I’ve been writing for a couple of years about the disturbing sequence of events in the Bedouin communities of the Negev, as home demolitions incite greater frustration among the Bedouin communities and their leaders.  Recent protests at the Knesset seem to be getting more attention from the Israeli authorities (I received this message July 23 from Faisal Sawalha, spokesperson for the RCUV, whom I met with Hussein Al-Rafay’a on a trip to the Negev in 2005):

Thanks to the RCUV’s [Regional Council for the Unrecognized Villages] pressure: the evacuation and home demolition in Um Al-Hiran Stopped

Mr. Hussein Al-Rafay’a, the RCUV’s chairperson, and the RCUV leadership who are in the Refugee Camp for the Victims of Home Demolition in front of the Knesset in Jerusalem since July 16 got information this morning that a large number of policemen with their vehicles and bulldozers were near Omer on their way to demolish homes in the village of Atteer Um Al-Hiran, where 20 homes were demolished three weeks ago. Mr. Al-Rafay’a called people in the relevant ministries and governmental offices asking them not to demolish homes. After that, they received a call from the Ministry of Housing saying that the forces will not demolish homes today.

Mr. Al-Rafay’a sad, "We started the Refugee Camp last week to protest against home demolition. After that, we talked to people from different governmental ministries. The Ministries of Interior and Housing said that they will stop home demolition if the Legal Counselor of the government approves this agreement. We are still waiting for his decision. There are people in the governmental offices in the Negev that do not want this agreement. When I called the ministries this morning, they did not know about the home demolition that was planned today."

المجلس الاقليمي للقرى غير المعترف بها في النقب
המועצה האזורית לכפרים הבלתי מוכרים בנגב
The Regional Council for the Unrecognized Villages in the Negev
tel: 972-8-6283043
fax: 972-8-6283315

There are two sides to every story, of course, but, in my view, the Bedouin community issue will not be resolved through government stonewalling.

Moushumi Khan recently posted an article on Slate which picks up where Irshad Manji’s Wall Street Journal opinion piece left off:

"The Muslim communities of North America and Europe are often compared, with the conclusion that American Muslims are better integrated, less likely to be radicalized than their European counterparts. But as the war on terror proceeds, racial profiling, the lack of direct communication between Muslims and the government, and the use of paid confidential informants to monitor the Muslim community are all causing an increasing rift between American society and Muslims."

Ms. Khan worries, as I do, that the successful integration of Muslims in America may not continue as it has historically:

"While there might not be actual radicalization in the American Muslim community, there is a danger of increasing frustration leading to alienation. … While the vast majority of Muslim youth are wondering how they can be civically minded Muslim Americans, the government seems to be stuck on the theme of the radicalization of Muslim American youth. … European Muslims and American Muslims have not had much in common until now, but if we unreflectively adopt the European view of Muslims as the perpetual "other," we risk making this true. "Equality not integration" is the rallying cry of European Muslims. Ours is "due process." Some of our worst laws were passed and later regretted at times of reaction against ethnic communities, from the Palmer Raids of 1919 to today’s Patriot Act. In a land founded by immigrants and the rule of law, our nation’s strength lies in its resilience; our way of life depends on equal opportunity. Europe and European Muslims are suffering from the inability to bring Muslims into the economic and political mainstream. Will America turn its back on its rich heritage of celebrating diversity? Will we start to see Muslims as a "law and order" problem as Europe does, rather than as the next wave of dream-seekers?"

These are profound, important thoughts about the social context in which Muslim Americans may come to see "due process" stood on its head.  Going forward, America runs the risk of hiding behind anachronistic notions of protectionism and isolationism in the midst of knee-jerk reactions to stop the inexorable trend of globalization.  The social side effects of these hiccups on the road to the future may lead to unfortunate laws that alienate Muslim Americans and push them closer to the European reality in our own country.  We can avoid this by asking  tough questions of ourselves now– and answering them with the type of tolerance and the spirit of religious pluralism that has made America strong– before it is too late. 

