San Diego Jewish World

Friday, May 18, 2007    

Vol. 1, Number 18
 

Zionist Organization of America says ex-CIA director
has changed his account of Jonathan Pollard and Wye

NEW YORK (Publicity Release)—The Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) has pointed to a major discrepancy in former CIA Director George Tenet's accounts of his role in the continuing imprisonment of Jonathan Pollard.

ZOA has pointed out that Tenet, at a 1998 Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations meeting held after the Wye Agreement was signed, when asked about rumors that he had threatened to resign if Pollard was released, completely denied it. Now, in his newly published memoir, At the Center of the Storm: My Years at the CIA , Tenet states that he did, in fact, threaten to resign from the Clinton Administration if Pollard was released. Tenet further added that the Pollard release offer was not necessary to obtain Israel's signature on the Wye Agreement.

When Israel and the Palestinian Authority (PA) were negotiating an interim land-for-promises agreement at the Wye Summit in 1998, then-President Bill Clinton promised then-Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that he would release Pollard if Netanyahu signed the agreement, but Clinton withdrew that promise before the signing and simply promised to review the Pollard situation. [ZOA National President Morton A. Klein adds that David Bar Ilan, who attended the Wye negotiations as Netanyahu's Director of Communications and who was a close personal friend, told him that, on the first day of these negotiations, Clinton had offered the release of Pollard to Netanyahu if there was an agreement signed at the end of these meetings.]

Tenet, in his recently published memoir, now claims that he did in fact threaten to resign if Pollard was released. He writes (p. 70): "John Podesta, Clinton's chief of staff, called. John was not pushing, just delivering a message. 'The vice president [Al Gore] asked me to phone you,' he began. 'Do you know how important this agreement is?' 'Yes, I know it is important.' 'Well, the Israelis won't sign unless they get Pollard.' 'John,' I told him, 'this agreement is in their interest. They will sign it. Do not give them Pollard.' Just so there could be no misunderstanding, I repeated my position. If you give them Pollard, I'm done—but you don't have to. They will sign this agreement because it is in their interest. Just hold fast.'"

Morton A. Klein, national president of the Zionist Organization of America, said, "The account that George Tenet provides in his memoir is both perplexing and troubling, because I myself was present at the 1998 meeting of about 15 Jewish leaders at which Tenet, in response to a question about this, unequivocally and emotionally denied that he had threatened to resign if Pollard was released. Obviously, one of the two accounts he has provided is false. George Tenet should clarify which one is in fact the true account and why the discrepancy exists."

"The other strange aspect of the account Tenet now gives in his book is his repeated claim that the Wye Agreement was in Israel's interest. How can Tenet say that this agreement was in Israel's interest when it required Israel to give away 15% more of Judea and Samaria to the terrorist Yasser Arafat, in return for rehashed promises he had already made and failed to fulfill in the Oslo Agreements? In addition, our own contacts at the highest levels at that time spoke of less than veiled threats to Israel from the Clinton Administration if Netanyahu failed to sign Wye, which may better explain why Israel signed this agreement. So much for the vaunted pro-Israel lobby. Furthermore, the very night before Netanyahu signed the agreement, he held a conference call with leaders of Jewish organizations, forcefully and emphatically telling us that he would not sign this agreement because it was against Israel's interests. Netanyahu also told me his bags were packed and he was ready to return to Israel. Clearly, Netanyahu and the Israeli delegation did not feel this agreement was in their interest, contrary to what Tenet now alleges in his book. Tenet should clarify all these matters."

The Iraq Debate
Lieberman tells Republican Jewish Coalition Iraq is 'frontline' against Islamist extremism

Editor's Note: U.S. Senator Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn) spoke on May 16 to the Republican Jewish Coalition about the national debate over Iraq.  Here is a transcript of his speech. As other important figures in the Jewish community deliver policy addresses on this important issue, The San Diego Jewish World will endeavor to bring them to you.

