View this post on the web at [link removed]

In normal circumstances, the Oscars could be filed under “things I don’t watch.” However, something occurred during the recent awards ceremony that should be addressed—in particular, the following statement by Jonathan Glazer, director of the Holocaust film “The Zone of Interest,” which won the Academy Award for best international film :
“We stand here as men who refute their Jewishness and the Holocaust being hijacked by an occupation which has led to conflict for so many innocent people. Whether the victims of October the 7th in Israel or the ongoing attack on Gaza—all the victims of this dehumanization.”
This statement contains several confusing elements that require further examination. First, Glazer did not actually “refute his Jewishness”; rather, he awkwardly objected to the assumption that his Jewish identity means he supports the State of Israel’s “occupation” of land in historical Palestine. And of course, he is entitled to his opinion. But let’s explore this a little further. What did he actually mean?
Did he intend to say that the State of Israel exists because of the Shoah? If so, he is wrong. The contemporary movement to return Diaspora Jews to our ancient homeland began nearly a century prior. Furthermore, Jews have been continuously settled in the land of Israel, stretching all the way back to the Roman occupation and before.
Did he intend to say that “the occupation” has caused the conflict in the region? If so, he is wrong. The conflict long preceded the existence of the State of Israel, let alone the occupation of the West Bank, which began in 1967. We must not forget that Israel, within its pre-1967 borders (the “Green Line”), is not occupied territory. It is a sovereign state that is recognized by most of the world, enabled by the U.N. Partition Plan of November 29, 1947. Additionally, Gaza had not been occupied by Israel since Israel withdrew from the area unilaterally in 2005. The full history of Israel’s borders is far too complicated to address here. But we must remember that a blanket statement of “occupation” is at best inaccurate and at worst an antisemitic canard.
Did Glazer intend to say that Israel is attacking Gaza? If so, he is wrong. Israel is attacking Hamas targets in Gaza, a densely populated area. Hamas uses Gazan civilians as human shields, does not allow civilians to use its tunnels for shelter, stores its weapons in schools and hospitals, and fires rockets from around these buildings intentionally, so that Israel will cause as much collateral damage as possible, leading to even greater criticism.
And finally, did he intend to say that it is generally understood that Jews believe in, support and feel connected to the State of Israel? About this, he is not wrong. In fact, the vast majority of us are standing with Israel at this moment, as we have since Israel was established in 1948. For most Jews on earth today, it is an essential statement of Jewish peoplehood—the idea that all Jews, as members of a sort of extended cousins’ club, are connected to and responsible for each other—that we stand with Israel.
Glazer’s remarks reflect an anti-Jewish trope, au courant among social justice warriors: that Jews misuse our long, long history of persecution to cry “antisemitism!” whenever we are accused of doing something wrong. And he is not alone; I heard this from one of the Christian ministers with whom I sat in an uncomfortable interfaith clergy meeting on the subject a few weeks back. The dilemma that has faced the Diaspora, and in particular the American Jewish community since October 7, is that we suddenly find ourselves in a political landscape in which Israel is continuously vilified.
I am a pulpit rabbi in Pittsburgh, and one recent bit of excitement in our neighborhood was a “cease-fire now” resolution brought to the Allegheny County Council. Over the course of two agonizing council meetings, residents delivered a total of about eight hours of public comments on a motion supporting the resolution. Of course, the Allegheny County Council has no business opining on foreign affairs. Rather, this was an undisguised misappropriation of the council’s regular business to impugn Israel for defending herself against terrorists who have declared their intent to kill Jews. It became a platform for anti-Zionists to demonize Israel as a “genocidal,” “apartheid,” “colonial” state.
And, because feelings about this issue run so high, the pro-Israel speakers in the room were vastly outnumbered by those who clearly wish Israel would just go away. Most of the latter, I am sure, would not deny that characterization. And there was definitely discomfort and fear in the room when some of these folks shouted at the members of the council following the vote, calling them “murderers” and “racists.”
I sat through several hours of these public comments and endured many distortions and outright lies read into the public record, including statements denying that Hamas attackers engaged in sexual violence against Israeli women (there were cheers in the overflow room when that happened). And although many pro-Palestinian speakers invoked the number of Palestinians killed and the other deeply painful results of this war, none could bring themselves to concede that it was Hamas who broke the existing cease-fire on October 7, or that Israelis have a right to live in peace.
