Dear Editor,
Amidst debate of the Cincinnati City Council ceasefire resolution proposed by Councilmember Anna Albi, our organization found itself at a crucial intersection of advocacy and dialogue. Recognizing the wide spectrum of opinions within our community — especially concerns regarding a permanent ceasefire with Hamas — we supported the resolution. Even at the time of our decision, we accepted that there would be those who would disagree with it. Jewish tradition teaches that the minority voice is important, and we take these dissenting opinions to heart. Still, our decision was complex and multifaceted, underpinned by our commitment to peace, humanitarian relief, the return of Israeli hostages, and diplomacy. We did not arrive at our stance haphazardly; instead, it reflects carefully considered choices informed by research, representing what we know to be the majority sentiment among Jewish Cincinnatians. In our actions, we sought not just to preserve but to enhance our communal relationships and to counteract extremism in ways that will protect our community — here and abroad.
The Background
City Council Member Anna Albi independently drafted her resolution, striving for impartiality by not initially consulting specific community groups. This unconventional method aimed to guarantee the resolution’s neutrality. Nevertheless, Councilmember Albi sought our perspective, granting us the opportunity to review the resolution and recommend adjustments. These modifications, most of which Albi adopted, marked a collaborative effort to refine the resolution, ensuring it represented a well-rounded approach to achieving peace. In contrast, another resolution by City Council Member Meeka Owens, pushing for a permanent ceasefire and subtly attributing blame to Israel, encountered our resistance. Our proactive involvement and advocacy — including the community’s tremendous advocacy on February 14 where over 175 community members came together at Cincinnati City Hall, showcasing our united wish for peace — was instrumental in blocking its adoption.
A Compromise for Peace
Our support of Councilmember Albi’s resolution emerged as a balanced compromise, acknowledging the significant suffering endured by all parties involved in the conflict. The resolution’s call for a six-week ceasefire, the release of vulnerable hostages, and the delivery of unrestricted humanitarian aid reflects the official stance of Israel’s government, aligning with the overarching aim of facilitating lasting peace. Through endorsing this middle ground, we sought to foster an atmosphere of constructive engagement, elevating humanitarian concerns above the polarizing debates that frequently dominate such discussions.
Building Bridges
Our decision also served a strategic purpose, bolstering our ties with both local and national political leaders. Navigating the intricate dynamics of community and politics, the potential label of being obstructionist threatened to distance us from essential dialogues and decisions. Simply put, opposing any resolution put forward — even those which represented the official negotiating position of Israel — was not a viable option. Instead, by choosing a path of compromise, we not only reaffirmed our dedication to peace and conversation but also guaranteed the Jewish community’s active and influential presence in wider civic exchanges. It’s better to have a seat at the table than to be on the sidelines; the strategy we chose enabled us to be active participants in the debate, serving as connectors, nurturing mutual understanding and collaboration amid great tension.
Mitigating Extremism
Notably, our support for the ceasefire resolution acted as a deterrent to extreme viewpoints. The noticeable decline in anti-Israel and antisemitic protests at City Hall in the aftermath of the resolution’s passage — with merely a few demonstrators appearing compared to the previous larger gatherings, which had taken place for months — illustrates the impact of strategic compromise in diminishing the influence of radicals. This significant decrease is a testament to our approach’s effectiveness in calming divisive rhetoric and steering public discourse towards more fruitful and amicable engagement.
Conclusion
In supporting the ceasefire resolution, we were driven by the belief that thoughtful compromise, open dialogue, and strategic action form the foundation of meaningful advancement. While aware that our stance might not universally resonate, we stand firm in our conviction that this approach represented the most beneficial path forward for our community and the broader quest for peace. Our dedication to these principles is steadfast, and we welcome ongoing discussions and reflections on navigating the complexities we face. Together, we aspire to a future defined by mutual understanding, peace, and security for everyone involved.
Jewish Federation of Cincinnati along with our public-affairs arm, the Jewish Community Relations Council