editorials
Collective Punishment for
Looking Jewish
W e struggle to contain our
indignation. The story is
upsetting. The video is chilling. The
apology was milquetoast. Lufthansa
Airlines blew it. But very few seem to
care. The saga began on May 4, when
a large group of Jewish passengers
were denied boarding on a connect-
ing Lufthansa flight from Frankfurt,
Germany, to Budapest, Hungary,
after several passengers reportedly
failed to comply with the airline’s
mask regulations on the first leg of
the trip from New York.

It is not clear how many pas-
sengers on the JFK-Frankfurt leg
ignored the mask rule. But it is clear
that all identifiable Jewish passen-
gers on the connecting flight were
punished for the offense. According
to the Lufthansa supervisor whose
remarks were recorded by passen-
gers, the airline’s intent for group
punishment was explicit: “Everyone
has to pay for a couple,” said the
supervisor. “It’s Jews coming from
JFK. Jewish people were the mess,
who made the problems.”
And so, a phalanx of German police
brandishing machine guns barred
identifiable Jews from boarding the
connecting flight, and Lufthansa
banned those passengers from pur-
chasing another ticket to Budapest
or anywhere else for 24 hours.

According to reports, there were
an estimated 135-170 Jews on the
Lufthansa flight, 80% of whom were
dressed in Chasidic garb. During
the flight, a pilot announced that
flight attendants were frustrated with
people blocking the galleys while
praying, and with having to repeat
themselves to remind people to
wear masks. Some of the Jewish
passengers on the Lufthansa flight
were part of a group on an annual
pilgrimage to visit the grave of Rabbi
Yeshaya Steiner, a wonder-working
rabbi who died in 1925 and is buried
in northeast Hungary.

But dozens of the Jewish pas-
sengers on the flight were not part
of the group or even going on the
pilgrimage. Nonetheless, anyone
who “looked Jewish” was denied
boarding in Frankfurt. As a result, the
connecting flight to Budapest, which
reportedly had close to 200 seats,
took off with only 20 passengers on
board. After reports and videos of the
incident went viral, Lufthansa issued
a lame “apology,” which failed to
acknowledge the enormity of the
offense, failed to articulate mean-
ingful remorse and sought to cast
blame for the mask violations on
a “large group” of Jewish passen-
gers on the first leg of the trip.

When that “apology” was roundly
criticized, Lufthansa’s CEO, Carsten
Spohr, called Rabbi Yehuda Teichtal
in Berlin, and told him that the antise-
Political Self-preservation
T he recent return of the Ra’am
Islamic party to Israel’s
precariously balanced government
shows just how significantly political
self-preservation motivates the
members of the eight-party coalition
led by Prime Minister Naftali Bennett
and Foreign Minister Yair Lapid.

When first formed a short 11
months ago, the Bennett-Lapid coa-
lition had 61 members — a razor-thin
majority in the 120-member Knesset.

Few believed the delicate coalition
could survive the rough and tumble
realities of Israeli political life. But it
has survived, even through the res-
ignation last month of Yamina party
leader Idit Silman, which shrank the
coalition ranks to a 60-seat dead-
lock with the opposition. Since the
loss of one more seat will topple the
Bennett-Lapid regime, every effort
is being made to keep the coalition
together, even as Bennett and Lapid
10 MAY 19, 2022 | JEWISHEXPONENT.COM
themselves jockey for positioning
for the prime minister post should
the government collapse and require
new elections.

What keeps the parties from stray-
ing too far is the fear of defeat in the
next election. Each of the coalition
parties compromised some aspect
of its historic aims in order to join
the ideologically diverse coalition,
and each faces an uncertain future
were new elections to be called now.

Ra’am, with four Knesset seats, is a
case in point.

Led by Mansour Abbas, Ra’am
is the first Arab party to join an
Israeli government. In doing so,
Abbas made a pragmatic decision
to table the Palestinian issue and
work instead to get practical ben-
efits for his constituents, many of
whom are Bedouin in the Negev.

