J Street on the Docket

Will Left-Leaning Israel Lobby Be Let Into the Tent?

Uphill Fight: J Street president Jeremy Ben-Ami came under attack at a committee meeting of the Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations.
j street
Uphill Fight: J Street president Jeremy Ben-Ami came under attack at a committee meeting of the Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations.

By Theodore Sasson

Published April 27, 2014, issue of May 02, 2014.
  • Print
  • Share Share
  • Multi Page

On April 30, the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations will vote on J Street’s application for admission. It will be a significant moment not just for the left-leaning lobby, but also for the Jewish establishment as a whole, which will have to provide a verdict on whether the communal tent should include an organization that has publicly opposed the policies of the current Israeli government.

The 51-member Presidents Conference includes the larger religious, advocacy, service, fraternal and fundraising organizations. Newly established groups like J Street must wait five years before applying to join, and a vote of two-thirds of the membership is required for acceptance. The fraternity Alpha Epsilon Pi was admitted earlier this year as the newest member.

Established in the mid-1950s, the Presidents Conference has as its central purpose the job of conveying the consensus view of American Jewish organizations to the White House and the State Department. “Dissent ought not and should not be made public,” the organization’s 1978 annual report explained, as “the result is to give aid and comfort to the enemy and weaken that Jewish unity which is essential for the security of Israel.” During its first quarter-century, the Presidents Conference achieved unity mostly by adopting the positions of Israel’s various governments.

But in 1993, following the announcement of the Oslo Accords, the organization became mired in conflict. Right-wing groups led by the Zionist Organization of America joined Israeli opposition parties in challenging the peace deal. Chastised by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee for breaking ranks, the ZOA’s newly elected national president, Morton Klein, declared that “in the absence of a consensus in the community, individual groups should be free to pursue their own strategies.”

Twelve years later, stymied by right-wing dissent, the Presidents Conference was one of the few Jewish organizations that dragged its heels before expressing support for Israel’s disengagement from Gaza.

Perhaps to avoid further paralysis, longtime Executive Vice Chairman Malcolm Hoenlein no longer brings contentious issues to a vote. Instead, Presidents Conference statements are issued in the name of the organization’s leaders and signed by Hoenlein and by the organization’s lay chairman, Robert G. Sugarman. There is no pretense of representing all the member organizations, which now span the ideological spectrum from American Friends of Likud to Americans for Peace Now.

In this context, the vote on J Street’s application for membership will not much affect the balance of power within the Presidents Conference or the organization’s ability to reach decisions by consensus.

Nonetheless, the vote matters a great deal. For J Street, it comes shortly after the release of “The J Street Challenge,” a one-sided documentary produced by Charles Jacobs’s organization, Americans for Peace and Tolerance, featuring the views of J Street’s harshest critics. In March, the Philadelphia federation and Hillel screened the film, providing its first mainstream venue. In the context of this new challenge, the Presidents Conference vote could provide J Street with a seal of approval from the establishment and, perhaps, a degree of insulation from future attacks.

But the Presidents Conference also has a great deal on the line. Alongside the recent attacks against J Street, the vote comes in the context of broader efforts by right-wing activists and donors to limit who can speak about Israel in Jewish communal settings. Their targets have included federations, Jewish community centers, Hillel organizations and synagogues. Fair or not, a vote by Presidents Conference members against J Street would be widely viewed as evidence that the Jewish establishment has joined in the crackdown on dissent.

A vote against J Street would also call into question the Presidents Conference’s own claim to represent organized American Jewry. With dozens of chapters across the country and on college campuses, the support of more than 700 rabbis and cantors, and annual conventions that attract thousands — including Israeli Knesset members from both the government and the opposition — J Street certainly qualifies as a major Jewish organization.

Moreover, as the Pew Research Center’s 2013 survey documented, J Street’s political platform — in favor of a two-state solution, opposed to settlement expansion and skeptical of the aims of the current Israeli government — represents a strong tendency in the American Jewish public.

Given the requirement of a two-thirds majority in the Presidents Conference, J Street faces an uphill battle. But for member organizations that favor a big tent for Jewish communal life, it’s a battle that is worth joining. A “yes” vote, if they can pull it off, will broadcast a clear message that the Jewish establishment intends to remain open and representative.

Sending a message of inclusivity would be a significant accomplishment for an umbrella organization that, given deep ideological divisions in the American Jewish community, can hope to accomplish little else.

Theodore Sasson is the author of “The New American Zionism”(New York University Press, 2014). He is a professor of international and global studies at Middlebury College and a senior research scientist at the Cohen Center for Modern Jewish Studies at Brandeis University.


The Jewish Daily 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 Jewish Daily Forwardrequires 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, our spam filter prevents most links and certain key words from being posted and The Jewish Daily Forward reserves the right to remove comments for any reason.





Find us on Facebook!
  • Is Twitter Israel's new worst enemy?
  • More than 50 former Israeli soldiers have refused to serve in the current ground operation in #Gaza.
  • "My wife and I are both half-Jewish. Both of us very much felt and feel American first and Jewish second. We are currently debating whether we should send our daughter to a Jewish pre-K and kindergarten program or to a public one. Pros? Give her a Jewish community and identity that she could build on throughout her life. Cons? Costs a lot of money; She will enter school with the idea that being Jewish makes her different somehow instead of something that you do after or in addition to regular school. Maybe a Shabbat sing-along would be enough?"
  • Undeterred by the conflict, 24 Jews participated in the first ever Jewish National Fund— JDate singles trip to Israel. Translation: Jews age 30 to 45 travelled to Israel to get it on in the sun, with a side of hummus.
  • "It pains and shocks me to say this, but here goes: My father was right all along. He always told me, as I spouted liberal talking points at the Shabbos table and challenged his hawkish views on Israel and the Palestinians to his unending chagrin, that I would one day change my tune." Have you had a similar experience?
  • "'What’s this, mommy?' she asked, while pulling at the purple sleeve to unwrap this mysterious little gift mom keeps hidden in the inside pocket of her bag. Oh boy, how do I answer?"
  • "I fear that we are witnessing the end of politics in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. I see no possibility for resolution right now. I look into the future and see only a void." What do you think?
  • Not a gazillionaire? Take the "poor door."
  • "We will do what we must to protect our people. We have that right. We are not less deserving of life and quiet than anyone else. No more apologies."
  • "Woody Allen should have quit while he was ahead." Ezra Glinter's review of "Magic in the Moonlight": http://jd.fo/f4Q1Q
  • Jon Stewart responds to his critics: “Look, obviously there are many strong opinions on this. But just merely mentioning Israel or questioning in any way the effectiveness or humanity of Israel’s policies is not the same thing as being pro-Hamas.”
  • "My bat mitzvah party took place in our living room. There were only a few Jewish kids there, and only one from my Sunday school class. She sat in the corner, wearing the right clothes, asking her mom when they could go." The latest in our Promised Lands series — what state should we visit next?
  • Former Israeli National Security Advisor Yaakov Amidror: “A cease-fire will mean that anytime Hamas wants to fight it can. Occupation of Gaza will bring longer-term quiet, but the price will be very high.” What do you think?
  • Should couples sign a pre-pregnancy contract, outlining how caring for the infant will be equally divided between the two parties involved? Just think of it as a ketubah for expectant parents:
  • Many #Israelis can't make it to bomb shelters in time. One of them is Amos Oz.
  • from-cache

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.