In Monday’s Wall Street Journal Irshad Manji makes a simple and cogent argument holding the United States as a model of Muslim integration that other countries should wish for.  In explaining why Political Islam has not taken significant root in the U.S., she draws heavily on statistics from a recent Pew Report, concluding, for example, that:

"For plenty of Muslims in the United States, ambition and initiative pay off. The Pew survey reinforces this lesson, telling us that 71% of Muslim Americans believe most people in the U.S. ‘can make it if they are willing to work hard.’ "

These and other factors common to the American Dream, such as the historic ethnic and racial diversity of the United States, have also facilitated Muslim integration.

Irshad concludes: "Europe, take notes. America, take a break from self-flagellation. Reformist Muslims, take your cue. In the U.S., you have the possibility of a voice. Islam’s better angels depend on it."

This opinion piece stops short of stating Irshad’s view as to how successful this replication of Muslim integration can be outside of the U.S. http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110010164.

As I reflect on this article, several things worry me.

First, I see the U.S. becoming increasingly polarized and economically segregated.  How different will the answers be to the same Pew research report in 2012?

Second, I worry that the success we have had in the U.S. will be virtually impossible to replicate in Europe because of the systemic socio-economic barriers which define the European psyche.

Is it already too late to de-radicalize the Muslim minority in France, for example, and is there a French national will to do what is necessary to create economic opportunity for French Muslims?  Mainstream French politics today would suggest otherwise, which implies that only serious civil unrest, well beyond what we have already seen, can lead to fundamental social change in that country.

Americans should take note of what we’ve done right with the Muslim community to prevent the spread of Political Islam.  What is most heartening is that upward mobility, the value of hard work, and welcoming people of all backgrounds and faiths into our society are all essential to the American DNA.  Let’s not squander it!

I recently received a progress update from the Hand in Hand bilingual Jewish-Arab schools in Israel. The schools’ current total enrollment is approaching 800 children, and there is more growth ahead:

* The Hand in Hand Galilee School , which had been in temporary quarters for several years, recently moved into its new campus in Ashbal. Co-founder Amin Khalaf comments: "We have been waiting for years for this to happen and it was a real celebration yesterday with the children, staff and parents as they began their first day in the new school building. We are planning to organize a grand opening in the fall."

* The Max Rayne Hand in Hand Bilingual School in Jerusalem is being completed and there will be an opening celebration on Oct. 21,2007 organized by the Jerusalem Foundation.

* Hand in Hand is moving ahead with a local parents group in Beer Sheva to open a fourth school with pre-kindergarten and kindergarten classes. Funding for this project has come from USAID’s second grant to Hand in Hand.

* Hand in Hand has printed the curriculum for the programs that they have developed on bilingualism, land use, religion, identity, history and bilingual education in early childhood. Amin comments– "I believe this will contribute greatly to a more unified school approach in these areas and will also reach others."

* Hand in Hand has been awarded the 2006 Lombardia Region Peace Award ( Italy) which the organization will receive in June.

* The third annual Victor J. Goldberg IIE Prize for Peace in the Middle East has been awarded to Hand ni Hand co-founders Amin Khalaf and Lee Gordon for their work in building Hand in Hand.

* Hand in Hand co-founder Amin Khalaf has received the 2007 Martha Lobe Prize for Democracy, Dialogue and Tolerance from the Jerusalem Foundation in recognition of his work in promoting Jewish-Arab coexistence and mutual respect in Jerusalem through bilingual, integrated childhood education.

Greg Myre of The New York Times published an important story about the demographics of Jerusalem today.

The article analyzes some of the implications of the statistics illustrated in the graph at left:

"In a 1967 census taken shortly after the war, the population of Jerusalem was 74 percent Jewish and 26 percent Arab. Today, the city is 66 percent Jewish and 34 percent Arab, with the gap narrowing by about 1 percentage point a year, according to the Jerusalem Institute for Israel Studies.

Jerusalem’s profound religious and historical significance makes its status perhaps the single most explosive issue in the Arab-Israeli conflict. And that status clearly would become even more contentious were the balance of the population to tip toward the Arabs. This is a specter that worries Israelis, even as the 40th anniversary of their victory in the June 1967 war approaches."

The article goes on to describe the well-known fact that Jerusalem remains highly segregated, in fact, it remains two separate cities– West Jerusalem, which is largely Jewish, and East Jerusalem, which is largely Arab.  While the author mentions the city’s weak economy, he does not state clearly that Jerusalem is, in fact, the poorest city in all of Israel.

