J Street’s substantive political viewpoint is openly radical and partisan, identifying clearly with the Palestinian narrative.
By Alan Baker, JNS
According to its website, the congressional lobbying organization calling itself J Street was established “to serve as the political home and voice for pro-Israel, pro-peace Americans” through “organizing pro-Israel and pro-peace Americans to promote U.S. policies that embody our deeply held Jewish and democratic values and that help secure the State of Israel as a democratic homeland for the Jewish people.”
In its founding aims and principles, J Street declares its overriding aim as “reshaping political perceptions of what it means to be pro-Israel.”
The first and evidently central provision of J Street’s basic principles acknowledges that Israel faces enemies, and J Street expresses support for Israel to defend itself and live in security and peace within internationally recognized boundaries.
However, J Street’s political manifesto as detailed on its website would appear to run counter to — and even undermine — any such sentiment.
On the one hand, J Street presents itself and is perceived by many naïve elements within the Jewish and non-Jewish communities as a genuine lobbying organization with the veneer of supporting Israel and expressing concern for its welfare.
But behind the misleading platitudes and sweeping statements in its manifesto, it is clear that J Street’s substantive political viewpoint is openly radical and partisan, identifying clearly with the Palestinian narrative and aligning with other openly critical-of-Israel organizations such as the Israel Policy Forum, Brookings and the International Crisis Group.
J Street has failed to welcome and promote the normalization agreements between Israel and Arab states, apparently because they downgrade the urgency of a Palestinian state. The organization has actively lobbied against military aid to those Arab states that normalized relations. As such, J Street is clearly undercutting any genuine concern for Israel’s security and is, in fact, undermining Israel’s right to defend itself.
J Street ignores and attempts to bypass the agreements and other documents signed by the Palestinians and Israel during the course of the Middle East peace negotiation process. These include the internationally-accepted and sponsored Oslo Accords to which the United States, together with Russia, the European Union and others are signatories, and which the United Nations sponsored.
J Street has adopted a political viewpoint that parallels and parrots positions expressed in numerous politically-generated anti-Israel resolutions in the U.N. and other international fora, such as the infamous 2016 Security Council Resolution 2334, as well as in numerous biased political statements uttered by Palestinian and European leaders.
In so doing, J Street has adopted a narrative hostile to Israel’s interests. So much so that it attempts to preempt and prejudge the agreed-upon and internationally-supported negotiating process by which issues such as boundaries, Jerusalem, settlements, security and the permanent status of the territories are to be settled.
While referring to Israel as the state of the Jewish people, J Street has nevertheless adopted and openly advocates complete submission to the Palestinian narrative, without requiring any change, without calling for Palestinian acceptance of Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people and without calling for an end to Palestinian incitement to hatred, terror and anti-Semitism.
J Street fails to call upon the Palestinians to completely stop the payment of salaries to terrorists, even though such payments violate internationally-accepted counter-terror conventions, as well as central commitments in the Oslo Accords.
J Street’s website is replete with anti-Israel propaganda and blanket, one-sided condemnations of Israeli security actions, presented out of context, all of which reads more like a summary of Israel-bashing U.N. resolutions. Its website even reproduces and attempts to fuel the false accusations claiming that Palestinians “living under occupation in the West Bank and Gaza” do not have access to COVID-19 vaccines and have not been included in the Israeli government’s current vaccination plans.
In calling for Israel to “give up the vast majority of occupied territory in favor of a Palestinian state based on the pre-1967 lines,” J Street is prejudging the agreed-upon negotiation process for the permanent status of the territories, as well as the issue of negotiating boundaries. Their declared preference for a two-state solution ignores the fact that any solution, whether involving one, two, or three states, a federation, confederation, or any other permutation, can only be the outcome of direct negotiation between the parties.
Misrepresents international law
J Street, which professes concern for Israel’s welfare, cannot advocate imposing a solution upon Israel that would be opposed to Israel’s basic interests.
In determining that Israel’s settlement policies are in violation of international law, J Street is not only misrepresenting international law and thereby misleading its supporters, but also prejudging and attempting to undermine the agreed negotiating process between the Palestinians and Israel on the issue of settlements.
In calling for reinstating an independent U.S. diplomatic mission to the Palestinians in eastern Jerusalem, J Street advocates a policy that runs counter to numerous congressional resolutions, as well as attempting, again, to prejudge the agreed-upon negotiating issue of Jerusalem.
