Prime Minister Lapid
W hen Yair Lapid became the
caretaker prime minister of
Israel on July 1 — a position he will hold
at least until the next round of elections
scheduled for November — he offered
a simple yet profound statement of his
vision for Israel: “Jewish, democratic,
liberal, big, strong, advanced and
prosperous.” Lapid is a political “centrist.” He is a
secular Jew from the “Tel Aviv bubble”
— something akin to the East Coast or
Beltway elite. His is a patriotic Zionist
who supports the establishment of a
Palestinian state. He believes that the
Israeli economy must be based on
free-market principles. And, despite
very real, existential threats from Iran
— which he pledges to monitor closely
— he does not believe that the whole
world is against Israel.

Lapid’s vision for the Jewish state
is full integration into the world com-
munity while continuing to strengthen
Israel’s close relationship with the
United States. He recognizes Israel’s
responsibility to help lead the world-
wide struggle against antisemitism,
which is also tied to efforts to delegit-
imize the Jewish state.

Lapid’s speech was inspiring. But,
understandably, it lacked a clear game
plan for fulfilling his vision. He is, after
all, working with the same fragile, dis-
parate coalition government as former
Prime Minister Naftali Bennett — a
construct which was largely orches-
trated by Lapid himself a little more
than a year ago, in the then-successful
effort to prevent Benjamin Netanyahu
from returning to power.

In the process of forming the
Bennett-led government, Lapid did
something audacious. Even though
Lapid’s Yesh Atid party had more
elected Knesset seats than any other
coalition partner, Lapid agreed not to
become prime minister and to give
the prize to Bennett, of the much
smaller, ultranationalist Yamina party.

If their government lasted more than
two years, or if their government fell
and Yamina was part of the reason,
Lapid would become prime minister.

That’s what happened.

Lapid is Israel’s 14th prime minis-
ter. He is the country’s first non-right-
wing leader in two decades, and
Israel’s Prime minister Yair Lapid and
France’s PresiIdent Emmanuel Macron at
the Elysee palace in Paris, France.

one of the few Israeli prime ministers
without significant military experi-
ence. And his rise to power was also
atypical. Lapid is a former TV jour-
nalist and news anchor, who many
initially dismissed as an intellectual
lightweight, who lacked the expe-
rience to navigate the complexities
of national politics, and too good
looking. But he persevered. And
he has been remarkably success-
ful. After the 2013 election, Lapid
joined Netanyahu’s government and
became finance minister, only to be
fired along with fellow moderate
Tzipi Livni. He then settled into oppo-
sition until the 2021 election, which
enabled him to be the kingmaker
and chart his own political course.

As caretaker prime minister
between now and November, Lapid
will have the political bully pulpit of
the prime minister’s office. He will
have the opportunity to convince
voters that their future is brighter
with his moderate policies than they
are with the right-leaning politics of
Netanyahu and his political allies. On
that score, Lapid has an uphill battle.

But he has surprised us before, and
he could do so again.

In the interim, we wish Yair Lapid
much success. JE
Johnson gets the boot
T hree years ago, many British
Jewish voters were in a quandary
as they evaluated their political
choices in advance of parliamentary
elections. The Labour Party, which
most Jews had historically considered
home, was led by Jeremy Corbyn, a
myopic antisemite who was hostile
to Israel and was chummy with its
enemies. And there was mounting
evidence that the Labour Party itself
was infected with antisemitism.

The leading alternative was the
pro-Brexit Conservative Party, led
by Boris Johnson, who appeared to
be a Donald Trump knockoff — com-
plete with Islamophobia and impos-
sible hair.

The Brits and the country’s Jews
were spared Corbyn, but they got
the full Johnson. That included
what one commentator described
12 JULY 14, 2022 | JEWISHEXPONENT.COM
as a toxic reign by a man who was
“deceitful, narcissistic, inconsistent,
undisciplined, unethical, unserious,
and indifferent to the institutions
and norms that sustain democracy.”
Johnson resigned last week after a
mass walkout by ministers and other
members of his administration.

Johnson was like a caricature of a
British prime minister: faux populist
and faux erudite. He carried out the
Brexit plan, which seems to be shrink-
ing Britain’s footprint. He scoffed
when the COVID-19 pandemic began,
and the country was in lockdown, only
to end up in the intensive care unit
of a hospital, with a “50-50 [chance]
whether they were going to have to
put a tube down my windpipe.”
Johnson’s term in office was cha-
otic and scandal prone. There was,
for example, “Partygate,” where
Johnson attended parties that vio-
lated COVID precautions while
the rest of the country was in lock-
down, and then lied about it. He
became the first prime minister to
be fined by police for breaking the
law. And then there was the time
Johnson asked Queen Elizabeth II
to prorogue Parliament — that is,
shut it down — during the debate
over Brexit. The queen complied.

But the Supreme Court found the
action to be illegal, and Johnson was
forced to publically apologize to the
queen for embarrassing her.

Although Johnson’s tenure of scan-
dal and controversy has come to
an end, he will stay on as caretaker
until the Conservatives pick a new
party leader, who will become prime
minister. There is a line forming. Most
anticipate that the party will select
someone “a bit less exciting” than
Johnson. And that makes sense.

