Will a political turf war kill off Israel’s main world Jewry program?
The he said-she said battle over control of the $300 million World Jewry Joint Initiative threatens a promising, well-funded project
Deputy Editor Amanda Borschel-Dan is the host of The Times of Israel's Daily Briefing and What Matters Now podcasts and heads up The Times of Israel's Jewish World and Archaeology coverage.
From an emergency teleconference meeting called by the Jewish Federations of North America on Monday to dismal headlines in Jewish media, the Jewish world is proclaiming the demise of the World Jewry Joint Initiative, a well-funded partnership program designed to bolster ties between Israel and the Diaspora.
A weekend Haaretz article based on leaked Diaspora Ministry documents claimed that Diaspora Minister Naftali Bennett is using his position to push a right-wing, Orthodox agenda in the initiative that would stifle criticism of Israel among Diaspora youth. In reaction to the report, Jewish Agency for Israel head Natan Sharansky sent a letter to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that appeared all over news pages and stated that, since the direction of the initiative has changed, JAFI can no longer see itself as a part of the partnership and calls on the prime minister to begin again from scratch.
What makes this initiative so sensitive on so many fronts is its symbolism in an era of troubled Israel-Diaspora relations — and the relatively large budget allocated to it. Although reports differ, last year Sharansky told The Times of Israel it is meant to reach an overall budget of $300 million in its first five years.
For Bennett, faced with a smaller Knesset faction following the 2015 elections, the initiative is of such importance that his Jewish Home party’s coalition agreement with the Likud actually includes a stipulation reworking the original 2014 government decision that launched the initiative as a partnership between the Prime Minister’s Office, the Diaspora Ministry and the agency. The coalition agreement accords Bennett’s ministry full authority over the program and its budget.
If Netanyahu — a great admirer and supporter of Sharansky — revokes the Diaspora Ministry’s authority, as the Jewish Agency hopes, Bennett would have cause to leave the slim 61-seat coalition and force new elections.
Ironically, there’s not much of an initiative to fight over. The collapse of the previous Knesset in December 2014 meant that the government did not pass a budget for 2015. A corporation called the Initiative for the Future of the Jewish People was established earlier this year, but few concrete programs are on the docket, and no new ideas are in the works for changing the Jewish future.
The real fault for the lack of implementation, the Diaspora Ministry told The Times of Israel on Monday, is largely that of the Jewish Agency.
‘The Jewish Agency was the main reason the initiative was delayed’
“The Jewish Agency was the main reason the initiative was delayed. Since 2014, they insisted on controlling the initiative’s budgets and being heavily involved in the execution process. This position raised considerable objections with our partners in the Jewish world, as well as within the government,” said a ministry spokesman.
The initiative, meant to be a historic partnership between the government of Israel and world Jewry to generate the next big idea that would aid in the fight for the future of the Jewish people, was based on a partnership funding model in which for every $2 the Diaspora donates, the government puts in $1.
In practice, the Jewish Agency was seen as responsible for bringing the Diaspora dollars to the table. Citing a lack of dialogue with the ministry, it has not.
The ministry cited Birthright as a past example, which depicts JAFI’s typical modus operandi.
“The Jewish Agency’s actions today can only remind us of their objections to the Taglit-Birthright program, which they rejected because it wasn’t being executed by them,” said the ministry.
‘The Jewish Agency’s actions today can only remind us of their objections to the Taglit-Birthright program, which they rejected because it wasn’t being executed by them’
Birthright was originally initiated and funded by private American Jewish philanthropists Michael Steinhardt and Charles Bronfman in 1994. It faced stiff opposition from the agency at first, but after several years of operations, the agency become a partner and contributor.
“In the weeks to come, we and our partners in the Jewish world will implement an innovative plan, which will give birth to the next 10 Taglits, once again, apparently without the Jewish Agency,” said the ministry.
An official close to JAFI said that this time is entirely different. Following years of discussions between the PMO and JAFI, two successful JAFI-initiated 2013 brainstorming conferences brought together some 150 Jewish professionals and educators who worked to generate the next big Birthright-style idea.
Like the successful 10-day free trip to Israel that is proving to have lasting positive effects on young Jews’ affiliation, the initiative’s impetus was the “shared commitment to sustaining the connection between Israel and the Jewish People for the next generation,” according to a 2014 draft report.
“Recall that the initiative was conceived by the Prime Minister’s Office and the Jewish Agency for Israel, representing world Jewry, long before the Ministry of Diaspora Affairs had any involvement whatsoever. Arriving late at the party and then declaring to those in attendance that you’re the host is in rather poor taste,” the official said.
‘Arriving late at the party and then declaring to those in attendance that you’re the host is in rather poor taste’
The latest crisis is hardly the first time the bell has tolled on the initiative due to JAFI-Diaspora Ministry infighting.
Already a year ago, cooperation between the Jewish Agency and the ministry was shaky at best as JAFI ramped up efforts to get government funding for its Israel Fellows program, which promotes Israel advocacy on campuses. (JAFI overwhelmingly relies on Diaspora donors for implementation of its programs.)
The power struggles continued, and by the time the Jewish Home-Likud coalition agreement was signed in May of this year, one of the first points in the 90-item agreement stated that the Government of Israel granted the Diaspora Ministry sole authority over the World Jewry Initiative, including its leadership, programming, budget, steering committee, etc.
Although the Prime Minister’s Office is meant to have some oversight and inter-ministerial coordinating duties, the stipulations on the Diaspora Ministry’s authority leave no doubt as to who is meant to be in charge.
There are those who think that the transfer of authority to the Diaspora Ministry is not all bad. Dan Brown, founder of the Jewish philanthropy blog eJewishPhilanthropy and an insider in the halls of Jewish organizational life, told The Times of Israel Monday that the Jewish Agency doesn’t have a great track record with management and implementation.
“Although Natan Sharansky is a great thinker and definitely a thought leader, and [director-general] Alan Hoffmann is an experienced educator, neither is a good administrator,” said Brown.
In addition to stripping the Jewish Agency from any significant role in the initiative, the coalition agreement has a few other related stipulations. The Diaspora Ministry, it states, is not to interfere with Birthright or the joint Jewish Agency-PMO program Masa Israel.
The agreement takes pains to note that the Diaspora Ministry’s role is not intended to “weaken the Jewish Agency’s status and operations.”
Who deserves to be blamed for the stalled implementation is a matter for debate. But the damage wrought by the fight — which sees the Jewish Agency battling to preserve its status and the Diaspora Ministry to bolster its own — is becoming increasingly clear.