In supporting a right for the Palestinians to join international organizations, institutions and conventions as a member state, J Street is deliberately ignoring the legal reality in which, pending the outcome of the permanent status negotiations, there is no “Palestinian state.”
J Street is not only seeking to prejudge the issue of the future permanent status of the territory but sanctions and encourages a material breach of the Oslo Accords, under which the Palestinians committed not to join international organizations and conventions pending the outcome of negotiations on the permanent status of the territories.
In J Street’s most recent flurry of activity aimed at influencing the incoming Biden administration, it has reportedly presented to President-elect Joe Biden and his advisers detailed policy recommendations that echo a distinct Palestinian, anti-Israel narrative.
J Street is on the other side
Such proposals include reversing the Trump peace plan, reversing the State Department’s legal opinion regarding the legality of settlements, reopening the Palestinian diplomatic mission in Washington, restoring U.S. financial aid to the Palestinians, canceling the penalization of boycott activity against Israel and diluting the accepted international definition of anti-Semitism.
In a further attempt to undermine the internationally accepted and agreed peace negotiation process called for in U.N. Security Council resolutions and implemented through the Oslo Accords, J Street advocates setting aside bilateral, direct negotiation, preferring to recommend a “multilateral approach to resolving the conflict.” Such a multilateral approach echoes ongoing Palestinian attempts to bypass direct negotiations with Israel and transfer the issue to an international conference that would impose a solution on Israel.
Despite universal condemnation of Iran’s declared hostility toward Israel, its oft-repeated intention to attack the Jewish state and its deep involvement in encouraging and financing international and regional terror, J Street is nevertheless pressing the incoming administration to relax sanctions on the Islamic Republic. It encourages a return to the JCPOA arrangement that would enable Iran to push ahead with its aims to achieve nuclear weapons capability.
How does J Street square its supposed concern for Israel’s security and welfare with advocating a policy of appeasement vis-à-vis Iran while deliberately ignoring Iran’s direct existential threats against it?
All of the above indicates that J Street has evolved from an organization justifying its existence by expressing concern for Israel’s security and welfare into one actively working to undermine Israel’s interests, legitimacy, security and international standing, as well as its democratically elected government.
J Street is doing so first and foremost within the U.S. Jewish community, and secondly within the U.S. congressional and governing bodies.
Judging from J Street’s recent activity, it seems to be more intent on bolstering its own stature in new White House and congressional circles than in acting in accordance with its declared aims. To the contrary, J Street is increasingly acting to harm Israel, side with Israel’s enemies, fuel false information and incite against Israel.
While logical and substantive criticism of any particular action or policy by Israel may well be legitimate, J Street, by its actions and policies, has redefined itself as an anti-Israel organization. What is perhaps even worse is that through its activities and incitement, J Street is permitting itself to be a tool for Palestinian and European organizations hostile to Israel, which utilize its ostensible concern for Israel to bolster and enhance their own credibility and status.
Any purported concern for Israel as a means of justifying and mobilizing support and financing from donors and organizations within the U.S. Jewish community is patently false. It is nothing more than a sham, a thin veil of deception, poorly camouflaging an intense and obvious aversion to Israel’s democratically elected leadership and government as well as a deep-rooted and radical political agenda that is an anathema to Israel’s security and national interests.
J Street cannot presume to determine for Israel the details of its government, security and political interests. In attempting to do so, it deceives its constituency, acts with unclean hands and misrepresents its true intentions.
J Street is working to undermine Israel, its democratically elected government and the will of the Israeli public. It is nothing more than another anti-Israel pressure group that has blindly adopted the Palestinian narrative.
It is therefore high time that J Street remove the letter “J” from its name, replace it with the letter “P,” and admit to its supporters and donors that it is functioning solely to undermine Israel, promote Palestinian interests and maintain itself.
Alan Baker is director of the Institute for Contemporary Affairs at the Jerusalem Center and the head of the Global Law Forum. He participated in the negotiation and drafting of the Oslo Accords with the Palestinians, as well as agreements and peace treaties with Egypt, Jordan and Lebanon. He served as legal adviser and deputy director-general of Israel’s Foreign Ministry and as Israel’s ambassador to Canada.
This article was first published by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs.