Israeli Think Tank Report on NATO-Israel relations - 2022

https://mitvim.org.il/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/English-Israel-and-NATO-Rina-Basist-November-2022.pdf

Mission of Israel to the EU and NATO
NATO-Med Dialogue

Source: Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs

​Based on the understanding that security in the Mediterranean is vital to assure the security of Europe NATO’s Mediterranean Dialogue was launched in late 1994. The Dialogue framework encompasses 7 nations – Israel, Jordan, Egypt, Algeria, Tunisia, Morocco, and Mauritania. It primarily takes place on a bilateral level (NATO+1) but also foresees regular multilateral meetings (NATO+7). One of the Mediterranean Dialogue's main goals is to create a basis for dialogue and cooperation in the sensitive field of security.
 

• ​The Mediterranean Dialogue is based upon the two pillars of political dialogue and practical cooperation. The latter is centered on an annual Work Program that includes seminars and other practical activities in various fields such as scientific and environmental cooperation. Several Israeli projects have been funded by the Science for Peace and Security (SPS) Program for instance. It is a policy tool that enhances cooperation and dialogue, based on scientific research, innovation, and knowledge exchange.
  The Work Program also includes a military dimension with common military exercises, courses and academic activities. The MD is steered by NATO's Partnerships and Cooperative Security Committee (previously by the Mediterranean Cooperation Group). ​

• Key principles

• The MD is based on the following key principles:
  ·         Non-discrimination of all partners
  ·         Self-differentiation for an approach tailored to the specific needs of each of the partner countries
  ·         Inclusiveness with all partners as equal shareholders of the cooperative effort
  ·         Two-way engagement with contributions from both sides, a regular consultation process and practical cooperation
  ·         Non-imposition as partners can choose the pace and extent of their cooperation
  ·         Complementarity and mutual reinforcement of other existing cooperation such as the EU's Union for the Mediterranean
  ·         Diversity in respect of the specific regional, cultural and political contexts of partners

• Operation Active Endeavour and the Istanbul Summit

• ​Following the terror attacks of 9/11 NATO recognized the specific contribution and the public and operational added value that can be brought by the Mediterranean nations in the field of the fight against terror. A main pillar of the cooperation in this field was NATO’s proposal to the Mediterranean nations to take part in NATO’s policing activities in the Mediterranean such as Operation Active Endeavour (OAE) that was launched shortly after 9/11. OAE aims to monitor shipping activities in the Mediterranean in order to help deter, defend, disrupt and protect against terrorist activity.
  During the Istanbul Summit in 2004, NATO started looking for support from non-NATO states for OAE and Israel accepted to take part in the operation. Modalities were finalized with the ratification of the Individual Cooperation Program (ICP) agreement. In this framework, Israel has for instance sent liaison officers to HQ MARCOM in Northwood following the signing of the tactical Memoranda of Understanding with NATO on the exchange of information.
  At the Istanbul Summit a new instrument was also introduced to the MD: The Mediterranean Dialogue Work Program (MDWP) is an essentially military tool and has been expanded with time to over more than 30 areas of cooperation and more than 700 activities and events yearly. This opened the way for stronger practical cooperation such as accelerated political dialogue, interoperability, defense reform, and fight against terror.

• The Individual Partnership Cooperation Program (IPCP)

• In spring 2005, NATO presented the Mediterranean nations the Individual Cooperation Program (ICP), which is a bilateral framework aimed to enable better planning of the cooperation with NATO. Israel was the first of the Mediterranean nations to accept NATO’s proposal to join the ICP and signed the agreement in October 2006.
  The Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs was opening the door for cooperation of Israel's security services and NATO in various fields such as counterterrorism, increasing the number of joint NATO-Israel military exercises, improving cooperation in the areas of armament and logistics, connecting Israel electronically to the NATO system, etc.
  The ICP has now been replaced by the Individual Partnership Cooperation Program (IPCP)

FACEBOOK ANNOUNCEMENT - REICHMANN YATO CHAPTER 2021 MARCH 18 

FACEBOOK link

International Institute for Counter-Terrorism - ICT at #IDC is pleased to announce the establishment of the Youth Atlantic Treaty Association’s Israeli Chapter! The Youth Atlantic Treaty Association - Israel aims to empower young leaders of today and tomorrow, while promoting the values embedded in the North Atlantic Treaty.

YATA Israel is a member of the Youth Atlantic Treaty Association, which is the youth component of the Atlantic Treaty Association. YATA represents…

See more

Stevie Weinberg - YATA Prez

source Reichmann University

Deputy Executive Director, The International Institute for Counter-Terrorism (ICT); Founder & Editor-in-Chief, The International Counter-Terrorism Review (ICTR), Reichman University, Herzliya, Israel

Stevie Weinberg is the Deputy Executive Director of the International Institute for Counter-Terrorism (ICT) at Reichman University, Herzliya, Israel. He is also the Founder & Editor-in-Chief of the International Counter-Terrorism Review (ICTR), a leading publication that serves as a platform for exchanging research and policy recommendations addressing international issues pertaining to terrorism and counter-terrorism. Weinberg also serves as the President of the Youth Atlantic Treaty Association (YATA)’s Israel Chapter, which aims to empower the next generation of security leaders and foster the values embedded in the North Atlantic Treaty. At the ICT, he leads various large-scale projects for private and public customers and manages the daily operations of the ICT team.

Weinberg is the Director of the ICT’s Annual Summit on Counter-Terrorism, the World’s leading international conference in the field of Terrorism and Counter-Terrorism. He is also a Researcher for two Horizon 2020 grants, the largest research and innovation programme established by the EU. Weinberg served as the ICT lead-researcher and liaison to tech-companies; including Facebook and the Global Internet Forum to Counter-Terrorism (GIFCT), a consortium dedicated to prevent terrorists and violent extremists from exploiting digital platforms. As part of this cooperation, the ICT received two important research awards.

In addition, Weinberg is an Adjunct Lecturer at the Lauder School of Government, Diplomacy & Strategy at Reichman University, Herzliya, where he previously served as a Researcher and Teaching Assistant for various world leading experts in terrorism. As part of the Lauder School of Government, Diplomacy & Strategy, Weinberg also served as the Co-Founder and as the first Director of the Shadow Government, a program that parallels the actual government and monitors its activities, with students acting as ministers and providing policy recommendations.

Prior to his current position at the ICT, Weinberg served as the Director of Operations; Internship Coordinator & Project Manager; and Researcher at the ICT. He managed a team of 50 Israeli and international interns per year; and co-founded and first coordinated ICT’s Online Academic Programs.

Weinberg graduated Valedictorian (Magna Cum Laude) from the Lauder School of Government, Diplomacy and Strategy’s Master of Arts in Government with a Specialization in Counter-Terrorism & Homeland Security.

https://ict.org.il/ourteam/weinberg-stevie/

Wikipedia on TAT

Tech Against Terrorism is a United Nations-backed international initiative founded in April 2017 to combat terrorist activity within the online technology sphere.[1][2] It builds tools to help other companies combat online terrorist activities.[3]

Founding members include the United Nations Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate and ICT4Peace.[1]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tech_Against_Terrorism

Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GIFCT logo

The Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism (GIFCT) is an Internet industry initiative to share proprietary information and technology for automated content moderation.[1][2]

History[edit]

Founded in 2017 by a consortium of companies spearheaded by Facebook (now known as Meta), Google/YouTube, Microsoft and Twitter, it was created as an organization in 2019 and its membership has expanded to include 18 companies as of the end of 2021.[3] The GIFCT began as a shared hash database of ISIS-related material but expanded to included a wider array of violent extremist content in the wake of the attack on two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand that was live streamed on Facebook.[4]

Members include Microsoft, Meta Platforms (Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp), YouTube, Twitter, Airbnb, Discord, Dropbox, LinkedIn, Amazon, Mailchimp, Pinterest, JustPaste.it, Tumblr, WordPress.com and Zoom.[5]

GIFCT maintains a database of perceptual hashes of terrorism-related videos and images that is submitted by its members, and which other members can voluntarily use to block the same material on their platforms.[5] The material indexed includes images, videos and will be expanded to include URLs and textual data such as manifestos and other documents.[6]

Global Network on Extremism and Technology[edit]

The Global Network on Extremism and Technology (GNET) is described as the "academic research arm of GICFT".[7][8] It is a collaboration of several academic research centers, led by the International Centre for the Study of Radicalisation and Political Violence at King's College London.[9]

Criticism[edit]

GIFCT has been flagged by civil society activists and scholars as a "content cartel" similar to YouTube's Content ID,[1] and a potential tool for "cross-platform censorship".[2]

Accusations of misuse[edit]

In 2022, Facebook, Inc., a subsidiary of Meta Platforms, was subject to a subpoena about GIFCT usage as OnlyFans was alleged to have used GIFCT to harm competitors by getting their content and accounts censored on Instagram.[10] Facebook and OnlyFans have described these allegations as being "without merit".[11]

From <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Internet_Forum_to_Counter_Terrorism>

Zionist Zuck can't even get accurate information to present on his platform--wtf he know about terrorism

Senator Elizabeth Warrens July 2022 letter to Zuck about his platform censoring ACCURATE INFORMATION ABOUT ABORTION ACCESS/RIGHTS in the wake of the Supreme Court Dobb's decision eliminating a federal right to abortion by overturning Roe v. Wade

https://www.warren.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Letter%20From%20Senators%20Klobuchar%20and%20Warren%20Regarding%20Censoring%20of%20Abortion%20Posts_7.7.2022.pdf

2016nov22 NYT | Facebook Said to Create Censorship Tool to Get Back Into China

From <https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/22/technology/facebook-censorship-tool-china.html>

By Mike Isaac

Nov. 22, 2016

阅读简体中文版

SAN FRANCISCO — Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook’s chief executive, has cultivated relationships with China’s leaders, including President Xi Jinping. He has paid multiple visits to the country to meet its top internet executives. He has made an effort to learn Mandarin.

Inside Facebook, the work to enter China runs far deeper.

The social network has quietly developed software to suppress posts from appearing in people’s news feeds in specific geographic areas, according to three current and former Facebook employees, who asked for anonymity because the tool is confidential. The feature was created to help Facebook get into China, a market where the social network has been blocked, these people said. Mr. Zuckerberg has supported and defended the effort, the people added.

Continue reading….

From <https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/22/technology/facebook-censorship-tool-china.html>

Zuck don't give a F*ck! NO LANGUAGE SKILLS/NO MODERATORS--So what's the deal with 'terrorism'

PBS 2021oct25 Facebook’s language gaps allow terrorist content and hate speech to thrive

Oct 25, 2021

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — As the Gaza war raged and tensions surged across the Middle East last May, Instagram briefly banned the hashtag #AlAqsa, a reference to the Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem’s Old City, a flash point in the conflict.

Facebook, which owns Instagram, later apologized, explaining its algorithms had mistaken the third-holiest site in Islam for the militant group Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, an armed offshoot of the secular Fatah party.

For many Arabic-speaking users, it was just the latest potent example of how the social media giant muzzles political speech in the region. Arabic is among the most common languages on Facebook’s platforms, and the company issues frequent public apologies after similar botched content removals.

Now, internal company documents from the former Facebook product manager-turned-whistleblower Frances Haugen show the problems are far more systemic than just a few innocent mistakes, and that Facebook has understood the depth of these failings for years while doing little about it.

Such errors are not limited to Arabic. An examination of the files reveals that in some of the world’s most volatile regions, terrorist content and hate speech proliferate because the company remains short on moderators who speak local languages and understand cultural contexts. And its platforms have failed to develop artificial-intelligence solutions that can catch harmful content in different languages.

In countries like Afghanistan and Myanmar, these loopholes have allowed inflammatory language to flourish on the platform, while in Syria and the Palestinian territories, Facebook suppresses ordinary speech, imposing blanket bans on common words.

“The root problem is that the platform was never built with the intention it would one day mediate the political speech of everyone in the world,” said Eliza Campbell, director of the Middle East Institute’s Cyber Program. “But for the amount of political importance and resources that Facebook has, moderation is a bafflingly under-resourced project.”

WATCH: ‘Choices being made inside Facebook are disastrous,’ whistleblower says

This story, along with others published Monday, is based on Haugen’s disclosures to the Securities and Exchange Commission, which were also provided to Congress in redacted form by her legal team. The redacted versions received by Congress were reviewed by a consortium of news organizations, including The Associated Press.

In a statement to the AP, a Facebook spokesperson said that over the last two years the company has invested in recruiting more staff with local dialect and topic expertise to bolster its review capacity around the world.

But when it comes to Arabic content moderation, the company said, “We still have more work to do. … We conduct research to better understand this complexity and identify how we can improve.”

In Myanmar, where Facebook-based misinformation has been linked repeatedly to ethnic and religious violence, the company acknowledged in its internal reports that it had failed to stop the spread of hate speech targeting the minority Rohingya Muslim population.

The Rohingya’s persecution, which the U.S. has described as ethnic cleansing, led Facebook to publicly pledge in 2018 that it would recruit 100 native Myanmar language speakers to police its platforms. But the company never disclosed how many content moderators it ultimately hired or revealed which of the nation’s many dialects they covered.

Despite Facebook’s public promises and many internal reports on the problems, the rights group Global Witness said the company’s recommendation algorithm continued to amplify army propaganda and other content that breaches the company’s Myanmar policies following a military coup in February.

In India, the documents show Facebook employees debating last March whether it could clamp down on the “fear mongering, anti-Muslim narratives” that Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s far-right Hindu nationalist group, Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, broadcasts on its platform.

In one document, the company notes that users linked to Modi’s party had created multiple accounts to supercharge the spread of Islamophobic content. Much of this content was “never flagged or actioned,” the research found, because Facebook lacked moderators and automated filters with knowledge of Hindi and Bengali.

Arabic poses particular challenges to Facebook’s automated systems and human moderators, each of which struggles to understand spoken dialects unique to each country and region, their vocabularies salted with different historical influences and cultural contexts.

The Moroccan colloquial Arabic, for instance, includes French and Berber words, and is spoken with short vowels. Egyptian Arabic, on the other hand, includes some Turkish from the Ottoman conquest. Other dialects are closer to the “official” version found in the Quran. In some cases, these dialects are not mutually comprehensible, and there is no standard way of transcribing colloquial Arabic.

Facebook first developed a massive following in the Middle East during the 2011 Arab Spring uprisings, and users credited the platform with providing a rare opportunity for free expression and a critical source of news in a region where autocratic governments exert tight controls over both. But in recent years, that reputation has changed.

Scores of Palestinian journalists and activists have had their accounts deleted. Archives of the Syrian civil war have disappeared. And a vast vocabulary of everyday words have become off-limits to speakers of Arabic, Facebook’s third-most common language with millions of users worldwide.

For Hassan Slaieh, a prominent journalist in the blockaded Gaza Strip, the first message felt like a punch to the gut. “Your account has been permanently disabled for violating Facebook’s Community Standards,” the company’s notification read. That was at the peak of the bloody 2014 Gaza war, following years of his news posts on violence between Israel and Hamas being flagged as content violations.

Within moments, he lost everything he’d collected over six years: personal memories, stories of people’s lives in Gaza, photos of Israeli airstrikes pounding the enclave, not to mention 200,000 followers. The most recent Facebook takedown of his page last year came as less of a shock. It was the 17th time that he had to start from scratch.

He had tried to be clever. Like many Palestinians, he’d learned to avoid the typical Arabic words for “martyr” and “prisoner,” along with references to Israel’s military occupation. If he mentioned militant groups, he’d add symbols or spaces between each letter.

Other users in the region have taken an increasingly savvy approach to tricking Facebook’s algorithms, employing a centuries-old Arabic script that lacks the dots and marks that help readers differentiate between otherwise identical letters. The writing style, common before Arabic learning exploded with the spread of Islam, has circumvented hate speech censors on Facebook’s Instagram app, according to the internal documents.

But Slaieh’s tactics didn’t make the cut. He believes Facebook banned him simply for doing his job. As a reporter in Gaza, he posts photos of Palestinian protesters wounded at the Israeli border, mothers weeping over their sons’ coffins, statements from the Gaza Strip’s militant Hamas rulers.

Criticism, satire and even simple mentions of groups on the company’s Dangerous Individuals and Organizations list — a docket modeled on the U.S. government equivalent — are grounds for a takedown.

“We were incorrectly enforcing counterterrorism content in Arabic,” one document reads, noting the current system “limits users from participating in political speech, impeding their right to freedom of expression.”

The Facebook blacklist includes Gaza’s ruling Hamas party, as well as Hezbollah, the militant group that holds seats in Lebanon’s Parliament, along with many other groups representing wide swaths of people and territory across the Middle East, the internal documents show, resulting in what Facebook employees describe in the documents as widespread perceptions of censorship.

“If you posted about militant activity without clearly condemning what’s happening, we treated you like you supported it,” said Mai el-Mahdy, a former Facebook employee who worked on Arabic content moderation until 2017.

In response to questions from the AP, Facebook said it consults independent experts to develop its moderation policies and goes “to great lengths to ensure they are agnostic to religion, region, political outlook or ideology.”

“We know our systems are not perfect,” it added.

WATCH: Facebook probe looks at how the company handles its ‘negative side effects’

The company’s language gaps and biases have led to the widespread perception that its reviewers skew in favor of governments and against minority groups.

Former Facebook employees also say that various governments exert pressure on the company, threatening regulation and fines. Israel, a lucrative source of advertising revenue for Facebook, is the only country in the Mideast where Facebook operates a national office. Its public policy director previously advised former right-wing Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Israeli security agencies and watchdogs monitor Facebook and bombard it with thousands of orders to take down Palestinian accounts and posts as they try to crack down on incitement.

“They flood our system, completely overpowering it,” said Ashraf Zeitoon, Facebook’s former head of policy for the Middle East and North Africa region, who left in 2017. “That forces the system to make mistakes in Israel’s favor. Nowhere else in the region had such a deep understanding of how Facebook works.”

Facebook said in a statement that it fields takedown requests from governments no differently from those from rights organizations or community members, although it may restrict access to content based on local laws.

“Any suggestion that we remove content solely under pressure from the Israeli government is completely inaccurate,” it said.

Syrian journalists and activists reporting on the country’s opposition also have complained of censorship, with electronic armies supporting embattled President Bashar Assad aggressively flagging dissident content for removal.

Raed, a former reporter at the Aleppo Media Center, a group of antigovernment activists and citizen journalists in Syria, said Facebook erased most of his documentation of Syrian government shelling on neighborhoods and hospitals, citing graphic content.

“Facebook always tells us we break the rules, but no one tells us what the rules are,” he added, giving only his first name for fear of reprisals.

In Afghanistan, many users literally cannot understand Facebook’s rules. According to an internal report in January, Facebook did not translate the site’s hate speech and misinformation pages into Dari and Pashto, the two most common languages in Afghanistan, where English is not widely understood.

When Afghan users try to flag posts as hate speech, the drop-down menus appear only in English. So does the Community Standards page. The site also doesn’t have a bank of hate speech terms, slurs and code words in Afghanistan used to moderate Dari and Pashto content, as is typical elsewhere. Without this local word bank, Facebook can’t build the automated filters that catch the worst violations in the country.

When it came to looking into the abuse of domestic workers in the Middle East, internal Facebook documents acknowledged that engineers primarily focused on posts and messages written in English. The flagged-words list did not include Tagalog, the major language of the Philippines, where many of the region’s housemaids and other domestic workers come from.

In much of the Arab world, the opposite is true — the company over-relies on artificial-intelligence filters that make mistakes, leading to “a lot of false positives and a media backlash,” one document reads. Largely unskilled human moderators, in over their heads, tend to passively field takedown requests instead of screening proactively.

Sophie Zhang, a former Facebook employee-turned-whistleblower who worked at the company for nearly three years before being fired last year, said contractors in Facebook’s Ireland office complained to her they had to depend on Google Translate because the company did not assign them content based on what languages they knew.

Facebook outsources most content moderation to giant companies that enlist workers far afield, from Casablanca, Morocco, to Essen, Germany. The firms don’t sponsor work visas for the Arabic teams, limiting the pool to local hires in precarious conditions — mostly Moroccans who seem to have overstated their linguistic capabilities. They often get lost in the translation of Arabic’s 30-odd dialects, flagging inoffensive Arabic posts as terrorist content 77 percent of the time, one document said.

“These reps should not be fielding content from non-Maghreb region, however right now it is commonplace,” another document reads, referring to the region of North Africa that includes Morocco. The file goes on to say that the Casablanca office falsely claimed in a survey it could handle “every dialect” of Arabic. But in one case, reviewers incorrectly flagged a set of Egyptian dialect content 90 percent of the time, a report said.

Iraq ranks highest in the region for its reported volume of hate speech on Facebook. But among reviewers, knowledge of Iraqi dialect is “close to non-existent,” one document said.

“Journalists are trying to expose human rights abuses, but we just get banned,” said one Baghdad-based press freedom activist, who spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of reprisals. “We understand Facebook tries to limit the influence of militias, but it’s not working.”

READ MORE: How the U.S. Capitol attack highlights the challenges of thwarting online right-wing extremism

Linguists described Facebook’s system as flawed for a region with a vast diversity of colloquial dialects that Arabic speakers transcribe in different ways.

“The stereotype that Arabic is one entity is a major problem,” said Enam al-Wer, professor of Arabic linguistics at the University of Essex, citing the language’s “huge variations” not only between countries but class, gender, religion and ethnicity.

Despite these problems, moderators are on the front lines of what makes Facebook a powerful arbiter of political expression in a tumultuous region.

Although the documents from Haugen predate this year’s Gaza war, episodes from that 11-day conflict show how little has been done to address the problems flagged in Facebook’s own internal reports.

Activists in Gaza and the West Bank lost their ability to livestream. Whole archives of the conflict vanished from newsfeeds, a primary portal of information for many users. Influencers accustomed to tens of thousands of likes on their posts saw their outreach plummet when they posted about Palestinians.

“This has restrained me and prevented me from feeling free to publish what I want for fear of losing my account,” said Soliman Hijjy, a Gaza-based journalist whose aerials of the Mediterranean Sea garnered tens of thousands more views than his images of Israeli bombs — a common phenomenon when photos are flagged for violating community standards.

During the war, Palestinian advocates submitted hundreds of complaints to Facebook, often leading the company to concede error and reinstate posts and accounts.

In the internal documents, Facebook reported it had erred in nearly half of all Arabic language takedown requests submitted for appeal.

“The repetition of false positives creates a huge drain of resources,” it said.

In announcing the reversal of one such Palestinian post removal last month, Facebook’s semi-independent oversight board urged an impartial investigation into the company’s Arabic and Hebrew content moderation. It called for improvement in its broad terrorism blacklist to “increase understanding of the exceptions for neutral discussion, condemnation and news reporting,” according to the board’s policy advisory statement.

Facebook’s internal documents also stressed the need to “enhance” algorithms, enlist more Arab moderators from less-represented countries and restrict them to where they have appropriate dialect expertise.

“With the size of the Arabic user base and potential severity of offline harm … it is surely of the highest importance to put more resources to the task to improving Arabic systems,” said the report.

But the company also lamented that “there is not one clear mitigation strategy.”

Meanwhile, many across the Middle East worry the stakes of Facebook’s failings are exceptionally high, with potential to widen long-standing inequality, chill civic activism and stoke violence in the region.

“We told Facebook: Do you want people to convey their experiences on social platforms, or do you want to shut them down?” said Husam Zomlot, the Palestinian envoy to the United Kingdom, who recently discussed Arabic content suppression with Facebook officials in London. “If you take away people’s voices, the alternatives will be uglier.”

Akram reported from Gaza City, Gaza Strip. Associated Press writers Sam McNeil in Beijing, Sheikh Saaliq in New Delhi and Barbara Ortutay in Oakland, California, contributed to this report.

Left: FILE PHOTO: FILE PHOTO: Facebook Chairman and CEO Mark Zuckerberg testifies at a House Financial Services Committee hearing in Washington, U.S., October 23, 2019. REUTERS/Erin Scott/File Photo/File Photo

By — 

Isabel DeBre, Associated Press 

From <https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/facebooks-language-gaps-allow-terrorist-content-and-hate-speech-to-thrive>

big  tech says--oh, it's the small platforms that are struggling to deal with 'terrorist content.' We Big Tech are Complying, and Helping out the smaller firms---Right! Sure...Whatever

2023nov23 This New Tool Aims to Keep Terrorism Content Off the Internet

Small platforms without resources to handle takedown requests have been weaponized by terrorist groups that share their content online. A free new tool is coming to help clean house.

NOV 10, 2023

WIRE Magazine

By David Gilbert i

TERRORIST GROUPS HAVE found a home on smaller, less well-known online platforms in recent years where they store, share, and link to content such as violent beheading videos and recruitment propaganda.

Those platforms have struggled to deal with the problem due to a lack of resources and expertise, but a new tool being built by a Google subsidiary in collaboration with a terror-tracking NGO is seeking to solve that problem.

Launched in Paris on Friday, Altitude is a free tool built by Jigsaw—a unit within Google that tracks violent extremism, misinformation, and repressive censorship—and Tech Against Terrorism, a group that seeks to disrupt terrorists’ online activity. The tool aims to give smaller platforms the ability to easily and efficiently detect terrorist content on their networks and remove it.

The project is also working with the Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism, which is an industry-led group founded in 2017 by Facebook, Microsoft, Twitter, and YouTube that hosts a shared database of image hashes—a kind of digital fingerprint—of terrorist content.

After years of missteps and failing to deal with the problem of removing terrorist content from their networks, big tech platforms like Facebook, Google, and X (formerly Twitter) have—with the help of dedicated NGOs and law enforcement—largely removed this content from their networks, with the notable exception of Telegram. As a result, terrorists have moved to less regulated and under-resourced platforms where their presence either goes unnoticed or cannot be dealt with because the companies involved simply don’t have the resources to cope with a flood of takedown requests.

“Islamic State and other terrorist groups didn't give up on the internet just because they no longer had the megaphone of their social media platforms. They went elsewhere,” Yasmin Green, the CEO of Jigsaw, tells WIRED. “They found this opportunity to host content on file-hosting sites or other websites, small and medium platforms. Those platforms were not welcoming terrorist content, but they still were hosting it—and actually, quite a lot of it.”

While there are some tools on the market that work in a similar way to Altitude, they are prohibitively expensive for a lot of smaller companies. Experts like Green believe that tools like this need to be open source and free of charge.

The new tool can be integrated straight into the backend of whatever platform it is working with. It then connects to Tech Against Terrorism’s own Terrorist Content Analytics Platform, which centralizes the collection of content that has been created by officially designated terrorist organizations. The database allows all the platforms using Altitude to easily check whether a piece of content has been verified as terrorist content.

Altitude will also provide context about the terrorist groups the content is associated with, other examples of this type of material, information on what other platforms have done with the material, and, eventually, even information pertaining to the relevant laws in a particular country or region.

“We are not here to tell platforms what to do but rather to furnish them with all the information that they need to make the moderation decision," Adam Hadley, executive director of Tech Against Terrorism, tells WIRED. “We want to improve the quality of response. This isn’t about the volume of material removed but ensuring that the very worst material is removed in a way that is supporting the rule of law.”

Tech Against Terrorism works with more than 100 platforms, almost all of which don’t want to be named because of the negative impact on their business of being linked to terrorist content. The type of companies that Tech Against Terrorism works with include pastebins, messaging apps, video-sharing platforms, social media networks, and forums.

For many of these smaller platforms, dealing with takedown requests from governments, civil society organizations, law enforcement, and the platform's own users can be overwhelming and result in companies going to one extreme or the other.

“Platforms can become easily overwhelmed by the takedown requests, and they either ignore them all or they take everything down,” Hadley says. “What we're looking for is to try to create an environment where platforms have the tools to be able to properly assess whether they should remove material or not, because it's imperative to take down terror content, but it's also really important that they're not just removing any content because of concerns about freedom of expression.”

The Israel-Hamas war has shown what an important role Telegram continues to play in allowing terrorist groups to spread their messages. While efforts to hold Telegram to account have had limited success in recent weeks, terror content remains accessible, and it is from here that the content is quickly shared on a multitude of other platforms. And this is where the Altitude tool can make a difference, according to Hadley.

“Ideally, the content wouldn’t be put up on Telegram in the first place,” Hadley says. “But given that it is, the next best thing we can do is make sure that other platforms that are being co-opted into this by terrorists are aware of this activity and have the right information to take down the material in an appropriate fashion.”

David Gilbert is a reporter at WIRED who is covering disinformation and online extremism, and how these two online trends will impact people's lives across the globe, with a special focus on the 2024 US presidential election. Prior to WIRED, he worked at VICE News. He lives in Ireland.

From <https://www.wired.com/story/altitude-terrorism-content-removal-tool/>

2021jul11 | lawfare Challenges in Combating Terrorism and Extremism Online

Erin Saltman

Sunday, July 11, 2021

Preventing online radicalization will require a collaborative approach with companies from around the world.

By Dr. Erin Saltman is the director of programming at the Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism (GIFCT). She was formerly Facebook’s head of counterterrorism and dangerous organizations policy for Europe, the Middle East and Africa, working with multi-sector stakeholders and building out CVE programs for Facebook in partnership with international NGOs. Dr. Saltman’s background and expertise includes both far-right and Islamist extremist processes of radicalization within a range of regional and socio-political contexts

Editor’s Note: Terrorists and other bad actors exploit a variety of social media platforms, taking advantage of their different capabilities and trying to find weak areas in which they can operate. Social media companies have begun to cooperate more against this danger, but their efforts are plagued by many problems. Erin Saltman of the Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism describes the many problems facing the industry when they try to fight extremism and assesses some of their efforts to improve cooperation among companies.

Daniel Byman

***

Online terrorism and violent extremism are cross-platform and transnational by nature. Nobody has just one app on their phone or their laptop, and bad actors are no different. These trends are evident in case studies—from the international recruitment of foreign terrorist fighters, including women, by the Islamic State, to the violence-inducing conspiracy theories from QAnon.

Any efforts trying to effectively counter terrorism and violent extremism need to similarly go beyond one-country, one-platform frameworks. The next big challenge for governments and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) working with tech companies is to embrace the reality that the internet and its services are highly heterogeneous, and platforms with global users are increasingly not based in the United States.

