The Haj & the struggle for Islam's soul

It is sometimes difficult, especially in this part of the world,
to distinguish Islam ­ the religion and civilization ­ from the
threat posed by its militant adherents, the Islamists, who are at war with the West and our values of liberty, tolerance and individual freedom.

This confusion is as understandable as it is counterproductive,
and opponents of Muslim extremism have an interest in identifying, cultivating and promoting non-Islamist personalities inside the Muslim
world.

Such a strategy goes beyond ecumenical do-goodism and does not require our deluding ourselves about the extent to which the Islamists have penetrated the Muslim world.

There are 1.3 billion Muslims. Seeking a modus vivendi with them
is just plain common sense.

We also need a better understanding of Islam. For instance, how
many Westerners realize that Sunday was the first day of the haj,
a pilgrimage every able-bodied believer is expected to undertake at least
once in a lifetime? How many know that the other pillars of Islam are the profession of faith in Allah and the centrality of the Prophet Muhammad; praying five times a day, alms for the poor, and fasting during Ramadan.

Islam is a proselytizing religion spread originally by the
sword. But history shows that Muslim civilization has also embraced long periods of tolerance, during which bellicosity was replaced by civility and stability.

It isn't for us to identify what "real" Islam should be. But why
not listen to the several million Muslims from around the world now encircling the Ka'aba in Mecca? They are not obsessing about Jews, Christians or al-Qaida.

As Salah Nasrawi, an AP reporter on the scene found, they are
focused on personal salvation, repentance and prayer.
"Facing the Ka'aba, Zeinab Abdouazizi of Bangladesh raised her
voice... 'Oh Allah, give me health and strength so that I can raise my
children and make them... good Muslims and obedient,' she said."

How many Jews know that Muslims believe the Ka'aba mosque was
built by Abraham (and Ishmael)? When Muslims pray daily they face this shrine, which they hold to be the first place God created on earth and where Allah's holy presence is most felt.

For some pilgrims the sojourn to Mecca can be dangerous. Last
week a hotel collapsed, killing at least 76. In 1990 a terrible stampede
fatally trampled 1,426 worshipers.

What motivates individual believers to make the arduous journey
is their desire to be closer to God ­ -- a faithfulness hardly problematic
for Jews or Christians.

Let's remember that the West's war against terrorism is really
a war against Muslim extremism and not against Islam. With every
violent outrage ­from New York and London to Baghdad and Jerusalem ­ the Islamists are struggling not just to defeat Judeo-Christian civilization but to to determine which of Islam's multitude of beliefs emerges
paramount.

It is for Muslims themselves to determine whether their faith,
in this century, will be shaped by the likes of Iranian President
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and al-Qaida's fanaticism, or whether moderate views gain a hearing.

For example, Khadidja Khali, president of the French and
European Muslim Women's Association, has denounced Ahmadinejad as a "fraud." And Tarik Oubrou, chairman of France's Imam Association, says that the best tactical answer to fanaticism, rather than making blanket denunciations, is teaching tolerance within the Muslim community.

Such voices may still be faint and their influence limited, but
we ignore their positive potential to our own detriment.

It is easy to be cynical, sure, when the final declaration read
out at last month's Organization of the Islamic Conference in Mecca ­ where Ahmadinejad ranted against the Jews ­ concluded with the thought that Islam needs to "fight" "deviant" ideas and is a religion of "moderation" that "rejects extremism and isolation."

Coming from Muslim leaders such as the Saudi king such a platform seemed embarrassingly disingenuous.

Nevertheless, we are witnessing a struggle for the soul of Islam where the "good guys" are not necessarily friends of the West, but nor are they outright enemies such as Iran.

Which is why I see this haj season as a good time to remind ourselves of the need to welcome voices of reason and encourage Muslim theologians
willing to engage Westerners in a spirit of mutual respect.

Does Kadima Have a Future?

