Conflicting sentiments

Almost all the GA will be dedicated to discussing Israel this year. It makes sense, because the weather's similar in Los Angeles, because the prime minister is coming for a visit, and primarily because the reverberations of the war in Lebanon can still be felt.

The L.A. community has raised money for Israel and will continue to do so. In Los Angeles alone, $4.5 million was donated in one evening by a few rich Iranian Jews, who constitute a strong and active community in the region. Karnit Goldwasser, the wife of captive Israeli soldier Ehud Goldwasser, was the magnet that drew the respectable donations.

But the relationship between Jews and Israel has encountered more difficulties than it would seem since last summer's war in Lebanon. The organized community did what it had to do with typical determination, and that is the community that will be represented at the conference.

But conflicting, troubling sentiments abound among the millions of Jews scattered across the United States.

A recent survey by the American Jewish Committee asked American Jews if they thought there would ever be peace between Israel and the Arabs. Most of them answered in the negative, that is, in despair. That is not the feeling that generates a desire to connect with Israel, but rather the opposite: to disengage, or at least to push what happens in Israel to the margins of awareness. It's a trend that worries Jewish activists who support Israel and are attentive to what is happening in the American Jewish community.

The continuing debate over the appropriate attitude American Jews should have toward Israel relates not only to the question of support, but also to Israel's position on the long list of American citizens' priorities. Rabbi David Saperstein, director of the Reform movement's Religious Action Center, told Haaretz this week that social justice was most important to American Jews.

"When polls ask American Jewry what is the primary expression of their Jewishness, more than worship, or study, or even support for Israel, involvement in social justice or commitment to social idealism is at the center of their Jewish consciousness," he said.

But it won't seem that way at the GA this week, where Israel will be the top priority, and just about the only one. A random visitor to the conference would have an intoxicating feeling that American Jews are in the process of moving closer to Israel, but such a feeling would be based on a falsehood. Indeed, there are many indications that the opposite is the case, especially among the youth who will not be participating in the GA. It seems that even a war is unable to stop the trend.

Ehud Olmert

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert will, of course, be received politely when he comes to the GA. It's not every year that the Israeli prime minister speaks at the conference, and it's not every year that the conference is almost entirely dedicated to Israel. But politeness does not mean support, or affection, or admiration, or enthusiasm. The American Jews will applaud Olmert, but in conversations about him, they sound confused: What does he want? Where is he going?

They hear what is said in the U.S. and read the public opinion polls. Many American Jewish leaders have met with Olmert in the past and were impressed by his ability to express himself and to analyze, by his grasp of the material. It's easier to generate enthusiasm when you're the talented adjutant and not the leader being tested daily. Communities across the U.S. volunteered to help during the war in Lebanon, but even among them, some are wondering: Why was it conducted as it was?

They look at the new generation of Israeli leaders and do not get the impression that these are lions of Israel. In the best case scenario, an American Jewish leader said this week, they're lion cubs rather than foxes. In other words, there's still hope that they'll grow up, get stronger, and display some might.

What does an American Jew think of when he thinks of the prime minister of Israel? David Ben-Gurion, Golda Meir, Yitzhak Rabin, and Ariel Sharon, too: That was the instinctive response from one of the more veteran American Jewish community leaders.

Then he thought about it more, hesitated, and added: But there was also Bibi [Netanyahu]. The American Jewish leader respected Netanyahu at first, but ended up disappointed. And he has yet to figure out Ehud Barak. Neither have the Israelis, right? he asked. He had another question too: And do they really not like Olmert?

This is the test Olmert faces when he comes to speak to a group of leaders from the organized American Jewish community. How will he get them to rely on someone whom the Israelis still don't rely on? It's impossible, someone planning to attend the GA said this week. There's no such thing as an Israeli prime minister who is not highly regarded in Israel but is highly regarded here - only the opposite is possible, he said.

Hispanics

In January, the Israeli consulate in Los Angeles will co-host an event with the Mexican consulate there. There will be food, speeches and a good atmosphere. Contact with leaders of the Mexican community is an issue that rises in importance the more demographics show an increasing Hispanic minority in the U.S. - to the point where they could become the majority.

This situation is more evident in southern California than anywhere else in the country, and the Jewish community and Israeli Foreign Ministry are preparing for it - and not a moment too soon.

