Ronald Lauder is a billionaire and art collector who became passionately committed to Jewish life when, as U.S. ambassador to Austria, he witnessed virulent anti-Semitism. I have known him for over 20 years and was involved in no small measure in his election as president of the World Jewish Congress.
Over the WJC's 82-year history, its greatest achievements were the 1952 German reparations deal and the efforts made in 1998 that allowed the heirs of Holocaust victims to receive restitution from major Swiss banks, including $1.25 billion of unclaimed assets deposited by Jews who were murdered.
However, in 2004, shameful financial irregularities were exposed which tarnished the organization's standing and caused a drastic reduction in donations.
In 2007, Lauder assumed the presidency of a discredited, bankrupt WJC, successfully returning it to its former glory.
Lauder is one of the Jewish world's most generous philanthropists and a passionate lover of Israel. He currently supports 62 projects in Central and Eastern European countries which have led to a resurrection of Jewish life in the region.
For many years, Lauder had been a friend and backer of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Regrettably, in 2011, as a major shareholder in Channel 10, Lauder had a confrontation with Netanyahu over the station's despicable allegations about the prime minister's wife. It was beyond Lauder's capacity to accede to Netanyahu's request to close the station; since then, Netanyahu has refused to acknowledge Lauder's existence.
As a consequence, Lauder's ongoing humiliation and lack of access to Netanyahu began to have its impact.
Though a long-standing Republican, Lauder was also surrounded by liberal advisers, many of whom were opposed to Netanyahu's government. They deluded Lauder into believing he could become a historic figure by personally achieving Israeli-Palestinian peace and bypassing the Israeli government.
His first major foray in this direction was in March 2018, when he wrote an op-ed in The New York Times calling for the creation of a Palestinian state and condemning Netanyahu.
Lauder, the Republican, castigating Netanyahu as an obstacle to peace was like manna from heaven for Jewish liberals.
This month, Lauder published another, even more bizarre op-ed in The New York Times which suggested he had really lost the plot.
Lauder condemned haredi influence in areas as such as conversion, Shabbat observance, egalitarian prayer at the Western Wall, and surrogacy legislation. Most Israelis would like to limit the haredi influence but is this an issue for a WJC president to promote in a mainstream newspaper that is hostile to Israel? And how dare he suggest that this is "creating the impression that the democratic and egalitarian dimensions of the Jewish state are being tested"? It was inexplicable for a man purporting to speak on behalf of the Jewish people to distort such issues out of proportion.
Does Lauder really believe that non-Orthodox Jews have drifted from Judaism and Israel primarily because of the Western Wall fracas? Most have never visited Israel and would never have been aware of the issue had they not been whipped up by frenzied leftist Jewish leaders. Nor does Lauder realize that the problem of alienation does not stem from Israel's government policies but from the lack of Jewish education and ignorance of heritage among non-Orthodox American Jewish youth.
Lauder also criticized the nation-state law, threatening that it may "have severe national and international repercussions" and negatively impact on "the sense of equality and belonging" of non-Jewish Israelis.
I do not propose to analyze Lauder's ridiculous remarks. Education Minister Naftali Bennett has done so in a superb response that The New York Times was obliged to publish.
Lauder concluded his disgraceful column wondering "if the nation they cherish is losing its way" and that the government seems "to be tarnishing the sacred value of equality," shockingly adding that Israeli policies represented a threat to the Jewish people's future, demanding that the government "listen to the voices of protest and outrage being heard in Israel and throughout the world" noting that unless the government hearkened to his warnings, alienated young Jews may not fight BDS or support Israel in Washington.
I challenge Lauder's right to speak on behalf of world Jewry when he publicly vilifies Israel.
Many Jewish liberals will applaud Lauder. But even those who are inclined to agree with his criticisms would consider it improper for him to publicly express such views in The New York Times.
Those WJC members who are appalled by Lauder's behavior will remain silent; they know that without his substantial funding, the organization would collapse. But the WJC cannot function as a one-man band.
Lauder is a decent person and generous philanthropist who loves Israel and the Jewish people, but he has been misled. Harsh public criticism, even if well-intentioned, expressed by someone purporting to represent world Jewry, may backfire and negatively impact the Jewish people.
Let us hope that on Lauder's next visit to Israel, the prime minister will make efforts to reconcile with him, re-establishing the vital contact so as to avoid future outbursts.
