Publisher?s Page Nan Fink othing Tzl?kzm has done has provoked as much fury from the organized Jewish world as the op-ed articles we printed in the New York Time: and in the Jerusalem Post this March. In these op-eds we pointed out that it is a mistake for people to think that the opinions of the leaders of the organized American Jewish world about the political situation in Israel represent those of the large numbers of Jews who do not belong to their organizations. Neither do these leaders? opinions necessarily represent those of their own members, since these organizations typically don?t have democratic procedures for deciding positions on important issues. 4 We took on the organized Jewish leadership directly at this time because we thought that it is crucial for Americans and Israelis to know that large numbers of American JeWs don?t support Shamir?s policies toward the Palestinians. We think that Shamir?s intransigence is bogging down the peace process, and we want to create pressure on him to be open to negotiating with the PLO. One way to create this pressure is to publicize the fact that many American Jews, as shown by the polls, are unhappy with his leadership. The two op-ed articles came out just as ?fteen hundred Jews were gathering in Jerusalem for Shamir?s Solidarity Conference. Although we knew that some delegates to this conference privately disagreed with Shamir, we also knew that the press and Shamir?s stage managing would make it appear that the American Jewish world, as represented by these American Jewish leaders, strongly supports him. We were also concerned that Shamir would sail through his April trip to the [15. without it being made clear that many of us are in opposition to his . policies. In March 1988 he was applauded by American Jewish leaders and went back to Israel with reports of strong American support. Although American opinion is obviously not the only determining factor in the Israeli government?s decision-making process, American support, or the lack of it, can play an important role. For example, the Who-is-a-Jew issue provoked strong American response, which in turn was instrumental in the decision to form the current coalition government in Israel. In a series of public and private responses to the op-ed articles, many people, among them the president 8 VOL. 4, No. 3 of Hadassah and the chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations, at- tacked us for taking such an oppositional position. The criticism fell into two major categories. First, some people thought that these op-eds re?ect disloyalty to the Jewish people. They said that pointing out the diversity within the American Jewish world can only lead to trouble for Israeli and American Jews. One leader publicly stated that he saw his job as ?stemming the tide of the Michael Lerners of America.? We weren?t at all surprised by this response. Since we?ve been articulating our position about Israel and the Palestinians, we?ve received a great deal of criticism for speaking out. We strongly disagree with this criticism, because we think that Israel is in greater danger if it continues with its current policies toward the Palestinians than if American Jews are critical in public. We do not think the potential damage from speaking out comes close to the potential damage that comes from American Jews supporting an Israel that is acting immorally. However, we were surprised by another kind of criti- cism that we heard?namely, that it is a mistake for Tile/can to call attention to the division in the Jewish world, because the American Jewish community has in fact become more open to debate about Israel in the last year. Even though there is still little criticism voiced publicly, what really counts is that people are thinking about the issues in different ways. The problemrwith this second criticism is that it is contradicted by the ?rst criticism. If the Jewish world is now so open, how come we are being attacked so intensely by the organized Jewish world? Why are they denouncing us as being anti-Israel and harmful to the Jewish people when we speak out against Shamir?s policies? If, indeed, the Jewish world is now so open for debate, why tell us that we should work from within rather than publicly voice an alternative opinion to the one articulated by American Jewish leaders? The truth is that, although perhaps more American Jews are starting to question what is happening in Israel, there is still overwhelming caution about publicly voicing this criticism. Several leaders of establishment organizations have told us that they are afraid to go public with their views. The personal risks are too great. So much for the alleged openness?in the name of which we are supposed to moderate our criticism. Cl