Democratic Convention Extends No Hand and Brings Loneliness to the Jewish Patch

As an American Jew, I found myself glued to the television last week, mesmerized by the notion that unity had finally returned to the party of Franklin D. Roosevelt. I watched my party select a candidate who manifests the confidence and compassion of John F. Kennedy, the character and integrity of Harry S. Truman and the management skills of Lyndon B. Johnson.

I was moved by Michael Dukakis’ hopes and dreams for America. Touched by his empathy for the less fortunate and the downtrodden. And yet, I could not shake a feeling of loneliness, of being uncomfortable, that gripped me amid all the thunderous cheering and hoopla.

I heard well the eloquence of Ann Richards’ ”. . . born with a silver foot in his mouth.” Of Ted Kennedy’s “Where was George?” Of Jesse Jackson’s “. . . but your patch is not large enough.” And yet, in this convention of diverse ethnic groupings, no one seemed to want to weave a Jewish patch into the quilt.

In what must have been an orchestrated departure from the Democratic Party’s long tradition, not a single speaker felt comfortable enough to reach out, extend a hand to the Jewish patch that has been part of the tapestry of the Democratic Party since the turn of the century.

This was the first time in memory when neither the principal nominees nor the leaders of the party made mention of the state of Israel, nor did they even venture out to mention Soviet Jewry.

It was the first time that a plank calling for a Palestinian homeland had been brought to the floor of a Democratic National Convention.

True, the Dukakis forces made sure that the plank would not be voted on, nor would a discussion of it be aired on prime-time television, but even that could not mask the fear that grips American Jewry--a fear that Jesse Jackson’s forces have become the decisive major group in the Democratic Party.

It would be a mistake of major consequences for the Dukakis team to assume that Jewish issues can be relegated to Jewish audiences in order to avoid alienating the Jackson forces. The Jewish community deserves and expects to hear a clear enunciation of Michael Dukakis’ and Lloyd Bentsen’s Middle East policies.

It is true that the intifada, or uprising, in the Israeli-occupied territories has caused debate among American Jews as to which direction Israel should pursue. The same debate is going on in in Israel, with Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir and Foreign Minister Shimon Peres expressing diverse opinions. But as I found out in discussions this month with these two leaders in Jerusalem, Jackson’s views are not acceptable to either man.

Peres would not negotiate with the Palestine Liberation Organization, nor is he in favor of a PLO state. Even on the question of land for peace, Peres’ view is that Jerusalem and other strategic areas of the West Bank are non-negotiable. Nor does he believe that the Israeli Defense Forces would ever pull out of the strategic areas of the West Bank.

It is a bitter lesson, learned from the Holocaust: It is not good enough for a few insiders in Washington to take responsibility for assuring American Jews that they know where the nominee stands on crucial issues that affect them.

All Americans have a right to know where Dukakis and Bentsen stand on Israel, on Soviet Jewry, on Jewish minorities in Arab countries, and on all human-rights issues.

Democrats get elected to the White House by a coalition of ethnic groups. Dukakis has stirred the emotions of some of these ethnic groups. His challenge now is to inspire those he left out.