Editorial (July 24, 2009)

Who is a Jewish pupil?

HOW do you define an individual as Jewish? This thorny question arose again this month when a British court ruled that a school was discriminatory in knocking back a student enrolment application.

JFS, a London Orthodox Jewish school, with the support of the United Synagogue, had argued that its decision was based on religion, not race or ethnicity, but the court rejected that argument.

The plaintiff was the Jewish father of a child whose mother had converted to Judaism under a Progressive rabbi.

But as the head of Britain’s Movement for Reform Judaism, Rabbi Tony Bayfield said it was not an issue about the admission policy of any particular school, but about a court defining such policies for Jewish schools, a development he opposes, even if it is to the detriment of the student in question.

There have been the occasional admission disputes in Australia’s Jewish schools based on differences over Jewish identity, and a local court might well define the proof of Jewish identity as the applicant’s religious practice, rather than the halachic precept of matrilineal descent.

Defining “Who is a Jew?” is a perennial Jewish argument, and there are no right or wrong answers. But it is an argument “within the family”, so to speak, and that is ideally where it should stay.

Racial discrimination is abhorrent and, moreover, Judaism is not by any definition a racial grouping. In a pluralistic society, schools should have the right to discriminate positively in order to promote a learning environment in which Jewish religion and culture are promoted.

But such policies are never absolute, nor should they be, and a small number of non-Jewish students are enrolled in our Jewish schools.

In borderline areas of identity, such as the case in Britain, the schools’ judgement on admissions in these instances needs to be especially circumspect, sensitive and guided by a strong measure of commonsense.

If schools make heavy-handed decisions, they will invite litigation, which will bring the courts into the picture to impose rulings — and that is not in the best interests of the schools, of any students applying to enrol or their families.

An unreasonable demand

THE United States, at the behest of Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, recently sent a message to Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu demanding he prevent a private Jewish developer from constructing 20 apartments on his East Jerusalem property.

The US State Department defended the demand on the grounds the US does not want Israel or the Palestinians to take any action that would prejudge the outcome of final-status negotiations.

We agree that it is important for both sides not to take action that would prejudge the outcome of peace talks. However, forcing the cessation of the project in question would do just that.

As Netanyahu pointed out in his cabinet meeting on Sunday, just as Israel does not prevent Arabs from living in Jewish neighbourhoods, nor should it prevent Jews from living in Arab neighbourhoods.

The suggestion by Abbas that these few apartments would shift the demographic balance of East Jerusalem defies logic.

Setting aside the larger issue of Israel’s claim of sovereignty over all of Jerusalem, given the fact that this construction project does not materially upset the demographic status quo, the Israeli government was right to reject demands to intervene in a private matter.

This flap over Jerusalem is only the latest incident in a period of escalating tension in US-Israel relations as a result of a growing number of demands that the US is making on Israel.

It is not too late for the US to review this policy, which has achieved nothing except to actually increase Israeli and Palestinian distrust of each other and of the US.

It is important to recall that as recently as last November, then-Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert was engaged in high-level peace negotiations with Abbas in the absence of a settlement freeze or curbs on Jewish construction in Jerusalem.

US President Barack Obama, who in a recent meeting with American-Jewish leaders asked them to “engage in self-reflection” over the peace process, should consider taking some of his own advice.

Perhaps it is time for Obama to ask himself whether the strategy of making unilateral demands on Israel as a precursor to peace talks brings the region any closer to peace, or instead drives the Israelis and Palestinians further away from the negotiating table., Kron, Israel, housing, Jerusalem