“Peace is generally good in itself, but it is never the highest good unless it comes as the handmaid of righteousness; and it becomes a very evil thing if it serves merely as a mask for cowardice and sloth, or as an instrument to further the ends of despotism or anarchy. We despise and abhor the bully, the brawler, the oppressor, whether in private or public life, but we despise no less the coward and the voluptuary. No man is worth calling a man who will not fight rather than submit to infamy or see those that are dear to him suffer wrong. No nation deserves to exist if it permits itself to lose the stern and virile virtues; and this without regard to whether the loss is due to the growth of a heartless and all-absorbing commercialism, to prolonged indulgence in luxury and soft, effortless ease, or to the deification of a warped and twisted sentimentality.”

“Moreover, and above all, let us remember that words count only when they give expression to deeds, or are to be translated into them… many a tyrant has called it peace when he has scourged honest protest into silence. Our words must be judged by our deeds; and in striving for a lofty ideal we must use practical methods; and if we cannot attain all at one leap, we must advance towards it step by step, reasonably content so long as we do actually make some progress in the right direction.”

This quotation is not taken from an op-ed by a neo-conservative in The Wall Street Journal. It’s Theodore Roosevelt’s Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech of May 10, 1910. His words resonate almost a hundred years later, just as President Obama’s Oslo speech did earlier this month.

My September 15th Blog, entitled Engaging Iran: Speak Softly and Carry a Big Stick, supported efforts by the President to use diplomacy to engage Iran on peacefully resolving the nuclear issue. The President set a deadline of the end of 2009 to reach some kind of agreement. Unfortunately, but not surprisingly, the deadline will pass with an ever more vitriolic Iranian leadership, disenfranchised from its populace.

The time for action is now as Iran’s stance is an existential threat for Israel, and endangers the stability of the world. The House recently passed the Iran Petroleum Sanctions Bill, which imposes sanctions on companies which help to supply gasoline to Iran. Crippling sanctions must be imposed that will degrade Iran’s economy and capacity to engage in aggressive military action, as manifested by Iran’s takeover of an oilfield in Iraq.

The President stated that all options must be on the table to prevent Iran from going nuclear. A vise must be applied to Iran in two ways: from economic political pressure and the threat of military action, and support for the internal revolt by its people who desire freedom and democracy from Iran’s tyrannical rule.  We’re beyond negotiating with a regime that murders its own people and fosters World-wide terrorism and kills U.S. troops.

If the Western powers, particularly France and Germany, heeded Teddy Roosevelt’s words, scarcely thirty years after his acceptance speech, we could have prevented Hitler’s quest for lebenstraum. Two generations later, we cannot afford to make the same mistake.

I was pleased by the recent acceptance speech by President Obama of the Nobel Peace Prize. He discussed the concept of the “just war,” “that war is justified only when certain conditions were met: if it is waged as a last resort or in self-defense; if the force used is proportional; and if, whenever possible, civilians are spared from violence.”

This is criteria to which our Afghan war abides as did the recent Israeli War in Gaza. The President continued, “We must begin by acknowledging the hard truth: We will not eradicate violent conflict in our lifetimes. There will be times when nations —  acting individually or in concert — will find the use of force not only necessary but morally justified.”
 
“I make this statement mindful of what Martin Luther King Jr. said in this same ceremony years ago: "Violence never brings permanent peace. It solves no social problem: it merely creates new and more complicated ones." As someone who stands here as a direct consequence of Dr. King's life work, I am living testimony to the moral force of non-violence. I know there's nothing weak —  nothing passive —  nothing naïve —  in the creed and lives of Gandhi and King.”
 
“But as a head of state sworn to protect and defend my nation, I cannot be guided by their examples alone. I face the world as it is, and cannot stand idle in the face of threats to the American people. For make no mistake: Evil does exist in the world. A non-violent movement could not have halted Hitler's armies. Negotiations cannot convince al Qaeda's leaders to lay down their arms. To say that force may sometimes be necessary is not a call to cynicism —  it is a recognition of history; the imperfections of man and the limits of reason.”
 
“I raise this point, I begin with this point because in many countries there is a deep ambivalence about military action today, no matter what the cause. And at times, this is joined by a reflexive suspicion of America, the world's sole military superpower.”

Now that our progressive President has enunciated his justification for a just war, even as he was receiving a Nobel Peace Prize, it reminds me of a prior incident which I encountered years ago.

My son was a junior at Oberlin, and my wife and I attended parent’s weekend in November 2001, shortly after the horrendous terrorist attack against America on 9/11. Oberlin College, is an outstanding liberal arts institution with a world-class conservatory. It is also known for its progressive politics. The President and Dean, who spoke with the parents, noted that the campus treasures diversity of opinion, particularly in the aftermath of September 11.

