I’m sure you know the legend of the great Hasidic rabbi imprisoned in St. Petersburg on false charges. While awaiting trial, he was visited by the Chief of Police. Struck by the quiet majesty of the rabbi’s appearance and demeanor, the official asked, “Why is it that a God that was all-knowing had to call out when Adam was hiding and ask him ‘Where art thou?’
“You do not understand the meaning of the question,” the rabbi answered. “This is a question God asks of every man in every generation -- after all your wanderings, after all your efforts, after all your years, 0 man, ‘Where art thou?’”
This is a question that all of us must ask ourselves in this election. And I hope that it is a question that each of you will ask between now and November 7 -- “Where art thou?”
And then, I think you should ask yourselves one more question -- what happens on November 8th? Let’s talk about that for a few minutes.
The experts say that there’s a big shift among Jewish voters and that Nixon may get a majority of Jewish votes.
Well, I don’t believe it.
I believe that the Jewish people who gave this nation a Brandeis, a Cardozo, and a Felix Frankfurter will not vote for a President who picks a Haynesworth and a Carswell above a Paul Freund, a Bernie Segal, or a Henry Friendly.
I believe that the Jewish people who saw their brothers suffer from Gestapos and Ogpus are not going to vote for an Administration which sabotages and subverts the campaigns of Americans like Hubert Humphrey, Henry Jackson and Ed Muskie.
The people who gave us Micah and Isaiah with their reverence for life will not vote for an Administration which kills indiscriminately in Vietnam.
I believe that the people who founded Brandeis University and Yeshiva, great seminaries and day schools, who support hospitals and medical centers and old age homes, will not vote for a President who vetoes every major measure for schools, for the sick and for the elderly.
The people who gave us James Marshall and Arthur Spingarn and Jack Greenburg and Arthur Lelyveld and Joachim Prinz are not going to vote for an Administration which sets neighbor against neighbor, hard hats against students, whites against blacks.
Look at the men Jack Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson gathered around them: -- Arthur Goldberg as Secretary of Labor, Abe Ribicoff as Secretary of HEW, and Mike Feldman, Lee White, Dick Goodwin, Lou Oberdorfer, Newt Minow, and Lee Loevinger – people high in White House councils and high in the agencies of our government.
Compare the Nixon Administration record. And while you are at it, count Nixon’s appointments of Blacks, Poles, Italians, and other ethnic groups. You won’t have much to count!
I read the polls and I read the Republican propaganda. But I know your tradition, your love for learning – your compassion, your generosity, and your faith.
And I say that when the critical moment comes on November 7th most American Jewish voters will not vote for John Mitchell or Richard Kleindienst, and, most of all, they will not vote to keep Spiro Agnew where he can succeed to the Presidency itself.
But despite these facts, I’ve heard it said this year that American Jewish voters are moving toward Mr. Nixon because of his support for Israel.
That’s a puzzle to me – as one whose interest in Israel goes back even before a Democratic President, Harry Truman, saw to it that the USA was the first nation in the world to recognize the new state in 1948.
It’s too bad that this issue has to be discussed. For years, men like Senators Humphrey, Ribicoff, Javits, Jackson, McGovern, and others, tried to make support of Israel bipartisan and not a political issue.
But this year, Mr. Nixon chose to make support of Israel into a political issue by seeking credit from Jewish voters because he sold Phantom jets to Israel.
I think there is something cynical, if not sinister, in an Administration – which for three years withholds badly needed jets from Israel – and then seeks gratitude for doing something that should have been done during those three lean years.
With Mr. Nixon, Israel has had three lean years. And only this election year is a fat year. Jews did better than that under the Pharoahs in Egypt. At least then the seven lean years were balanced by seven fat years.
But since the issue has been created by Mr. Nixon to divide the Jewish community, let’s look at the record. Let’s start with Richard Nixon as Vice President. Then, Nixon was for:
- The suspension of economic aid to Israel; he was for the sale of arms to various Arab states; he was for refusal to sell arms to Israel.