The article also notes that the large majority of Israelis treasure Jerusalem but would not want to live there:

"A poll released last week captured the Israeli ambivalence over Jerusalem. More than 60 percent of Israelis said they would not want to give up Israeli control of the city’s holy sites, even as part of a peace agreement with the Palestinians. Yet 78 percent of Israelis said they would not consider living in Jerusalem or would prefer to live elsewhere in Israel."

One anecdote from a Jewish woman who decided to leave Jerusalem after being harassed by an ultra-orthodox woman who disapproved of her attire captures some of the angst that people feel about living in Jerusalem, but, in my view, this brief story only scratches the surface of the intolerance that ultra-Orthodox Jews, the haredim, have toward other Jews, not to mention anyone else of a different persuasion or ethnicity.

In my own experiences visiting Jerusalem on eleven occasions, I have felt unwelcome at the Kotel (this is the general description of the site of the Western Wall) almost every time that I go to pray at the Western Wall.  I’ve been harassed by the ultra-orthodox on multiple occasions.  Unlike many non-Orthodox Jews who now avoid going to the Wall to avoid being harassed, I’ve developed my own way of dealing with it:  I make sure to go to the Western Wall as many times as possible in order to assert the fact that the Holiest place in Judaism is not the exclusive territory of the haredim.

According to the article, Jews are leaving Jerusalem because a minority of Jewish fundamentalists are, in effect, chasing them away.  Unfortunately, this trend will only have the residual effect among Jews of leaving more polarized and intolerant people in Jerusalem.

The haredim are not likely to change their ways anytime soon.  If the Israeli government would officially recognize the legitimacy of Conservative and Reform Judaism and take concrete steps to officially allow greater religious pluralism among Jews in Israel, perhaps more Jews in Israel would want to live in Jerusalem and this would not be the poorest city in the State of Israel.  Such contructive change might have a positive ripple effect across a wide range of the socio-economic issues that plague Jerusalem.  Well, I can at least dream…   

An important opinion column in yesterday’s Wall Street Journal by Katherine Kersten, a columnist for the Minneapolis Star Tribune, titled "Shariah in Minnesota?", exposes the weak underbelly of our open, democratic society. 

Our policymakers need to think very hard about underestimating the political intent behind the tactics of fundamentalist activists who wish to use the tools of democracy and tolerance to subvert religious pluralism in this country.  Fundamentalists wish to impose their view of how things must be done on everyone else, and they are perfectly happy to use democracy to destroy democracy.

One of the things that makes America a great country is our openness to diversity and our tolerance of "the other".  A melting pot society only works, however, when everyone "melts" a bit to become woven into the rich tapestry that is America.

Minnesota has turned into an interesting test case due to a number of incidents that a reasonable person might consider part of a broader group’s attempts to faciliate a larger political agenda :

* Several years ago, Muslim taxi drivers at the Minneapolis-St.Paul International Airport started refusing to transport passengers carrying alcohol in their bags, demanding the right to discriminate among passengers;

* In November 2006 the now-celebrated case of the six "flying imams" occurred, where disruptive behavior by six imams before and immediately after boarding a flight raised suspicions among passengers and airline personnel, leading to the detention of the imams and more recently, to the following:

"Last week, the six imams filed suit in the U.S. district court in Minneapolis against US Airways and the Metropolitan Airports Commission, claiming discrimination and defamation.  Now some Muslim cashiers at Twin Cities Target stores have begun refusing to scan pork products, like bacon and pepperoni pizza, and insisting that other cashiers or the customers themselves do it."

Ms. Kersten observes:

"The events here suggest a larger strategy: By piggy-backing on our civil rights laws, Islamist activists aim to equate airport security with racial bigotry and aim to move slowly toward a two-tier legal system.  Intimidation is a crucial tool.  The "flying imams" lawsuit ups the ante by indicating that passengers who alerted airport authorities will be included as defendants."

Allowing such attempts to succeed today will undermine our open society and stand the notion of civil rights in this country on its head.  In my view, reversing bad legislation that may have "good intent" will exact an even greater cost on our socio-political institutions farther down the road.

Are we willing to allow mis-guided notions of tolerance and diversity to rule over common sense?  I hope not.   