The College then sent out an editorial piece called Oberlin Reflections on 9/11. Nowhere in this publication did it state the justification for a just war against the Taliban and Al Qaeda. Instead it grieved for the victims of this horrendous “tragedy,” as if it were an earthquake. Finally, there were references made to Pearl Harbor. But it wasn’t to justify our war against the Japanese aggressor. No, it pointed to our incarceration of Japanese Americans in California. This was a reprehensible over-reaction led by then California Attorney General, Earl Warren, who as Chief Justice presided over Brown vs. Board of Education. But the war against the Japanese fit every definition of a “just war.” Yet this was ignored.

In response I sent the following letter, published in the Oberlin Alumni Magazine, Spring 2002:

“Where Is Oberlin's Patriotism? In November I attended Parents' Weekend, as my son is a junior at Oberlin. The president and dean noted that the campus treasures diversity of opinion, particularly in the aftermath of September 11. Having recently received Oberlin Reflections, I find that while this may be the theory, it is not fully practiced. Leafing through its pages, I noted poignant reminisces of individuals caught in the maelstrom of the World Trade Center. However, any reference of a political nature made within the document related to anti-war protests, "militarism"-assumed racism, and other "politically correct" issues. This was reflected in the editorial of The Oberlin Review, the section on the students' response on campus, and in other articles. Nowhere in this publication was there any sense of patriotism or support for the president or our armed forces. Considering the fact that 88 percent of Americans support the president in our war against terrorism, one would think this perspective would be evidenced in Oberlin Reflections. Perhaps the fundamentalism of political correctness on the campus precludes any discussion of a "just war" in this publication. It is clear, however, that not all perspectives are represented in campus publications, if Oberlin Reflections is an example.”

My letter generated vitriol by other Oberlin alumni. I was therefore particularly gratified that the President articulated the case for fighting “just wars” as an essential ingredient to advance the larger goal of worldwide peace.

Today we are confronted with the most hideous headlines regarding horrific atrocities committed in the name of religion. At Fort Hood, one of our own, a psychiatrist to boot, slaughtered thirteen of his military comrades in the name of fanatical Islam, and injured dozens of others. Thousands are killed in Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan and elsewhere by The Taliban and their allies who share a world view that does not tolerate dissent.

From the horrific to the obscene, we are inundated by the latest sexual escapades by sports celebrities and the Hollywood set. What a toxic environment in which we expose our children day in and day out.

With the Hanukkah season upon us, one that celebrates religious tolerance, as I indicated in my prior blog, I wanted to share some anecdotes which celebrate ethnic diversity and the brotherhood of humankind. They are drawn from Rabbi William Silverman’s book, The Sages Speak: Rabbinic Wisdom and Jewish Values.

While I was conducting services for the men in the armed forces at Fort Custer, Michigan, it happened that a young man of the Protestant faith was in emergency need of a chaplain. Since the Protestant chaplain was on leave, the Catholic chaplain went to see the boy. The soldier was somewhat apprehensive and said: “Father, I appreciate your coming to see me, but I am a Protestant. I hope you won’t try to change my faith.”

The Roman Catholic chaplain said with a gentle smile: “My son, I don’t want you to change your faith. I want your faith to change you!”

That, too, is the Jewish hope: not to change any man’s faith—but to look to G-d with the prayer that man’s faith may change him, inspire him, and challenge him to enter into a Divine partnership.

In northern Minnesota, a farmer’s five-year-old child was playing in the kitchen while his mother was busily engaged in her domestic chores. Unnoticed, the child toddled out of the house and out into the wheatfield.

Shortly thereafter, the mother noticed the absence of the child and began a frantic search for her baby. When she could not find the child in the immediate vicinity of the farmhouse, she called her husband and together they searched through the heaped-up sheaves of wheat. In desperation they summoned the farmhands and continued their search.

Several hours later, when the child still had not been found, the townspeople were called in and urged on by the entreaties of the father and mother. Those of every social position, economic level, and religious faith—the minister and the rabbi, the laborer and millowner—beat at the sheaves of wheat, walking and running every direction, with the hope of finding  the child.

When this proved futile, someone suggested: “We seem to be going off in all directions. Why don’t we join hands, form one large circle, spread out and then close in, encompassing every inch of the land?”

As the result, the preacher joined hands with the laboring man, and the physician joined hands with the town idler. Men of every station of life and of every faith joined hands to form a gigantic circle. Carefully examining every inch of the land, they narrowed the circle until someone reached down, picked up the child, and handed him to his father. After the physician had carefully examined the child, the father knew, by the look on his face, that the child was dead. He lifted the lifeless body of his child in his arms and cried out: “G-d, G-d—why didn’t we join hands before it was too late?”

