Tensions Strain U.S. Jewish-Muslim Relations : Debate: Discord over response to Islamic extremists is threatening a dialogue that has produced cooperation on behalf of Bosnians and joint stands on religious freedom.

The budding national dialogue between American Jewish and Muslim leaders has been severely strained by a sharpening debate over the U.S. response to terrorist acts linked to Middle East extremists.

In recent years, mainstream Jewish and Muslim groups have engaged in a tenuous national dialogue while trying to avoid the more contentious aspects of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict over which they differ vehemently. The 1993 agreement between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization gave the process a major push forward.

Fruits of that dialogue have included cooperation on behalf of Bosnian Muslims and joint stands on religious freedom issues. Both sides have also condemned acts of terrorism that have threatened to scuttle the Middle East peace process.

But now the dialogue is threatened. The reason is that Jewish groups in the United States are sounding the alarm that Islamic extremists pose a threat in the United States and are jeopardizing the move toward peace in the Middle East.

The warnings have angered U.S. Muslims, who argue that the Jewish groups have unfairly stigmatized them.

Jewish groups helped persuade President Clinton last week to freeze the American bank accounts of 30 groups and individuals--most of them Muslim--tied to Middle East terrorist acts.

American and Israeli government officials say Muslim extremists clandestinely raise funds in the United States, sometimes under a charitable cover.

Adding to the tension is the New York trial of Sheik Omar Abdel-Rahman and 11 other Muslims charged with planning a “war of urban terrorism.” The defendants have been charged with planning to blow up the United Nations, two tunnels connecting Manhattan to New Jersey and FBI headquarters in New York.

At the heart of the renewed tensions between American Jews and Muslims are dramatically differing views of the Middle East conflict. They differ on who is responsible for the recent increase in violence there and the impasse in Israeli-Palestinian negotiations.

“We’re at a flash point,” said Rabbi A. James Rudin, interfaith director for the American Jewish Committee. “The perceptions are so different.”

Moreover, Jewish leaders worry that American Muslim groups have hidden ties to Iranian or Palestinian groups associated with attacks against Israeli and Jewish targets around the world.

Muslim groups, meanwhile, support the Palestinian cause and view Clinton’s order as a threat to their civil liberties and their right to criticize Israel and the policies of PLO leader Yasser Arafat.

Muslim leaders have repeatedly denied any knowledge of funds raised in the United States being used to underwrite terrorist activities.

As with Israelis and Palestinians, U.S. Jewish and Muslim leaders blame each other for the current chill in their relationship.

A primary Muslim complaint is that the Jewish groups are contributing to the impression that Islam is an inherently violent religion and that Muslims are prone to terrorism.

But the Jewish groups assert that they are always careful in their public statements to differentiate between the few individuals who commit violent acts in the name of Islam and the overwhelming majority of Muslims who favor a peaceful resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

“We keep saying over and over and over again that we are not attacking Islam or Muslims or Arabs, but that we are only trying to address a legitimate concern,” said Malcolm Hoenlein, executive vice president of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, an umbrella group representing 50 Jewish agencies.

Muslims maintain that such assertions are inadequate.

“We cannot accept anymore that they are only targeting a few bad apples,” said Abdurahman Alamoudi, executive director of the American Muslim Council.