By Sen. Joseph Lieberman

Now, I know there are some who are probably wondering—what is a nice Independent Democrat from Connecticut doing at a Republican event like this?

Well, a funny thing happened on the way to reelection last year... And as Rabbi Hillel said, the rest is commentary.

In all seriousness, many of you in this room stood with me last year through the long journey up a winding road that was my 2006 reelection campaign. You came to my side without regard for party affiliation, and you stayed there even after I ran as an Independent but said I would caucus with the Democrats. Your non-partisanship in my race is a model for what our politics should be. I thank you personally and deeply for it. I could not have won without it.

And I pledge to you that I will do everything I can to vindicate your confidence.

We gather at a critical time for the future of our country. The war in Iraq has now become the defining issue for this Congress and for this presidency—although the decisions we will make in the weeks and months ahead about Iraq will have consequences that reach far beyond the terms of anyone now in office.

Part of the disagreement we face over Iraq comes down to a genuine difference of opinion.

On the one hand, there are those who believe, as I do, that the struggle against Islamist extremism really is the central challenge of our time, and that, as General David Petraeus—our commander in Iraq—recently said, Iraq is now the central front of the war against Islamist extremism.

On the other hand, there are those who reject this view—who genuinely believe that the threat of Islamist extremism is overstated, or that Iraq is a distraction from the "real" war on terror, or that the war there is lost, or not worth fighting to win.

It is my deeply held conviction that these people are not only wrong, they are disastrously wrong—and that the withdrawal they demand would be a moral and security catastrophe for the United States, for Iraq, and for the entire Middle East, including Israel and our moderate Arab allies.

Let there be no doubt—an American defeat in Iraq would be a victory for Al Qaeda and Iran... the two most threatening enemies we face in the world today. It would vindicate the hope of our enemies that America is weak and that we can be driven to retreat by terrorism, and it would confirm the fear of our friends—not only in Iraq, but throughout the world—that we are unreliable allies who will abandon them in the face of danger.

The fact of the matter is, you cannot claim to be tough on terrorism while demanding that our military withdraw from Iraq, because it is the terrorists—particular Al Qaeda—that our military is fighting in Iraq.

You cannot claim to be committed to defeating Al Qaeda, while demanding that we abandon the heart of the Middle East to Al Qaeda.

And you cannot claim to be tough on Iran, while demanding the very thing that the mullahs want most of all—the retreat of the American military from the Middle East in defeat, leaving a vacuum that Iran will rush to fill.

I recognize that this war has been controversial, and there are those who oppose it on principle. I respect that.

But too much of the debate we are having today about withdrawal from Iraq has little or nothing to do with principle, or with reality in Iraq.

It is about politics and partisanship here in Washington.

For many Democrats, if President Bush is for it, they must be against it. If the war is going badly, it is bad for Republicans and it is good for Democrats. It is as simple as that, and it is as wrong as that.

For many Republicans, the unpopularity of this war and this President has begun to shake their will. They say that they have no choice but to abandon General Petraeus and his strategy because the American people tell the pollsters they want out. If previous generations of American leaders had allowed their conduct of war to be shaped by partisanship or public opinion polls, we would not be the strong and free nation we are blessed to be today.

Republicans in Congress delude themselves if they think they will be helping either themselves, their party, or their country if they now attempt to wash their hands of Iraq, out of a sudden sense of political anxiety.

Democrats in Congress delude themselves if they think they will not be held accountable for the bloody consequences of the retreat from Iraq they seek.

The fact is, a loss to Al Qaeda and Iran in Iraq would be devastating to our security. These are fateful days and critical decisions we are making about Iraq. We must make them with our eye on the safety of America's next generation, not the outcome of America's next election.

It is to the everlasting credit of President Bush that in the war against Islamist extremism he has shown the courage and steadfastness to stand against the political passions of the moment.

I have never hesitated to express disagreement with the President on any issue when I felt he was wrong—and I have criticized his administration many times for the serious mistakes I believe it made in prosecuting the war in Iraq.