- And, after the 1956 Suez explosion, he was for forcing the Israelis back to indefensive borders without a negotiated peace settlement. Let’s not forget that this is the only occasion in the history of Israel that the USA has been against Israel. Nixon was one of the leaders against Israel.
- Has that been all forgotten? Has Nixon forgotten? Will he remember on November 8th?
Now, look at Mr. Nixon’s first three years as president.
Mr. Nixon and Mr. Rogers claimed that they wanted to be “even-handed” between Israel and Egypt and not supply arms to either. That sounds virtuous. It has a nice ring to it. But, being even-handed between peace-loving nations and belligerent nations, between just causes and unjust causes, is like being “even-handed” between the robber and his victim.
What was behind this “even-handed” argument? What did it mean when we didn’t supply arms to Israel or Egypt? Well, you know that Russia continuously supplied tanks, jets and missiles to Egypt! They weren’t even-handed. So the result was un-evenhanded. The balance tipped in favor of the Arabs. And this is what Nixon and Rogers wanted.
In 1969, Mr. Nixon tried the big power approach to settle the Arab-Israeli dispute. Israel was against this. Israel wanted direct negotiations. George McGovern has always insisted on direct negotiations.
And we say that again today! We favor face-to-face negotiations between the Arabs and the Israelis.
In 1970, the Nixon Administration unveiled the “Rogers Plan.” And it held up arms shipments to pressure Israel into accepting it. You know about the Rogers plan. It would make Israel withdraw to its insecure pre-Six-Day War boundaries. It would place Jerusalem under joint Israeli-Jordanian control. It undermined Israel’s demand for direct negotiations. And while Egypt continued to violate the cease fire and build up arms, Nixon and Rogers continued to press Israel to accept the Rogers Plan.
Do you remember the enormous pressure Mr. Rogers placed on Israel to accept his plan? Can we forget that rabbis and community leaders all through America were urging that letters and telegrams be sent to the President and Congress protesting the Administration pressure to put across the Rogers Plan?
Have you forgotten that when Abba Eban briefed some U.S. Senators privately, Mr. Rogers demanded equal time? It was only a little more than a year ago. Are memories that short?
Mr. Nixon rejected at least nine different initiatives by the Democratic Congress to provide Israel with the needed Phantom jets, and to support direct negotiations without prior conditions.
In November, 1971, the Senate, including George; McGovern, voted overwhelmingly to provide $500 million in military credits for Israel. But even then – less than a year ago – Nixon still withheld Phantoms to force Israel into concessions. He said that the legislation was not mandatory – only “permissive.” It was permissive all right – it encouraged another, round of Egyptian intractability and invectiveness against Israel.
Finally, came 1972 – an election year. Now, after two visits by Premier Golda Meir, after an overwhelming Soviet buildup had grown to overwhelming size, and after heavy pressure from a Democratic Congress – only then did Mr. Nixon begin to sell Israel the arms she needed. And that’s a friend: How short can memories get?
Now, let’s look at George McGovern’s record during those years.
I know that George McGovern doesn’t have a Jewish constituency in South Dakota. But that’s the point! George McGovern supported Israel back in 1957, when there couldn’t have been any political advantage in doing so.
He did it because he believes in Israel’s cause. One of his first actions in Congress was to call on the Eisenhower-Nixon Administration to obtain commitments from Egypt to keep the Suez Canal and the Straits of Tehran open before Israel withdrew from Sinai – another was to vote against the Eisenhower Doctrine, which would have sent arms to Arab states.
And throughout his Senate career, George McGovern’s record has been one of consistent support of Israel.
In the past five years, George McGovern made his support of ‘Israel and Soviet Jewry a matter of public record eleven times, in addition to his Senate votes supporting military aid to Israel. Such a record is fully as outstanding: as that of Israel’s well-known friend -- Senator Scoop Jackson.