Abbas has focused on issues like
housing and fighting crime. And he
has made some progress. But he
needs the coalition to survive in
order to achieve more.

Abbas’ pragmatism set an import-
ant precedent that will enable other
Arab parties to join a Zionist-led
government, similar to the Haredi
Orthodox parties that have histor-
ically put their disagreement with
Israel’s existence aside to join gov-
ernments and reap the benefit in
generous budgets for their schools
and social services, in protecting
their exemptions from the draft and
in maintaining Haredi hegemony
over the rabbinate.

Last month, however, Ra’am froze
its membership in the coalition in
response to the outbreak of violence
on the Temple Mount. Almost imme-
diately, Netanyahu’s Likud sched-
uled a no-confidence vote in the
Knesset, hoping to topple the gov-
ernment. By rejoining the coalition,
mitic incident shouldn’t have hap-
pened and that employees involved
had been suspended. No details
were provided.

What is almost as upsetting as
the deeply troubling Lufthansa
offense is the lack of more vocal
and active expressions of indigna-
tion and outrage about the incident
from the organized Jewish com-
munity and others. We complain
regularly about antisemitism and
its pernicious infection of our soci-
ety. We complain regularly about
the hateful victimization of Jews
and the targeting of the Jewish
community. The Lufthansa story
checks all those boxes. And yet, the
broader Jewish communal reaction
to the Lufthansa outrage has been
remarkably restrained.

Why is it that when the targets
of blatant antisemitism are Chasidic
Jews we don’t seem quite so
offended? JE
Abbas doomed, for now, any no-con-
fidence vote.

Similar political self-preservation
played out late last week when
Matan Kahana of the Yamina party
announced his resignation as minis-
ter of religious services. As a result,
Kahana will resume his seat in the
Knesset, pushing out Yom Tov Kalfon,
who is viewed as a “weak link” in
Yamina, and who many feared would
follow Silman and join the opposi-
tion. With Kalfon gone and Kahana in
place, Bennett strengthens his coali-
tion and helps ensure that one less
right-wing resignation threat could
topple his government and enable
Lapid to become interim prime min-
ister. The permutations are mind-bend-
ing, with political self-preservation a
recurring, potent motivator to keep-
ing the coalition together. How long
that lasts is anyone’s guess. JE



opinions & letters
Germany Has
Changed, Antisemitism Has Not
BY MICHAEL LAITMAN
A recent survey of Germans and Muslims
who live in Germany conducted by the
American Jewish Committee found that 60% of
both populations consider antisemitism to be a
widespread phenomenon in Germany that has
increased over the past 10 years.

But the study also brought to light the
wide gap between the two populations in
terms of the reasons for this hatred and how
deeply rooted antisemitism is in all sectors
of society.

The survey states that 34% of the general
German population and 54% of Muslims who
live in Germany agree with the statement,
“Jews today use their status as victims of
genocide during the Second World War in
their favor.” The survey also revealed that 18%
of Germans and 46% of Muslims agree with
the statement “Jews have too much power
in the media,” and similar percentages think
“Jews have too much power in politics.”
population is no longer a generation highly
conscious of the Holocaust and the Third
Reich, so what do they care? While Germans
may still express support for the Jews and
Israel because it remains a national obliga-
tion for them to do so, deep down the sorrow
and sense of guilt has disappeared. They
are already fed up with the issue and do not
understand what we want from them. Such
attitudes eat away at the status of Jews in
Germany who stay there because they feel
they are doing well — but one might ask, for
how much longer?
The same goes for the status of bilateral
relations between Germany and Israel. Israel
has considered Germany a strong ally in
Europe. Former Chancellor Angela Merkel,
for example, said in 2008 that Israel’s security
was part of Germany’s national interest. She
felt obliged to speak about it and expressed
her sympathy for the Jewish people because
of Germany’s past. She belonged to the gen-
eration for which that was common, a kind of
polite commitment that is quickly becoming
We Jews need to reach a point where we
become partners to one another, among
ourselves, so that our future does not depend
on external support.