But let me tell you this: I believe that each of us should be grateful that we have a commander-in-chief who does not believe that decisions about war should be driven by poll numbers. And each of us should be grateful that we have a commander-in-chief who does not confuse what is popular with what is right for our security as a nation. The public opinion polls may not reflect this today, but I believe history will tomorrow.

My friends, as Ronald Reagan once said, now is the time for choosing.

If we stand united through the months ahead, if we stand firm against the terrorists who want to drive us to retreat, the war in Iraq can be won and the lives of millions of people can be saved.

But if we surrender to the barbarism of suicide bombers and abandon the heart of the Middle East to fanatics and killers, to Al Qaeda and Iran, then all that our men and women in uniform have fought, and died for, will be lost, and we will be left a much less secure and free nation.

That is the choice we in Washington will make this summer and this fall. It is a choice not just about our foreign policy and our national security and our interests in the Middle East. It is about what our political leaders in both parties are prepared to stand for. It is about our very soul as a nation. It is about who we are, and who we want to be.

Will this be the moment in history when America gives up—when Al Qaeda breaks our will, when our enemies surge forward, when we turn our backs on our friends and begin a long retreat from our principles and promise as a nation?

Or will this be the moment when America steps forward, when we pull together, when we hold fast to the courage of our convictions, when—with a new strategy, and a new commander on the ground—we begin to turn the tide toward victory in this long and difficult war?

I know that we can rise above the anger and smallness of our politics. I know we can rise to the greatness that this moment demands of us.

The question is—will we choose to do so?

I would like to close today by sharing with you a story from my last visit to Iraq a few months ago. It was in Anbar province in western Iraq—the center of the insurgency—a part of the country that conventional wisdom last year dismissed as hopeless.

In fact, on September 11, 2006, the Washington Post ran a front-page story reporting that even the chief of Marine Corps intelligence in Iraq had concluded that Anbar was "lost," and our position there was "beyond repair."

I was in Anbar last December, on a forward operating base just outside Ramadi, the capital of the province. As one of the briefings with our military commanders ended, a colonel who had been sitting in the back of the room came up to me. He said something that I carry with me to this day—something that I hope you will carry with you as well.

He said: "Sir, I want you to know on behalf of the soldiers in my unit and myself that we believe in why we are fighting here, we want to finish this fight. And we know we can win it."

Today, five months later, Anbar has been dramatically transformed. Thanks to the bravery, ingenuity, and commitment of our men and women in uniform, shops and schools have reopened, Al Qaeda is on the run, thousands of Iraqis have joined the local police, and—yes—no less than the New York Times reports that we have turned the corner there.

My friends, now is not the time for despair. Now is the time for resolve. Now is not the time for reflexive partisanship and pandering to public opinion. Now is the time for the kind of patriotism and principle America's voters have always honored. I ask you to plead with every member of Congress you can in the days and weeks ahead. Do not surrender to hopelessness. Do not succumb to defeat. Do not give in to fear. Rise above the political pressures of the moment to do what is right for America.

Believe, like that colonel, in why we are fighting in Iraq, and know, as he and his soldiers know, that we can and must win there."

                                                          --------------

Commentary
Arrest of plotter against Ehud Olmert
shows why U.S. should not arm Palestinians

By Shoshana Bryen

WASHINGTON DC (JINSA)—Item: The Jerusalem Post reports that Palestinian Mazab Bashir was arrested for plotting to assassinate Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. Bashir works for "Doctors Without Borders." The head of "DWB" told Israel Radio, "We are very sad for Bashir who has been working for us for almost six years. But we... make a distinction between his professional work and what he does on his personal time... I don't think our organization can be held liable for every aspect of (his) life."

Item: The U.S. military is training Abu Mazen's "Presidential Guard" in the belief or ephemeral hope that this particular group of Palestinians, more than others, meets an American standard for the responsible exercise of lethal force. This would be risible if it were not so dangerous.

We've said it before - training Palestinian troops is not an appropriate mission for American military officers. And it doesn't matter if, as our Government often says, Israel approves of the training. We don't. This mess started during Oslo when Israel believed it had a Palestinian partner for police and counter-terror operations. It was a mistake by Israel compounded by the U.S. Government. Palestinians were never going to give Israelis security in a country Palestinians didn't believe should exist. Not surprisingly, Palestinians of various loyalties played policeman during the day and moonlighted as terrorists.

This is not news. We stopped the training for a while in part because they were blowing up Israelis and in part because they failed generally to accept our rules for organization, operation and transparency. Then we started again. Over time we became more and more heavily invested in thinking that if the Palestinians only had better capabilities, they would be better protectors of Israel's security. They can't; they don't want to be.

They can't even protect themselves. The Palestinians are having what appears to be a civil war. [Their government disintegrated much faster than the Iraqi government in part because Israel left the playing field precipitously; this is a warning.] The war is not between those in power and those out - it is more like conjoined twins fighting for control of the body. The U.S. is training one army of the government against another army of the government but, according to reports from the area, Fatah, including American-trained forces, have been almost entirely ineffectual against Hamas. Fatah is pleading for more weapons, as if what is lacking in Gaza is weapons.

What is lacking in Gaza is a clear-eyed understanding of the disintegration of Palestinian society at the hands of its own leadership. It was said that when Hamas had to govern it would become more moderate or at least more attuned to the people who elected it - the "pothole" theory of governance. In fact, Hamas is fighting Fatah for control in order to freely pursue its terrorist agenda against Israel. And despite American help - or because it only saw our help as a means to an entirely different end - Fatah is in no position to advance its own goals (not that those are so great, either).

This suggests that Israel may be forced to consider intervention for its own safety. If it comes, the U.S. will bear heavy responsibility.

The foregoing article was provided by the Jewish Institute for National Security
Affairs (JINSA). Bryen is JINSA's director of special projects. 
                                               _____________

Your specialist in cruises and tours           Upcoming 2007 San Diego  sailings: May 27-December 29: Carnival: Elation: multiple 4-and 5-day sailings, round trip to Mexico. Sept 23-Dec 30: Princess Cruises: Dawn Princess: 7-day round trip to Mexico Sept. 28: Celebrity Cruises: Summit: 14-day Hawaii Sept. 29: Holland America: Oosterdam, 7-day Mexico.

Jews in the News          
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Like you, we're pleased when members of our community are praiseworthy, and are disappointed when they are blameworthy. Whether it's good news or bad news, we'll try to keep track of what's being said in general media about our fellow Jews. Our news spotters are Dan Brin in Los Angeles, Donald H. Harrison in San Diego, and you. Wherever you are,  if you see a story of interest, please send a summary and link to us at sdheritage@cox.net.  To see a source story click on the link within the respective paragraph.
_______________________________________________________________________

*Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke said in Chicago that he did not think the growing number of defaults on mortgages would have much effect on the economy, and he cautioned members of Congress not to be too sweeping in proposals for reforming the mortgage lending system.  U.S. Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) and U.S. Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) are among legislators who have proposals on the issue pending.  The story by Jeremy W. Peters of the New York Times News Service is in today's San Diego Union-Tribune.

*Michael Eisner, former chairman of Disney, has a new project: marketing 90 second serial videos that can be received on cell phones.  James Hebert has the story in today's San Diego Union-Tribune.

*The immigration bill that U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff helped to broker with Congress has bipartisan support from Senators like Arlen Specter (R-Penn.) and Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif), has procedures for immigrants here illegally to become legal; requirements for a border fence; sanctions against employers of illegal immigrants, and a declaration that English is the official language of the United States. The story by Jerry Kammer and George Condon Jr. of Copley News Service is in today's San Diego Union-Tribune.

*San Diego Mayor Jerry Sanders has decided to issue a stop-work order against the 180-foot Sunroad Enterprises building owned by Aaron Feldman because its height might prove an obstacle to aviation at Montgomery Field.  Jennifer Vigil's story is in today's San Diego Union-Tribune.

*A court hearing was held to decide whether Vice President Dick Cheney, Karl Rove, Lewis "Scooter" Libby and Richard Armitage violated Valerie Plane's civil rights by disclosing that she was a CIA agent.  The Associated Press story is in today's San Diego Union-Tribune. 

*Bad news for teen fans of the Veronica Mars television show on CW. "It's over," according to CW Entertainment President Dawn Ostroff. Karla Peterson's column is in today's San Diego Union-Tribune.

*U.S. Senators Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) say they will call for a no-confidence vote in Alberto Gonzales as attorney general. Among those expected to vote in favor of the non-binding resolution, based on their statements, are Senators Arlen Specter (R-Penn.) and Norm Coleman (R-Minn.) The Associated Press story by Laurie Kellman is in today's San Diego Union-Tribune.

*Israel's Prime Minister Ehud Olmert visited Sderot to tell residents they shouldn't feel alone; Israeli jets meanwhile flew over targets in Gaza in retaliation for continued Qassam missile attacks on Sderot. The Associated Press story by Sarah el Deeb is in today's San Diego Union-Tribune.  In other news, Palestinian Masseb Bashir was charged with gathering information for a conspiracy to assassinate Olmert.  He gained access to Israel while working for Doctors Without Borders, according to an Associated Press story in the Hartford Courant

*San Diego's Old Globe Theatre is tackling Edward Albee's Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf, a daunting task in the wake of the definitive performances on film by Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton. Anne Marie Welsh has the story in today's San Diego Union-Tribune.

*President George W. Bush, saying he was "sorry" that Paul Wolfowitz had to resign as president of the World Bank, said he would soon have a new nominee for the position.  Jeannine Aversa of the Associated Press has the story in today's San Diego Union-Tribune.  Steve Breen also had an editorial cartoon on Wolfowitz's resignation in today's San Diego Union-Tribune.

*Black separatist Yahweh ben Yahweh, who taught his followers Hebrew and claimed to be descended from a lost tribe of Israel, has died at age 71—six years after being paroled from prison. The story by Matt Schudel of the Washington Post is in today's Los Angeles Times.
__________________________________________
The Jewish Grapevine                                                    
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AROUND THE TOWN—S. Esther Segal is putting together a musical roundup, with the help of accompanists Datha Rothstein and Jim Lobardi and choreographer Sonia Snyder that will feature selections from Oklahoma.  The singing groups that are participating have some interesting names:  "Women of Note," "Serra-Naders," "The Inflections—Vocal Jazz," and "Men of Note."  The production will be staged at 4:30 p.m., Saturday June 9, in the Patrick Henry High School Auditorium, 6702 Wandemere Drive in the San Carolos area.  Tickets are for adults $8 and for children under 12 $4. More information may be obtained at (619) 427-2448. ...
 

CONGREGATIONAL CURRENTS—Rabbi Leonard Rosenthal of Tifereth Israel Synagogue flew with his wife Judy to New York City to kvell as his son, Adam Rosenthal, was ordained as a Conservative rabbi in a ceremony at the Jewish Theological Seminary.

COMMUNITY ROUNDUP—The United Jewish Federation's Israel Center, working with I. Gerry Burstain, is in the process of exploring the possibility of establishing a special program with Kibbutz Ruhama, which is part of the Sha'ar Hanegev Regional Council in the northwestern portion of the Negev Desert.  Burstain, who regularly commutes between San Diego and Israel, is gathering information about the possibility of Ruhama becoming a base of operations for study and Israel travel for San Diegans interested in creating friendships with Israelis.  A former president of Ner Tamid Synagogue in Poway, Burstain has family in Petach Tikvah and Haifa. The Sha'ar Hanegev Regional Council has a partnership relationship with the UJF of San Diego.

