There seems to be a paralysis of thought in our organized Jewish community 
about how to respond to the growing popularity in the African American 
community of Minister Louis Farrakhan of the Nation of Islam.

The operant strategy appears to be to chronicle every outrageous statement 
Farrakhan has made about Jews and other groups, denounce him as a vicious 
anti-Semite, discount any positive accomplishments made by the Nation of 
Islam under his leadership (anti-drug programs, voter registration, etc.)  
and then attempt to limit his impact by insisting that political leaders and 
Jewish community leaders withhold any positive recognition of Farrakhan.

So, when the Democratic vice presidential candidate Sen. Joseph Lieberman 
recently told a radio interviewer that he was “open” to a meeting with 
Farrakhan, it sent predictable shockwaves through the Jewish community.  The 
Republican Jewish Coalition was the first organization to issue a press 
release calling upon Lieberman to recant.   Soon former undersecretary of 
state Elliot Abrams, another Republican, issued a similar statement, in 
essence arguing that if Lieberman were to meet with Farrakhan, he would 
legitimate the Nation of Islam leader and magnify Farrakhan’s malevolent 
influence on the body politic.

The American Jewish Congress and the Anti-Defamation League not long 
thereafter checked in with similar statements. It was the second time within 
a month that the Anti-Defamation League took serious issue with America’s 
most visible Jew.  Earlier in September, reacting to all the God-talk in 
Lieberman’s speeches, the ADL told the senator from Connecticut what subject 
not to discuss.  Now, the organization is telling him with whom it is 
permissible to hold discussions.  If the ADL is not careful, it will become 
known as the Anti-Discussion League.

The issue is not whether Farrakhan has said reprehensible things about Jews 
and other groups, which he surely has.  The issue is whether the 
“containment” strategy has worked.  Is Farrakhan less an influence today in 
the African-American community than he was 10 years ago?  One need look only 
at the success of the Million Man March some years ago, and now at how the 
upcoming Million Family March is focusing attention on issues of interest in 
the African-American community to know that Farrakhan has plenty of traction 
-- with or without the Jewish community’s approval. 

When Vice President Al Gore announced Lieberman as his Democratic party 
running mate, Farrakhan expressed mixed reactions in a press statement.  He 
agreed with the general commentary that when a barrier falls for one group, 
it also falls for others.  At the same time, he questioned whether an 
Orthodox Jew can be objective about Israel.  The “dual loyalty” question 
angered many in the American Jewish community, who rightly resent any 
implication that we are anything less than patriotic American citizens.   
Farrakhan said as a Muslim he has a right to be concerned that the Arab side 
be treated fairly by American policy makers.

One could either read Farrakhan’s statement as just another case of anti 
Semitism -- as the official Jewish community did almost reflexively -- or as 
the question of someone who wants reassurance on a matter of foreign policy.  
Lieberman apparently chose to give Farrakhan’s statement the benefit of the 
doubt.

In saying that he is open to discussions with Farrakhan, Lieberman is not 
acting as a representative of the American Jewish community; he is responding 
as someone who seeks to serve as the vice president of all the American 
people.  Perhaps without saying so, Lieberman senses that Farrakhan has been 
more reflective about life since surviving his recent cancer surgery, and is 
ready in an appropriate setting to urge reconciliation between his followers 
and our people.  Who can forget how Malcolm X, once regarded as an apostle of 
Black hatred, became in the last chapter of his life a proponent of racial 
amity? 

If movement toward reconciliation were an outcome of a Lieberman Farrakhan 
meeting, it would be as worthwhile as discussions were between the once 
reviled Palestinian Liberation Organization and Israelis.  As it was often 
noted before the Oslo process began, you don’t make peace by talking to your 
friends, only by talking to your enemies.

The private fear among Jewish organizations is that such a meeting with 
Lieberman will provide a public spotlight to Farrakhan, without any 
assurances that, from the Jewish point of view, the meeting will have any 
positive outcome.  

There is palpable concern that Farrakhan instead might use the occasion to 
foster more hatred, discontent and anti-Semitism, rather than to promote 
reconciliation.  A meeting with Lieberman would open the gates to meetings 
with other politicians, less well informed than Lieberman on the status of 
Jewish relations with African-Americans. 

Having received no tangible assurances from Farrakhan that he is changing his 
attitude toward Jews-- and is willing to urge his followers to do the same -- 
the Jewish organizations are fearful that Lieberman is simply being duped.

Personally, I believe that Lieberman has a lot more moxie  than apparently 
our Jewish organizations are willing to give him credit for.  His willingness 
to take action to improve race relations may be the second most important 
positive step taken in behalf of minorities during this presidential campaign 
-- second only to Gore’s decision to put Lieberman on the ticket in the first 
place. 

Instead of trying to interpose themselves between a potential vice president 
of the United States and an important group within the African American 
community, our Jewish organizations could be rendering a more important 
service: 

They should attempt to develop various peace-making scenarios based on the 
assumption that Farrakhan sincerely wants to build bridges between the Jewish 
community and the Nation of Islam.   At the same time, they should fashion 
various contingency plans for shaping public opinion should Farrakhan prove 
to be as incorrigible as they fear.

The old paralysis of thought has gotten our community no where with a growing 
segment of the African-American community.  Perhaps sincere dialogue 
initiated by Lieberman and Farrakhan can lead to progress.

Peace and racial amity certainly are worth the risk.