Rabbi Michael Melchior recently participated in the fourth Global Forum for Combating Anti-Semitism.  Sheikh Abdullah Nimr Darwish, founder of the Islamic movement in Israel, made a very important speech in which he condemend Holocaust deniers.  I have excerpted a portion of the article covering the event, which was publsihed in Haaretz (click here for full article):

February 13, 2007

The founder of the Islamic Movement in Israel condemned Holocaust denial in the Muslim world on Sunday, rejecting statements by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Also, Darwish accused his audience of not understanding Muslims or their concerns, and he protested Israel’s refusal to support the recent Saudi Arabian peace initiative involving Hamas and Fatah. "Why are you trying to distance yourselves from Muslims as if they were the devil?" he said. …

In many conversations that I have had with experts on Islam about the absence of outrage against Muslim extremism by the so-called "Silent Majority" of Muslims, we invariably get caught up debating the question of the persistence of this deafening silence from moderate Muslims.

When a constructive Muslim voice is expressed in a public forum, we should all take note and remember the importance of the event and the  courageousness of such people.  The fact is that Islamic pluralists who speak out against hate invite threats and death edicts (fatwa) from fundamentalist extremists who actively promote anarchy and the cult of death through martyrdom thoughout the Middle East.

I don’t agree with everything that the Sheikh had to say, but I am willing to give him the room to be constructive and to ask for more Muslims to join him in bringin more voices to light from the Silent Majority.

Today’s New York Times featured an important Op-Ed contribution from Mark Taylor, who is a professor of religion and humanities at Williams College, on the need for critical thinking in religious study.  For a link to the full article, click here. Below I quote the parts of the article that resonated the most with me–

Any responsible curriculum for the study of religion in the 21st century must be guided by two basic principles: first, a clear distinction between the study and the practice of religion, and second, an expansive understanding of what religion is and of the manifold roles it plays in life. The aim of critical analysis is not to pass judgment on religious beliefs and practices — though some secular dogmatists wrongly cross that line — but to examine the conditions necessary for their formation and to consider the many functions they serve.

It is also important to explore the similarities and differences between and among various religions. Religious traditions are not fixed and monolithic; they are networks of symbols, myths and rituals, which evolve over time by adapting to changing circumstances. If we fail to appreciate the complexity and diversity within, and among, religious traditions, we will overlook the fact that people from different traditions often share more with one another than they do with many members of their own tradition.

If chauvinistic believers develop deeper analyses of religion, they might begin to see in themselves what they criticize in others. In an era that thrives on both religious and political polarization, this is an important lesson to learn — one that extends well beyond the academy. …

Until recently, many influential analysts argued that religion, a vestige of an earlier stage of human development, would wither away as people became more sophisticated and rational. Obviously, things have not turned out that way. Indeed, the 21st century will be dominated by religion in ways that were inconceivable just a few years ago. Religious conflict will be less a matter of struggles between belief and unbelief than of clashes between believers who make room for doubt and those who do not.

The warning signs are clear: unless we establish a genuine dialogue within and among all kinds of belief, ranging from religious fundamentalism to secular dogmatism, the conflicts of the future will probably be even more deadly.

In my view, this article is a clearly exposes the need for intelligent study as the basis for interfaith dialogue to establish common ground.  It reafirms the need for one person of faith to allow for another person’s different but equally strongly held belief system to coexist.  I am fully aware that many rational people are justifiably frustrated by the extremism of dogmatic fundamentalists, and I share this frustration with anyone who is deterministic– whether in their faith or in their secularism.

One should not, however, take the position that dogma, by definition, is unassailable through critical thinking.  To do so closes the door on an opportunity to find common ground and to achieve a synthesis through critical thinking.  For example, consider the reformation of Islam advocated by courageous people such as Irshad Manji through Project Ijtihad.

The real war against fundamentalism will not be won against the hard core extremists by trying to change their views.  It will be won by awakening, energizing, and empowering the very large and still very silent majority of those who can move against the extremists and disempower them from within.  As Professor Taylor argues, interfaith dialogue and critical thinking are important weapons in this war.   

