a safeguard against Jewish control and distortion,” the article states. “However, this is not the case.” Jewish control of the U.S. media, states the article, “illustrates the insatiable appetite Jews have shown for all the organs of opinion control on which they could fasten their grip.”

An accompanying editorial, written by Hassan Al-Ahdal, the publication’s editor-in-chief, endorses the antisemitic conspiracy theory. “In this issue,” Ahdal writes, “we carry an article that exposes the myth of neutral journalism. Through deception and deceit the world media is controlled by the few and what gets printed is what they want.”

According to the Anti-Defamation League, the article includes some paragraphs that are identical to an article published widely on antisemitic Web Sites.

The Saudi-based MWL, which claims 36 branch offices worldwide, including in New York and Washington, has been on the radars of watchdog groups for years as an alleged purveyor of extremist ideas and antisemitic and anti-Israel rhetoric.

Despite this background, it was the MWL that King Abdullah entrusted with the task of turning an interfaith initiative he launched last year into an ongoing reality by organizing a series of international meetings. The first meeting held outside Saudi Arabia took place in Madrid in July 2008 and was seen as a major breakthrough toward religious openness by Saudi Arabia.

While a number of other major Jewish groups attended the earlier gatherings sponsored by Abdullah, the ADL has protested the MWL’s role in them. Last month, the ADL called on interfaith leaders worldwide “to condemn the antisemitism of the MWL and to not participate in their interfaith gatherings.”

“This is not the kind of group we should be having an interfaith dialogue with,” said Eric Greenberg, director of interfaith policy at the ADL.

Repeated attempts to reach the MWL by phone and email for comment on this issue went unanswered.

After Jewish activists protested the publication of the May MWL Journal article claiming Jewish control of the media, the MWL issued a clarification stating that it was not responsible for the article’s content since it was copied from another source. ADL National Director Abraham Foxman called this “a pathetic attempt to deflect responsibility.”

Others agreed. For the first time, representatives of other major Jewish groups, including the World Jewish Congress and the American Jewish Committee, joined the ADL in refusing to attend a two-day Saudi initiative gathering in Geneva that began on September 30.

“In the first [Madrid] event you could argue that they are so new to this and were not adequately informed,” Rabbi David Rosen, director of inter-religious affairs at the AJC said. “But now they already know and still have problematic issues for us.”

Rabbi Marc Schneier, vice president of the World Jewish Congress, cited other issues. One was the participation in the conference of William Baker, former head of the extreme right-wing Populist Party who has authored many antisemitic writings. “The straw that broke the camel’s back was when I looked at the schedule of the Geneva conference” and saw he would be speaking on a panel with Baker.

“I’m very saddened and disappointed,” he said, “but there’s just so much I can take.”

Now, the MWL dispute is spilling over to a Catholic-Jewish-Muslim meeting planned for December in Seville, Spain, unrelated to King Abdullah’s interfaith initiative. A product, instead, of the world Jewish community’s ongoing dialogue with the Catholic Church, the Vatican chose the MWL to participate in the meetings.

The Jewish community’s representative will be the International Jewish Committee on Interreligious Consultations (IJCIC) —a consortium of the three major Jewish denominations and large Jewish communal organizations that is organized Jewry’s designated representative for relations with the Vatican.

Twice in recent months, IJCIC debated whether to participate in the December trilateral meeting and finally voted to go forward with it despite calls from the ADL to withdraw because of the MWL’s presence. Israel, apparently seeing value in opening a channel of communication with the Saudis, strongly backed the umbrella group’s decision.

Rabbi Richard Marker, chairman of IJCIC, said the group was entering the dialogue with open eyes. “It is not as if we are naive about MWL or any other group,” Marker said, warning that “the idea of having organizational purity doesn’t work in real life.”

Supporters of attending the trilateral cited the government of Israel’s support for going ahead with the meeting as a significant factor in the group’s decision. According to two participants in the IJCIC discussions, Israeli Foreign Ministry officials conveyed their government’s view that the MWL has changed course and that Israel believes engaging with it would benefit the Jewish community and Israel. “They unequivocally endorsed” the idea of attending the Seville meeting, said Marker.

The ADL’s Eric Greenberg disputed this. A letter presented from the government of Israel at one of the IJCIC meetings was a not a specific endorsement of the Seville meeting, since it was undated and spoke generally of Israel’s favorable view of King Abdullah’s initiative, he said. But this argument failed to sway other IJCIC members when Greenberg made it at their meeting.