State of Play

The ability of tech companies to share risk mitigation tools across platforms, as well as to work with governments and civil society to share trends and advance compatible crisis response frameworks, has come a long way in recent years. These endeavors have been fostered through initiatives like the Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism (GIFCT), where I work; Tech Against Terrorism (TAT); and the Global Network on Extremism and Technology (GNET). These organizations and networks work collaboratively with wider government-led forums—such as the EU Internet Forum, the United Nations’ Counter-Terrorism Executive Directorate and the Christchurch Call to Action—in an effort to advance tech companies’ efforts to self-regulate and increase proactive responses.

To date, GIFCT and others have worked on cross-platform efforts for its member companies. This includes things like a hash-sharing database to share hashes, or “digital fingerprints,” of photos and videos that have been identified as terrorist content so that platforms can track and remove it if necessary. Learning from progress made in the child-safety space, hashed versions of labeled terrorist content allow the identifiers of terrorist content to be shared without sharing any user data or personally identifiable information.

Shared efforts also include a cross-platform incident response framework to react quickly to real-world attacks that have online elements, like the 2019 live-streaming of the Christchurch shootings, and a series of international working groups. Working groups bring together government officials, tech leaders, members of civil society, first responders, and other stakeholders to build best practices and understanding on topics such as crisis response, content algorithms and positive interventions for countering online extremism, transparency reporting frameworks, and technical approaches to countering terrorism.

Research on terrorist and violent extremist trends shows that a single online terrorist campaign often uses three or more platforms. A smaller, less-regulated platform is usually used for private coordination—such as an end-to-end encrypted chat platform. A second platform is used for storing original copies of propaganda and media; think cloud storage or similar file-sharing sites. Additionally, core members or sympathizers disseminate strategized content on larger social media platforms, or “amplification” outlets, which will inevitably be the well-known platforms that everyone uses to gain the most traction. Fighting terrorism online requires addressing this interplay, but any single platform or company lacks visibility into the trends elsewhere online.

Academic insights into adversarial trends and efforts to map which platforms are being exploited are key for tech companies to adapt their safety efforts accordingly. Government efforts to convene internet companies around counterterrorism and counterextremism also need to draw on expert insights to cast a wide net that brings smaller and more diverse platforms to the table.

Social media platforms, despite what some observers fear, are not psychic. Without strong on-platform signals, such as text or images that might be shared alongside a link, they don’t inherently know that a URL link shared on their platform leads to violating content if that content is hosted on a third-party platform. They also often can’t tell that a user is a “terrorist” or “violent extremist” without obvious signals on their platforms. Research looking at the outlinks associated with one Islamic State publication showed that URLs shared on Twitter alone linked to 244 different content-hosting platforms, largely housed on lesser-known micro-sites, such as 4shared.com, cloudup.com or cloud.mail.ru.

Beyond Social Media

Large, Silicon Valley-based social media companies will always rightfully be subject to scrutiny, but if policymakers are going to effectively challenge terrorism and violent extremism online, they need to think laterally and globally.

Violent extremist organizations are savvy about online branding and membership. These organizations, and their followers, increasingly engage in “swagification” as their audiences grow. Logos and subculture slogans of neo-Nazi and white supremacy groups are put on T-shirts, flags, caps, manifestos, and even “survival kits” for members and supporters to purchase. Financial technology and online marketplace platforms are often shocked when human rights groups and social justice NGOs flag these monetized products.

Looking at current efforts and advocacy for increased regulation online, the focus has been almost entirely on user-generated content on social media. Legislation in the EU, Australia, the United Kingdom and elsewhere focus almost exclusively on the fast removal of images and videos. However, many of the platforms being used to further terrorist and violent extremist efforts have less to do with official propaganda on social media and more to do with funding and coordination.

Conference dial-in services, hospitality platforms for room bookings, smaller chat platforms, gaming-adjacent communication platforms, and transportation applications have all been implicated in terrorist and violent-extremist plots and events in recent years. To help guide these platforms, attention will have to shift to a wider range of safety tools. Logo detection, text classifiers, network deplatforming and URL-sharing efforts are just some of the ways collaborations can further safety-by-design and proactive work.

We can’t simply algorithm our way out of the problem. Algorithmic oversight and tools that can enhance efforts are certainly needed, but tooling will always have to be paired with context and human oversight. Open source intelligence and research insights are necessary so that platform moderation teams have resources to help guide them. It is then the responsibility of platforms to take those insights and act on them in accordance with legal guidance and their policies. While tools and algorithms help platforms solve for scale and speed, human oversight and context resources are needed to ensure nuanced understanding and to mitigate any potential over-censorship.

Global Users, Global Platforms

For the past 10 to 20 years, people have associated global tech with Silicon Valley, or at least with big American companies. These companies have to adhere, at the very least, to U.S. laws, and often implicitly accept U.S. norms on free speech and other rights. But as they have expanded globally, their user base has also expanded exponentially among non-U.S. audiences. For counterterrorism and counterextremism efforts, this has meant the need for a huge scale-up in language comprehension and nuanced understanding of how social and cultural norms of hate speech and violence manifest internationally.

The indicators of violent extremism in the United States can’t be expected to look identical to indicators across Europe, Asia and Africa. Every region and country has its own violent extremist and terrorist organizations, each with specific sociopolitical histories that often include coded symbols, slogans and slurs. Yet not every tech company has the capacity to hire tens of thousands of moderators around the world. Only the largest monetized companies can afford this internal support infrastructure. Cross-sector efforts and public-private partnerships will remain key, particularly for the smaller platforms relying on third-party intel and tooling.

Lastly, global companies are emerging from non-U.S. markets more frequently. In an Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development survey of the top 50 social media platforms, 13 were based in China. These companies are coming from countries with different rules and oversight infrastructure, as well as different cultural norms around privacy and security. This is not inherently bad. However, there are no real supranational global mechanisms to institute digital norms, and even when human rights NGOs and UN bodies highlight the need for “human rights” oversight, GIFCT and those monitoring tech platform progress are already seeing varying interpretations of what that means.

Are tech companies solving for free speech, privacy or safety? Oftentimes solving for one is at the expense of the other two. Platforms navigating among these three necessary pillars have followed different paths. Ultimate user privacy with end-to-end encrypted communication has been criticized as giving a free pass for child exploitation and terrorists. Safety- and security-focused policies to remove bad content faster on platforms are criticized for potential over-censorship with possible ramifications for activists when data is handed over to governments. Free speech without parameters inherently leads to dehumanization and violence when unchecked.

Cross-Sector Collaboration

There is, as always, no one solution to solve all the nuanced problems around countering terrorism and violent extremism online. However, to evolve and mitigate risk with the times, a big-tent approach is clearly needed. Multistakeholder forums will have to become more comfortable with non-U.S. companies at the table.

The next big question is, who is willing to come to the table and what can they do together? It will always be easier to judge those companies already at the table, those trying to provide some level of transparency and those willing to admit when something has gone wrong. What to do with companies unwilling to take part in dialogues or provide transparency will increasingly be a question for governments and lawmakers.

From <https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/challenges-combating-terrorism-and-extremism-online>

Taglit Excel

source reichmann u.
Taglit Excel is the branch of business leadership of Taglit, which was established with the aim of developing and empowering the next generation of business leaders in Israel and around the world.

During the summer months, program participants take part in a series of leadership workshops and meetings with senior executives, politicians and leading intellectuals in Israeli society.
Target audience: Israeli undergraduate students up to the age of 26.

The program takes place in June-July mainly in the evening at a rate of 3-2 sessions per week.

At the end of the summer program, all participants join an active alumni community that creates a variety of social and business opportunities for over 500 members abroad and in Israel.

Important details: Club language: English, 10 weeks during the summer, Recorded: December-January

ADELOSON - TAGLIT ISRAEL - LINK

Your Free Epic Adventure in Israel Starts Here

10 incredible days in Israel

Explore the best beaches, trek the deserts, tour ancient sites, and enjoy mouthwatering cuisine. Get up-close and personal with local culture and make memories that will last a lifetime.

LEARN MORE >

Travel with no hassle

We’ll handle all the planning and booking flights, accommodations, itineraries and activities. All you have to do is register, pack your bags, and get ready to explore.

LEARN MORE >

Meet your new best friends

Explore Israel with a busload of young Jewish adults from all backgrounds and lifestyles. It’s like traveling with a crew of best friends… you just haven’t met them yet.

Times of Israel - Birthright to cut up to a third of its free trips to Israel for young Jews

CEO Gidi Mark says decision made due to ‘significant cost increases’ in programming, barring a ‘major immediate increase in fundraising’

By ANDREW LAPIN  LINK TOI

21 November 2022, 6:36 pm 

JTA – Birthright Israel is drastically cutting back on the number of free trips it plans to offer to Jewish young adults, scaling back its operations by up to a third, the organization announced Monday.

The cuts come amid what the organization said is a mix of financial pressures, chiefly inflation and heightened travel expenses in a post-COVID world. It plans to make added appeals to its top donors but still expects to heavily reduce its Israel trips in 2023 to as few as 23,500 participants, down from 35,000 this year and 45,000 annually pre-pandemic.

“The significant cost increases of our program mean that we will not be able to accommodate as many applicants in the coming years,” Birthright CEO Gidi Mark said in a statement provided to JTA.

However, Birthright’s own fundraising has not been affected. A Birthright spokesperson told JTA that the organization actually expects its funding to increase from 2022 to 2023, but that the growth won’t be enough to compensate for the rise in expenses and inflation.

The group has shown other signs lately of scaled-back operations for its free 10-day trips to Israel for Jewish young adults.

Earlier this year, Birthright said it would lower the maximum age of participation back to 26, after five years of allowing Jews aged 27 to 32 to enroll. The group’s leadership said at the time that the increased age limit was backfiring by convincing younger Jews to keep delaying their trips.

Birthright also merged with Onward Israel, another Israel travel program for young adults, during the pandemic.

Illustrative: Jewish youth from across the world attend the main annual Taglit-Birthright event at the International Conference Center in Jerusalem, December 24, 2017. (Hadas Parush/Flash90)

The program was founded in 1999 as a means of encouraging greater Israel engagement among younger generations of Jews, and studies commissioned in the two decades since have shown that Jews who participated in Birthright trips were more likely than peers who applied but did not go to marry somebody Jewish and to feel a deeper connection to Israel. One such study was released last week.

“Without a major immediate increase in fundraising, we will be hard-pressed to have the positive effect we’ve had on many individuals,” Mark said.

The Birthright Israel Foundation, its fundraising arm, is making a large appeal to donors this year for increased funding. Though it receives large portions of its estimated $150 million annual budget from the Israeli government and large donors such as the Adelson Family Foundation, the foundation’s CEO, Izzy Tapoohi, said it is “a myth” that “just a few large donors” fund Birthright.

It’s been a difficult period for several of Birthright’s most stalwart funders, from various legal troubles for founder Michael Steinhardt to potential sanctions for Russian Jewish philanthropists in the wake of Russia’s war with Ukraine.

Young American Jews have also indicated in demographic studies that they feel less culturally and politically connected to Israel than previous generations, and the group IfNotNow, which aims to end American Jewish support for Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territories, urged a boycott and other protests of Birthright.

Israel’s recent election that propelled a far-right bloc into government is widely seen as likely to drive a further wedge between Israel and many young American Jews.

Link to TOI

Researchers spot new infrastructure likely used for Predator spyware

https://therecord.media/new-predator-spyware-infrastructure-identified

Daryna Antoniuk Daryna.Antoniukn@therecord.media

March 1st, 2024

Cybersecurity researchers have identified new infrastructure likely used by the operators of the commercial spyware known as Predator in at least 11 countries.

By analyzing the domains likely used to deliver the spyware, analysts at Recorded Future’s Insikt Group were able to spot potential Predator customers in Angola, Armenia, Botswana, Egypt, Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Mongolia, Oman, the Philippines, Saudi Arabia, and Trinidad and Tobago.

No Predator customers within Botswana and the Philippines had been identified before Recorded Future’s analysis. The Record is an editorially independent unit of Recorded Future.

Predator is a sophisticated spyware developed by the Israeli-owned spyware consortium Intellexa. It has been deployed since at least 2019, infecting both Android and iPhone devices. A consortium of journalists, activists and cyber experts previously examined the spyware in a project called the Predator Files.

Predator can gain access to a device's microphone, camera, and all stored or transmitted data, including contacts, messages, photos, and videos. It’s highly invasive and leaves very limited traces on the target device, making it challenging to investigate.

Insikt Group hasn't identified specific victims or targets of the latest Predator activity.

"Since Predator spyware is typically delivered to individual victim devices via vulnerability exploitation, identifying targets is challenging without direct access to those devices," the researchers said.

It starts with spoofing

During the latest analysis, the Insikt Group identified a new multi-level Predator delivery network, comprising delivery servers, upstream servers and infrastructure highly likely associated with Predator customers.

The delivery servers were likely used for device exploitation and initial access. These servers typically host a domain, spoofing websites for specific entities that might be of interest to the target. Some of these domains posed as legitimate news outlets, weather forecast websites or specific companies, such as real estate businesses.

For example, the domains krisha-kz.com and kollesa.com appear to be spoofing a real estate company and an auto sales platform in Kazakhstan. The country's history of using cyber surveillance vendors such as NSO Group, FinFisher, and RCS Lab to target activists and politicians further suggests that it is likely a Predator customer. Over half of the domains identified by Insikt Group were linked to Kazakhstan, indicating a potentially heightened level of spyware activity, researchers said.

Read More: Spyware maker NSO Group ordered to turn over Pegasus code in WhatsApp case

Other parts of the Predator network discovered by researchers include virtual private servers upstream from the delivery servers. They were likely used for anonymizing traffic and to reduce the likelihood of associating the delivery servers with specific Predator customers.

The anonymization network that obscures the operator's location and identity makes the attribution of attacks more challenging, according to the report.

These upstream servers communicated with static in-country internet service provider addresses that were likely associated with Predator customers.

“Based on our findings and the fact that organizations in these countries were almost all historically reported to be Predator customers, it is highly likely these organizations will very likely continue to employ Predator spyware,” researchers said.

Not just law enforcement

Spyware technologies such as Predator and Pegasus are marketed as tools sold for counterterrorism and law enforcement usage. However, they are continuously abused to target civil society, including journalists, politicians and activists.

In September of last year, for example, the phone of an Egyptian opposition politician was targeted with Predator, in a campaign that researchers at the digital forensics organization Citizen Lab believe was carried out with the knowledge of the Egyptian government.

Other Predator victims include Greek journalist Thanasis Koukasis, former Meta employee Artemis Seaford, and a member of the European Parliament, Nikos Androulakis.

Predator customers usually target high-profile individuals who are expected to have significant intelligence value. This is due to the high deployment costs with charges per infection, according to the Insikt Group.

“Domestic use of mercenary spyware such as Predator outside of serious crime and counterterrorism poses privacy, legal, or physical safety risks for end targets, their employers, and the entities conducting this activity,” researchers said.

https://therecord.media/new-predator-spyware-infrastructure-identified

crunchbase profile https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/insikt-intelligence

Euro-Israel Surveillance - CounteR Project

CounteR Project - https://counter-project.eu/network/insikt-intelligence/

A project kick-off e-meeting held on May 19-20, 2021, outlined the collaboration mechanisms between the 19 partners in the CounteR consortium, the project timelines, expected outcomes, along with other organizational matters related to the activity implementation.