But what about the Jews? Johnson’s
win over Corbyn and Labour’s antisem-
itism was a big deal. And notwithstand-
ing all of his other problems, Johnson
proved to be a strong supporter of
both the State of Israel and the U.K.’s
Jewish community. So, what’s next?
Although there doesn’t seem to be
an obvious successor to Johnson, the
U.K.’s Jewish Chronicle reports that
Grant Shapps, current transport sec-
retary and the most senior Jewish
politician in the cabinet, is a signif-
icant contender. Shapps had been
one of Johnsons’ staunchest allies and
a frequent fixture on news channels
defending government decisions.

We join our British cousins in hop-
ing for less excitement and more
serious and honest leadership. JE
Photo by Eliot Blondet /Abaca/Sipa USA
editorials



opinion
Curtailing abortion rights undermines
religious freedom
FATIMA ARGUN AND WALTER RUBY | SPECIAL TO JE
sdominick / iStock / Getty
A s adherents of the two largest minority faith
groups in the United States, Judaism and
Islam, we strongly protest the Supreme Court’s
overturning Roe v. Wade, the landmark SCOTUS
decision guaranteeing the right to abortion.

This regressive decision not only tramples on
the fundamental right of women to control their
own bodies but is a transgression on the religious
freedom and values of members of our respec-
tive faiths. While the decision does not expressly
endorse Christian theological beliefs, its honor-
ing only those constitutional liberty rights that
are “deeply rooted in our history and tradition”
implicitly does so by disregarding the diverse
beliefs and values long not found to be sufficiently
“rooted.” As such, it represents a deeply worrying
precedent in which the highest court in the land
has adopted the dictates of Christian theology
to justify a ruling that will now compel women in
states that abolish abortion — including members
of our own faiths — to carry a fetus to term.

In addition to its troubling adoption of only
those historical values held by a limited segment
of our Christian population, a result at least
implicitly violative of the separation of church
and state guaranteed by the First Amendment of
the Constitution, the decision known as Dobbs
v. Jackson Women’s Health disregards serious
issues of the right to privacy inherent to both our
faith traditions. The decision also raises deeply
worrying questions as to how comfortable or
safe American Muslims and Jews will be in a
nation ever more overtly defined by the most
inflexible and doctrinaire segments of the larger
and more diverse Christian community.

According to a May 2022 Pew Research Center
poll, 83 percent of American Jews believe abor-
tion should be legal in all or most cases. Among
Muslims, a poll by the authoritative Institute for
Policy and Understanding (ISPU) found a substan-
tial majority of 56-37 in support of legal abortion
in all or most cases.

In that context, it is dismaying to hear some voices
referring to the Court’s permitting states to ban
abortion as “Christian Sharia.” Sharia (Islamic law)
does not demand the banning of abortion either
in the Muslim world or here in the United States;
the Dobbs decision is far more akin to an expres-
sion of Christian fundamentalism pure and simple.

While there are important Muslim theological voices
on both sides of the issue, just as there are in the
Jewish community, the fact remains that for both our
faith traditions, the life of the mother always takes
precedence over that of the unborn child.

As for the all-important question of when life
begins, Muslim scholars point to different opin-
ions ranging from 40 days, at which time the
Prophet Muhammad said human beings are “con-
stituted in the womb,” to 120 days, when the soul
is believed to enter the fetus. In Judaism, the
Torah, the Mishnah and the Talmud all consider
a fetus to be a part of its mother’s body until
delivery. It is not coincidental that the Hebrew
word for soul is neshamah, meaning “breath.”
The predominant opinion in both our faiths is that
forcing a woman to carry to term a pregnancy that
she does not want or that may endanger her life
is morally wrong.

For these reasons, the Court’s striking down
of Roe v. Wade appears as nothing less than a
Christianization of American law, which is per-
ceived by our minority faith communities as a peril
to the principles of religious pluralism and govern-
mental neutrality. The majority opinion’s new rule in
Dobbs that the relevant constitutional rights be lim-
ited to those “deeply rooted in our history and tra-
dition” carries us back 200 years to a more overtly
“Christian” America in which women could not
vote or own property, and African Americans were
slaves — and clearly dismisses the present reality
of a diverse and pluralistic 21st century America.

Jews and Muslims are prepared to rigorously
challenge the Court’s overt institutionalization
of Evangelical and Catholic doctrine into U.S.

law. Even before the striking down of Roe v.

Wade, Congregation L’Dor Va-Dor, a synagogue in
Boynton Beach, sued Florida over its ban on abor-
tions after 15 weeks, arguing that it imposes “the
laws of other religions upon Jews.” Muslim experts
on sharia and constitutional law argue that Muslim
Americans similarly have standing to sue against
abortion bans that interfere with their religious
exercise. Similar challenges based on the same
principles are expected to ensue in the near future.

We strongly urge those spearheading this bat-
tle in our respective communities to join forces in
challenging this state-imposed diminution of our
religious freedoms. In so doing, American Muslims
and Jews across America will show in one more
way how they can stand together in support of
pluralism, enhanced interfaith understanding and
democracy — societal values that make Muslim
and Jewish life sustainable in America. JE
Walter Ruby and Fatima Argun are leaders of
JAMAAT (Jews and Muslims and Allies Acting
Together), a Washington-area grassroots inter-
faith organization.

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. JEWISHEXPONENT.COM
13