editorials
Russia Targets the Jewish Agency
T here’s a lot of uncertainty surrounding the
Jewish Agency for Israel office in Moscow.

Here is what we know: Last month, Russia’s Justice
Ministry called for the Jewish Agency to end
operations in that country. Last week, a Russian court
held a preliminary hearing on the Justice Ministry’s
application to close the office. The next hearing is
scheduled for Aug. 19.

The Jewish Agency is the quasi-governmental
body that, among other things, helps Jews immi-
grate to Israel. Russian Jews need the Jewish
Agency’s presence in their country to help facili-
tate aliyah efforts, which have surged since Russia
invaded Ukraine.

The potential closing of the Jewish Agency
office in Moscow is serious business — a move
that would have significant symbolic as well as
practical implications. The threatened closure
brings to mind the dark decades of the Soviet
Union when Jews were barred from leaving that
country and were punished for trying to do so.

That changed in the 1980s when the Iron Curtain
parted to allow emigration. Since 1989, some 1.7
million Jews have emigrated from the Former
Soviet Union, with more than a million of them
going to Israel.

Russian authorities have explained the request
for closure based upon the assertion that the
Russian Jews need the
Jewish Agency’s
presence in their country
to help facilitate aliyah
efforts. Jewish Agency’s collection of immigrant data vio-
lates Russia’s privacy laws. But no one takes that
claim seriously. Instead, most agree that the move
is retaliation for Israel’s new leadership, headed
by Prime Minister Yair Lapid, speaking out against
Russia’s unprovoked invasion of Ukraine.

When Russia first invaded Ukraine, Naftali
Bennett was Israel’s prime minister, and Lapid was
foreign minister. Bennett sought to position him-
self as a neutral. He traveled to Russia early in the
war to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin
and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and
sought to mediate potential peace talks between
Ukraine and Russia. That never happened. But
even as Bennett was playing the neutral, his
foreign minister was vocal in joining Western con-
demnation of Russia’s aggression.

Another cause for mounting tension is Russia’s
increasing embrace of Iran, a country whose
leaders regularly call for Israel’s destruction.

Last month, Putin traveled to Iran for talks with
Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. This was
Putin’s first visit to a country outside the former
USSR since the invasion of Ukraine, and it sent a
clear message.

Israel is watching these developments closely.

Lapid has warned Russia against closing the
Jewish Agency office, saying that doing so would
hurt the relationship between the two countries.

Israel wants to send a diplomatic team to Russia
to discuss the issue, and that’s a good idea. This
is not a matter that should be debated by the
parties on the public stage. It is a serious matter
that requires careful diplomacy that can only be
handled in private.

And diplomatic navigation will likely require
acceptance of the fact that, in a world of bad
choices, it is more important for Russian Jews to
have access to a Jewish Agency office than to
have Israel join the Western boycott of Russia.

Quite simply, Israel must avoid poking the Russian
bear. JE
Realpolitik in the MD-4 Primary
I srael isn’t much of an issue to the voters of Prince
George’s County, Maryland. But last month’s
Democratic primary in Maryland’s 4th Congressional
District, which includes most of the county, attracted
millions of dollars in dueling pro-Israel campaign
contributions. In the end, the better candidate won — former
state’s attorney Glenn Ivey, who has a strong
record of performance and communal involve-
ment, prevailed and will likely be elected in
November in the heavily blue district. Although
Ivey shares many of the progressive positions of
his defeated rival, former Rep. Donna Edwards,
including on gun control, health care and climate
change, they differ on Israel.

Ivey supports continued U.S. security assis-
tance for Israel, embraces a further strengthening
of the U.S.-Israel relationship and opposes the
boycott, divestment and sanctions movement
and other efforts to delegitimize the Jewish state.

Edwards’ record in office was less than stellar
when it came to Israel.

Enter the pro-Israel money, for both candi-
dates. Nearly $6 million went to Ivey from United
14 AUGUST 4, 2022 | JEWISHEXPONENT.COM
Democracy Project, a super PAC affiliated with
AIPAC. Another pro-Israel group, Democratic
Majority for Israel, spent an additional $426,000
in support of Ivey. The Washington Post reported
that about half of Ivey’s $1 million in campaign
contributions also came from AIPAC donors.