This is not an issue that will be emphasized at the GA, but its presence in the lives of the community hosting the conference is evident. John Fishel, the president of the Jewish Federation of Greater Los Angeles, said the community has yet to figure out the challenge of finding a more strategic approach. In other words, it has yet to set clear goals that can be upheld. The Jewish community in the area already has intensive contact with the large Hispanic community, through several channels: It provides assistance with health and social services and sends volunteers to help Spanish speakers learn English. In addition to this personal contact, Jewish community leaders are also in touch with political and religious leaders in the Hispanic community.

In Washington, the Israeli Embassy held an evening of appreciation last month in honor of National Hispanic Heritage Month. Two senators, Mel Martinez (R-Florida) and Ken Salazar (D-Colorado), participated in the event. Organizations such as the American Jewish Committee, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee and the Simon Wiesenthal Center are all working on strengthening the ties between the Jewish and Hispanic communities. No one will be able to say that the Jewish community did not prepare for the year 2050, when America will be completely different, but it's too early to predict whether the groundwork will be successful.

The history of Jewish-black relations in America raises a few concerns. In the 1950s and 1960s, Jews marched at the forefront of efforts to achieve equality for blacks, but the partnership collapsed after Martin Luther King was assassinated and the Afro-American protest movement changed. Several experts on the issue were asked this week how it is possible to avoid the mistakes that might have been made then and how to make sure that the relationship being built now will withstand future turmoil. The responses showed that the question was apparently a foolish one: You have to listen to them; you have to do what you can, but it's impossible to control every development; give them the feeling that you really care.

If these are the demands, then it will be relatively easy. The Jews really do care about issues that are central to the Hispanic community: education, health, immigration. As Fishel put it, the relations are important from a strategic point of view, but we also believe in the issues themselves.

The elections

One can guess that in the GA itself, the participants will continue talking about the midterm elections, just as they were talking about it all last week. It's obvious that this will be a big topic in Washington, and Los Angeles isn't exempt from the discussion either.

Many people were happy, almost ecstatic, about the Democratic victory. There's no doubt that most of the Jewish community voted for Democratic candidates. But there were also those who were anxious about the future that can be expected for U.S.-Israel ties. On Wednesday evening, several American Jews were upset by the prospect of the new Congress deciding not to keep John Bolton as the permanent U.S. representative to the United Nations. They considered such a move to be a serious blow to someone they see as a clear supporter of Israel. They were also worried by the candidacy of a few Democrats, who are not known as Israel supporters, to head important congressional committees.

On the other hand, Rep. Tom Lantos (D-California) appears to be the leading candidate to head the House Committee on International Relations, and that was a bit of a relief. Those who were not enthusiastic about the new leadership began to realize that the sky wasn't falling.

In any case, the argument over the extent to which the Democrats will be good for Israel will apparently not end in the near future. The Republican Jewish Coalition argues that it racked up a success in this election, relying on a survey it conducted showing that 26 percent of Jewish voters pulled the lever for the Republicans. All the same, while they may have failed to get enough Jewish votes to produce a Republican victory, they did put the subject of voting Republican on the Jewish agenda, and they don't intend to let it slide off. It appears that the matter is ripe for debate.

The Jewish federations, though, see no reason for concern or a change in policy. "The Jewish community's domestic priorities - protecting Medicaid's mission and funding, enhancing homeland security, providing timely disaster relief among others - have long enjoyed bipartisan access and support," said William Daroff, the United Jewish Communities vice president for public policy and the director of UJC-Washington. And Saperstein said, "There have been no achievements which Jews have supported in the 20th century that happened because of purely partisan votes in Congress."

Needed for the GA

A year in America offers a good number of Jewish conferences, assemblies and ceremonies and to tell the truth, the GA is not the most exciting. Indeed, an article last year by Haaretz writer Shlomo Shamir quoted several Jewish leaders  many of whom spoke on condition of anonymity, of course  who described the GA as an event that is no longer relevant and has become unnecessary. That could be true, but it does not have to be like that.

The GA needs a major facelift to preserve the need for its existence. It lacks the kind of spiritual experience that can be found, for example, at the biennial conference of the Reform movement. It also lacks the refreshing impertinence that can be found at the Jewish Funders Network conference. And it certainly doesn't have the political might of the annual AIPAC conference in Washington. The GA is an event that is boring itself to death.

All the same, it is not a superfluous event. An annual conference of the representatives of all the Jewish communities of America is something desirable, which should be filled with substance. It should be less ceremonial and more exciting. Let there be tempestuous debates, let there be arguments, let there be stirring, provocative speeches that reveal breakthrough studies.