The CounteR consortium brings together an illustrious group of international subject-matter experts in counterterrorism, radicalisation and privacy law, six European law enforcement agencies with practical in-field knowledge, as well as a group of technical SMEs and academic partners.

The Consortium partners - https://counter-project.eu/consortium/

Countering Radicalisation for a Safer World

Privacy-first situational awareness platform for violent terrorism and crime prediction, counter radicalisation and citizen protection

The ultimate goal of the CounteR solution is to provide law enforcement agencies and Internet providers and social media platforms with an

SEC Form 13d-1d filing for Ronald Lauder - December 2022 

SEC LINK

As of December 31, 2022, the Reporting Person beneficially owned 4,848,545 shares of Class A Common Stock as follows: 

(i) 4,768,846 shares of Class B Common Stock, par value $.01 per share, of the Issuer (the “Class B Common Stock”) held directly by the Reporting Person; 

(ii) 6,364 shares of Class A Common Stock and 6,364 shares of Class B Common Stock held indirectly as the sole trustee of The Descendants of Ronald S. Lauder 1966 Trust; and 

(iii) 66,971 shares of Class A Common Stock held indirectly as Chairman of the Board of Directors of The Ronald S. Lauder Foundation. 

The Reporting Person disclaims beneficial ownership of: 

(i) 66,971 shares of Class A Common Stock held indirectly as Chairman of the Board of Directors of The Ronald S. Lauder Foundation and 

(ii) 6,364 shares of Class A Common Stock and the 6,364 shares of Class B Common Stock held indirectly as the sole trustee of The Descendants of Ronald S. Lauder 1966 Trust.

As of December 31, 2022, 4,375,000 shares of Class B Common Stock are pledged by the Reporting Person to secure loans under loan facilities with certain banks (“Loan Facilities”) as to which he has sole voting power and shares dispositive power with certain pledgees (“Pledgees”) under the Loan Facilities.

(b)

The responses of the Reporting Person to Row (11) of the cover pages of this Schedule 13G are incorporated herein by reference. Each share of Class B Common Stock is convertible at the option of the holder into one share of Class A Common Stock and is automatically converted into one share of Class A Common Stock upon transfer to a person who is not a Permitted Transferee, as that term is defined in the Issuer’s Certificate of Incorporation. Assuming conversion of all such shares of Class B Common Stock beneficially owned by the Reporting Person, the Reporting Person would beneficially own 4,848,545 shares of Class A Common Stock, which would constitute 2.1% of the number of shares of Class A Common Stock outstanding.

Each share of Class A Common Stock entitles the holder to one vote on each matter submitted to a vote of the Issuer’s stockholders, and each share of Class B Common Stock entitles the holder to ten votes on each such matter, including the election of directors of the Issuer. Assuming no conversion of any of the outstanding shares of Class B Common Stock, the 73,335 shares of Class A Common Stock and the 4,775,210 shares of Class B Common Stock for which the Reporting Person has voting power constitute 3.2% of the aggregate voting power of the Issuer

(c)

(i) The Reporting Person has sole voting power with respect to 4,781,574 shares of Class A Common Stock as follows: (i) 4,768,846 shares of Class B Common Stock held directly by the Reporting Person; and (ii) 6,364 shares of Class A Common Stock and 6,364 shares of Class B Common Stock held indirectly as the sole trustee of The Descendants of Ronald S. Lauder 1966 Trust.

(ii) The Reporting Person shares voting power with respect to 66,971 shares of Class A Common Stock held indirectly as Chairman of the Board of Directors of The Ronald S. Lauder Foundation.

(iii) The Reporting Person has sole dispositive power with respect to 406,574 shares of Class A Common Stock as follows: (i) 393,846 shares of Class B Common Stock held directly by the Reporting Person; and (ii) 6,364 shares of Class A Common Stock and 6,364 shares of Class B Common Stock held indirectly as the sole trustee of The Descendants of Ronald S. Lauder 1966 Trust.

(iv) The Reporting Person shares dispositive power with respect to 4,441,971 shares of Class A Common Stock as follows: (i) the Reporting Person shares dispositive power with the Pledgees with respect to the 4,375,000 shares of Class B Common Stock pledged to secure the Reporting Person’s obligations under the Loan Facilities and (ii) the Reporting Person shares dispositive power with respect to the 66,971 shares of Class A Common Stock held indirectly as Chairman of the Board of Directors of The Ronald S. Lauder Foundation.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/942617/000110465923018536/tm235615d3_sc13ga.htm

Scroll or Open Link

2021nov08 #lauder jpost | King of the Jews

Linde, Steve

The Jerusalem Report; Jerusalem (Nov 8, 2021): 10.

From <https://www.proquest.com/docview/2606936283/695DC43F29D946D7PQ/2?accountid=6749&sourcetype=Magazines>

Twenty years later, after establishing himself as a successful businessman, he became a Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for European and NATO policy at the US Department of Defense. In 1998, Lauder was asked by prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu to launch back-channel negotiations with Syrian leader Hafez al-Assad, and these talks continued after Ehud Barak became prime minister. Lauder communicated a willingness on Assad's part to make compromises with Israelin an overall land-for-peace deal, and his draft "Treaty of Peace Between Israeland Syria" formed an important part of the ultimately fruitless Israeli-Syrian talks that took place in Shepherdstown, West Virginia in January 2000. In 2020, Lauder gave 91 pieces of arms and armor to the Metropolitan Museum of Art, for which the museum honored him by naming its entire group of Arms and Armor galleries for him.

RONALD STEVEN LAUDER, who has served since 2007 as president of the World Jewish Congress is the leading voice of world Jewry.

His is an authentic, moral voice that doesn't reflect partisan interests but rather the good of the Jewish people as a whole. He doesn't seem to fear anyone or anything, nor does he hesitate to speak out whenever he deems fit - in defense of the State of Israel, to advance the Israel-Diaspora relationship and against antisemitism wherever it rears its ugly head.

In an interview with The Jerusalem Report, Lauder says the biggest challenge facing the Jewish world right now is "a crisis in public image and public relations"- or hasbara, as it's known in Hebrew.

He elaborates in the interview: "Israelis far behind in making crucial investments in hasbara - and, due to that lack of focus, is far behind in the battle for public opinion, particularly in the Diaspora. Unfortunately, that has led to damaging developments. A deficit in public opinion towards Israelhas led to a drop in public support for the Jewish people. This has led to a terrifying and unprecedented spike in antisemitic violent acts tacitly supported by public statements from political figures from the far left to the far right, and from celebrities and other notably recognizable, influential figures. We must invest in hasbara to quickly return public opinion squarely behind the safety and prosperity of the Jewish people in Israeland the Diaspora."

Addressing the Malmo International Forum on Holocaust Remembrance and Combating Antisemitism on October 12, Lauder declared, "If I have learned one thing, it is this: antisemites are cowards. They are bullies. And when they are confronted, they back away and hide. At the same time when there is no reaction to their hate they are emboldened. Silence gives them strength.

"My greatest role as president of the World Jewish Congress has been to fight back. To tell people that we cannot allow this growing group of people to continue this hate.... I am not naive. I realize the hatred of Jews has been with us for 2,000 years and will never completely go away. But we can do everything in our power to keep this virus from spreading."

A strong believer in education, Lauder called on schools around the world to set aside one day - January 27th, the day Auschwitz was liberated, as Holocaust Awareness Day. "I want every classroom in every city throughout the world to designate this one day - to teach children, what happened, why it happened and how to prevent this from ever happening to any people again."

After Polish President Andrzej Duda earlier this year signed a law that effectively prevents Holocaust victims and their descendants from recovering stolen property, Lauder lashed out. "The decisions made by the Polish leadership are a slap in the face to survivors of Nazi brutality and their families and to what remains of the Polish Jewish community, and to all those who seek justice," he tells the Report.

In a video address to the 10th annual Jerusalem Post Conference on October 12, Lauder - who traditionally serves as president of the event - warned that "Israelis losing the political war around the world, and the lies and distortions - the outright dishonesty is taking a very real hold on people. All around the world, people now actually believe that Israelis an apartheid state, Israelis really engaged in ethnic cleansing, Israelis guilty of crimes against humanity. It's reported as facts on the BBC and the Associated Press, and the front pages of major newspapers everywhere. How else can you explain that when terrorists attack a sovereign nation with 4,000 rockets, it is Israelthat is seen as the guilty party?"

Lauder suggested that the singling out of Israelacross the globe was not happening by accident. "It's part of a coordinated attack on Israel's very legitimacy that began in the Middle East and with the Muslim Brotherhood. And now this enemy has found willing partners in colleges, universities, and in the media," he said.

"No one was prepared for political war, and perhaps Israelthought people would never believe these ridiculous lies. I am telling you that this political war is much more dangerous, more existential than any war Israelhas faced in the past. The battlefield has changed, and Israelmust quickly adapt. It must change its tactics, and it must respond in a very different way than it has in the past. There is something else that is missing right now. In the past, Israelhad a strong Diaspora that supported it in every war and put pressure on their governments for support, but for the past 15 years, the Diaspora has been neglected."

LAUDER WAS born in New York City on February 26, 1944. He is the younger son of Joseph and Estee Lauder, founders of multi-million-dollar Estee Lauder Companies. His older brother, LeonardLauder, is chairman of the board.

He attended the Bronx High School of Science and holds a bachelor's degree in International Business from the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania. He studied at the University of Paris and received a Certificate in International Business from the University of Brussels.

Lauder started to work for Estee Lauder in 1964. Twenty years later, after establishing himself as a successful businessman, he became a Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for European and NATO policy at the US Department of Defense. In 1986, President Ronald Reagan named him US ambassador to Austria, a position he held until 1987. He ran for mayor of New York City in 1989, losing to Rudy Giuliani in the Republican primary.

In 1998, Lauder was asked by prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu to launch back-channel negotiations with Syrian leader Hafez al-Assad, and these talks continued after Ehud Barak became prime minister. Lauder communicated a willingness on Assad's part to make compromises with Israelin an overall land-for-peace deal, and his draft "Treaty of Peace Between Israeland Syria" formed an important part of the ultimately fruitless Israeli-Syrian talks that took place in Shepherdstown, West Virginia in January 2000.

A billionaire in his own right, Lauder made a name for himself as an entrepreneur, philanthropist and art collector, managing investments in real estate and media in the US, Europe and Israel.

On November 16, 2001, Lauder opened the Neue Galerie in New York, an art museum across the street from the Metropolitan Museum of Art that showcases works from Germany and Austria from the early 20th century. In 2006, he purchased from Maria Altmann and her family the painting, Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer I, by Gustav Klimt for $135 million, the highest price ever paid for a painting at that time. Lauder called it, "Our Mona Lisa." The Nazi-looted art painting, which had been restored to Altmann following years of negotiation and litigation with the Austrian government, now forms the centerpiece of the museum's collection.

In 2020, Lauder gave 91 pieces of arms and armor to the Metropolitan Museum of Art, for which the museum honored him by naming its entire group of Arms and Armor galleries for him.

Lauder was elected president of the World Jewish Congress on June 10, 2007, following the resignation of Edgar Bronfman, Sr. In his role as president of the WJC, which today represents Jewish communities in 106 countries, Lauder meets regularly with heads of state, prime ministers and government representatives to discuss and advance causes of concern to Jews and Jewish communities internationally. He advocates for Israel, especially in times when the state or its citizens are under attack, encourages and aids the development of vibrant Jewish communities around the world, and supports a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinianconflict.

On October 23, 2019, Lauder presented the WJC's highest honor, the Theodor Herzl award, to German Chancellor Angela Merkel for her strong stand in defense of the Jewish people and against antisemitism.

Lauder serves as chairman of the Auschwitz-Birkenau Memorial Foundation, which supports the preservation of the remains of the former Nazi death camp. In January 2020, the foundation brought a delegation of more than 100 survivors and their families to the memorial site to participate in the commemoration of the 75th anniversary of the liberation of the camp.

Lauder says his experience as the US ambassador in Austria heightened his deep appreciation of, and his commitment to, his Jewish heritage. During his tenure, he initiated what has become a core personal mission: supporting the revitalization of Jewish life across central and eastern Europe in communities that had been devastated by the Holocaust and remained suppressed under Communism. In 1987, he established the Ronald S. Lauder Foundation, which supports Jewish schools, camps and community centers in Austria and across Europe.

Lauder was elected president of the Jewish National Fund in 1997, and after a successful 10-year tenure, became chairman of the board.

He lives in New York, is married to Jo Carole (Knopf) Lauder, and has two children, Aerin and Jane.

Here is my interview with him:

As president of the WJC, what do you see as the biggest challenge facing the Jewish world at the moment?

A crisis in public image and public relations. Let me explain: Israelis far behind in making crucial investments in hasbara - and, due to that lack of focus, is far behind in the battle for public opinion, particularly in the diaspora. Unfortunately, that has led to damaging developments. A deficit in public opinion towards Israelhas led to a drop in public support for the Jewish people. This has led to a terrifying and unprecedented spike in antisemitic violent acts tacitly supported by public statements from political figures from the far left to the far right, and from celebrities and other notably recognizable, influential figures.

We must invest in hasbara to quickly return public opinion squarely behind the safety and prosperity of the Jewish people in Israeland the Diaspora. This is a key investment that I will be focused on over the next four years. Watch this space.

How do you think Israeland the US should tackle the Iranian issue?

The bottom line is that Iran must not be allowed to obtain nuclear capabilities, and in order to ensure that they do not, Israeland the United States must be firm, committed, trusting and wholly unified partners in dealing with Iran. That unity is the most important element to success - and to Israeland the American people's security.

What is your position on what to do on the Palestiniantrack?

Lasting peace between Israeland Palestine is the only way that Israel's long-term preservation is assured. I propose looking closely at the Abraham Accords, begun by the two previous American and Israeli administrations and, I hope, continued by President Biden and Prime Minister Bennett. Normalization is working well with moderate Arab nations - and that philosophy and practices, based on economic interests and economic development, can work between Israeland the Palestinians. The goal of a two-state solution remains paramount, and I am fully committed to it, as is the United States. It is my hope that Israelitself more fully and boldly engages in the peace process.

How do you see tension between the Jewish world and Poland resolving itself, if at all?

It has not, so far. The decisions made by Polish leadership is a slap in the face to survivors of Nazi brutality and their families and to what remains of the Polish Jewish community, and to all those who seek justice. Now, the priority must be to make sure that this type of policy does not migrate to other eastern and central European countries. I am currently holding high-level conversations with government leaders across Europe to ensure that other countries remain committed to justice for survivors and their families.

Are you continuing to see a spike in antisemitism around the world, especially in the US, and do you think it's related to the pandemic?

Yes, I do see a continued spike - and it comes from multiple directions. For example, the pandemic has led to a surge in misinformation and hate online and social media platforms have done far too little to curtail it. In fact, the WJC is making new strategic investments in cybersecurity including tracking and calling out hate and misinformation online.

