Washington (JTA) — Former President Bill Clinton’s claim that Jewish urging contributed to his controversial pardon of Marc Rich has left some Jewish leaders feeling scapegoated. Others dismiss it as a non-issue.
In an opinion article in Sunday’s New York Times, reprinted in Tuesday’s Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Clinton defended the pardon of Rich and his associate Pincus Green, saying that “Israeli officials of both major political parties and leaders of Jewish communities in America and Europe urged the pardon of Mr. Rich.”
The Journal Sentinel also reprinted a response article by NYTimes columnist William Safire saying, in part, that Clinton’s allegation about Israeli and Jewish influence “only whips up anti-Semitism….”
But Wisconsin Jews presently or previously active in the Democratic Party doubt that this will happen or even that Clinton’s raising the issue is significant.
“It sounds to me like [Clinton is] rationalizing again,” said Esther Leah Ritz, a member of the board of the National Jewish Democratic Council. “Using Israel as the reason why he pardoned Rich is just more fabrication.”
She also said that “the main issue for the Jewish people is not whether the pardon of Rich will cause anti-Semitism. The Jewish community has much bigger problems than that.”
Former Madisonian Hannah Rosenthal, now the executive director of the Jewish Council for Public Affairs, believes there has been “a huge over-reaction” to this part of Clinton’s article. Rosenthal, a former Clinton appointee to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, said she believes Clinton made his decision on Rich “based on the legal merits.”
Dr. Richard Boxer, who has been a delegate to two national Democratic Party conventions, said, “I trust the American people not to believe there was any kind of plot by the Israelis to undermine our legal system.”
Milwaukee attorney Robert Friebert, a longtime Democratic activist and a former president of the Milwaukee Jewish Council for Community Relations, said he found Clinton’s reasoning “to be pretty lame. It doesn’t seem to add up very well. If there were some major foreign relations issues, he never called the State or Defense Departments to get their input.”
Helped peace process?
Other Jewish leaders in America and Israel are mixed on whether Clinton is setting up the Jewish community or whether they indeed influenced the decision.
Malcolm Hoenlein, executive vice chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, said it “seems inappropriate” for Clinton to cite Israeli lobbying as an important factor in his decision after first citing legal grounds for the pardon.
Phil Baum, executive director of the American Jewish Congress, said Clinton must take responsibility for his decision. “The emphasis he gave to the intervention of the Jews is regrettable, because it makes it sounds like he did it in response to that,” he said.
Rabbi Eric Yoffie, president of the Reform movement’s Union of American Hebrew Congregations, has been critical of Jewish lobbying on Rich’s behalf, charging last week that the Jewish community was “bought.” On Tuesday, Yoffie said Jewish leaders should not be reacting harshly to Clinton’s comments, but should do some introspection.
Rich had been indicted on 51 counts of tax evasion, racketeering and violating trade sanctions with Iran, but fled to Switzerland in 1983 before standing trial. He later became a major benefactor of Jewish charitable organizations and Israeli universities and hospitals.
Jewish officials in the United States, Israel and Europe lobbied the White House on Rich’s behalf. Many of them had benefited from Rich’s largesse.
Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak requested Rich’s freedom in phone conversations with Clinton and in letters. Clinton said in his column that he felt Rich had aided the Middle East peace process by sponsoring health and education programs in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.
Shabtai Shavit, head of Israel’s Mossad spy agency 1989-1996, said Rich had helped the Mossad search for missing Israeli soldiers and helped evacuate Jews from “enemy countries,” the New York Times reported.
Several prominent Clinton administration officials active in the Mideast peace process said Clinton never consulted them about the pardon. They include former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright and current Central Intelligence Agency Director George Tenet.
U.S. Ambassador to Israel Martin Indyk said he was first approached about Rich in 1995 by Israeli officials seeking clearance for Rich to travel without threat of arrest and extradition to the United States. The New York Times reported that former Israeli Prime Minister Shimon Peres said Rich had proposed raising money to help economic development in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, but needed to travel to accomplish the task.
While members of the Jewish community wrote letters on Rich’s behalf, Baum said the letters must be examined to see whether they are pardon requests or merely character references. While he sees no problem in submitting character references, Baum said, requesting the pardon would require an assessment of Rich’s crimes and their effect.
“It conveys the impression that Jews, because they were recipients of philanthropic contributions, were willing to intervene, even when there are charges that could harm the rest of society,” Baum said.
Some Jewish leaders are upset about how the community may be perceived, but they are not concerned that the Rich affair will affect U.S.-Israeli relations.
“I do not think that this will have a long term impact on U.S.-Israel relations, but the attempt to shift the onus onto Israel is unfortunate,” Hoenlein said in Jerusalem.
( JTA correspondent Avi Machlis in Jerusalem and Leon Cohen and Mardee Gruen of The Chronicle staff contributed to this report )
Loading ...