Religion and politics: The other Jewish lobby

Last updated on: February 12, 2010 at 7:00 am by Rafia Zakaria

Religion and politics: The other Jewish lobby 2010-02-12T07:00:56-04:00 Rafia Zakaria

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

A different route

During the process of jury selection for her trial for attempted murder in New York, Dr Aafia Siddiqui alleged that she could not get a fair trial because she felt “everyone here is” a Jew. She said she would “boycott” the trial unless the Jews on the jury were removed. Because defendants have the right to have jurors removed from their trial, Dr Aafia was successful in having Jewish Americans taken off the jury.

Dr Aafia’s outburst was widely reported in the media but there was little reflection on the allegation itself. This comment investigates the specific allegation that being Jewish would automatically render a person unfit to reach a fair judgment in the Dr Aafia case.

In simple words, this is not a discussion of Dr Aafia’s guilt or innocence or the morality or justice of her detention. Instead, it is a dissection of the belief held by many Muslims around the world that being a Jewish American automatically leads to bias against Muslims in general and Muslim Americans in particular.

As Muslims fight against the evil of being judged as a group because of the actions of the Osamas and Hakeemullahs of this world, they should in turn refrain from passing judgment on a community, based on the actions of a few of its members.

Since Dr Aafia’s trial is taking place in the US it is pertinent to focus on Jewish Americans. The construction of this group in the eyes of most Muslims has been defined by the actions of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) that has over the decades been instrumental in constructing US foreign policy’s uncritical stance on Israel.

AIPAC’s influence on American foreign policy is clear but its status as the only political voice of Jewish Americans is no longer true. The year 2009 saw the emergence of another Jewish lobbying group called J Street that has since garnered the support of many liberal and progressive American Jews. One of J Street’s foremost political platforms is the advocacy of the two-state solution and “the right of Palestinians to a sovereign state of their own”. The organisation overtly opposes the construction of new settlements on Palestinian land.

The J Street website features a press release condemning the arrest of Palestinian political activists in Sheikh Jarrah and the increasing repression of political dissent by Israeli authorities. Another press release issued on Jan 28, 2010 commends US Foreign Affairs Committee chairman Howard Berman on his statements emphasising the urgency of a two-state solution to the Israel-Palestinian conflict.

The politics of J Street and its pronounced distance from the unquestioning approval of all actions of the Israeli state is but one illustration of the fallacy of assumptions that portray all Jewish Americans as accepting of atrocities committed by the Israeli state.

The irony of Dr Aafia’s allegations against Jewish jurors is exacerbated further when one considers the fact that Jewish American activists and lawyers have been at the forefront of ensuring that those imprisoned in Guantanamo and other terrorism suspects are produced in courts of law. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which is at the forefront of these efforts, was not only founded by a former justice of the US Supreme Court and a Jewish American, but is headed and largely funded by Jewish Americans.

Not only has the ACLU been at the helm of leading the fight against indefinite detention and torture, most recently it filed a Freedom of Information Act request demanding that the US government provide accurate information on the number of drone attacks and give the correct casualty figure for those killed in such attacks. It was the ACLU that recently forced the US government — in line with another Freedom of Information Act request — to reveal the names of detainees held at the Bagram airbase in Afghanistan.

On Jan 25, 2010 the International Justice Network (IJN), a monitoring group, issued a statement on behalf of Dr Aafia’s brother saying that the group and family were disturbed that the defendant was not acting in the manner she usually did and they were concerned that the stress she had undergone in recent days had affected her behaviour.

The IJN — selected to speak on the family’s behalf by Dr Aafia’s own brother — has on its board a Jewish American attorney named Buz Eisenberg. The latter is a member of the Centre for Constitutional Rights’ Guantanamo Global Justice Initiative, which provides free legal representation to inmates detained at Guantanamo Bay. Mr Eisenberg’s first client was released and repatriated to Saudi Arabia thanks to his efforts. He is currently representing two more Algerian Muslim detainees at Guantanamo Bay.

Simply put, even as Dr Aafia casts aspersions on the Jewish Americans that may have been present in her jury, it is Jewish Americans who are working at the request of her own brother to monitor the fairness of her trial and the condition of her mental state.

Undoubtedly, many questions can be raised about the flawed mechanisms through which Dr Aafia and many others accused of terrorism have been treated by the US authorities.

But this has little to do with being Jewish American. It is a myth that all Jewish Americans are against the two-state solution and to feel strongly against the community obscures Jewish American efforts to stand up for the rights of those detained in Guantanamo and Bagram.

Explaining their efforts does not suggest that prejudice against Muslims does not exist or that individuals who are Jewish are never prejudiced. Instead, it is meant to stress that reflection is needed on the notion that religious identity necessarily translates into certain political views. It is also meant to stress that there are those who are not Muslims but who are nevertheless fighting for the rights of Muslims and perhaps owed a similar favour in return.

Rafia Zakaria is Associate Editor of altmuslim.com and an attorney teaching constitutional law and political philosophy. An edited version of this article was previously published in Dawn (Pakistan)

Briefings

Rafia Zakaria

Previous Post

February 10, 2010

Civil liberties: Another red scare?

Next Post

February 15, 2010 Domestic violence: Remembering Aasiya Zubair

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category 2012 Elections 30 Dayd 30 Writers (2017) 30 Days 30 Writers 30 Days 30 Writers (2015) 30 Days 30 Writers (2016) 30 Days 30 Writers (2018) 30 Days 30 Writers 2017 Ali Asadullah Ali Eteraz Alper Bilgili Arthur Richards Asides Asma Uddin Black History Month Briefings Charles Turner Commentary Cyrus McGoldrick Eman H Aly Fatimah Popal Hajj Hajj and Dhul Hijjah Hesham Hassaballa Hisham Hellyer Ibrahim Abusharif Inas Younis Irfan Yusuf Jalal Baig Junaid Afeef Laila Alawa Laila Alwala Mas'ood Cajee Muqtedar Khan Nakia Jackson Newsmakers Parvez Ahmed Podcasts Rabia Chaudry Rafia Zakaria Ramadan Reviews Safiyyah Ally Saud Inam Shahed Amanullah Svend White The Opinionated Oncologist Visions Wajahat Ali Zahed Amanullah Zahir Janmohamed Zainab Khan

Select a Month November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003 March 2003 February 2003 January 2003 December 2002 November 2002 October 2002 September 2002 August 2002 July 2002 June 2002 May 2002 April 2002 March 2002

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

True or False: The parable of the Prodigal Son appears only in Luke's Gospel.

Select your answer to see how you score.

FALSE TRUE