Much of this emanates from far-right and far-left sources - and it has seeped into the mainstream due to the mainstreaming of extreme political figures. For example, though the issue resolved itself a day later thanks to cooler heads, US House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi's recent 24-hour decision to let the far-left, anti-Israelso-called "squad" pull funding for Israel's Iron Dome was wrong and terrifying. It showed that too often, leaders bow to anti-Israeland antisemitic extremists.

How do you rate the performance of the new Israeli government?

So far, so good. Prime Minister Bennett and Foreign Minister Lapid have my full support and my friendship. Each leader has also done an exemplary job in reaching out and cultivating the international community. For instance, PM Bennett was highly visible during the most recent United Nations General Assembly. Being present is key.

What are your goals as president of the WJC for the upcoming year?

To invest in hasbara to fight antisemitism, and to secure commitments from world leaders and public figures to join in this fight. That's why I am making key investments designed to fight antisemitism by encouraging growth in connection to Judaism and Jewishness among the under-40 generation.

If the last year has shown us anything, it's that conversations that impact the Jewish community are increasingly taking place on new platforms and among younger crowds. They are now the ones on the front lines. If we are to ensure a strong future, we must invest in fostering strong Jewish leaders among the next generation. I look forward to investing in the development of dynamic, enthusiastic groups of young Jews and new allies through the programs of the Word Jewish Congress. We hope to announce a strategic campaign soon to work with students on college campuses in confronting antisemitism and antisemitic professors, and generally to meet young Jews and non-Jews where they are, including on social media.

As we bid farewell to German Chancellor Angela Merkel, what is it about her that inspired you to present her with an award?

Where do I start? There is not just one thing. Chancellor Merkel is a friend and a role model, to me personally and to the Jewish people in Germany, across Europe, in Israeland around the world. She has ushered in a new Germany that is an example to Europe and the world. She will be missed, but I am optimistic that the new leadership in Germany will build on her legacy.

Who inspires you in the world/Jewish world today?

Young people who embrace, value, and take pride in their Jewishness!

© Copyright Jerusalem Post. All rights reserved.

Word count: 2480

Copyright Jerusalem Report Nov 8, 2021

Linde, S. (2021, Nov 08). King of the jews. The Jerusalem Report, , 10. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.lapl.org/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/magazines/king-jews/docview/2606936283/se-2

From <https://www.proquest.com/docview/2606936283/695DC43F29D946D7PQ/2?accountid=6749&sourcetype=Magazines>

#lauder 2021mar21 #lauder Interview | Ronald Lauder

Mar 21, 2021

From <https://www.alainelkanninterviews.com/ronald-lauder/>

ONE WORLD. Ronald Lauder, President of the World Jewish Congress since June 2007, is on the board of the Estée Lauder Companies and Chairman of Clinique Laboratories. He also serves as Chairman of both the Auschwitz-Birkenau Memorial Foundation and the Ronald S. Lauder Foundation, whose mission it is to rebuild Jewish life in Central and Eastern Europe. In 2001 he opened the Neue Galerie in New York, dedicated to German and Austrian art, and he is the world’s largest collector of medieval and renaissance armor.

Listen to the podcast of this interview here.

Ronald Lauder, you have many jobs and many interests. You were appointed US deputy assistant Defense Secretary for Europe and NATO in 1983, and in 1986 President Reagan named you US Ambassador to Austria. You also have long standing ties with Israel. Would you define yourself as an eclectic personality? 

Eclectic, I don’t know, but, perhaps, many personalities. Today, my most important role is President of the World Jewish Congress – that’s what I feel strongest about. We see a huge uptick in anti-Semitism in many countries throughout the world today, including Italy. This is my major concern. Yes, I am still involved in the Neue Galerie, I am still an art collector, and I’m still very much involved in the Auschwitz-Birkenau Foundation. On the 75th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz in 2020 we honoured all the survivors, an event where I gave the keynote speech. I am also very involved in Israel, particularly in the Negev where we have an Employment Center, that helps many young people settle in the Negev. I have many different interests. 

Are you still close to the Estée Lauder Companies, and what has changed since your parents, Estée and Joseph, died?  

I continue on the Board of Directors and I am Chairman of Clinique, one of our most important brands. I’m involved on an almost daily basis. I would say the greatest change is size – the company has grown dramatically since my parents died. My father died in 1983, but my mother died in 2004, so it wasn’t that long ago. But it’s a much larger and more complex corporation today. Estée Lauder is one of the leading US corporations worldwide.  

Your mother was an exceptional woman. What did she teach you?  

Growing up, I remember every meal we had involved a discussion about the business. I learned it at the dinner table, and I worked with her for 17 years in the business. She was a brilliant woman. My brother Leonard, who was CEO for many years, is now Chairman Emeritus. He has just written a book (The Company I Keep: My Life in Beauty) about his time growing up in Estée Lauder and what it meant. It was truly a family business, and from my earliest memories, I remember we heard about the stores, the new ideas and all the products. There were always products on the table that everyone was trying, so it was very much a hands-on business. Literally.

“Estée Lauder is one of the leading US corporations worldwide.“

Ronald S. Lauder has served as president of the World Jewish Congress since 2007.

Ronald Lauder, was your family involved in the Jewish religion and charity, or did that come later?  

Both. We were definitely a Jewish family, but at the same time, my own strong affinity with my Jewishness came many years later.  I was very much an assimilated Jew. It wasn’t until I came to Vienna as Ambassador in 1986 and witnessed the Jewish children coming out of the Soviet Union (at that time), seeing the hardships they were going through had a deep, personal impact on me. That’s when I started getting involved with Jewish schools and education. Slowly but surely I became more and more involved. Ironically, it was the anti-Semitism that I witnessed and its effect on the children that turned me into a much more committed Jewish person than I was before.  

Did you become very interested in Central and Eastern European Jews because of your origins, or because you were in Vienna, or because of the Holocaust?  

All of the above. My family came out of what was then the Austro-Hungarian Empire. They came from Hungary, from lower Austria, and from part of the Czech Republic. The result is a mixture on both sides of the family. When I thought of Europe as a teenager I always thought more of Eastern Europe, and I was fascinated by the Iron Curtain and what it meant. 

Did you explore this further when you were US Deputy Assistant Defense Secretary for European and NATO Affairs between 1983 and 1986?  

Those three years were very important years for me. I went to all the NATO countries and worked very hard to strengthen our defenses. I worked at keeping the United States very involved with all the NATO countries, as well as sharing defense spending. I came to know all the defense ministers. It was a fascinating job.  

After which when you became US Ambassador to Austria? 

Because of my NATO experience, I was very well versed in the issues when I went to Austria. My focus had been Eastern Europe, which at that time consisted of the Warsaw Pact. Vienna was a turning point that changed my life. That’s when I became more Jewish, but it also made me more aware of the problems between East and West. At that time everything was focused on the Soviet Union, what today is Russia. When I was there, I also made my first trip to Israel. I was in my 40s and I had a chance to see the Middle East and see the possibilities of what could be done.  

Your present focus is with the World Jewish Congress. What is it? 

The World Jewish Congress is an organization that was founded in 1936 by a group of concerned Jewish leaders, working in Geneva, who saw what was happening in Nazi Germany. They tried to warn the world, particularly the Jewish world; and because they had very little influence, no one listened to them until it was too late. One of the leaders, Nahum Goldmann, saw this and decided to create a congress that would have strength and be able to talk to governments on a ministerial level. For the last 76 years (since the end of World War II) we’ve seen what can be done.  

What is the job of the President of the World Jewish Congress?  

I am in almost daily contact with many of the European countries. We are constantly fighting anti-Semitism and working together to help Jewish communities in 100 countries. We are working very closely with Israel and I’ve made five trips over the last six months to the Middle East, to countries that are now part of the Abraham Accords, which has had a major effect. The job of the President of the World Jewish Congress is to represent Jewish people all over the world. That’s a big job. 

You mean Diaspora Jews in America and Europe?  

Diaspora Jews plus Israel. We also represent Israel, so we represent Jews all over the world. The majority are in six or eight countries, but the fact is that we represent the Jewish Communities in 100 countries.  

How hard is the fight against anti-Semitism?  

It’s growing harder. Right after the Second World War, when people saw the atrocities the Nazis committed on the Jewish people, nobody in their right mind wanted to be associated with the Nazis and what happened. We are now three generations past that, and we are seeing that young people do not really and truly understand what happened in the Holocaust. There’s something evil that pulls a lot of young people into these anti-Semitic or neo-Nazi movements. That’s on the political right. But on the left, a new form of anti-Semitism has emerged … where people are using the Palestine movement as an excuse to attack Israel and Jews in general.

“The next year will be very crucial for the entire world“

Ronald Lauder, politically you are a Republican. You were at the Wharton School of Economics with Donald Trump, and supported him in his campaign. What do you think about the behaviour of Trump after the result of the election? And what do you think about the new President, Joe Biden?  

As a Republican I am always very supportive of the Republican Party, but as President of the World Jewish Congress, it’s my job to be very close with every President, and I’ve been close with every President since Richard Nixon. Although I’ve known President Trump for 50 years, I’ve known Joe Biden over 40 years, and I have a very good relationship with him as well. What happened at the Capitol after the election was a disaster for all of us. It was wrong. But rather than looking at the one event, we have to look at the four years in which Donald Trump did some very good things. There are things he did that I don’t agree with, and there are things I agree 100% with, and I’m sure that during the Biden administration there will be things I will agree 100 percent with and issues where I will disagree.  

President Trump moved the US Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, and a lot of work was done on the peace process with the Emirates and the Arab countries. Is Joe Biden going to go forward on the same lines?  

One of the first things President Biden has said is that he’s keeping the Embassy in Jerusalem, and that he is going to keep the Abraham Accords and what was accomplished by the Trump administration. The fact is that there are changes going on. President Biden is trying to build a strong relationship with Europe, and the real question for the entire world, not only for the US, but for the world, is what’s going to happen with Iran.  

What is going to happen?  

I believe that the Biden administration will find a way to stop Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. However, there are two different philosophies: the philosophy of the Trump administration was to place strong sanctions on Iran and attack them and really and truly make a case that it’s not to their advantage to have nuclear weapons; and the Biden administration believes in sitting down and talking and negotiating with them. They are both ways to gain the same end result. But, the fact is we must accomplish it, because if Iran ever gets a nuclear weapon, so will Saudi Arabia, and so will all the other countries in the Middle East. The next year will be very crucial for the entire world as to how this is solved. I know from my friends in both the Biden and the Republican administrations, we really and truly want to see an agreement. We have no choice but to make an agreement.  

What is the position of Israel?  

Well, there’s an election taking place.  

But there are elections all the time. Are you friends with Prime Minister Netanyahu?  

I know his philosophy, and although there is an election taking place, there is very little difference between his philosophy and his opponent’s philosophy as to what should be done. In both cases, they do not trust Iran to stop its aggression towards Israel, and remember, Israel is surrounded by Hamas and Hezbollah (Iranian proxies).  

Is the new opening of relations with the United Arab Emirates very important for Israel and for the international community?  

The Abraham Accords are critical for the future of the world, because if you have a strong and safe Middle East, it is better for everyone.  I just wrote a piece in the Arab News suggesting that the Middle East should have a coalition similar to NATO. Just as I saw the positives that NATO accomplished in Europe to stop the Soviet Union, I also can see what it could do in the Middle East for countries working together to stop nuclear weapons and weapons in general.  

The other big issue in American politics is China. What do you think about the difficult relationship between the US and China?  

It’s extraordinarily important for China and the US to become friendlier, to work together, because there’s no other choice. Their economies in many ways depend on each other, and as they work together it helps the global economy. A fight between the two would hurt the economy of the entire world. It’s very hard to be an optimist, but I am.  

As an art collector you specialize in German and Austrian art. You opened the Neue Galerie in New York, you are one of the largest collectors of the painter Egon Schiele, and you purchased for $135 million the very famous portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer by Gustav Klimt. They say that you call it your Mona Lisa. Does your passion for the Vienna Secession art movement come from your time in Vienna?  

Collecting Schiele and Klimt preceded my time of Vienna by about 30 years. I started when I was about 14 and 15, when no one had heard of them, and I have never stopped buying their works. I purchased a great piece of Austrian art a month ago. It’s part of what I’m about. At the same time, I collect art in many other fields. I never stop collecting.  

You gave 91 pieces of medieval and Renaissance armor to the Metropolitan Museum. What does that armor have to do with Vienna?  

They are completely different. Just as one has to eat, sometimes you eat fish, sometimes steak, sometimes vegetables.  

When did this collecting passion of yours really start?  

When I was 14 or 15 with the different fields. The first piece of medieval art I bought was when I was 19 years old; my first piece of armor when I was 21. I’ve been collecting a long time. A famous author named Pierre Cabanne describes collecting as almost like taking heroin. Once you’re on it, you never stop. I’m a collector. I collect everything.  

If I am not wrong, you even have a collection of telephones?  

Right. Exactly. A large collection of 30 or 40 telephones.   

What are you into right now? 

I’m into collecting Greek and Roman sculpture, ancient Greek helmets, things from the Middle Ages, from the Renaissance, Old Master paintings, and contemporary art.  

How can you know and love so many different things?  

With my eyes. In every catalogue that comes out I see things and I understand what’s good and what’s not good. I have three categories. “Oh”, “Oh my”, and “Oh My God!” I only buy “Oh My Gods”, and it’s been a very successful way of looking at things. Fortunately I have the ability to determine what is good, very good and great. I buy great.

Image Estée Lauder with her sons Ronald and Leonard.

Image Ronald Lauder is Chairman of Clinique Laboratories, one of the most important brands of the Estée Lauder Companies.

Image Ronald Lauder calls the very famous portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer by Gustav Klimt his Mona Lisa.

Ronald Lauder gave the keynote speech on the 75th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz in 2020. 

Image With President Donald Trump, an old friend with whom Ronald Lauder was at Wharton.

Image Ronald Lauder and his brother Leonard founded the Alzheimer’s Drug Discover Foundation.

“It’s one world and it’s time to learn how to read the future.“

Ronald Lauder, has the coronavirus very much changed your way of life?  

I’m sitting here in Florida when I would normally be in New York City right now. I have not been able to travel to Europe. Italy for example is locked down, so I can’t land in Milano or in Rome. It’s a major problem. I have houses in Paris, in London, in Vienna.  I can’t go there.  

How do you organize your time? 

Thank God for Zoom. Yesterday I was on Zoom seven times. When people have a piece of art to show me, they sometimes will show it to me on Zoom, or I do my business on Zoom. I do my travel on Zoom.   

Do you find it frustrating to see objets d’art on Zoom without being able to touch them?  

I need to touch them, I need to see them. Often I have them sent to me.  

When you say you only buy “Oh My God” pieces, surely that was the case of the Gustav Klimt that you call your Mona Lisa, the Adele Bloch-Bauer painting?  

If you saw “The Woman in Gold” movie, you would realize how difficult it was to get it back to its rightful owners. It took me seven years of working with different people, different groups, and with the family, to finally get the picture. They were happy and so was I. 

Because the picture was stolen by the Nazis and had ended up in a museum.  

Finally, because Austria changed the laws and decided to do restitution, I was able to get it. And now Italy is particularly difficult for art, because a great deal of art is blocked by the government from leaving the country. It’s a shame, because these pieces are important for the world to understand what Italy has, but at the same time, I understand the desire to keep many things in Italy for the Italian people.  