Despite this record, there have been smears against George McGovern, and I want to answer them. One smear is that George McGovern is a latecomer to the Israeli cause. Well, I’ve answered that. George McGovern’s record goes back to 1957. Nixon just became friendly this year. And are you confident that on November 8th Nixon won’t revert back?
Another smear is that McGovern voted against aid to Israel in 1971. That’s a lie too. Senator McGovern opposed Nixon’s efforts to embarrass Senate liberals by tying ABM and aid to military regimes in Vietnam, Greece and Cambodia with aid to Israel. That was a typical Nixon cynical maneuver. It also included $11 million in aid to Egypt. And McGovern opposed it. But a month earlier, he voted for the Jackson Amendment giving $300 million in additional aid to Israel.
Another smear is that because George McGovern has been strong against the war in Vietnam, he would be weak in support of Israel. That is sheer nonsense. There is absolutely no basis for comparing Israel and Vietnam. Anyone who does so is doing Israel one huge disservice.
Vietnam is a dictatorship and General Thieu is corrupt and repressive and does not command the support of his people.
Israel, on the other hand, is democratic and open and supported by its people. Vietnam has been a rat-hole costing billions of dollars, and what is far worse – thousands of American lives.
Israel, on the other hand, wants only to buy arms. It doesn’t ask for one American soldier. Strategically, Vietnam is not important to our national security. Israel, on the other hand, is in an area of strategic and economic importance to the United States.
And, finally, Vietnam has no political, cultural, or historical ties with the United States. With Israel, however, we have shared values, cultural affinities, a. common ethical and religious heritage and a struggling democracy whose beginnings remind us of our own.
It is Mr. Nixon who doesn’t see the difference between Israel and Vietnam. He continually tries to link support of Vietnam, Greece and other repressive regimes to the support of Israel. George McGovern does see the difference. And it’s the difference between right and wrong.
Mr. Nixon, however, sees our smaller allies as pawns in a big power chess game. Let us remember that in 1971 Nixon said Japan is our “most important ally.” He then pressed Japan to do nothing with China, which he then called “our mutual enemy.” But in 1972, Nixon shifted, and he did not even consult with the Japanese government!
And although I believe that Nixon’s visit to China was desirable, let’s remember that it was Nixon who built his entire career on red-baiting (starting right here in California). It was Nixon who promised unswerving, undying support to Nationalist China. And it was Nixon who abandoned Nationalist China when a visit to Peking seemed desirable as a power and public relations tactic for 1972.
Another country which Mr. Nixon used to call an ally was India. But that friendship also went-down the drain when Nixon unilaterally decided to wash it away.
There are, I know, distinctions in these analogies, but they do illustrate the character of Nixon – a man who courts power, who has no moral vision and who shifts with the winds of political expediency.
What will be expedient for four years after November 8th? The oil interests have contributed heavily to Nixon’s campaign. The 1972 Republican fact book calls for withdrawal from “all occupied lands.” Secretary Rogers still adheres to the Rogers Plan. And Nixon won’t have to worry about re-election the next time Israel asks for Phantoms. These are ominous omens for friends of Israel.
By contrast, George McGovern’s support of Israel is not based on the shifting sands of political expediency.
- We believe that it is in our national interest that we should give Israel the aid she requires in order to deter and repel attack.
- We believe that Israel and the Israeli people are important as of themselves.
- And most of all, we believe in the justice of Israel’s cause.
And in the long run, it is the justice of Israel’s cause that must prevail in world. You know as well as I do that Israel will never muster the power in the United Nations that the Arab states can muster. Israel will never have the population power that Arab states will have. Israel then must have the support of those who believe in her cause.
George McGovern is such a man -- heart and soul!
The same concepts of justice and concern for human values apply to George McGovern’s position on the oppression of Soviet Jews.
George McGovern spoke out against Soviet oppression of Jews back in 1963 and 1964 when even Jews were Jews of silence. He’s no Johnny-come-lately to this subject.
