Now Eizenstat is sort of infamous in Switzerland. He’s the guy that in the 1990s took on the case of Holocaust era Jewish-owned Swiss bank accounts and was pivotal in making restitution a reality. He’s also served as domestic policy adviser to Carter, secretary of treasury and under secretary of commerce under Clinton and US ambassador to the EU.

A couple of points stood out from a discussion that included US policy on Iran, the possibility of sanctions, the difficulty of getting China and Russian on board with said sanctions (subsequently proved to be accurate), the settlement freeze

“Never Again”

Bergmann recounted a conversation he had with Netanyahu, in which the latter stated firmly that if any country (read: Iran) poses an existential threat to Israel, he would “put them back to the Stone Age.” Bergmann attributes this stance to the history and ever-present memory of the Holocaust, explaining that the core of Israel’s foreign policy is based on preventing another attempted genocide of the Jewish people. Eizenstat had a problem with this, stating that “Never again is not a policy.” Bergmann responded, accurately saying that whether one agrees in the efficacy of such a policy, a policy it is nevertheless.

Israel’s progress and future

Eizenstat, who was returning from the annual World Economic Forum in Davos, came with positive news to report. Israel far surpasses other Western countries in its amount of start-ups and patents filed per year. Israel is also set to join the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development - and will be the first Middle Eastern country to do so.

On Israel’s future, Eizenstat invoked the Biblical passage, “A light unto the nations,” imploring Israel to once again become an example and model. How to achieve this? Israel could contribute its know-how in agricultural and water development to the arid and non-arable countries of Africa. As with Haiti, Israel should continue its aid in humanitarian crises - and better publicize its contributions. And lastly, with its agricultural and business innovation, Israel can be a leader in developing a green economy, this obviously being the current obsession of the developed world.

Eizenstat’s ideas are great, but unfortunately Israeli is dogged by its conflict with the Palestinians and the Arab world. Are countries open-minded enough to take advice or aid from Israel? Even after its contributions to Haiti, I remember reading a commentary in the Guardian criticising Israel’s aid as diverting from its own “humanitarian crises.” So Stuart, good ideas. But how do we make them listen?

Oh, but you know who did win? “The Jew Hunter,” or Christopher Waltz for his turn as Nazi officer Hans Landa in Tarantino’s Inglorious Basterds.

The Israeli contingent was also dissed. Over the years our Israeli brethren have had 9 films nominated. How many took home the Oscar? None.

Should we take it personally?

The answer depends on whether the particular films were worthy of claiming the trophy in their respective categories. While we enjoyed the mix of comedy and sobriety of A Serious Man, was it the year’s Best Picture? Underdeveloped concepts, such as the dybbuk theme, left us wanting more from this Coen Brothers’ movie. An Education, which explores anti-Semitism in 1960s Britain, is well crafted, but probably too small of a picture to catch such a big fish of an award.

Since gratuitous, violence doesn’t turn us on, we stayed away from Inglorious Basterds - despite it being a Jewish wet dream. Readers will have to fill us in on the Oscar-worthiness of Tarantino’s latest efforts.

Recently I saw an ad for an event honoring the 90th anniversary of Keren Hayesod/United Jewish Appeal. The event boasted a keynote address from Natan Sharansky and a roundtable discussion with participants such as Stuart Eizenstat. Of course I planned to attend, thinking this was a special, education-oriented event.

Question is, why did I not realize this was an annual benefit? The location should have clued me in: the Dolder Grand Hotel. Zurich’s most luxurious (read: expensive) hotel. Oh, and the ad did mention something about food being served.

So here’s the surprising thing about annual dinners in Zurich, and the answer to the question posed above: There is no plate charge. The event was completely donation-based, and there wasn’t even a suggested donation amount at that. Get this, there weren’t even donation forms on the table! These were only handed out later (although that may have been a mistake in organizational planning).

What conclusions can be drawn from such a policy? Is the community here is so wealthy that it is assumed that people will donate generously? Is there a history of financial generosity in the community? Or is it considered tacky to openly talk about money?

I’ll never know, but what I do know is that after an evening of stimulating discussion, speeches and beautiful live music from Israeli performers I was quite motivated to donate to an organization that knows how to put on a good show.

One of the evening’s highlights was hearing Natan Sharanksy - who recently took over as the chairman of the Jewish Agency - speak. Last spring I had the privilege of hearing this firebrand speak in defense of Israel at a rally I attended in Geneva. What an inspiring speaker - emotional yet succinct, a person who draws on his past as a refusenik and human rights activist.

He opened with an observation from a recent tour of a US college where a student expressed to him that Israel causes problems for young Jewish human rights activists. Sharansky then spoke about the different role the state Israel has played over the generations. For someone like Sharanksy, trapped behind the Iron Curtain, Israel represented (and continues to represent) hope and provided an aim: a place where people like Sharansky could be free. A way out. “I became a Zionist before I became Jewish,” said Sharansky.