Edwards received some $720,000 in PAC money
from J Street.

How was the money used? Not to play up the
strengths of either candidate and largely not to
address substantive policy differences between
them. Instead, the money was used to fund attack
ads, many of which ended with these words:
“Donna Edwards, aloofness from the details of
local problem solving, notorious for inattention to
constituent services. UDP is responsible for the
content of this ad.”
In the blizzard of ads leading up to the primary
vote, Israel was not mentioned.

So, what have we learned from this $7 million
exercise? We learned a lesson in contemporary
politics and the outsized influence national spe-
cial-interest groups can have in local political
campaigns. The expenditures were entirely legal,
above board and transparent. But the sheer mag-
nitude of the effort is noteworthy.

Members of special interest groups, including
AIPAC, have lent support to political candidates of
all stripes for decades. Many did so in a very pub-
lic way, while others worked more quietly behind
the scenes. Both were effective. But now, with
changes in how supporters can organize and fund
political messaging, AIPAC and other groups have
chosen to take the more public approach through
affiliated super PACs. And they have mastered the
art of negative ads.

We know from media reports that many vot-
ers in Prince George’s County had never heard
of AIPAC and that some expressed concern
and confusion when informed about millions in
“outside money” being invested in their local
campaign. But we also know that the investment
succeeded. Ivey overcame an initial significant
early polling deficit and won the election by 16
percentage points.

It is hard to argue with success. We are happy
that the better candidate won. But the message of
Israel got lost. JE



opinion
The Divine Call to Act on
Climate Change
BY RABBI DEVORAH LYNN
A s is appropriate for a people consumed by
books, texts and words, the commemoration
of Tisha B’Av, the commemoration of the destruction
of both Jerusalem Temples, is introduced by a pun in
the very first word of its scriptural reading, the Book
of Lamentations.

“Eicha,” the first word, means “lamentation”:
“Woe is me,” “Oy vey iz mir” or “How did it come
to this?”
“Ayeka” makes its first appearance in the Torah
way back in Genesis, in the Garden of Eden,
where God confronts Adam with “Ayeka,” which
means “Where are you?” in a challenge to Adam
to come out of hiding after eating the forbidden
fruit. Eicha and Ayeka are the exact same conso-
nants, very different vowels and drastically differ-
ent meanings. “How did it come to this?” versus
“Where are you?”
We can now breathe with the surprise good
news of a deal, the Inflation Reduction Act of
2022, brokered between Senate Majority Leader
Chuck Schumer (N.Y.) and Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.

Va.), but we cannot rest easy. It’s a start, but not
enough for a climate emergency and begs the
two questions above. How did we get to this point
of divisiveness, a nation torn apart and unable to
address the climate crisis, and where am I as an
individual actor?
Abraham Joshua Heschel speaks clearly to us
on this topic: “Some are guilty but all are respon-
sible.” When we look at the root of “responsible,”
we see “response.” Have we been hiding like
Adam in the bushes because we are too dis-
tracted and overwhelmed by the climate reality to
respond with active citizenship?
What we thought was responsible citizenship,
like cooking with gas and recycling plastic, is yet
another marketing ploy, backed by enormous fos-
sil fuel profits to distract us from the real problem
they are creating with dirty energy and plastic,
both made from oil. The fossil fuel companies’
plan B is to push more plastic on us to offset the
decline in their energy oil earnings.

We may not be guilty, but we sure are gull-
ible. This strategy is cunning and easy to fall for.

Nevertheless, this is in no way to excuse us from
a response.

We must choose to be loud, vocal, consistent,
active citizens and hold our elected officials
accountable. Ten or 20 years ago, we didn’t have
the technological solutions to our climate prob-
lem. But now we do. Widespread use of renew-
able energy sources, electrifying transportation
and buildings, elimination of plastic and smart
changes in waste, agriculture, livestock and fish-
eries will give us a cleaner, more beautiful world
and survivable earth. And now there are a number
of citizen groups to work with in our community:
Jewish Earth Alliance, Citizens’ Climate Lobby,
Interfaith Power and Light and Dayenu.

