+972 Magazine's Stories of the Week

Directly In Your Inbox

Analysis News
Visit our Hebrew site, "Local Call" , in partnership with Just Vision.

J Street past, present and future: Let’s get on with it

While it will be a long wait for a safe consensus about this issue to emerge in Israel or in America, we need to treat the prospect of the end of the two-state solution as the five-alarm fire that it is. The question is whether the American administration has the political will to engage in muscular diplomacy.

By Ken Winikur and Ben Avishai

Jeremy Ben Ami (Jstreet CC BY NC SA 2.0)

Addressing young Israelis in Jerusalem on March 21, 2013, President Obama discussed the imperative to reach a just peace with the Palestinians. Speaking like a community organizer, Obama laid out the challenge: “Political leaders will never take risks if the people do not push them.” It was a noble idea, but since then, those who agree have been left with a question: how?

The art of mobilizing citizens into action, of creating a voice that politicians actually hear, is the central theme a documentary we are making about J Street, the five-year old pro-Israel, pro-peace American-Jewish lobby group. J Street emerged shortly after Obama took office, rallying people from living rooms and synagogue basements across the U.S. around the progressive idea that to be pro-Israel means supporting a two-state solution, and that American involvement is crucial to making that happen. Its leaders soon found that the new administration was listening: when Obama convened an advisory session of Jewish leaders, he invited J Street founder and president, Jeremy Ben-Ami. And at J Street’s first national conference, National Security Advisor Jim Jones told a rapt audience that if he could solve any problem in the world, Israel-Palestine would be it.

We began filming J Street during the organization’s second year, curious to see if the it could make a difference. For the past three years, we have tracked its growth and witnessed its attempts to harness grassroots power to affect policy in Washington. J Street’s efforts have exposed a debate raging in the American Jewish community about how the U.S. government should act towards Israel, and have debunked the notion that American Jews are ideologically monolithic about that relationship. Criticized by the Right and the Left, we’ve watched as J Street has hunted for that elusive center – the sweet spot from which it could most effectively push the Obama administration to throw its weight behind an Israel-Palestine peace deal.

In 2009, Obama declared that Israelis and Palestinians could complete a deal “within one year.”  Since those optimistic words, the administration has backed away, and even fumbled the issue.  The result has been a continuation of the status quo. As Jeremy Ben-Ami said to us on the eve of the United Nations General Assembly vote to accept Palestine as a non-member observer state in November 2012 (which his organization did not support), “We set J Street up …to be the president’s blocking back. To blast a hole in the political line that’s preventing a president from going there. We did what we could, but when we looked behind us, it turned out no one was running through the hole.”

Nearly every expert we’ve interviewed over the course of our filming has stressed that the status quo is growing less and less tenable. Lawrence Wilkerson, former chief of staff for then-Secretary of State Colin Powell, said, “It’s increasingly difficult to see a Palestinian state crisscrossed by Israeli highways, checked by Israeli checkpoints, walled off by an Israeli wall. I cannot see that being a viable state if we let this go on much longer.” Thomas Friedman told us that if nothing changes, “Israel is going to be permanently pregnant with a Palestinian majority in its belly.” Alan Dershowitz, a staunch critic of J Street known for more a more hawkish line on Israel, said to us, “I have been in favor of a two-state solution since he [Jeremy Ben-Ami] was in diapers.” Yet he goes on to lament the “shrinking window of opportunity.” As Secretary of State John Kerry testified on Capitol Hill on April 17, 2013, less than one month after Obama’s speech in Jerusalem, “I believe the window for a two-state solution is shutting … a year to year-and-a-half to two years, or it’s over.”

Of course, Obama is correct that civic engagement is central to democracy. But while it will be a long wait for a safe consensus about this issue to emerge in Israel or in America, we need to treat the prospect of the end of the two-state solution as the five-alarm fire that it is. What is needed is a dose of bold leadership. The question is whether the American administration has the political will to engage in muscular diplomacy. As Thomas Friedman told us, “we all know what the parameters for a peace plan are.  Let’s get on with it, let’s get on with it.”