You created your own museum, the Neue Galerie, and you, and also your brother, gave fantastic pieces to the Metropolitan Museum of Art. Are you very passionate about museums?  

I was the Chairman of the Museum of Modern Art and I’m on the board of the Getty, so I’m very involved in different museums. I love museums. I love to see things.  

Do you think some contemporary art prices are excessive?  

Every piece I bought in my life I paid too much for. And it turned out that in three or five years, I got a bargain. You never know. If you buy a great piece of art, be it modern or ancient, you never know what’s going to happen to its value 5 years and 10 years later. You can never tell.  

Is collecting very different from business?  

The difference between business and art valuation is that in the case of business you work on it every day. In the case of art, when you buy a piece, there’s nothing you can do but just wait to see what happens, sometimes years. You can’t promote or market the piece, you can’t do anything like that. But also, when I buy art I buy it only because I love it. I think “that’s a great piece of art”, and never think of its future value.  

Why did you and your brother start the Alzheimer’s Drug Discovery Foundation? 

As we get older the risk of Alzheimer’s grows and we are doing everything we can to prevent this tragedy for the entire world. I think we are the second largest charity in Alzheimer’s. We now have things called biomarkers, where we can determine when someone is younger if they could get Alzheimer’s and what can be done. There’s no certainty, but it’s pretty accurate. We also have drugs now that will slow it down. There are many different things we can do and new things are coming along all the time.  

What do you feel about the technological world with its artificial intelligence on the one hand and the green movement that fights for the environment on the other? 

They’re all tied together. Technology will be something that may save this earth. Technology is something that’s changing man, and we are also learning a lot about health with technology. It’s one world and it’s time to learn how to read the future.  

How do you read it?  

The world is constantly changing. We have limited resources and we must do everything we can to use them wisely. We must change, and solve global warming. We can affect it, but it requires a great deal of effort. We have to stop coal mines. We have to stop different things we’ve grown used to. You don’t change it in one day to the next, it’s a 5 or 10 year effort, perhaps longer. Unfortunately, we are not putting enough time into the effort. People are thinking too much about today and tomorrow, not about what could be. In politics people don’t think about the future, all they think about is what can they do to get re-elected.  

What do you think about how they handle things in Europe?  

They did the stupidest thing you could possibly do on this vaccine, and tried to get the prices down and things like that. When you’re dealing with a pandemic you don’t worry about prices, you worry about just getting the vaccine to people. It’s been a disaster.  

In America, it wasn’t so good at the beginning?  

No, but we got it right after time. Europe has not gotten it right yet.  

In London Boris Johnson made a good choice to decide to vaccinate everyone.  

He did it because he was not in the European Union.  

In Italy the first priority of Prime Minister Mario Draghi’s government is to find a way to fight very strongly against Covid.

The new Prime Minister of Italy is an excellent person. Italy lost some very good people. What a shame compared to what could have been done.  

Nevertheless, are you still positive?  

We have no choice. You have to be positive or you don’t sleep and you die. If you’re positive and you have feelings of optimism, your chances of living longer are much better.  

Once the pandemic is over what is the first thing you want to do? 

I’ll be on the first plane to Europe.

From <https://www.alainelkanninterviews.com/ronald-lauder/>

2021oct28 jpost #lauder World Jewish Congress President Ronald S. Lauder speaks out: What does the head of the World Jewish Congress think is the greatest challenge facing Jewry today?

Here is a full interview.

Linde, Steve 

. The Jerusalem Post (Online) The Jerusalem Post Ltd. Oct 28, 2021.  

Linde, S. (2021). World jewish congress president ronald S. lauder speaks out: What does the head of the world jewish congress think is the greatest challenge facing jewry today? here is a full interview (English ed. ed.). Jerusalem: The Jerusalem Post Ltd. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.lapl.org/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/blogs-podcasts-websites/world-jewish-congress-president-ronald-s-lauder/docview/2587529686/se-2  

RONALD STEVEN Lauder, who has served since 2007 as president of the World Jewish Congress is the leading voice of world Jewry.

His is an authentic, moral voice that doesn’t reflect partisan interests but rather the good of the Jewish people as a whole. He doesn’t seem to fear anyone or anything, nor does he hesitate to speak out whenever he deems fit – in defense of the State of Israel, to advance the Israel-Diaspora relationship and against antisemitism wherever it rears its ugly head.

In an interview with The Jerusalem Report, Lauder says the biggest challenge facing the Jewish world right now is “a crisis in public image and public relations”– or hasbara, as it’s known in Hebrew.

He elaborates in the interview: “Israelis far behind in making crucial investments in hasbara – and, due to that lack of focus, is far behind in the battle for public opinion, particularly in the Diaspora. Unfortunately, that has led to damaging developments. A deficit in public opinion towards Israelhas led to a drop in public support for the Jewish people. This has led to a terrifying and unprecedented spike in antisemitic violent acts tacitly supported by public statements from political figures from the far left to the far right, and from celebrities and other notably recognizable, influential figures. We must invest in hasbara to quickly return public opinion squarely behind the safety and prosperity of the Jewish people in Israeland the Diaspora.”

Addressing the Malmö International Forum on Holocaust Remembrance and Combating Antisemitism on October 12, Lauder declared, “If I have learned one thing, it is this: antisemites are cowards. They are bullies. And when they are confronted, they back away and hide. At the same time when there is no reaction to their hate they are emboldened. Silence gives them strength.

“My greatest role as president of the World Jewish Congress has been to fight back. To tell people that we cannot allow this growing group of people to continue this hate... I am not naïve. I realize the hatred of Jews has been with us for 2,000 years and will never completely go away. But we can do everything in our power to keep this virus from spreading.”

A strong believer in education, Lauder called on schools around the world to set aside one day – January 27th, the day Auschwitz was liberated, as Holocaust Awareness Day. “I want every classroom in every city throughout the world to designate this one day – to teach children, what happened, why it happened and how to prevent this from ever happening to any people again.”

After Polish President Andrzej Duda earlier this year signed a law that effectively prevents Holocaust victims and their descendants from recovering stolen property, Lauder lashed out. “The decisions made by the Polish leadership are a slap in the face to survivors of Nazi brutality and their families and to what remains of the Polish Jewish community, and to all those who seek justice,” he tells the Report.

In a video address to the 10th annual Jerusalem Post Conference on October 12, Lauder – who traditionally serves as president of the event – warned that “Israelis losing the political war around the world, and the lies and distortions – the outright dishonesty is taking a very real hold on people. All around the world, people now actually believe that Israelis an apartheid state, Israelis really engaged in ethnic cleansing, Israelis guilty of crimes against humanity. It’s reported as facts on the BBC and the Associated Press, and the front pages of major newspapers everywhere. How else can you explain that when terrorists attack a sovereign nation with 4,000 rockets, it is Israelthat is seen as the guilty party?”

Lauder suggested that the singling out of Israelacross the globe was not happening by accident. “It’s part of a coordinated attack on Israel’svery legitimacy that began in the Middle East and with the Muslim Brotherhood. And now this enemy has found willing partners in colleges, universities, and in the media,” he said.

“No one was prepared for political war, and perhaps Israelthought people would never believe these ridiculous lies. I am telling you that this political war is much more dangerous, more existential than any war Israelhas faced in the past. The battlefield has changed, and Israelmust quickly adapt. It must change its tactics, and it must respond in a very different way than it has in the past. There is something else that is missing right now. In the past, Israelhad a strong Diaspora that supported it in every war and put pressure on their governments for support, but for the past 15 years, the Diaspora has been neglected.”

LAUDER WAS born in New York City on February 26, 1944. He is the younger son of Joseph and Estée Lauder, founders of multi-million-dollar Estée Lauder Companies. His older brother, LeonardLauder, is chairman of the board.

He attended the Bronx High School of Science and holds a bachelor’s degree in International Business from the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania. He studied at the University of Paris and received a Certificate in International Business from the University of Brussels.

Lauder started to work for Estée Lauder in 1964. Twenty years later, after establishing himself as a successful businessman, he became a Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for European and NATO policy at the US Department of Defense. In 1986, President Ronald Reagan named him US ambassador to Austria, a position he held until 1987. He ran for mayor of New York City in 1989, losing to Rudy Giuliani in the Republican primary.

In 1998, Lauder was asked by prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu to launch back-channel negotiations with Syrian leader Hafez al-Assad, and these talks continued after Ehud Barak became prime minister. Lauder communicated a willingness on Assad’s part to make compromises with Israelin an overall land-for-peace deal, and his draft “Treaty of Peace Between Israeland Syria” formed an important part of the ultimately fruitless Israeli-Syrian talks that took place in Shepherdstown, West Virginia in January 2000.

A billionaire in his own right, Lauder made a name for himself as an entrepreneur, philanthropist and art collector, managing investments in real estate and media in the US, Europe and Israel.

On November 16, 2001, Lauder opened the Neue Galerie in New York, an art museum across the street from the Metropolitan Museum of Art that showcases works from Germany and Austria from the early 20th century. In 2006, he purchased from Maria Altmann and her family the painting, Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer I, by Gustav Klimt for $135 million, the highest price ever paid for a painting at that time. Lauder called it, “Our Mona Lisa.” The Nazi-looted art painting, which had been restored to Altmann following years of negotiation and litigation with the Austrian government, now forms the centerpiece of the museum’s collection.

In 2020, Lauder gave 91 pieces of arms and armor to the Metropolitan Museum of Art, for which the museum honored him by naming its entire group of Arms and Armor galleries for him.

Lauder was elected president of the World Jewish Congress on June 10, 2007, following the resignation of Edgar Bronfman, Sr. In his role as president of the WJC, which today represents Jewish communities in 106 countries, Lauder meets regularly with heads of state, prime ministers and government representatives to discuss and advance causes of concern to Jews and Jewish communities internationally. He advocates for Israel, especially in times when the state or its citizens are under attack, encourages and aids the development of vibrant Jewish communities around the world, and supports a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

On October 23, 2019, Lauder presented the WJC’s highest honor, the Theodor Herzl award, to German Chancellor Angela Merkel for her strong stand in defense of the Jewish people and against antisemitism.

Lauder serves as chairman of the Auschwitz-Birkenau Memorial Foundation, which supports the preservation of the remains of the former Nazi death camp. In January 2020, the foundation brought a delegation of more than 100 survivors and their families to the memorial site to participate in the commemoration of the 75th anniversary of the liberation of the camp.

Lauder says his experience as the US ambassador in Austria heightened his deep appreciation of, and his commitment to, his Jewish heritage. During his tenure, he initiated what has become a core personal mission: supporting the revitalization of Jewish life across central and eastern Europe in communities that had been devastated by the Holocaust and remained suppressed under Communism. In 1987, he established the Ronald S. Lauder Foundation, which supports Jewish schools, camps and community centers in Austria and across Europe.

Lauder was elected president of the Jewish National Fund in 1997, and after a successful 10-year tenure, became chairman of the board.

He lives in New York, is married to Jo Carole (Knopf) Lauder, and has two children, Aerin and Jane.

Here is my interview with him:

As president of the WJC, what do you see as the biggest challenge facing the Jewish world at the moment?

A crisis in public image and public relations. Let me explain: Israelis far behind in making crucial investments in hasbara – and, due to that lack of focus, is far behind in the battle for public opinion, particularly in the diaspora. Unfortunately, that has led to damaging developments. A deficit in public opinion towards Israelhas led to a drop in public support for the Jewish people. This has led to a terrifying and unprecedented spike in antisemitic violent acts tacitly supported by public statements from political figures from the far left to the far right, and from celebrities and other notably recognizable, influential figures.

We must invest in hasbara to quickly return public opinion squarely behind the safety and prosperity of the Jewish people in Israeland the Diaspora. This is a key investment that I will be focused on over the next four years. Watch this space.

How do you think Israeland the US should tackle the Iranian issue?

The bottom line is that Iran must not be allowed to obtain nuclear capabilities, and in order to ensure that they do not, Israeland the United States must be firm, committed, trusting and wholly unified partners in dealing with Iran. That unity is the most important element to success - and to Israeland the American people’s security.

What is your position on what to do on the Palestinian track?

Lasting peace between Israeland Palestine is the only way that Israel’slong-term preservation is assured. I propose looking closely at the Abraham Accords, begun by the two previous American and Israeli administrations and, I hope, continued by President Biden and Prime Minister Bennett. Normalization is working well with moderate Arab nations – and that philosophy and practices, based on economic interests and economic development, can work between Israeland the Palestinians. The goal of a two-state solution remains paramount, and I am fully committed to it, as is the United States. It is my hope that Israelitself more fully and boldly engages in the peace process.

How do you see tension between the Jewish world and Poland resolving itself, if at all?

It has not, so far. The decisions made by Polish leadership is a slap in the face to survivors of Nazi brutality and their families and to what remains of the Polish Jewish community, and to all those who seek justice. Now, the priority must be to make sure that this type of policy does not migrate to other eastern and central European countries. I am currently holding high-level conversations with government leaders across Europe to ensure that other countries remain committed to justice for survivors and their families.

Are you continuing to see a spike in antisemitism around the world, especially in the US, and do you think it’s related to the pandemic?

Yes, I do see a continued spike – and it comes from multiple directions. For example, the pandemic has led to a surge in misinformation and hate online and social media platforms have done far too little to curtail it. In fact, the WJC is making new strategic investments in cybersecurity including tracking and calling out hate and misinformation online.

Much of this emanates from far-right and far-left sources – and it has seeped into the mainstream due to the mainstreaming of extreme political figures. For example, though the issue resolved itself a day later thanks to cooler heads, US House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s recent 24-hour decision to let the far-left, anti-Israelso-called “squad” pull funding for Israel’sIron Dome was wrong and terrifying. It showed that too often, leaders bow to anti-Israeland antisemitic extremists.

How do you rate the performance of the new Israeli government?

So far, so good. Prime Minister Bennett and Foreign Minister Lapid have my full support and my friendship. Each leader has also done an exemplary job in reaching out and cultivating the international community. For instance, PM Bennett was highly visible during the most recent United Nations General Assembly. Being present is key.

What are your goals as president of the WJC for the upcoming year?

To invest in hasbara to fight antisemitism, and to secure commitments from world leaders and public figures to join in this fight. That’s why I am making key investments designed to fight antisemitism by encouraging growth in connection to Judaism and Jewishness among the under-40 generation.

If the last year has shown us anything, it’s that conversations that impact the Jewish community are increasingly taking place on new platforms and among younger crowds. They are now the ones on the front lines. If we are to ensure a strong future, we must invest in fostering strong Jewish leaders among the next generation. I look forward to investing in the development of dynamic, enthusiastic groups of young Jews and new allies through the programs of the Word Jewish Congress. We hope to announce a strategic campaign soon to work with students on college campuses in confronting antisemitism and antisemitic professors, and generally to meet young Jews and non-Jews where they are, including on social media.

As we bid farewell to German Chancellor Angela Merkel, what is it about her that inspired you to present her with an award?

Where do I start? There is not just one thing. Chancellor Merkel is a friend and a role model, to me personally and to the Jewish people in Germany, across Europe, in Israeland around the world. She has ushered in a new Germany that is an example to Europe and the world. She will be missed, but I am optimistic that the new leadership in Germany will build on her legacy.