Let us all join hands in celebrating our commonalities rather than attacking our differences.

Happy Hanukkah.

Every year we hold a Hanukkah party for our staff, many of whom are not members of the Jewish faith. In my remarks to the group, I always state that Hanukkah is the first recorded example of a people fighting for and triumphing over its enemies in securing its own religious freedom. The Hellenization of Judea, resulting in the desecration of the Temple and banning of religious rites by Jews was defeated by the heroic stand led by the Maccabees.

As such, it’s a universal message. Hanukkah's symbol of religious freedom and tolerance are more relevant today than in recent memory. The Global war against radical Islamic terrorism reached a new stage with President Obama’s decision to add an additional 30,000 troops for an Iraqi-style surge. The Taliban is among the most repressive of theocracies, literally slaughtering those who diverge from their fundamentalist views. But despite being considered “Peoples of the Book,” Christians and Jews are second-class citizens in most Arab countries. Their status as dhimmis does not confer the same rights as for Muslims.
While Europe is struggling with the demographic explosion of Muslims, many of whom do not intend to integrate within its general society, the Swiss recently voted to forbid the construction of minarets alongside mosques. France’s chief Rabbi Gilles Bernheim complained that this vote showed that the Swiss had failed to show tolerance towards Muslims. “The problem” with the Swiss vote “is the discrimination that it introduces by authorizing the construction of church steeples and tall buildings by all other religions except Islam. He also called for the same tolerance in Muslim countries. Frankly, while the Swiss vote is regrettable, there is no equivalence between this insensitivity by the Swiss as contrasted to how minorities are treated in most Arab countries.

While we have had our own share of firebrands and intolerance as a people, we have done more, per capita, to fight for the rights of the oppressed and for religious liberty than any other religious or ethnic group.

The greatest Jewish philosopher of the medieval period, Maimonides, was an advocate for religious toleration. “You asked about the gentiles, keep in mind that G-d … depends on the intention of the heart, therefore…there is no doubt that he who achieves ethical qualities in the right ways of life and the right wisdom in the belief in G-d, merits the futureworld …“A gentile who studies the Torah is equal to the high priest.”

So our Jewish message of religious tolerance and liberty is inscribed on The Liberty Bell in Philadelphia: “Proclaim liberty throughout the land and to all the inhabitants thereof.” And so, I wish all of you Jew and gentile, best wishes for a Happy Hanukkah or whatever religious celebration you observe.

This week's Torah portion of Va-Yishlah tells about Jacob's struggle with his conscience. With his mother's complicity, he stole his brother Esau's birthright from his blind father. No one called our ancestors saints.

Jacob wrestling with the angel, by Gustave Dore

On the other hand, because of his innate goodness, he was chosen to be the patriarch of a people committed to follow G-d's will. Consumed by this inner turmoil, Jacob was confronted by a stranger who wrestled him, during which the former said that, "Your name shall no longer be Jacob but Israel, for ‘You have struggled with G-d.'"

This name Israel is the homeland of the Jewish people. As such, it is site of our holiest and historical places and now has the largest numbers of Jews in the world.

Yet within the State of Israel, there are about 300,000 non-Jews, originally from the Former Soviet Union, who were brought in as relatives of Jews who were allowed to enter as nascent citizens because of the Law of Return. Their children live in a "Twilight Zone" of being Israelis, but not being the children of Jacob.

Yet, a higher percentage of this group volunteer for combat units in the Israel Defense Forces than Jews. If, G-d forbid, any of them were killed during war, they could not be buried in Jewish cemeteries because of their ambiguous status.

In recognition of this demographic time bomb, the Israel Defense Forces and the Jewish Agency for Israel developed a program called Nativ, which allows six weeks of leave from service in the Israeli Defense Forces for this population, to learn about Judaism. After their first exposure, most opt for more study. As a result, many thousands have converted to Judaism.

I had the privilege of speaking to one of these groups at Kiryat Moriah, the educational campus of the Jewish Agency. Scanning the group, I noticed the Zahal, or the Israel Defense Force decals on their uniforms. I then thanked them for their commitment to the State of Israel and for participating in this program of Jewish education. I told them that they are soldiers for the Israel Defense Forces, but we also wanted them to learn about the "Jacob" side of Israel so that they can become full-fledged members of our Jewish people.

The tension between Jacob and Israel, between religion and state, religion and secularism, the West and Middle-East, these are the ingredients that make Israel one of the most complex, exciting, and argumentative societies on the planet. But just like our forefather Jacob, his descendants struggle with the meaning of life, as they take on the mundane responsibility of living day by day in a "dangerous neighborhood."