His solution to solving this generational gap was not totally clear. Of course programs like Birthright have been tremendously successful and bringing youth into contact with Israel and Israeli culture. Sharansky’s own Jewish Agency is touring college campuses trying to connect with young people and educate them about Israel. A video at the dinner presented a wonderful picture of Keren Hayesod’s work with integrating immigrants and other social services throughout Israel.

It is important to divert from the Arab-Israeli conflict and get a glimpse into the many, other facets of Israeli life. Unfortunately it doesn’t make the conflict go away, and many, such as the college student Sharanksy mentions, continue to have difficulties reconciling the importance of Israel to a Jewish identity with Israel as a participant in a violent conflict. Education and information is key, but so is the acceptance that divergent opinions on Israel and Israeli policy within the Jewish community is legitimate.

Tune in next week for excerpts from the roundtable discussion with Stuart Eizenstat, former US ambassador and Ronen Bergmann, Israeli journalist.

Here on Rocky Mountain Jew we’ve collected links to Purim spoofs from across the globe.

• Backward An annual favorite. The venerable Daily Forward pokes fun at -among others - the Goldstone Report, Twitter and the Wandering Jew.
• Wolfman DDS Brought to you from the Shushan Channel, the same group behind last year’s Meshugene (Mad) Men spoof, this year’s video tells the story of a Jewish werewolf/dentist.
• Haman Rap A somewhat silly yet fun musical and video rendition of the Purim story.
• For those looking last-minute for a Hamantaschen recipe, check this one out from Gourmet magazine via epicurious. We found the proportions just right, and the use of Crisco versus butter results in a flakier dough.

Remember to visit our Community Calendar for Purim events across the Metro area. All holiday events are color-coded “purple” or search using the term “Purim”.

A happy and joyous Purim to one and all!

This week saw me in Sils Maria, a small village close to the well-known and tourist hotspot St. Moritz but infinitely more peaceful and rejuvenating. It’s clear why Friedrich Neitzsche spent time here. For those looking for activity, Sils is also well-situated for skiing adventures and summertime hikes.

Okay, travel tip over. Let’s get back to our comparison. The ranges are very different. While the Alps - well the Swiss Alps - are not as high as the Rockies, incredibly narrow valleys mean that the individual peaks rise more majestically than a given peak in the Rockies. Then there’s the Dolomites, a range of the Alps found in northeast Italy. The peaks here are, simply put, unique. You won’t see another mountain like these. The massifs here are a composition of jagged teeth, creating a most dramatic, breath-stealing landscape.

A view from the top of the Corvatsch

For readers who find themselves protesting, wait. While I love the Alps, nothing beats the Rockies. As a range, their width, breadth and height, aren’t to be beat. And that’s not even starting with the issue of powder. Hey, there’s a reason why Europeans ski in Vail and Aspen.

Think your shot of the Rockies is better than this of the Swiss Alps (above)? Send your photos (with locations details) to shana@ijn.com and we’ll post them on the blog.

Is this just a somewhat crazy man’s fantasies, or is there some merit in his proposal?

In certain areas, such as sports competitions, Israel has always been classified as part of Europe. (Though this is due to rejection from its Arab neighbors rather than a sense of belonging to the European continent.) Many Israelis are European by descent; however upon arrival, most immigrants assimilated quickly into the burgeoning Israeli society without looking back.

But the real issue here is the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. While the was founded as an economics driven organization, it is now also a political union, and all members must adhere to a specific set of laws. What would this mean for Israel? Tearing down the fence/wall and withdrawing from all Palestinian territories. The chances of this happening? Pretty much zero. For its own security, Israel cannot take such measures.

But as a hypothetical: Let’s say Israel was on track to EU membership and took the above mentioned steps. This would certainly fast-track a two-state solution and with EU backing Israel would likely feel more secure making these risky moves. Could be a win-win.

But does Israel want to play along with EU rules and regulations? Israel’s top priority is its security. And by joining the EU, the Jewish state would cede much of its sovereignty. Keep in mind, too, that being an EU member also allows for the freedom of movement, meaning any EU citizen could move to Israel. So a Palestinian granted citizenship in say Britain, could then emigrate to Israel.

But let’s face it. This was Berlusconi, alterantely the most villified and ridiculed European prime minister. It made for an attention-getting soundbyte, something the showman surely realized, but a real initiative? We don’t think so.