CYBER REFERRALS—Who do you think wrote the following?  "Suicide bombers, jihadists, and other militant Islamists are evil at their core and just turn to the language of Islam found in the Qur’an or the Hadith to justify their barbarism, coercion, and doctrine of the ends justifying the means and of political Islam."  The author is Zuhdi Jasser, chairman of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy, based in Phoenix. Jay Jacobson of St. Louis Park, Minn., sent us a link to Jasser's essay on the need for moderate Muslims to speak up and for non-Muslims not to confuse Islam with Islamism.

POLITICAL SCENE—Joan Dean, who led the American Jewish Committee in San Diego for several years before relocating to New York City to be near her children, is serving as Director of Finance for the campaign of Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney, a Democrat who represents Manhattan's East Side as well as portions of Queens.  Dean says the AJC remains close to her heart and that she is now serving on the board of a Manhattan chapter. ...Sheriff Bill Kolender invites the public to root his team on as sheriff's deputies face the "Vista All Stars" in a soccer match at 2:30 p.m. tomorrow at Vista Townsite, 340 Townsite Drive, Vista. The match will follow a soccer clinic for children ages 6-17, and a Presentation of the Colors by a U.S. Marine Color Guard.  "This is an excellent way for the community to come together and just have fun," Kolender said. "I believe both the kids and our deputies will learn some new soccer techniques."
 

Rabbi Baruch Lederman

 Amazing tales of Judaism
                                                                      
                                                                          Congregation Kehillas Torah, San Diego         
______________________________________________________________

Mind boggling statistics from the Exodus

Dvar Torah: Bamidbar

The Children of Israel, led courageously by Moshe Rabeinu (Moses), traveled through the wilderness for 40 years with the help of Hashem (G-d). Many of us have heard this story hundreds of times, since we were children; but it is awesome, almost overwhelming when you think about it in detail:

Moshe and the people were in the desert, but what was he going to do with them?
They had to be fed, and feeding 2 or 3 million people requires a lot of food.

According to the Quartermaster General in the Army, it is reported that Moshe would have to have had 1,500 tons of food each day. Do you know that to bring that much food each day, two freight trains, each at least a mile long, would be required!  That is why Hashem provided them with Manna each day!

Besides you must remember, they were out in the desert, so they would have to have firewood to use in cooking the food. This would take 4,000 tons of wood and a few more freight trains, each a mile long, just for one day.  The manna came fully cooked.

And just think, they were forty years in transit.

And Oh yes! They would have to have water. If they only had enough to drink and wash a few dishes, it would take 11,000,000 gallons each day and a freight train with tank cars, 1,800 miles long, just to bring water!  Hashem provided water from the rocks!

And then another thing!  They had to get across the Red Sea in one night. Now,
if they went on a narrow path, double file, the line would be 800 miles long and would require 35 days and nights to get through. So there had to be a space in the Red Sea, 3 miles wide so that they could walk 5,000 abreast to get over in one night. Yet Hashem made the ground hard and smooth for them. Who else but Hashem could build a road so fast?

But then, there is another problem: each time they camped at the end of the day,
a campground two-thirds the size of the state of Rhode Island was required, or a total of 750 square miles long. Think of it!  This much space for just for nightly camping. And they didn't even have cell phones to stay in contact with each other to coordinate their actions and movements.

Do you think Moshe figured all this out before he left Egypt? I think not! Moshe believed in Hashem. Hashem took care of these things for him. Do you think Hashem has any problem taking care of all your needs? When the road you're traveling on seems difficult at best, just remember; Hashem has an amazing track record of helping and providing for us. Hashem did it before, He can do it again no matter how bleak or helpless your situation seems.

Dedicated in memory of Rochel bas Simcha by her brother Dr. Alfred Salganick.