“IJCIC requested and received a written message of support for this dialogue” from the person in charge of religious issues at the Israeli foreign ministry, said Rabbi Rosen.

An Israeli diplomatic source confirmed that talks took place between IJCIC leaders and the Israeli government, but said Israel did not issue an official opinion on the question of participation in the Seville meeting.

Contact Nathan Guttman at guttman@forward.com


  • Print
  • Share Share

The Forward welcomes reader comments in order to promote thoughtful discussion on issues of importance to the Jewish community. In the interest of maintaining a civil forum, the Forward requires that all commenters be appropriately respectful toward our writers, other commenters and the subjects of the articles. Vigorous debate and reasoned critique are welcome; name-calling and personal invective are not. While we generally do not seek to edit or actively moderate comments, the Forward reserves the right to remove comments for any reason.


Comments
irshad Fri. Oct 16, 2009

Yes! You're right! we all should compare what the muslims has done to the Jews over the centuries and contrast that with what the Christians did.

My only caveat is that you take your info from respected scholars. E.g. Daniel Pipes who is a respected scholar although he is a neocon and anti-Islamofascist. You may take the info from

For exaample, you may review "The Jew as an allie of the Muslim" . Daniel Pipe's review is posted in his website www.daielpipes.com. There the authors put forward their thesis that much of Christian European anti-semitism was because the Jews were viewed as agents of the Muslim. (as the Jews were far closer to the Muslims)

There are many more articles there where Dr Pipes claim that historically Muslims treated the Jews far better than the Christians did.

Remember Spain? Jews had a great civilization under muslim rule but when the Christians conqured it, the Jews were given two choices convert or die. Then most of them escaped to Muslims lands.

Jack Garbuz Fri. Oct 16, 2009

First of all, I wasn't comparing and contrasting Christian with Muslim treatment of Jews. WE were subject to the whims of both. However, the Catholic Church has formally recognized and apologized for the atrocities Christian rule caused European Jewry over the centuries. It has even reformed some of its old doctrines in the matter. Muslims have yet to recognize their own treatment of Jews. For 500 years the pagan "kuffer" Arabs allowed Jews to live in peace in Arabia. No restrictions or humiliations were imposed on Jews. The coming of Muhammad changed things. As for Spain, let's not forget that there was Jews in Spain long before the Moros came, and that the Jews actually collaborated with them to in their invasion of Christian Spain, for which they paid the price 800 years later when Christian rule returned.

At any rate, Jews no longer will be ruled over by either the Crescent or the Cross. We will not be dhimmis subject to either submit or pay the jizya. Thanks to God, we have our tiny land back in part, and it is the Shield of David that is our star and banner, and all we ask is that our rights to sovereignty in our tiny land be acknowledged and respected. Both Christians and Muslims owe us at least that.

Evren Sat. Oct 24, 2009

"In September, Jewish groups abruptly withdrew their participation in one of those interfaith conferences after the league’s magazine published an article depicting the world media as under total control of the Jews." As far as I know,it was Dr.Theodore Herzl, the early founder of modern Israel, who offered the Ottoman Sultan Abdulhamid II in the bargaining process over Palestine that he might end the media campaigne against him, using Eurpean Jewry's influence over European media in return for settlement permissions for Jewish settlers in Palestine. So the leader and brain of Zionism confesses the great Jewish influence over media... The facts speak for themselves...Why today they deny that?!

Jack Garbuz Sun. Oct 25, 2009

Jewish "control" of the media is history. Today, Al Jazeera, BBC, CNN and other major media organizations vigorously compete for the recently opened 1.5 billion Muslim market and its collective pocketbook. They were no factor at all when for decades the Muslim autocracies and dictatorships were able to keep them closed from outside penetration. That ended with the proliferation of satellite dishes and the penetration of the internet, not to mention western pressure. And so, today these media giants fall all over themselves to portray Israel in the worst light possible to win the hearts and pocketbooks of the vast Muslim audiences. As a result, it is today almost impossible to find a pro-Israel segment anywhere, because any reporter or content producer that dares to show any empathy for Israel in his or her reporting will have to start looking for employment in some other industry. Today Muslims indirectly control the media when it comes to reporting the Israel-Arab conflict thanks to bottom line considerations of the international media giants.






    Would you like to receive updates about new stories?












    We will not share your e-mail address or other personal information.

    Already subscribed? Manage your subscription.