Like all Coen brothers’ films, A Serious Man intertwines details large and small to create a complete story; however, as in most Coen Brothers’ films, the larger picture is not always immediately obvious. One such example is the opening sequence, which portrays the encounter of an Old World couple with a dybbuk. The theme of dybbuk does appear later in the main feature and the vignette does question the viewers’ perception of reality, and truth and fiction, but how the vignette relates directly to Larry Gopnick’s story? We’re not sure. A Serious Man, again like most Coen Brothers’ movies, surely requires repeated viewings.Conversely, the theme of physics, as a science made up of proofs, contrasts with Gopnick’s inability to control. At one point, speaking with a South Korean student (he and his father provide almost exclusively all of the laugh out loud moments of the film), Gopnick repeatedly states that mathematics is essential to comprehending physics. Meaning, everything is boiled down to equations - for which there is always an answer. Contrast this with Gopnick’s repeated visits to the town’s rabbis, from whom he begs an answer as to why God is afflicting him. None of the rabbis has an answer. Instead they employ a magician’s misdirection, trying to steer Larry away from his questioning.

Ultimately, A Serious Man is a film that explores man’s inability to act in the face of challenges, while concomitantly questioning whether taking action is futile, which is portrayed brilliantly in the film’s penultimate scene (no spoilers!). Whether this is the Coens’ best film for years, as many critics are saying, well, we’ll leave that one to the professional. On the comedy side it certainly isn’t The Big Lebowski and from the drama aspect it’s no Barton Fink.

Ironically, the lesson of A Serious Man may be the exact opposite of what the title denotes: we would all benefit from actually being less serious about our lives. What’s the point of self-reflection if life’s not in our control? Should we spend our limited time on Earth enjoying ourselves and let the course of fate unfold without our interference?

How is medical and humanitarian aid received, processed and doled out in such a country? Haiti had little functioning infrastructure prior to the earthquake; can it even deal with the deluge of aid coming its way?

But despite the logistical nightmares facing those wanting to help, Israel has managed not only to deliver aid, but even to build a makeshift hospital. This week’s IJN includes coverage of Israel’s efforts, alongside an IJN editorial with commentary on Israel’s humane - and effective - actions.

The lesson? Where there’s a will there’s a way.

After decades of efforts by the Simon Wiesenthal Center and others, John Demjanjuk, at 89 now an old man, is finally on trial for crimes against humanity. Much of the press has focused on how due to the ages of the perpetrators, the opportunity of bringing Nazi war criminals to justice is rapidly diminishing.

The passing of Miep Gies poignantly reminds us that it’s not only the evildoers that are dying, but also those who risked their lives to save their fellow humans.

Last year a reissue of Gies’ memoir, Anne Frank Remembered, arrived at the IJN. We’ve all read the story of Anne Frank from the diarist’s view, but Gies’ book allows us an outside view of the Frank family. More revealingly, the book tells us the heroic story of the family’s protector - though Gies is too modest to refer to herself as a hero.

In the recounting of her daily life, we understand the risk individuals such as Gies took. During WWII, Holland was plagued by food shortages. How did Gies source food for seven, later eight, individuals without raising suspicion? And Gies not only took an active role in hiding the Franks, but her and her husband were also hiding another Jew in their apartment.

People such as Gies risked their lives to protect others. And she wasn’t the only one. In Holland many families, especially those living in the isolated north secretly hid Jewish children in their homes.

The question is frequently asked, Why didn’t people do more? Reading Gies’ story, a much more troubling question presses: Would we do the same? Would we literally put our life on the line for our friends, neighbors, or even harder to fathom, complete strangers? Instead of questioning why people didn’t do more, our faith in humanity should be buoyed by the fact that some did anything, considering the circumstances under which they were living: military dictatorships or occupations where people’s every move was tracked.

This week, the world lost a courageous soul, a person to who’s fundamental goodness we all should aspire.

May she rest in peace.

One such effort is extra screening for passengers whose flights originate from troublesome countries, such as Yemen or Saudi. It’s a good try, but the flight on December 25th originated from Amsterdam, in the heart of Europe.

Another effort is looking at other airport screening systems, such as El Al’s, as featured in our news coverage.

Meanwhile in commentary on the site, in his column, Plain Truth, Dennis Prager is skeptical of knee-jerk security tightening measures - such as preventing passengers from leaving their seats in the final hour of a flight, and instead asks why other measures - such as full body scanning - aren’t being employed by the TSA.

An IJN editorial, “What is airport security for?“, asks why the TSA is not employing a targeted screening process, using human profiling, with nuanced instead of perfunctory questions.

We’ve come across an analysis of the Christmas Day attack from George Freedman at Stratfor, a global intelligence firm out of Austin. In a concise analysis, Freedman reaches similar conclusions to those already mentioned above regarding the failure of current airport security measures. On racial profiling, he writes that by screening flights from troubled countries, the US is finally starting out on a much-needed policy of profiling. He also, however, explains that airport security is in large part simply a policy of reassurance, so that American citizens feel safe traveling. Greater inconvenience to the passenger does not automatically equal better security.

Let us know what you think. Is airport security a joke? Is airline terrorism completely preventable? Are we using the wrong tools in our screening process?