(return to top)


Kindergartner explains to mommy how
people get that 'dent' under their noses

Editor's Note: The following article is reprinted from the current issue of Kolenu,
the weekly newsletter of Soille San Diego Hebrew Day School, where the author serves
as admissions director.

By Audrey Jacobs

SAN DIEGO—Of course we all get such nachas from our children on how bright and talented they are.  I am truly amazed my Kindergarten son Jonas can read
so well and talks in great detail about what he learned in science.  But
when he tells me about something he learned in  his Judaic class, his eyes
fill with wonder and pride.  I know how much spiritual safety and comfort
he gets from knowing Hashem is part of his life.

Here’s a sweet little story to illustrate…. this morning after a late
night of working on the auction for our June 3rd gala, I stumbled into the
boys room to wake them up and laid down next to my five year old Jonas. 

He rolled over and said, “Good morning Mommy.  Do you want to know a
secret about an angel?”

“Sure honey, tell me,” I replied.

Jonas sat up, gave a huge grin and said, “Did you know there’s an angel in
your tummy with the baby and he’s teaching our baby everything about the
world and Hashem?  But when the baby comes out of your tummy, the angel
will touch him right under his nose and the baby will forget everything. 
That’s why we have that dent under our nose and why we have teachers at
Hebrew Day School.”

“That’s beautiful,” I said welling up with tears of nachas.  “Who taught
you that sweetie?”

“My teacher, Morah Bracha.  She teaches me all the best secrets of the
world.”

Thank you Morah Bracha and all our wonderful teachers at Hebrew Day.  We
are blessed our children have you in their lives.
                                             ________________




                  Above advertisement courtesy of Lucy Goldman, who urges everyone to come
 

I
 

Dance~The Jewish C~o~n~n~e~c~t~i~o~n             by Sheila Orysiek

A Nod of the Head: A Turning Point(e) in Artistic Time – 98 Years Ago this Month..

In May 1909, Nicholas II was still “Emperor of all the Russias,” the Imperial theaters had had a glittering dance season and the dancers of the Imperial Ballet had departed in many directions ostensibly “on leave” – on vacation.  But young dancers at the height of their careers don’t like to take vacations away from their dancing – they simply dance elsewhere.  On the night of May 19, 1909 they were in Paris and the curtain was about to go up at the Theatre du Chatelet. The exceedingly skeptical Parisian audience doubted that these dancers from a Russia perceived as semi-barbaric, could possibly be a success in the city that had given birth to the ballet.

Serge Diaghilev, a Russian who had been dismissed from his position as Assistant Director of the Imperial Theaters several years before, had spent the intervening years bringing a bouquet of Russian paintings, music and opera to Paris with great success. This encouraged him to bring the Tsar’s own dancers from the Russian Imperial Ballet.  Immediately he ran into obstacles. 

Since the dancers were in fact civil servants, they were engaged to dance for the Imperial Theater through the winter social season and at various command performances.  Unfortunately, by the month of May, when the dancers were free, the social whirl in Paris was over and people – the people who mattered – often left the city.  But that was only the first of several problems.

Though the ballet had matured from a folk dance to an  artful child of the theater in France, had been codified, and had been under the auspices of the French royal court for three hundred years and more, by the late 1800’s it had decayed into an entertainment presented at the end of an evening of opera. To some extent it continued to exist at the sufferance of the male half of the suitably wealthy as a framework for providing them with the opportunity to observe a feminine ankle – or even a curved calf.  Choices were then made for the balance of the evening’s activities.  The Salon de la Danse, made famous by Degas, was the exhibit hall.  In short, the ballet was no longer the art form it once had been; Parisians had no memory of its past glories but they were jealously protective of the fact that the ballet was considered totally French.

However, the greatest of Diaghilev’s problems was money.  His life was spent on the edge of a fiscal abyss.  For that reason the lesser of the theaters – Theatre du Chatelet - instead of the larger and much more prestigious Paris Opera, had been engaged.  Use of the smaller theater helped to rob the evening of the all important cachet that captured Parisian hearts.