But what about Nixon? I would be happy if he were a Dick-come-lately to this area. But Mr. Nixon is silent. He goes to Moscow; he sleeps in the Kremlin. Have you heard anyone say that he placed the oppression of Soviet Jewry on his agenda? You know he did not.
And let me tell you that many Soviet experts believe that the Nixon failure to emphasize Soviet Jewry in Moscow was a green light for the Soviets to continue their oppression. Leaders of virtually all major Jewish organizations have called upon Mr. Nixon to lend his prestige and influence on behalf of Soviet Jewry.
He has refused to speak out against the Leningrad trials. He refused to meet Soviet immigrants. He refused to meet with Richie Maass, the President of the National Conference of Soviet Jewry. He refused even now to speak out against the sadistic exit taxes. On his great human rights cause, Nixon has become the Nixon of silence.
Now Mr. Nixon has another chance in the trade deal with Russia. He wants to send our wheat to Russia.
Mr. Nixon wants to give Russia most favored nation treatment. And Russia needs our wheat.
What a great opportunity to strike a blow against oppression. What an opportunity to help Soviet Jews leave without the onerous exit tax which is a reversion to serfdom and slavery.
You know where George McGovern and I stand. We believe that the question of the exit tax should be linked to trade concessions.
Of course, Senator McGovern and I want more trade with the Soviet Union. But we are not willing to conduct “business as usual” in the face of this flagrant violation of basic human rights.
We call on Mr. Nixon to reverse his stand on this issue. We say that legislation implementing these agreements should not be presented to the Senate for passage until the exit tax has been repealed.
We know that linking trade concessions to better treatment of Soviet Jews would be effective. What about it Mr. Nixon? And if Nixon won’t do this before November 7th, will he do so afterward?, I ask you.
You may have heard that Mr. Brezhnev is planning a visit to the United States in April. I can tell you that with George McGovern in the White House, the issue of Soviet Jewry will be high on the agenda. Brezhnev will know that George McGovern is concerned.
But I ask you, why is the Russian communist press supporting Nixon’s re-election? Do they know something about Nixon’s position on Soviet Jewry that you do not know?
I believe also that our government should call on the Secretary General of the United Nations to undertake a personal mission to persuade the Soviet authorities to change their policy. This, too, would help focus the pressure of world opinion on the problem.
I believe, too, that the United States should take the lead in introducing into the United Nations an international convention (treaty) on the right to leave. This would help to secure this right in international law.
Recently a colloquium of distinguished scholars met at the University of Uppsala in Sweden and promulgated a Declaration on the Right to Leave. I have examined it and believe it provides an excellent basis for a treaty on this subject.
Such a treaty would advance the cause of Soviet Jewry. And it would also help those held against their will in East Berlin, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Poland and elsewhere.
Under Richard Nixon, the United States has been apathetic and lethargic in pressing for human rights. Under George McGovern, there will again be initiative in the cause of human rights. And once again, this nation will be known as the champion of the oppressed.
I would like to conclude by reading to you from a letter written last week by the saintly philosopher, Dr. Abraham Joshua Heschel.
Dr. Heschel says:
“If the prophets Isaiah and Amos were to appear in our midst, would they accept the corruption in high places, the indifferent way in which the sick, the poor, and the old are treated? Would they condone the indifference’ to gun control legislation...would they not be standing amidst those who protest against the violence of the war in Vietnam, the decay of our cities, the hypocrisy and falsehood that surround our present Administration – even at the highest level?”
Dr. Heschel continues:
“George McGovern’s call for a revival of our national values echoes the demands of Israel’s ancient prophets.
“By word and by deed, Senator McGovern is committed to the idea that ‘setting the moral tone of this nation is the most serious responsibility of the President.’ Regrettably, the same cannot be said of Mr. Nixon.”
Dr. Herschel concludes:
“We must elect George McGovern to the Presidency of the United States because the needs of America and the values of our Jewish heritage demand it.”
To this I can only say, Amen!