As these words are being written, Ariel Sharon lies in a coma in the intensive care unit of Hadassah Hospital, Ein Kerem. The prognosis isn’t known, yet it’s obvious he won’t be returning to the Prime Minister’s Office. His career is finished. Still, the party he founded at the end of November remains not only politically viable but essential to Israel’s political well-being.

Kadima already has an iconic founder, a working party platform, an organizational director (Avigdor Yitzhaki), a plethora of talented politicians and, most importantly, an overarching mission that goes beyond Sharon the man. That mission is to give Israelis a choice between Amir Peretz and Binyamin Netanyahu.

Peretz and those to his left remain convinced that there is a Palestinian negotiating partner, and continue to embrace the ghost of Oslo. Netanyahu, and those to his right, oppose unilateralism and claim to want “a better deal” from the Palestinians. Some desire no deal at all. They are comfortable with the status quo.

That is why Kadima’s centrist alternative is no less imperative today than it was when Sharon first broke away from the Likud. Kadima’s pragmatism was articulated by Justice Minister Tzipi Livni on November 29, when she summarized the new party’s political platform:

“The Jewish people have a national and historic right to the Land of Israel; but to maintain a Jewish majority in a Jewish democratic state we have to concede parts of the Land of Israel....”
Thus while Kadima understands the inevitability of a Palestinian Arab state, it certainly does not relish the prospect. It accepts the internationally-brokered road map diplomatic plan – with the explicit proviso that the Palestinians first fulfill their obligations: dismantling the terrorist groups and ending violence and incitement. Kadima calls for maintaining the major settlement blocs, and supports an undivided Jerusalem (a fairly meaningless mantra, I admit).

I’m not suggesting that Kadima’s platform could not be improved. For instance, a truly centrist party would favor a civil marriage option as well as support for non-Orthodox conversions.


BUT I’M not deluding myself. Kadima could easily fizzle out, just like Yigal Yadin’s Democratic Movement for Change, Yitzhak Mordechai’s Center Party, and now Tommy Lapid’s Shinui.
For that not to happen, Ehud Olmert, Meir Sheetrit, Tzipi Livni and Avi Dichter, in consultation with other Kadima politicians, will have to make some tough decisions, quickly. Kadima needs not only to replace Sharon but also to display the esprit de corps and unity so abysmally lacking in Likud and Labor.

My own preference is for the 60-year-old Olmert. And I say this despite the fact that as mayor of Jerusalem he neither had my garbage collected as often as I would have liked nor used municipal taxes efficiently.

Olmert is the most seasoned and polished politician in Kadima’s ranks, having been mayor of Israel’s largest city (1993-2003), a Knesset member, a minister and, previously, a successful attorney. He has excellent English, already knows the key players in Washington, London, Brussels and Berlin, and has the added advantage of being Acting Prime Minister.

He was out front on the need for unilateral disengagement even before the idea captured the support of most Israelis. He was the first to join Kadmia after Sharon established it. And he’s cunning enough to follow in Sharon’s tactical footsteps. He has an excellent political and familial pedigree in the Jabotinsky movement. He was a member of Betar.

All this tells me he’s capable of striking the right balance between ideological principle and realpolitik.

Is Olmert a squeaky-clean politician? Let’s not kid ourselves. But, like many Israelis, I’d rather have a shrewd, slightly shady character at the helm of the state than a knave or charlatan.

PLATFORM OR no platform, the ethos of Kadima is clear to savvy Israelis. I refer you to the interview published on October 11, 2004 between Sharon’s consigliere Dov Weissglass and Haaretz’s Avi Shavit.

Here is the lawyer encapsulating the thinking of his foremost client: “Because of his trenchant realism, Arik never believed in permanent settlements: He didn’t believe in the one-fell-swoop approach. Sharon doesn’t think that after a conflict of 104 years it’s possible to come up with a piece of paper that will end the matter.