(So, where’s the Jewish connection?  Read on, read on…..)

It is not often that a turning point in history, or in an art form, can be recognized with such precision as what happened on that evening of May 19, 1909.  All the old conceptions (and misconceptions) of dance, music, costume, sets, lighting, choreography, libretto, were swept away in the blaze of color, sound and truly magnificent dancers and production.  The glory of the ballet, which had been moribund in Paris, had been incubating in Russia for two hundred years and now burst forth in a kaleidoscope of triumph.  Paris was overwhelmed by the Russian art storm. 

Fashion in clothing and furnishings were influenced, standards of what one should expect from the theater were expanded and artists of every genre were affected.  The success was so complete that Diaghilev brought the Russian Ballet – The Ballet Russe – back year after year expanding the touring to include the rest of Europe, England, South America, North America, eventually touching every continent, year after year until Diaghilev’s death in 1929.  Following his death The Ballet Russe continued to live and tour under different direction and names - such as The Ballet Russe de Monte Carlo – until the 1950’s.

(The Jewish connection is coming up – I promise!)

During Diaghilev’s time as impresario he introduced to the world (or encouraged) the following artists:

Dancers:  Anna Pavlova, Vaslav Nijinsky, Bronislava Nijinska, Tamara Karsavina, Fokine, Bolm, Mordkin. Baldina, Kosloff, Ida Rubenstein (Jewish), Danilova, Massine, Spessivtseva, Sokolova, Doubrovska, Dolin, Lifar, Lopokova, Marie Rambert (Miriam Ramberg – Jewish), de Valois, Prima Ballerina Dame Alicia Markova (Lillian Alicia Marks – Jewish).

Artists - set, scene and costume designers: Benois, Bakst (Lev Samoilovich Rosenberg – Jewish), Picasso, Matisse, Derain, Dali.

Choreographers:  Fokine, Massine, Nijinska, Balanchine, Nijinsky – altogether over 40 major productions, many of them still performed today.

Composers: Stravinsky, Rimsky-Korsakov, Glazunov, Poulenc, Satie, Auric, Ravel, Debussy, R. Strauss, de Falla, Respighi, Prokofiev.

The above list is partial – only a small – tiny – segment of the great artists discovered, presented and/or encouraged by Diaghilev. 

As time went by the dancers (alas) aged and retired in various cities around the world and opened schools and started companies such as Ninette de Valois founder of the Royal Ballet (London) and Balanchine (with Lincoln Kirstein – Jewish) founder of New York City Ballet.  Two of them, Alexandra Baldina and Theodore Kosloff opened a famous school in Southern California and my first ballet teacher was their devoted student.  Today, almost every well taught dancer is likely to trace his/her pedigree back to these Ballet Russe foundations.  Theater as we know it has been profoundly affected – and ballet totally affected – by the performance of May 19th, 1909.

(So – in addition to the artists above noted as being Jewish…..as I promised the Jewish connection is coming up….)

At the very last moment before the curtain could rise, Diaghilev faced the first of a series of continuing financial crisis that was to plague him throughout the decades.  But in this case, the curtain would definitely not go up unless he could secure financial backing as security.  Fortuitous application was made to the Baron de Rothschild and – prescient as always – he guaranteed the financial guardrail and the performance went on.

The glories of that evening and its subsequent seminal impact on theatrical art, dance, music, composition, production, design, choreography, lighting and all the artists and lovers of the arts down through the decades hung on the nod of the head of the Baron de Rothschild.

The quiet gift behind the glitter – the name you never see on the program.  This May we will celebrate the 98^th year since that seminal performance.

Some historians date that turning point(e) to May 18, 1909 – because sometimes the dress rehearsal (in front of a select audience) is considered a “first performance.”  It’s the way dancers fool themselves into thinking that the first night is really the second. night, and so the hurdle of a first night has already been overcome.

(return to top)