Who inspires you in the world/Jewish world today?

Young people who embrace, value, and take pride in their Jewishness!

Word count: 2495

Copyright The Jerusalem Post Ltd. Oct 28, 2021

From <https://www.proquest.com/docview/2587529686/E5101014D3D4BB5PQ/11?accountid=6749&sourcetype=Blogs,%20Podcasts,%20&%20Websites>

2018Aug14 Jewish leader Ron Lauder slams nation-state law, Orthodox hegemony

In second op-ed critical of government, former Netanyahu confidant writes that recent Israeli policies pose the ‘greatest threat’ to the future of the Jewish people

 By ToI Staff and JTA 14 August 2018, 7:46 am

From <https://www.timesofisrael.com/jewish-leader-lauder-slams-nation-state-law-orthodox-hegemony/>

World Jewish Congress president Ronald Lauder on Monday excoriated the Israeli government, saying that recent policies and legislation pose a threat to the future of the Jewish people.

In an op-ed published by the New York Times, the cosmetics billionaire and Jewish advocate listed the cancellation of the agreement for an egalitarian prayer plaza at the Western Wall, strict conversion laws, the recent passing of surrogacy legislation which excludes gay men, the nation-state bill, the arrest of a rabbi for performing weddings outside the rabbinate and a tightening of rules surrounding the closing of convenience stores on Shabbat in some Israeli municipalities, as “creating the impression that the democratic and egalitarian dimensions of the Jewish democratic state are being tested.”

The op-ed is the second time this year that Lauder, a former confidant of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and a prominent and deep-pocketed supporter of Israel, has published strident criticism of the government, reflecting a growing rift between Diaspora Jewry and the Jewish state.

Going into greater detail on the controversial nation-state legislation, Lauder noted that it “correctly reaffirms that Israel is a Jewish state, but also damages the sense of equality and belonging of Israel’s Druze, Christian and Muslim citizens.”

The nation-state law passed by the Knesset on July 19 as one of the country’s basic laws enshrines Israel as “the national home of the Jewish people” for the first time, but critics say it undermines the constitution’s commitment to equality for all its citizens.

Photo Protesters wave Israeli and Druze flags at a demonstration in Tel Aviv against the nation-state law, on August 4, 2018. (Luke Tress / Times of Israel staff)

The government says the new nation-state law merely enshrines the country’s existing character, and that Israel’s democratic nature and provisions for equality are anchored in existing legislation.

However, Lauder charged that the repercussions of the legislation will not only be felt on a national level, but also on a global scale as the country “may find itself associated with a broken values system and questionable friends.”

“As a result, future leaders of the West may become hostile or indifferent to the Jewish state,” he wrote.

The longtime donor to pro-Israel and Republican causes said the recent Israeli policies pose the “greatest threat” to the future of the Jewish people because as, “Israel’s government appears to be tarnishing the sacred value of equality, many supporters feel it is turning its back on Jewish heritage, the Zionist ethos and the Israeli spirit.”

“When members of Israel’s current government unintentionally undermine the covenant between Judaism and enlightenment, they crush the core of contemporary Jewish existence,” he charged, though without mentioning Netanyahu by name.

Photo Members of the Reform movement an hold Torah scrolls during a mixed men and women prayer at the public square in front of the Western Wall, in Jerusalem’s Old City, November 16, 2017. (Noam Rivkin Fenton)

While many of the policies enacted by the government are seen as concessions to Netanyahu’s ultra-Orthodox coalition partners, Lauder noted that the majority of Jews around the world are not Orthodox, but rather traditional, secular, Conservative, Reform or unaffiliated.

Lauder charged that the country is being held hostage by ultra-Orthodox politicians, and that this in turn could result in a lack of support for Israel on American campuses and in the corridors of power.

“Orthodoxy should be respected, but we cannot allow the politics of a radical minority to alienate millions of Jews worldwide,” he wrote.

“Young Jews might not acquiesce to an affiliation with a nation that discriminates against non-Orthodox Jews, non-Jewish minorities and the LGBT community,” noted Lauder. “They may not fight the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions movement, they may not support Israel in Washington and they may not provide it with the strategic rear guard that Israel so needs.”

Photo Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu meets with the managing committee, and Chairman Ronald Lauder, of the World Jewish Congress, at the Prime Minister’s office in Jerusalem, on September 11, 2016. (Haim Zach/GPO via Flash90)

“I call upon Israeli leaders to rethink their destructive actions during this summer of disharmony,” he wrote.

“This is not who we are, and this is not who we wish to be. This is not the face we want to show our children, grandchildren and the family of nations. Let us work together to change course and ensure that Israel will continue to be the Jewish democratic state it is meant to be.”

In March, Lauder published an op-ed in the New York Times in which he said that Israeli government policies threaten the country’s democratic character and even its existence, as well as pressing hard for a two-state solution and implicitly chiding Netanyahu for his repeated claims that the only thing obstructing peace is Palestinian recalcitrance.

Lauder was for decades close to the prime minister, backing him during his first run for prime minister in 1996 and defending him in the Diaspora. He also served as a back-channel for contacts with Arab leaders.

Over the last several years, there have been signs that they have grown apart, stemming from Lauder’s refusal, seven years ago, to block a report unflattering to Netanyahu and his wife, Sara, that was broadcast on an Israeli television channel in which Lauder had a part ownership stake.

Photo President-elect Donald Trump shakes hands with World Jewish Congress President Ronald Lauder after meeting at Mar-a_Lago, Dec. 28, 2016, in Palm Beach, Florida. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

Lauder, chairman emeritus of Estée Lauder cosmetic empire and president of the World Jewish Congress since 2007, has also been one of the most consistent voices of support for Trump in the Jewish community, and the two have been friends since the 1980s, when they both emerged as influential moguls on the New York political and social scenes.

2013dec22 #wjc wapo Edgar M. Bronfman, Seagram billionaire who led World Jewish Congress, dies at 84

Wapo By — From staff and wire reports

December 22, 2013 

From <https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/obituaries/edgar-m-bronfman-billionaire-who-led-the-world-jewish-congress-dies-at-84/2013/12/22/1e069304-6b17-11e3-aecc-85cb037b7236_story.html>

Edgar M. Bronfman Sr., a billionaire businessman and longtime president of the World Jewish Congress, which lobbied the Soviets to allow Jews to emigrate and helped spearhead the search for hidden Nazi loot, died Dec. 21 at his home in New York. He was 84.

His family charity, the Samuel Bronfman Foundation, announced the death but did not disclose the cause.

The hard-driving and mercurial Bronfman made his fortune with his family’s Seagram liquor empire, taking over as chairman and chief executive in 1971 and continuing the work of his father, Samuel. Under Edgar Bronfman’s leadership, Seagram expanded its offerings and was eventually acquired by French media and telecom group Vivendi Universal in 2000.

Mr. Bronfman’s wealth, combined with his role in the World Jewish Congress, an umbrella group of Jewish organizations in some 80 countries that he led for more than a quarter century, allowed him to be a tireless advocate for his fellow Jews.

In 1999, President Bill Clinton awarded Mr. Bronfman the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the nation’s highest civilian honor. In the citation, Mr. Bronfman was heralded for working “to ensure basic rights for Jews around the world.”

In a 1986 Associated Press profile, he said his position and money helped him have access to world leaders.

“It’s a combination of the two,” Mr. Bronfman said. “In the end, it doesn’t really matter why that access is available, as long as it is there.”

The year before, he had become the first WJC president to meet with Soviet officials in Moscow, bringing his case for human rights and taking a little time to promote Seagram’s interests. He visited again in 1988, by which time Jewish emigration from the Soviet Union, a key goal of the congress, had begun to rise under the reforming leadership of Mikhail Gorbachev.

abduction of sun

In 1975, the Bronfman family made the news for a far different reason when one of Edgar Bronfman’s sons, 21-year-old Samuel II, was abducted in a New York suburb.

The family paid a $2.3 million ransom, and Samuel was later found when authorities raided a Brooklyn apartment. The missing money was found under a bed and two men were arrested.

The two were convicted of extortion but acquitted of kidnapping in a sensational 1976 trial in which the defense accused Samuel Bronfman of staging his own kidnapping as a hoax intended to cheat his father out of the ransom money. Samuel Bronfman denied the allegation, and the prosecution called it “ridiculous.”

Edgar Bronfman’s son Edgar Jr. helped steer Seagram into the entertainment business in the 1990s. Seagram took over MCA, with its big movie, music and theme park businesses, in 1995, and Edgar Jr. became an executive with Vivendi after a 2000 deal.

Vivendi’s expansion efforts later ran into financial trouble, and former top executives, including the younger Bronfman, were accused of misleading investors about the company’s health. In 2009, a French judge ordered former Vivendi chief executive Jean-Marie Messier and others to stand trial, including Edgar Bronf­man Jr.

singer controversy

Mr. Bronfman had left the WJC president’s post amid a series of controversies. He had fired his longtime deputy, Rabbi Israel Singer, after a 2006 report by the New York attorney general concluded that Singer improperly used WJC funds for personal use. No criminal charges were filed.

Edgar Miles Bronfman was born in Montreal on June 20, 1929. Because of the family fortunes, he was raised amid luxury during the Depression, but in his memoir, “Good Spirits,” he described a home life of “emotional dysfunction,” with a distant mother and a father preoccupied by work. After attending boarding schools, he graduated in 1951 from McGill University in Montreal and joined the family business.

In 1953, he married Ann Loeb, an heiress of two Wall Street investment banking families. Their marriage led to many business ventures, with the Bronfmans using the Loeb, Rhoades & Co. investment firm to buy swaths of land and diversify its holdings into the entertainment and petroleum industries.Edgar and Ann Bronfman divorced in 1973.

From <https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/obituaries/edgar-m-bronfman-billionaire-who-led-the-world-jewish-congress-dies-at-84/2013/12/22/1e069304-6b17-11e3-aecc-85cb037b7236_story.html>

2012dec26 jpost #wjc Not quite all in the family....

GREER FAY CASHMAN

Jerusalem Post ; Jerusalem. 26 Dec 2012: 16.  

IS THE PRESIDENCY of the World Jewish Congress jinxed? 

LAUDER'S INTERFERENCE IN AUSTRIA'S ELECTIONS

Former president Edgar Bronfman left his post under a cloud of ignominy and current president Ronald Lauder, who is a former US ambassador to Austria, has been declared persona non grata by the leadership of Austrian Jewry. Oskar Deutsch, the recently reelected president of the influential Vienna-headquartered Israelitische Kultusgemeinde (which literally translates as "Israelite community"), claims that Lauder pledged millions of dollars to causes in which voting board members of the IKG are involved so that they would vote for Martin Engelberg, who stood against Deutsch. 

Both Lauder and Engelberg have denied the allegations.

Engelberg did ask Lauder to contribute to the funding of a synagogue for Georgian Jews living in Austria. He also asked for extra funding for a school, but this did not have to do with the elections. Deutsch's election campaign was based on archival research and the construction of a new museum, whereas Engelberg put his focus on social services. 

Lauder was reported by American news outlets as admitting that he had intervened in the elections, but only to the extent that he wanted the elections to be free of any kind of coercion. After publicly castigating Lauder, Deutsch forwarded his complaints to the European Jewish Congress, which is reportedly taking a serious view of Lauder's alleged interference.

* MEANWHILE, BACK in New York where he lives, Lauder, together with his brother, Leonard Lauder, and Nobel Peace Prize laureate and celebrated author Elie Wiesel were dinner chairs last week at a gala WJC fund-raiser at which President Shimon Peres was honored with the WJC's Theodor Herzl Award.

RON LAUDER' & PAL SHIMON PERES (architect of the PRO-Apartheid Israel-South-Africa-Secret Security Agreement

Ronald Lauder hailed Peres as "the last great founding father of the State of Israel" and called him "a man of vision" who was "a true champion for peace in our time."

• Peres, who was unable to attend and accept the accolades in person, sent a videotaped message in which he thanked the WJC for the honor "The Jewish people are a fighting people, more with values than with swords," he said, adding: "Today, we stand together on two complicated fronts: the State of Israelvis-a-vis Hamas, and the Jewish people vis-a-vis anti-Semitism. 

• When it comes to Jewish life, anti-Semitism is a bias and a sick perception. 

• As for Hamas, after 64 years, when we thought the time had arrived for peace, we have had to face the ugly, unbelievable assembly of Hamas. 

• Their leaders are calling for the destruction of Israel, for war, for hatred. 

• They belong to the past. They don't have any future. We must try to make peace with those Palestinians ready to make peace."

IRAN CONCERNS

• Lauder expressed grave concern about Iran's continuing nuclear ambitions, the resurgence of virulent anti-Semitism across Europe and the ongoing attempts by Israel's enemies to delegitimize, demonize and isolate the Jewish state. "The World Jewish Congress is on the ground taking effective action wherever and whenever Jewish life, property or culture is threatened," he stated. "The WJC has always, and will always, stand with Israelas one Jewish family."

Ehud Barak - Defense Miniser

• Defense Minister Ehud Barak, who was among the 300-plus dinner guests and who was the keynote speaker of the evening, thanked Lauder for his life-long friendship to the State of Israeland his "positive impact on global Jewry" and lauded Peres for his "dedicated service to Israel."

In discussing the challenges facing Israel and the wider Middle East, Barak said: "We must be ready to stretch out our hand for peace while keeping the other hand on the trigger, ready to defend ourselves." 

IRAN CONCERNS

He then clarified Israel's determination to prevent Iran from becoming a military nuclear power. "The Iranians are deliberately trying to create a level of redundancy and protection for their program, what we call the 'zone of immunity,'" he said. "Once they enter the 'zone of immunity,' our fate will be out of our hands. The State of Israel was founded precisely so that our fate would remain in our own hands."

• Barak called the recent Palestinian bid for non-member status at the UN "provocative" and said that it "cannot replace direct negotiations without preconditions, nor should it be used as an excuse not to negotiate. The objective of these negotiations is clear: two states for two peoples."

Part of the WJC dinner program was dedicated to recognizing the unique success of the Iron Dome missile defense system. A satellite hook-up enabled dinner guests to see a live interview with IDF soldiers stationed at an Iron Dome battery in southern Israel.

It will be interesting to see if there will be reciprocity on Peres's part when he awards the President's Medal of Distinction in 2013. Without detracting from the achievements of any of the honorees who received medals at the initial award ceremony this year, there are not too many people whose activities on behalf of the Jewish world and Israel can compare with those of Lauder. As Communist regimes in Eastern Europe began to crumble, Lauder stepped in and established schools and Jewish community centers, which were decisive factors in helping Jews to regain their heritage and their religious identity. Many of these Jews subsequently settled in Israel and would certainly not have done so without the projects funded by Lauder. He has also invested hundreds of millions of dollars in Israel, and those investments that he put food on the table for hundreds of families. His involvement with several major Jewish organizations has been beneficial to Israel at other levels. As president of the Jewish National Fund in America, he has played a significant role in the development of the Negev. 

Works Cited

GREER, FAY C. "Not quite all in the Family..." Jerusalem Post, Dec 26, 2012, pp. 16. ProQuest, http://ezproxy.lapl.org/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/newspapers/not-quite-all-family/docview/1265996359/se-2.

