If it is the first, it would suggest Darfur is a priority but not Congo (for example). But if it is the second, then one might conclude (reluctantly) that Darfur was being addressed about as well as it can be (which I actually more or less believe, on admittedly limited knowledge of what is being done), and pick another issue. Congo might be one of several that are deserving.

I am not sure which of the criteria I mention is really the more relevant one, given scarce resources (and scarce fasting ability). And maybe I am taking a “too political” view to it, but that’s an occupational hazard for me. For better or worse, political systems often remain the most effective vehicles for collective action. But even if NGOs are ultimately more effective, I think the logic is much the same.

http://www.fastforgaza.net/

It just so happens that I learned about it on Tzom Tammuz, but it seems not to have anything to do with today’s fasting.

Thank you for your thoughtful and well argued response.

A couple of points – since it seems we are now exchanging ideas and analysis.

1. If there is every a follow-up post on how and what criteria we decide to fast over another group’s suffering in the Jewish tradition then I think that would be most interesting (and perhaps more relevant to JCarrot). I do understand that this might be a broader conversation than can be enumerated in an exchange of blogpost comments…so we should leave it there.

2. I appreciate your recognition that we may have chosen to fast or sympathize with Darfur at the expense of the Congolese (or other groups) out of simplicity or out of the realization that this is a “clear” case of genocide – the same crime that was committed against the Jews. I would submit, however, that the movement around Darfur is not just a coincidence of circumstances as you have stated it – but a deliberate attempt to frame the Darfur crisis in a way that fits an American (and yes, Jewish American and Israeli) interests. This framing turns what is an ongoing crisis that has its roots in a 30-year civil war (similar to the Congo) into a morality tale where an Arab government is persecuting and committing genocide against innocent Christian and animist tribes in the Darfur region. Let’s not forget that Darfur has its own rebels – many of which have committed atrocities themselves. This is not a clear case of genocide any more than the Congo. It’s the War on Terror type of framing by the Bush administration that has called us to action. So while I feel that so many of us are good intentioned in our desire to scream out for Darfur – we need be much more wary about whose interests we actually serve. Are we humanitarians? Or are we diverting our attention from crises like Iraq and Israel-Palestine for which we would have to look in the mirror to understand. For a good analysis on this I would see Mahmoud Mamdani’s piece on the politics of naming: http://www.lrb.co.uk/v29/n05/mamd01_.html

3. I recognize the sympathy you feel for those Palestinians who are suffering under Israeli blockade and occupation. The point of this comment is not to point the finger back and claim that Israel is entirely to blame for its wars and crises. I’m not nearly that naive. I also appreciate your mentioning of Rabbis for Human Rights. They do amazing work. Maybe they’ll even do a fast the next time Israel bulldozes a Palestinian home or annexes land that belongs to Palestinian farmers.

I also appreciate that you have, as you wrote, been a long time activist for peace, and I never meant to argue that we, as American Jews, are wholly responsible for Palestinian suffering.

All of that said – I find the argument that Palestinians, and themselves alone, are to blame for their suffering and that “there is no partner” to be a tired argument. It is true – Palestinian leadership has had its follies. But this does not excuse occupation and blockade. It does not excuse settlements (the US, now under Obama, is apparently still permitting Israel to build settlements – (http://haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1098716.html) and home demolitions, a wall that annexes land and a blockade that starves children. It does not excuse responding to rocket fire from a militant group by bombing and killing hundreds if not thousands of innocents as Israel did over New Years. It does not excuse the bombing of Beirut, the clearest symbol of Lebanon’s sovereignty as a retaliation for Hezbollah’s activity in the south of that country. We, as a community, decry that the United Nations is out to violate Israel’s sovereignty (http://jta.org/news/article/20.....:14:22:00Z) by holding it to internationally recognized standards of human rights – but we applaud or even urge Israel to violate the sovereignty of others.

Are these examples not the folly of Israeli leadership? Is it not the folly of American Jewish leadership and even progressives who support these actions because they support Israel no matter what?

Again, the central point is not that we alone have responsibility for these atrocities – but are these Palestinians any less worthy of our sympathy? In fact, aren’t they more worth of our sympathy considering that it was the creation of the state of Israel (which I would argue was just) that ultimately resulted in their suffering?

The blogpost that you provided ponders why there are still Palestinian refugee camps and blames it on their leadership. Some of this is true. But it is distasteful and irresponsible to point the finger while Israel has never acknowledged its role in creating these camps or declared its remorse for the creation of more refugees in this world (of which we were many when we came to Israel in the first place)?

