Boundary Issues

There are few Jewish organizations more respected than the Anti-Defamation League. Over the years, the ADL has not only been the steadfast defender of Judaism and the Jewish people against the scourge of anti-Semitism.

In addition, they have correctly recognized that all forms of prejudice and discrimination are harmful and need to be opposed strenuously. The ADL has forged strong working relationships with a wide array of racial, ethnic and religious organizations. This, after all is its raison d'être. This is why the ADL is absolutely deserving of widespread support, not only by Jews but by people of many diverse communities.

It is precisely because of my great respect for the ADL that I found the recent statement of its head, Abraham Foxman, to be distressing and inappropriate. Mr. Foxman, speaking for the ADL has taken the unexpected and unnecessary step of criticizing Gen. David Petraeus, the widely respected commander of U.S. troops in the Middle East and South Asia, for his recent comments to the Senate Armed Services Committee that lack of progress on Israeli-Palestinian peace sets the "strategic context" for U.S. security fortunes in the region. "Gen. Petraeus has simply erred in linking the challenges faced by the U.S. and coalition forces in the region to a solution of the Israeli-Arab conflict, and blaming extremist activities on the absence of peace and the perceived U.S. favoritism for Israel," the ADL's Abraham Foxman said in a recently-released statement. "This linkage is dangerous and counterproductive."

All Petraeus did was acknowledge the uncontroversial truth that "conflict foments anti-American sentiment, due to a perception of U.S. favoritism for Israel. Arab anger over the Palestinian question limits the strength and depth of U.S. partnerships with governments and peoples in [the Middle East and South Asia] and weakens the legitimacy of moderate regimes in the Arab world. Meanwhile, al-Qaida and other militant groups exploit that anger to mobilize support. The conflict also gives Iran influence in the Arab world through its clients, Lebanese Hezbollah and Hamas." For this, Foxman labelled Petraeus' views "dangerous" while taking care to call him a "patriot and hero."

Here is the ADL's actual statement: "The assumptions Gen. Petraeus presented to the Senate Armed Services Committee wrongly attribute "insufficient progress" in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process and "a perception of U.S. favoritism for Israel" as significantly impeding the U.S. military mission in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan and in dealing with the Iranian influences in the region. It is that much more of a concern to hear this coming from such a great American patriot and hero."

The Anti-Defamation League has a clear mission: to combat prejudice and discrimination. It is not the mission of ADL to defend the State of Israel except in cases where opposition to Israel may be a disguised form of anti-Semitism. There are other organizations, most notably AIPAC, that forcefully lobby on behalf of Israel, and do its bidding before the American public and in the halls of Congress.

Criticism of Israel's policies does not de facto constitute anti-Semitism. For the head of the ADL to challenge General Petraeus constitutes a blurring of the lines and an inference that anyone who criticizes Israel must be anti-Semitic. No one should accuse General Petraeus of being anti-Semitic. He was just offering his professional judgement. Hence, the ADL had no reason to challenge his remarks. It is essentially a matter of boundaries. The ADL has plenty to do in combating discrimination. By taking upon itself the role of Israel's defender at every turn, they overstep their boundaries and run the risk of diminishing their overall effectiveness in their primary mission. They should leave advocacy of Israel to the pro-Israel lobby and to Israel's diplomatic corps.