But perhaps most disturbing were the Jews who spoke against Israel. Every single speaker who was in favor of the cease-fire motion who had any connection to Judaism made sure to announce that fact with pride. They invoked their benei mitzvah at local synagogues. Some of them proudly wore kippot or a visible magen David. Some of them wore shirts reading “Jews Say Ceasefire Now” or “Not in Our Names.” They self-righteously recalled their ancestors who were murdered by the Nazis.
Some of them echoed the revolting idea that antisemitism is the result of supporting Israel, that standing with Israel as she defends herself from terrorists is what has caused the dramatic rise in anti-Jewish activity here in America and around the world since October 7. Among the statements made by Jews at the council meeting were:
“The Zionists in this room are a powerful and entrenched lobby.”
“If you want to curb antisemitism, stop assuming that all Jews have a primary loyalty to a foreign nation.”
And, as a local Muslim faith leader stated more bluntly:
“Those against a cease-fire are causing antisemitism.”
I am proud that I live in a nation where free expression in public spaces is an essential value. I am also grateful that Jewish tradition values dissent. As you know, the pages of the Talmud are filled with deep disagreement. The very idea of maḥloqet leshem shamayim, a disagreement for the sake of heaven, underlies the intellectual framework of Jewish life. We know that engagement with those with whom we disagree fosters honest debate and supports democratic ideals, serving as a xxxxxx against fanaticism.
I am less enamored of the unfortunate reality that some in the Jewish world have bought into the narrative of Israel as a colonial state, a remnant of the oppression wreaked upon indigenous peoples by the European powers in past centuries. They say, “I am Jewish, but …”
These folks have missed a central value of contemporary Jewish life: the yearning of 2,000 years for a return to our homeland, the land from which we came. That some of our fellow Jews have been manipulated by anti-Israel activists to believe and repeat horrid lies is a shame upon us. It means that we have failed to successfully inculcate our deepest values, and in particular, the value of peoplehood.
As I pointed out in my own public comment at the Allegheny County Council meeting, a December poll conducted by the Pittsburgh Jewish Chronicle (hardly scientific, but informative nonetheless) said that nearly 90% of respondents think an immediate cease-fire would put Jews in jeopardy. This indicates that the handful of quite vocal Jews who spoke on behalf of the cease-fire motion were not only not representative of most Jews, but they were, in fact, a small minority.
I wish I could remind the folks from Jewish Voice for Peace and IfNotNow that the modern State of Israel is not the result of colonialists who set out from Europe to subjugate natives, impose European culture and steal local resources to send back home. Rather, it is a haven for a persecuted people who have been hounded out of virtually every place they have ever lived due to the ancient affliction of, yes, antisemitism.
It is the homeland of a people who were exiled at the hands of ancient colonizers. Most of the Jews who live there today are descendants of those who came because they had nowhere else to go; half of them were kicked out of Muslim countries after 1948. I also wish I could remind the anti-Israel faction that Palestinians will enjoy self-determination once coexistence is accepted on both sides of the Green Line.
Israel is a haven that should be celebrated, not reviled. It is up to us to stand with our fellow Jews as they protect themselves from Hamas.
On Purim, we read the scroll of Esther, the story of a brave young Jewish woman who, when her moment came, stood up for the Jewish people. Yes, she entered the palace of Ahashverosh while hiding her Jewishness. But when the time came—when her uncle Mordecai told her, “And who knows, perhaps you have attained to royal position for just such a crisis”—she announced her Jewishness with pride and saved the Jews of Persia.
At the Allegheny County Council, we won. The “cease-fire now” motion was rejected 9-3 (with two abstentions). But the other side also won; those who oppose Israel’s very existence succeeded in broadcasting their hateful message, over and over and over.
The dilemma of our current moment, when so many we used to trust are pointing accusing fingers at us and crying “Genocide!” and far worse, is to stand with our fellow Jews even though it is difficult. And we all should look to Queen Esther at this moment: Perhaps we are here, in Allegheny County and all over the Diaspora, to speak truth to the anti-Zionists.

Unsubscribe [link removed]?