HOW CAN WE BE MORE EFFECTIVE ?
A. Our priorities
Who are we trying to influence, i.e. who are our target groups ?
We have several: the Jewish community, the political establishment, left –wing MPs and Peers, liberals, the left, the Palestinian/Arab community, the general population. We have never prioritised between them. Our underlying goals are obviously to influence the British government in its attitude and actions, and more indirectly, to influence the Israeli government.
It seems to me that the political establishment and the Jewish community should now be our
clear priorities, because influencing them has the most potential for influencing both the British and Israeli governments.
Centrist and liberal politicians (of all parties) are by nature open-minded and often have a balanced view of the conflict, i.e. they support the existence of Israel but also support Palestinian rights. Giving them logical arguments and relevant facts can help sway them. They have the best contacts with government ministers and the most influence on them. Future ministers will overwhelmingly be drawn from their ranks.
The Jewish community is obviously an important influence, as seen in the periodic statements of whole- hearted support for Israel’s security, etc., coupled with relative silence about Palestinian rights, frequently made by party leaders and some MPs. The political leaders and MPs clearly believe that the Jewish community is virtually unanimous in supporting the Israeli government and blaming the Palestinians.
The section of the recent UJIA survey dealing with attitudes towards the conflict demonstrates that this belief is far from accurate. Therefore there is great potential for influencing the Jewish community. We should aim to activate the large minority who disagree with Sharon’s policies, and the near 50% of people who are uncertain. To the extent that we are successful, this will influence party leaders and MPs’ to take a more even-handed approach in both public and private. It could also influence the Israeli government. (See Appendix 1 for a brief summary of the survey results.)
Conversely, the Palestinian/Arab community, the political left and the left in general are already overwhelmingly in favour of the Palestinian cause. This is well known to governments. We can add little to these groups other than sometimes providing relevant facts. Furthermore, their influence on government will always be small compared to that of centrist / liberal people and politicians.
B. Our size and our positions
JFJFP now has 1,000+ signatories. This is a “big” number and we use it in our PR. But it is under 1% of the adult Jewish population of the UK. (See Appendix 2 for BOD figures.) Bearing in mind the UJIA survey and JFJFP’s positions through European Jews for a Just Peace, we should be aiming for far more. However, there is a big hurdle in persuading people to sign up to JFJFP, or to speak out in any way, as shown by the large majority of all those surveyed who are disturbed by media criticism of Israel.
JFJFP has evolved significantly since being founded. Initially we had a very general statement. Our only positions were opposition to Israeli policies and support of the Palestinians. This played well to the left and to Palestinians/Arabs, but in retrospect not to many Jewish people.
We now have the EJJP positions which specifically recognise Israel’s ’67 “green line” borders, advocate the Palestinian right to a state in the currently occupied territories, condemn all violence against civilians, and advocate a fair solution of the refugee problem by negotiation. They are stated in our new brochure and they represent the strong consensus of the active members who attend the monthly meetings. They should also attract many of the Jewish people who either criticise Israeli policies or are uncertain what to think.
C. Our name
We should reconsider our name, which is highly relevant to the issue of priorities. When we discussed our name 18 months ago or so, most people agreed that it caused a subliminal reaction against us in many Jewish people, perhaps the majority, in that it appears to be anti-Israel. Most said that, with hindsight, it wasn't an ideal name, but didn't want to change it then. Some thought changing it wouldn't help in the Jewish community anyway. With our positions through EJJP, which we didn't have at the time, we are now much better placed to get through to a substantial part of the Jewish community. It seems a shame not to maximise our chances.
Two suggestions for a name:
Jews for a Just Peace with Palestinians
This is more of a mouthful than JFJFP, but the "with" formulation eliminates the aggressiveness and the subliminal anti-Israel message of JFJFP. Conversely, by not saying "Jews for a Just Peace between Israel and the Palestinians", we would avoid implying that the two sides are equally to blame.
British Jews for a Just Peace
This would just anglicise European Jews for a Just Peace.
Both names would lose the inference that Israel has committed the injustice, but that's the point of changing the name, even though we know it to be true. Once we get a hearing with Jewish groups, we can explain our position and the reasons for it. Israel's responsibility would come out then, when hopefully people would be in the frame of mind to listen. There is no guarantee it would work, but we know we aren't getting through with our present name, the proof being that only two synagogues accepted our offer of a speaker.
If it worked, it would also help our lobbying. Firstly, our size is our main claim of legitimacy when lobbying, i.e. we speak for a substantial number of Jewish people. We would hope to increase our membership significantly by changing our name. Secondly, a new name would probably make it easier to get meetings with some MPs and other political people of the centre.
D. Proposals
Our priorities should be political lobbying and getting through to the Jewish community. This would not mean ignoring other campaigning groups or certain kinds of activity, but it would mean favouring the priorities when there was a conflict of activity. We already do this on a case by case basis.
We should emphasise the EJJP positions in contacts with Jewish groups, as we already do when lobbying, by simply presenting them as our positions, rather than keeping them at one remove by referring to them only as EJJP positions. When we need to reprint the new brochure, we should alter the wording accordingly.
We should reconsider our name.
In summary, we now have the positions to become much more effective. We should use them to the maximum. There is no guarantee that the proposed changes will have the desired effect, but let’s maximise our chances.
Appendix 1
Summary of United Jewish Israel Appeal survey results
The survey results cover only “moderately engaged” Jews in terms of engagement in Jewish life. The survey’s authors think they represent about 50% of the Jewish population. The survey was conducted among parents with children of all ages at Jewish schools, so we can assume the age range of those surveyed was mid-twenties to early fifties.
Key results:
There is a very strong attachment to Israel: 78% “care deeply”, only 5% do not.
75% are disturbed by what they see as biased coverage of Israel in the media.
31% are often very critical of current Israeli government policies; 22% generally support Israeli government policies; the remaining 47% are in various states of uncertainty.
My comment
These results show the kind of opinion distribution one would expect in any population; in fact it is skewed against Israel’s current policies. The fact that a large majority feel strong attachment to Israel is important, in that it indicates the unease with Israeli policies must also be strongly felt.
The fact that a large majority are disturbed by media criticism of Israel is also important, in that it means there is a big hurdle for us in persuading people to sign up to JFJFP, or to speak out in any way.
The results concerning attachment and attitudes to Israel were published in the Jewish Chronicle on 18/6/04. The full survey is about feelings of identity among “moderately identifying” Jews. It is now on the UJIA website.
Appendix 2
BOD figures. show the Jewish population of the UK as 267,000 in 2001. Assuming 45% are adults, there are some 120,000 adult Jews in the UK.)