Jerusalem
December 11, 2006

We stood on the side of the road in silence, looking across the valley at the Temple Mount and the Al-Aqsa Mosque from Mount Scopus. Only the gathering evening wind and the steady idle of the Mercedes taxi’s engine accompanied us while we looked out into the encroaching darkness.  It was almost 6 PM, and my Israeli driver, who has shepherded me through ten trips to Israel since 2002, had brought me to this historic site before my dinner meeting to enjoy a few quiet moments and admire the lights of Jerusalem.

We had just left the Kotel, where I observed the 32nd anniversary of my father’s passing by reciting the Jewish mourner’s prayer, the Mourner’s Kaddish, at the Western Wall.

As we contemplated the Old City, we heard a new sound.  A melodic and melancholy chant now blended with the swirling wind and rose through the valley from the Al-Aqsa Mosque to reach us on Mount Scopus.  It was the muezzin’s evening call to prayer , multiplying through a succession of loudspeakers from the minarets of the numerous mosques that dotted the darkening landscape in front of us.

“Do you know how to pray?” my driver asked, piercing the silence.

With my own recent prayers still in my head, I quickly replied, “Yes, of course I do.”

His query surprised me, since my own experience is that spirituality and prayer come from within and need no formal instruction.  But my first reaction misinterpreted what he was really saying.

“I don’t know how to pray”, he asserted. “I am a Jew, and I live in Israel, and that’s it. . . . I think that the Jews who live outside of Israel know much more about prayer than many Jews here in Israel.  To be a Jew outside of Israel, you have to want to be a Jew and want to learn how to pray.”

I felt saddened as I considered his heartfelt statement, but I didn’t know how to respond.  I closed my eyes and asked myself how differently he, an Israeli Jew, would feel about his own Jewish identity if the State of Israel actually embraced religious pluralism.

And for a moment, as I strained to hear the now fading melody of the muezzin, I imagined what that Israel would be like.

Photographs (click on image to enlarge)

The Western Wall in the foreground with the golden dome of Al-Aqsa Mosque above it, in a picture I took in June 2006.

The view of Al-Aqsa Mosque from Mount Scopus, December 11, 2006, at approximately 6 PM .

Moushumi Khan has written an excellent personal chronicle, which was published on November 1 in India Currents, about the extraordinary impact that Muhammad Yunus and Grameen Bank have had on her personal convictions and her professional life.

Mou and I met in 2005 through the Socrates Society at the Aspen Institute and are currently collaborating on new interfaith initiatives to promote greater tolerance and understanding in the United States and Europe between Muslims, Christians, and Jews.

I have reprinted her conclusion from the article below and encourage readers to read the full story:

The award of the Nobel Peace Prize to Muhammad Yunus and the Grameen Bank has wide-ranging significance. It is not only a victory for Yunus as an individual and for his visionary institution, it is a vote of confidence for a nation in desperate need of such international recognition. It is also an acknowledgement that the Muslim world has something valuable to offer. Bangladesh is at a critical juncture in its socio-political development while the Muslim world is more often feared than revered. The power of this award is heightened by the combination of micro-enterprise as a tool of economic empowerment, and the fact that it was innovated in a developing Muslim nation.

Perhaps the Nobel award for peace rather than for economics makes this point best. Not only has the Grameen Bank financed small business enterprises, it has demonstrated that the poor have the ability to improve their own lives, thus addressing one of the major sources of global conflict—economic disparities.

Yunus has given people hope, some through loans to fund their enterprises, others to believe that they can make a difference. He has demonstrated that we all have a stake in the world, that all people are creditworthy. He taught an idealistic girl, who thought that she had to be prime minister of Bangladesh to fix its problems, the practical lesson that we can all make a difference. He has taught the world that capitalism works when we all have a fair chance to access capital.

The example of Grameen’s success should not be lost on those who persist in arguing that promoting interfaith dialogue and reconciliation through economic empowerment is a pipe dream.

The example of Saudi Arabia shows us that affluence does not mean  individuals will not become radicalized and that education does not mean  frustrated people will not turn to terrorism.  But upward mobility at least means that violence and nihilism will not be their first or only choice when they choose to assert themselves as individuals.

Terrorists need to be marginalized, not mainstreamed.

I continue to believe that the economic empowerment of individuals– especially through promoting entrepreneurship for those at the bottom of the socio-economic ladder, can make a material and positive difference for peaceful social relations in the world.  Muhammad Yunus is showing the way– hopefully more countries will follow his beacon.