First let me repeat that I am no fan of Netanyahu, that I am heartbroken at the suffering of Gazan civilians, and that I believe the U.S. should insist that military assistance to Israel (and any other recipient) accords with our values.
However, I believe that the proposed permanent ceasefire resolution is misguided, divisive and takes sides.
There is no local precedent for a village board resolution on any international issue. Supporters cite how many towns have issued ceasefire resolutions. But this number is dwarfed by those which haven’t, including Evanston and Waukegan. Per Waukegan’s mayor, the issue is simply out of local governments’ wheelhouse. (1)
State officials may have made statements supporting Ukraine, but that was a noncontroversial response to an unjustified Russian invasion. There is no consensus regarding a permanent Gaza ceasefire, partly because the situation is very complex. It’s not only that the war resulted from a broken ceasefire and brutal attack. Hamas must answer for war conduct, including use of human shields and denying civilians tunnel access. Sadly, neither are mentioned in the proposed resolution.
Consider also:
Recently, the Israeli government made a ceasefire offer, rejected by Hamas, that Secretary of State Blinken described as “extraordinarily generous.” (2) Another proposal is on the table now. (3)
In contrast, the call for a permanent ceasefire is the Hamas position and leaves a terror group intact and in power. Hamas started this war, massacred, and kidnapped Israelis and stated its intent to do so again and again.
It makes no sense for the village to adopt Hamas’ position or to inject itself into such a dynamic situation with a fixed position.
Some Jewish residents support the ceasefire resolution. Some are anti-Zionist. But I repeat: Some 80% of Jewish-Americans care deeply about Israel as it is now, a Jewish state. (4) We want to see Hamas defeated. The resolution supporters have given no indication that they share this desire.
The suggestion that ending military assistance to Israel will result in more funding for local government programs is naïve. No diversion of federal funds from Oak Park to Israel’s military has been reported. Why expect a local increase if military assistance ends?
Jim Schwartz wrote of his love for student protesters and Gazan Palestinians [I can speak up for those who can’t, Viewpoints, May 22]. Sadly and shockingly, he doesn’t mention love for Jewish students who are spat upon or made to feel unsafe on campuses (including, reportedly, at OPRF). He doesn’t mention love for Israeli hostages or for Israelis who live under ongoing and threatened missile attacks, or the 135,000 who are internally displaced. (5) His omissions are part of a pattern that has Jewish people in our area and nationally feeling frightened and alone. The proposed resolution is also part of this pattern.
It is my fervent hope that the village board will courageously continue not to take it up.
(2) https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/04/29/israel-hamas-war-news-gaza-palestine/
(4) https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2021/05/21/u-s-jews-have-widely-differing-views-on-israel/
(5) https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(23)02521-7/fulltext