At any rate – I want to thank you for your thoughtfulness in your response.

Alan.

You can read an interesting analysis here: http://tr.im/rffgcmps

Rabbis for Human Rights: http://www.rhr-na.org/

`//rite On!
,\\ark Hurvitz
http://www.davka.org

Thank you for your response. You raise some excellent points. And, I appreciate your taking the time and effort to lift the issue to higher level.

How do we as a community determine which issues beyond our own obvious immediate self-interest should concern us and cause us to respond publicly? I am not sure we can answer this question here, though it is important always to keep in mind.

Certainly the Congolese are as deserving of our compassion as are the Darfurians. The fact that the civil war has continued in the Congo and killed over five million people is a horror of great magnitude. You are probably correct that the “complicated history” makes this issue difficult to explain to others. Not to make light of the situation, but there are enough abominations in our world to which we would want to call attention that I, we each, would indeed need to become a hunger artist to make each abhorrence known. And, so, it seems that the Jewish community has focused its attention on the situation in Darfur, because at least *it seems* as though what is happening there is a clear case of genocide. Similar to the lessons we were to learn based on our experience thousands of years ago because: “You were strangers in the land of Egypt.” No other people should be enslaved… so, to paraphrase the Bible: “Because of our experience with genocide… we can not, and will not allow it to happen to any other people.”

But, then, you ask us to look closer at our own behavior. Certainly, the plight of the Palestinian people, in particular those living in Gaza is harsh. It can be argued that what Israel is doing to Gaza is a form of collective punishment, even when we sometimes say that they (the average Gazans) aren’t responsible, their leaders are.

Nonetheless, though you seem to suggest it, I refuse to accept full responsibility for what has happened to the Palestinians over the past more-than-100 years. Their own leaders have continually made bad decisions and they seem, as a people not to have accepted responsibility for their own role in their plight. In fact, they and their leaders (at least in the PA) seem to prefer the current situation to the possibility of actual self-government. You can read an interesting analysis here: .

You and I do not know each other well, but we trust that the other is, at least, well meaning. For as long as I can remember, I have stood and worked with those who struggled for ways to bring Palestinians and Israelis (at different times we used different phrases: “Arabs and Jews” “Arabs and Israelis” “Christians, Muslims and Jews”) together in ways that would help lessen tensions, enable mutual understanding and achieve “Peace שלום سلام”. That this has been a frustrating task, does not mean that it has been any less important. You, and readers of the jCarrot should know more about Rabbis for Human Rights . While its members have not fasted on behalf of the Palestinian people, they have done much other good work. In particular RHR replants olive trees that have been illegally uprooted on the West Bank and protects the rights of Palestinians to safely farm their lands. Certainly, there is more that could and should be done. We each have our own limited resources and (as you state at the outset) need to determine how to “choose which international crises and whose suffering” will call us to action.

I believe that you are a person of commitment and action and that we can trust you to become involved in those organizations and actions that will advance the values I am sure we both treasure.

`//rite On!
,\\ark Hurvitz

this does, however, lead to other important questions. one would be – how do we as a community choose which international crises and whose suffering to fast over?

are Darfurians any more worthy of our compassion and fasting than those in the Democratic Republic of Congo? Over 5 million people have died there since the start of civil war in 1998. Are they not worthy of our compassion? Or perhaps there are too many militias, too many tribes and too much of a complicated history to make the Congo a good sell for a western audience.

are Darfurians any more worthy of our compassion and fasting than Palestinians who live under daily blockade in Gaza and occupation in the West Bank? strategically speaking, what kind of message would it send if more than 80 rabbis had fasted over new years when Israeli planes bombed and killed over 1000 Palestinians? would the Jewish community take notice? might American Jews fasting in solidarity with those under siege in Palestine make a bigger statement and help end our collective silence? Or is Israel to delicate a topic? Such a fast, after all, would inherently force us to look ourselves in the eye and take responsibility.

the point here is not that Darfurians are not worthy of our compassion and fasting – because they are. and fasting for them, as Rabbi Hurvitz states it, is an important way to call attention to their plight (and apparently a Jewish duty!). but how do we decide? with what criteria? in the end it seems it might take more courage from our leaders to call for a fast in those cases that are not quite as simply labeled as genocide, not quite so convenient, not quite so problematic.