Making the right personal choices is not enough.

Elections have consequences. We must work for
the election of courageous climate activists in
Congress and at every level of government. The
Environmental Voter Project is getting non-vot-
ing yet declared environmentalists to commit to
being regular voters. All our elected government
officials must have the will to make bold changes,
enact courageous legislation and help us to make
climate-friendly choices.

It is a healthy response to allow for some time,
certainly the 25-hour fast of Tisha B’Av, to wallow
in our grief and sorrow at how we got here. Let
us howl from the heart “Eicha” of a world gone
upside down. However, the next day we must
lift ourselves up to ask with blinders off, Ayeka?
Where are we in responsibility and response? And
what are we going to do about it? As Paul Hawken
writes in “Drawdown,” “From the earth’s point
of view, there’s no difference between a climate
denier and someone who understands the prob-
lem but actually doesn’t do anything.”
Our “how” must have a vision that ultimately
facilitates real accountability and effective action.

Remember that with the Roman destruction of
the Second Temple, a group of Jewish survivors
evacuated to the city of Yavneh and saved our
traditional values while relinquishing the sacrificial
priestly system that was no longer sustainable.

We must answer the question that God posed
to Adam, Ayeka, “Where are you?” in the same
way that our ancestors did when Jerusalem was
destroyed. They stood up, took responsibility and
created a new form of Judaism that has lasted
2,000 years. It turns out that Eicha, “Woe is me!”
and Ayeka, “Where are you?” are directly related.

Responding to the latter will lead to the solutions
we need to save this world. JE
Rabbi Devorah Lynn is the co-chair of Jewish
Earth Alliance, a Washington, D.C.-based grass-
roots network of communities calling on Congress
to act on climate.

Letters should be related to articles that have run in the
print or online editions of the JE, and may be edited for
space and clarity prior to publication. Please include your
first and last name, as well your town/neighborhood of
residence. Send letters to letters@jewishexponent.com.

letters Ignoring BDS Is Dangerous
For reasons known only to him, Mitchell Bard
wants to minimize the virulently anti-Jewish boy-
cott, divestment and sanctions movement — a
modern tactic employed to advance an age-old
hatred and bias — as well as the rampant attacks
against Jewish people and institutions.

To illustrate his claim, Bard (“Why Does Anyone
Care About BDS Campaigns on American College
Campuses?”, July 21) cherry-picks, listing some of
Congress’ leading anti-Israel activists and their
alma maters.

Bard neglects a host of other influentials in
government who work to eliminate or weaken
the US-Israel relationship or otherwise harm the
Jewish state, including by giving hundreds of
millions of fungible dollars to help the Palestinian
Authority and the United Nations Relief and
Works Agency — and their alma maters. Among
these are foreign-policy advisers for members of
Congress, State Department officials and bureau-
crats, and those serving in current or previous
presidential administrations. Then there is the
world of journalists, think-tank experts, lobbyists
and corporate leaders. All of these have spent
time on a campus.

No one knows the extent of or long-term impli-
cations of the worsening anti-Jewish indoctrina-
tion on America’s campuses.

All Jew-hatred — whether BDS or other guises
— must be identified and exposed and challenged
and combated no matter where it takes place,
whether on campus or elsewhere.

Steve Feldman, executive director
Greater Philadelphia ZOA
Mastriano Ads Unprotected Speech
I would add to your description of Doug Mastriano’s
political ad (“Mastriano Called Out for Link to
Extremist Social Media Site,” July 28), the fact
that though he himself did not make antisemitic
statements, he implicitly approved of and agreed
with the violent, abusive antisemitic ideas and
language. It is the prevailing standard in political cam-
paigns and ads for the candidate to write or state
their name, saying, “I have read or reviewed this
ad and approve of its content.” Failing such a dis-
claimer, Mastriano’s ads must be blocked because
they represent an unprotected form of speech, as
his language is intended to incite violence.

David Herman
Elkins Park
JEWISHEXPONENT.COM 15