Ben Avishai and Ken Winikur are the directors of J STREET: the Documentary. Their Facebook page is: facebook.com/JStreetTheDocumentary.

Before you go...

A lot of work goes into creating articles like the one you just read. And while we don’t do this for the money, even our model of non-profit, independent journalism has bills to pay.

+972 Magazine is owned by our bloggers and journalists, who are driven by passion and dedication to the causes we cover. But we still need to pay for editing, photography, translation, web design and servers, legal services, and more.

As an independent journalism outlet we aren’t beholden to any outside interests. In order to safeguard that independence voice, we are proud to count you, our readers, as our most important supporters. If each of our readers becomes a supporter of our work, +972 Magazine will remain a strong, independent, and sustainable force helping drive the discourse on Israel/Palestine in the right direction.

Support independent journalism in Israel/Palestine Donate to +972 Magazine today
View article: AAA
Share article
Print article

    * Required


    1. Like to think Obama welcomes being pushed (old political line “OK, you’ve convinced me. Now pressure me.”) but it seems that “push” ij American politics means “buy” or “bribe”. If the people, or even a lot of us, wanted a different USA-Israel relationship, one with some coercion in it on America’s side for a change, would we have the money to “push” Obama-Pelosi-Schumer et al?

      Reply to Comment
    2. XYZ

      It seems that Obama has finally wised up and realizes that there is not possibility of any sort of formal agreement between Israel and the Palestinians. Therfore, J-Street is simply an irrelevant organization that is wasting everyone’s time and money on a Quixotic crusade which is really only being carried out to make the participants “feel better about themselves” as “progressives”.
      This week, on the HaKol Diburim program, the former Israeli representative to Qatar was asked about the supposed “breakthrough” with the so-called “Arab initiative”. He said there is no breakthrough, what they said is trivial, HAMAS AND FATAH reject the “peace camp’s” interpretation and (note this well) NO ARAB LEADER WILL EVER SIGN AN AGREEMENT ENDING ARAB CLAIMS AGAINST ISRAEL. This is what a former member of the Israeli diplomatic service has learned. SO much for J-Street’s good intentions.

      Reply to Comment
      • ToivoS

        Impressive documentation xyz — Quoting an Israeli official interviewed on a popular Israeli radio show who says that its the Arabs fault. Though I should put “quoting” in “” since there is no evidence that what you put in caps was even said.

        Reply to Comment
        • XYZ

          Eli Avidar, the man who was interveiwed by Oded Ben-Ami dealt directly with these Arab leaders for several years. He said that former Foreign Minister Shlomo Ben-Ami, a true believer in the peace process was told to his face by IIRC the leader of Qatar that “no Arab leader would ever sign an ‘end of conflict’ agreement with Israel”.
          Just look at what HAMAS says. Look at Mursi’s commments from the past. It is all clear.

          Reply to Comment
    3. If colonial infrastructure prevented states from winning independence then Algeria, Angola, Mozambique, and Zimbabwe never would have won independence. They won independence because they mounted effective armed struggles and diplomatic campaigns that changed the political landscape. This means that there is no danger of the sand running out of the top half of the hourglass on the two-state solution. Presently the situation is not ripe for peace. If the Palestinians learn to mount an armed struggle that relies exclusively on guerrilla warfare, sabotage and non-violent methods as opposed to terrorism than this will begin to change the political calculus in both America and Israel, the two countries that really matter as far as the Palestinians are concerned. And then maybe J Street could play a role instead of serving as a Jewish Emily’s List for Progressive Jewish donors.

      Reply to Comment
    4. XYZ

      Actually, Thomas Mitchell, PhD, Arafat tried, after the Six-Day War, to do exactly what you recommend, based on the what he was seeing regarding the Vietnam War. It failed miserably.
      First of all, you can not separate terrorism for guerrilla warfare, as you seem to want.
      Secondly, Israel controls all the territory in a military sense.
      Thirdly, Israel outnumbers the Palestinians. There is no comparison with Rhodesia, Angola and Mozambique.

      Reply to Comment
    5. Leen

      Yikes, if Alan Dershowitz is worried about the two-state solution being nearly dead, you know this place is going to get 10000 times worse.

      Reply to Comment