This AJC poll was released at a time when
German authorities report record-high levels
of antisemitism. In 2021, 3,028 hate crimes
targeted Jews. That is the highest num-
ber registered since police began to track
reported antisemitic incidents in 2001.

I am not surprised by these statistics. I
evaluate them as a factual reality that does
not seem to improve over time. I have not
seen any decisive action by Jewish organi-
zations to eliminate this phenomenon. There
have only been formal measures: Antisemitic
incidents are widely reported, funds are allo-
cated to address the problem, an ineffective
campaign is carried out and then the cycle
begins again. Endless talk about the constant
threat to Jews without solving the problem is
an empty effort. It prevents nothing now, just
as it never prevented anything in the past.

German Jews should also take into
account the fact that German demographics
and mentality have changed. The current
irrelevant. A new government is in power,
and the mentality of the people has changed
in regard to Israel.

In the volatile world we live in today, there are
no guarantees of unbreakable partnerships.

We Jews need to reach a point where we
become partners to one another, among
ourselves, so that our future does not depend
on external support. We can trust no one but
ourselves. Our nation was founded in order to
realize the principle “love your friend as your-
self” and to become a conduit for this princi-
ple to all humanity — “a light unto the nations.”
In the final analysis, the more divided we are,
the more antisemitism rises; and the closer
we are to each other, the more the world will
have a positive view of us. JE
Michael Laitman is the founder and presi-
dent of Bnei Baruch Kabbalah Education &
Research Institute. This op-ed was originally
published by Israel Hayom.

Abortion Choice a Personal One
The op-ed by Rabbi Yaakov Menken (The Torah Is
Unequivocally Pro-life,” May 12) is interesting in the case he
tries to build in saying that the Torah is “pro-life.” I agree that
the Torah is in favor of life.

Where we disagree is whether being in favor of life means
that the Torah would side with the so-called “pro-life” move-
ment. Even Menken acknowledges that the Torah has “authority
over moral judgments.” Moral judgments are what we as
individuals use to lead our lives. Perhaps under a Jewish
theocracy it could be banned. I note, however, that even
in Israel abortion is not banned, but a lower percentage of
women tend to get them as compared to the rest of the
world. Apparently, women are using their moral judgments
to make these decisions.

There is no place in Torah, however, to find support for the
idea that a secular government ruling over a diverse commu-
nity of varying beliefs, has the right to weigh in on the side of
a fetus against a woman’s choice based on bodily autonomy.

Under our secular law, as it has always been, a person gets
legal rights once born alive.

The choice to get or not get an abortion is an agonizingly
personal one. Let’s leave it to the woman, and whoever she
might choose to consult, to make it.

Jules Mermelstein, Dresher
Op-ed Left Out Part of the Story
While I appreciate greatly the number of articles about the
abortion issue in the most recent edition of the Jewish
Exponent, I was extremely disturbed by the piece used to
represent the Torah-observant opinion. The Torah is most
definitely not unequivocally pro-life as described by Rabbi
Yaakov Menken (The Torah Is Unequivocally Pro-life,” May
12) in his piece that leaves out several verses from our holy
books specifically addressing this critical issue.

In Mishna Oholot, Chapter 7 verse 6, our sages wrote
2,000 years ago, “If a woman is having trouble giving birth,
they cut up the child in her womb and bring it forth limb by
limb, because her life comes before the life of [the child]. But
if the greater part has come out, one may not touch it, for
one may not set aside one person’s life for that of another.”
In Exodus Chapter 21, verses 22-23, the Torah states, “And
should men quarrel and hit a pregnant woman, and she mis-
carried but there is no fatality, he shall surely be punished,
when the woman’s husband makes demands of him, and he
shall give restitution according to the judges orders. But if
there is a fatality, you shall give a life for a life.”
While these verses are very specific and graphic in nature,
they both obviously are quite clear about one thing: In the
Jewish tradition, the life, health and well-being of the mother
takes precedence over the fetus inside her and its unfortu-
nate loss is not considered a fatality on par with the loss of
the mother carrying it. JE
Bettina Dunn, Rhawnhurst
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 11