“...Very quickly we discovered that we were up against a [Palestinian] stone wall, that when you get to the decision-making center, nothing happens.”

So what unilateralism does, Weissglass explained, is to “make it possible for Israel to park conveniently in an interim situation that distances us as far as possible from political pressure. It legitimizes our contention that there is no negotiating with the Palestinians.”
And so it has been.

The months ahead will not be easy ones. There is the need to deal with the Iranian threat – while emphasizing that this is a problem for the West and not just for Israel. Construction of the security barrier must be accelerated. Ground must be broken on the E1 project to connect Jerusalem to Ma’aleh Adumin – an area where Sharon has dragged his heels.
The next premier must devote himself to defining and solidifying the Israeli consensus, not just on security issues but on a range of domestic priorities to make this society a more equitable and cohesive one.

Kadima can yet make history by reflecting a 21st-century political realignment of the Israeli body politic – one that gives expression to the country’s pragmatic mainstream. But it can only do so if its luminaries are able to summon up the altruism to postpone gratification and put the nation first.

PLAIN TALK: Jack Abramoff & Ariel Sharon

Last night while I was still at work, Channel 10’s Baruch Kra (who once worked for Haaretz) broke a story he’s been following for year’s that’s again captured the headlines here.

Kra reported that police have evidence that Prime Minister Ariel Sharon took a $3 million bribe from Austrian businessman James Schlaff. It’s all tied to the Cyril Kern affair, violations of campaign finance limits, and Jericho Casinos... but don’t ask me precisely how it all ties together.

Everyone else in the media is now playing catch-up with Channel 10’s scoop.

As for the cops – they’re keeping shtum.

My hunch is that all things being equal (Sharon goes into the hospital tomorrow), this latest revelation will blow over and have minimal impact on Sharon’s anticipated margin of victory.

Yossi Verter in Haaretz gave spinmesiter Arthur Finkelstein the final word: “The public prefers a corrupt man to an idiot.”

Or several different idiots.

So my attention is drawn to real news and it comes from overseas.

I’m thinking about the tragedy of the miners in West Virginia and the pain of their families; about how their loves ones had been celebrating the “miracle” of their rescue only to have their gratitude turned into anguish when it emerged only one of the 12 trapped men had survived.

That’s real news – not the manufactured nonsense that fills so many of our newspapers and media outlets.

Elsewhere, I’m drawn to the reports of an extraordinary Chillul Hashem, what we Jews call – a desecration of God’s name – committed by an Orthodox Jew named Jay Ambramof.

He’s the Washington lobbyist who pleaded guilty to three felony counts in connection with Washington influence peddling.

Yet I wonder if it is news that people who think of themselves as pious observant Jews would nevertheless conspire to commit fraud, evade taxes use power unrestrained by ethical concerns.

No. The real news today is not Sharon and not Ambramof.

It’s the pain of the families who lost their loved ones in the mines of West Virginia. That’s what is real and enduring.

God give them strength to handle their pain and loss.

PLAIN TALK: Organized Crime in Israel

Even though I’m a news junkie, I find it hard to watch or read about organized crime in Israel.

It just disgusts me.

Back in New York, all the Jews I knew – and the Italians for that matter – either had, or aspired to, bourgeois middle class values.

Living in Israel, I’ve had to adjust (with difficulty) to the fact that some Jews are violent thugs with no redeeming values.

I was thinking about my aversion to news about organized on the way to work this morning.

What drew my attention was the Monday afternoon melee in the lobby of a Herzliya luxury hotel during a gathering of some of the Jewish State’s top hoodlums. You know, people who oversee the sale of illegal drugs, enslave women into prostitution and shake-down mom and pop businesses.

There are plenty of reasons to believe that organized crime has penetrated the police and government of the country.

It’s something I don’t want to dwell on too much.

Because if I did, I’d add that to the list of why life in Israel sometimes disappoints – why it sometimes shatters illusions about “us” all being in this together.