Equal Obligations
Wed, 07/24/2013

Gerald Steinberg, in his Opinion piece, “Beyond Tikkun Olam” (July 19), completely misrepresents Hillel’s famous dictum. Hillel said “If I
am not for me who will be for me and (italics) if I am only for me, what am I?” He
does not, as Steinberg says, enjoin us “first to be for ourselves, and then, with our security and survival in hand, to expand our commitment to people
who are outside the fold in need of assistance.” The two obligations are
simultaneous.

This same callous attitude is reflected in his use of quotation marks around
the phrase “human rights violations” (as if Israel has never committed one)
and “occupation” (as if Israel’s presence in the West Bank could reasonably
be described in any other way).

He conflates the desire for peace with a rejection of Israel’s right to
self-defense and suggests that seeking peace with the Palestinians is at odds
with Israel’s security. To the contrary, as leading Israeli security experts
like the former heads of Shin Bet noted in the documentary “The Gatekeepers,” peace with the Palestinians is vital to Israeli security.

 

Comment Guidelines

The Jewish Week feels comments create a valuable conversation and wants to feature your thoughts on our website. To make everyone feel welcome, we won't publish comments that are profane, irrelevant, promotional or make personal attacks.

Comments

The Arab world is pouring millions into the PA to battle Israel. They don't need help from anyone. And they have no incentive for peace, for then they would not get the millions. They have no will to use these millions in any other way.

If we study more Torah in the Orthodox Judaism way (the only way) Hashem may reverse this pathetic state of affairs.

Add comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.