From <https://www.proquest.com/docview/1265996359/Record/695DC43F29D946D7PQ/16?accountid=6749&sourcetype=Newspapers>

2007jun11 nyt #lauder Cosmetics Heir to Lead World Jewish Congress 

Ronald S. Lauder, center, will succeed Edgar M. Bronfman as the group’s president. He is with Roman Kent, left, and Daniel Mariaschin.Credit...Michelle V. Agins/The New York Times

By Stephanie Strom

June 11, 2007

Ronald S. Lauder, the cosmetics magnate, won his bid to become the first elected president of the World Jewish Congress, the tiny nonprofit group that faced down some of the world’s largest banks to win billions for Holocaust victims but is now struggling to recover from scandals resulting from lax financial controls.

Mr. Lauder succeeds another billionaire, Edgar M. Bronfman, whose decades-long patronage of the organization gave it a prominence and prestige that was the envy of most other Jewish organizations.

“A person who built an organization and loves it gets out of the way, and that’s what I’m doing,” Mr. Bronfman said in a speech to the organization’s governing board before it elected Mr. Lauder.

Additionally, Stephen E. Herbits, the organization’s secretary-general who was installed by Mr. Bronfman to effect a thorough overhaul of its accounting and financial processes, announced his immediate resignation.

The Bronfman family, however, will continue to play a pivotal role in the organization since Mr. Bronfman’s son Matthew will serve as Mr. Lauder’s second in command, an arrangement that was brokered to guarantee Mr. Lauder’s win and forestall a bruising fight for the leadership.

Additionally, Matthew Bronfman represents a younger generation of Jews that has thus far shown little interest in embracing the organizations their parents supported.

That indifference has been of paramount concern to Jewish elders around the world, and Mr. Lauder acknowledged the need to attract younger Jews like Matthew Bronfman to the World Jewish Congress.

Einat Wilf, a former foreign policy adviser to Shimon Peres who had put herself up as a candidate but withdrew before votes were cast, said the fact that the organization had held an open election to choose its next leader represented a good first step in what she hoped would be a far-reaching transformation.

“Young people like me experience their Jewishness in a whole new way,” Ms. Wilf said, “and by opening this organization up in this way, I think it demonstrates a commitment to developing the next generation of leaders.”

That task will be easy compared with the immediate challenges Mr. Lauder and Matthew Bronfman will face. A report from Mr. Herbits made clear that the organization still had severe financial and legal problems to overcome as a result of a financial scandal that attracted state and federal regulators.

The scandal involved unexplained movements of the organization’s money around the globe and lavish expenditures on hotels, travel and compensation for Israel Singer, the former secretary-general and close confidante of the senior Bronfman.

The episode ultimately ended their friendship, and Mr. Herbits said in his report to the governing board that Edgar Bronfman was considering suing to recover loans he had made to Mr. Singer to help cover money the latter took from the World Jewish Congress.

The Internal Revenue Service has an ongoing investigation into the organization. The group says it has new information that may result in a violation of a settlement it signed last year with the New York attorney general, who found that Mr. Singer had violated his fiduciary responsibilities and chided the organization for its lack of financial controls.

In his stump speech, Mr. Lauder confessed that he had long been a Jew who “went to synagogue three days a year” but said his experience serving as the United States’ ambassador to Austria in the 1980s had led to an awakening of his Jewish identity.

Since then, he has dedicated time and his fortune to supporting the Jewish community through schools to educate young Jews in Eastern Europe about their faith and history. “I was like a Chabad student compared to these kids,” Mr. Lauder said, referring to a strict Hasidic branch of Judaism that emphasizes scholarship and learning. “Today, 10,000 children are going to school and camp in Eastern Europe and learning to be Jewish, and that’s what I’m most proud of.”

As president of the Jewish National Fund, a nonprofit group dedicated to restoring and cultivating land and infrastructure in Israel, Mr. Lauder eliminated an $18 million debt and increased the group’s annual fund-raising to $60 million from $12 million.

The World Jewish Congress needs a similar turnaround, as Mr. Herbits’s report made clear. “The cost of this process over the last nearly three years has been astronomical — to the W.J.C.’s reputation, its legal and auditing fees, its depleted fund raising and in its ability to more fully fulfill its mission,” he wrote.

From <https://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/11/us/11jewish.html>

2007may08 nyt #lauder President of Jewish Congress Resigns After 3 Years’ Turmoil

By Stephanie Strom

May 8, 2007

The World Jewish Congress, the tiny nonprofit organization that won billions of dollars for Holocaust survivors, said yesterday that Edgar M. Bronfman Sr., the billionaire liquor magnate who is its largest patron, had resigned as its president.

The organization has been in turmoil for three years since accusations of financial improprieties surfaced against its former secretary general, Israel Singer, attracting the attention of the New York State attorney general and the Internal Revenue Service.

Mr. Singer was close to Mr. Bronfman and served as his spiritual adviser before the two had a falling out this year. Mr. Bronfman declined to be interviewed yesterday, but his resignation raises questions about the future of the organization.

Mr. Bronfman’s contributions have accounted for as much as 15 percent of its annual revenues in recent years, and it is unclear whether he will continue that support.

Additionally, donations to the organization declined after the controversy involving Mr. Singer began.

Mr. Bronfman’s resignation came as a surprise. The organization’s spokesman had assured reporters on Friday that Mr. Bronfman intended to stay on until 2009.

But Stephen E. Herbits, a longtime business associate of Mr. Bronfman’s who is the organization’s secretary general, said Mr. Bronfman, who served as president since 1979, had long planned to step down. “Edgar has been trying to retire for years,” Mr. Herbits said.

In a memorandum to Mr. Bronfman’s son Matthew, Mr. Herbits said the organization would need $5 million over the next two years to turn around its finances.

New accusations of further financial improprieties by Mr. Singer, however, will make raising that kind of money difficult.

In a presentation prepared for the organization’s steering committee, Mr. Herbits charged that Mr. Singer withdrew cash from the World Jewish Congress affiliates without accounting for it and covered personal expenses with the organization’s money, among other things.

Mr. Bronfman dismissed Mr. Singer in March because of the new accusations, Mr. Herbits said, but if they are true, Mr. Singer will have caused the World Jewish Congress to violate the terms of a settlement it signed with the New York attorney general’s office more than a year ago.

Under the agreement, the attorney general could reopen the investigation. A spokesman for Andrew Cuomo, the attorney general, did not return a call seeking comment.

Hank Scheinkopf, Mr. Singer’s spokesman, said Mr. Singer had declined to comment on the new allegations “because he is no longer involved with the World Jewish Congress and has moved on with his life.”

Mr. Singer’s ouster and Mr. Bronfman’s resignation and scheduled departure next month also leave the organization with a leadership vacuum, particularly since leaders of the Israeli and European branch have lobbied for Mr. Herbits’s departure, as well.

Menachem Rosensaft, a lawyer and founder of the International Network of Jewish Holocaust Survivors, said there was a need for the World Jewish Congress, which has served as a representative of Jewish diaspora communities around the globe. “I hope that it can continue in that role, but that will require a leadership that enjoys broad-based legitimacy and acceptance,” he said.

Mr. Bronfman had hoped his son Matthew would take his place as president, but Matthew Bronfman has been tarnished by accusations that he had conflicts of interest as a board member of the Israel Development Bank, according to reports in Crain’s New York Business. Matthew Bronfman has said that there was no conflict of interest.

Ronald Lauder, the billionaire cosmetics executive, sought the presidency a few years ago and has expressed an interest in it again. In his presentation, Mr. Herbits suggested that Mr. Lauder had sought to win Mr. Singer’s support during his first bid, maintaining that Mr. Singer “may have accepted” a gift of stock from Mr. Lauder.

Nelson Warfield, Mr. Lauder’s spokesman, denied that accusation. “It’s an insult to even suggest such a thing,” he said.

From <https://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/08/us/08jewish.html>

2007may8 jta Bronfman Resigns from Wjc, Ending a 30-year Tenure

 May 8, 2007

From <https://www.jta.org/archive/bronfman-resigns-from-wjc-ending-a-30-year-tenure>

Edgar Bronfman’s resignation this week as president of the World Jewish Congress put a sudden end to a 30-year reign at one of the world’s best-known Jewish organizations.

The move Monday, at a WJC steering committee meeting, capped weeks of turmoil in the organization following the firing of Rabbi Israel Singer, a longtime senior official, in March.

Bronfman’s departure closes a long and fabled era for the organization — an era that included both accomplishment and aggravation.

The WJC governing board will elect a new president June 10 in New York, officials said. The steering committee will convene a nominations committee to consider candidates.

Mendel Kaplan, chairman of the WJC executive, appears to be the leading contender at least as interim president, according to sources. Ronald Lauder, a philanthropist and president of the Jewish National Fund, also could be a candidate.

Kaplan could not be reached. Lauder would not comment, but his special assistant, Warren Kozak, told JTA that it was “way too premature to have this conversation.”

Lauder has said that “until he is sure that there is going to be a fair and transparent election, he is not going to commit one way or the other,” Kozak said.

Matthew Bronfman, Edgar’s son, is not a candidate, according to several sources, although the senior Bronfman reportedly had wanted his son to succeed him.

Edgar Bronfman declined requests for interviews Monday. But his closest associate, WJC Secretary-General Stephen Herbits, told JTA that Bronfman decided to leave because the issue with Singer had been resolved.

“Bronfman has been trying to leave for six years; now he is free to retire because the matter with Singer is closed,” said Herbits, adding that he was informed of Bronfman’s decision only a half-hour before Monday’s meeting.

Last Friday the WJC had put out a statement through a public relations firm saying that Bronfman! , who tu rns 78 next month, “has no intention of stepping down.”

Herbits said Bronfman’s view changed when the steering committee voted Monday to “no longer discuss Singer, that the matter is closed for the World Jewish Congress, that it would not have any more business with Israel Singer.”

Pierre Besnainou, head of the European Jewish Congress, said he backed Kaplan to take over the organization.

“We support Mendel Kaplan,” said Besnainou, who had been the fiercest critic of the way Singer’s firing was handled.

Founded in Geneva in 1936, the WJC is the umbrella organization for more than 100 local communities and the putative representative of world Jewry.

Under the leadership of Bronfman and Singer, the WJC played a major role in winning billions of dollars from European banks and governments in restitution for victims of the Holocaust. It also helped to uncover the Nazi past of Kurt Waldheim, a former Austrian president and United Nations secretary-general.

The group had been under a cloud since the revelation several years ago that Singer secretly transferred $1.2 million of WJC money to a Swiss bank account. The money subsequently was returned, but critics say the transfer was never fully explained.

A number of investigations were launched in the wake of that revelation. A 2006 report by the New York State Attorney General’s Office found no evidence of criminality on Singer’s part, but assailed the organization for lax record keeping and said Singer had violated his fiduciary duties by moving money around without proper authorization.

In 2005, a report by the accounting firm PricewaterhouseCoopers sought to analyze a decade’s worth of financial documentation from the WJC office in Geneva but was unable to account for $3.8 million of WJC money. A separate Internal Revenue Service investigation into the organization’s finances is under way.

Asked about a possible return to the WJC after Bronfman’s resignation, Si! nger tol d JTA, “I don’t think we have to talk about the future right now, but the answer is, ‘I don’t think so.’ “

He added, “Frankly, I worked for 30 years with Edgar Bronfman and we accomplished a tremendous amount in the areas of Soviet Jewry, restitution, Holocaust denial, despite everything that happened in the past few weeks.”

Sources in the WJC said it was just a matter of time before Herbits would leave as well, though Herbits said no one had suggested this at Monday’s meeting.

A former top adviser to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, and Bronfman’s right-hand man at Seagram, Herbits was brought into the WJC three years ago to clean up things amid charges of mismanagement.

Herbits reportedly derided Besnainou in a private memo in November amid discussion of Matthew Bronfman as a possible successor to his father, saying Besnainou could not be trusted because he’s French and Tunisian and “works like an Arab.”

Besnainou said Herbits had issued a public apology at Monday’s meeting and also sent him a written apology. That could not be confirmed with Herbits.

Asked if he had accepted the apology, Besnainou answered, “What can I do?”

In harshly criticizing the March firing of Singer, Besnainou wrote in a memo to EJC board members, “The decision to brutally dismiss Israel Singer is one of the last elements in this long list of unilateral and non-democratic decisions.”

Besnainou said he wasn’t surprised by Bronfman’s resignation; Bronfman had talked about resigning in November, he said.

“The only question was who would succeed him,” Besnainou said.

Another question is where the WJC will head in a post-Bronfman era. While the organization is focused on the threat from Iran, by many accounts it has been searching for the kind of motivating issue it once had in Holocaust restitution and the fight for Soviet Jewry.

The WJC “is in search of a rallying cry to galvanize its constituents,” said Rabbi! Marc Sc hneier, chairman of its American section.

“If there had been that kind of issue,” Schneier said, “there wouldn’t have been all this internecine struggle.”

The Archive of the Jewish Telegraphic Agency includes articles published from 1923 to 2008. Archive stories reflect the journalistic standards and practices of the time they were published.

Memo from Old Rumsfeld Aide May Sink Bronfman Heir

The World Jewish Congress, the influential Jewish organization headed by billionaire Edgar Bronfman Sr., has been on the brink of

By Anna Schneider-Mayerson• 05/07/07

The World Jewish Congress, the influential Jewish organization headed by billionaire Edgar Bronfman Sr., has been on the brink of self-destruction for several years. Since 2004, when allegations of financial mismanagement by one of the organization’s most venerable leaders sparked an investigation by the New York Attorney General, the organization has been plagued by internal squabbles, power plays, and secession threats.

Now, just as the organization’s steering committee meets today to discuss the organization’s future leadership, an explosive memo outlining plans for Mr. Bronfman’s second son Matthew to take control has surfaced, promising yet another episode of in-fighting and scandal.

The memo, a copy of which was obtained by the Observer and which was written about in the Jerusalem Post on Friday, was written by Stephen Herbits, the Congress’s secretary general and therefore a supposedly impartial player in the organization. However, Mr. Herbits is also a longtime advisor to Edgar Bronfman Sr., a trusted deputy with an unforgiving reputation who worked for him at the Seagram Company. He took a break from Bronfman-duty to serve as an assistant to Donald Rumsfeld during his first term as secretary of defense – a position in which he further burnished his reputation as a hard-charging “fixer” – but returned to Edgar Sr.’s side in 2004. His ostensible role was to bring the World Jewish Congress back to a place of transparent, good-governance, but as the memo makes clear, at least part of his energy during the last few months has been devoted to maneuvering Bronfman heir Matthew to the top of the organization.

Mr. Bronfman’s potential rivals for the chairmanship of the WJC include cosmetics billionaire Ron Lauder and Mendel Kaplan, a South African steel magnate.

“There is no doubt in my mind, drawing on all my various backgrounds, that you have what it takes to be a great leader of the Jewish people,” Mr. Herbits wrote in the November 16, 2006 memo to Matthew, who is 47. “As with your father, you will get better and better over time. But it will take some time, some practice, and some greater devotion in the early years to meeting preparation and policy development. This goes to time availability, of course; but also a willingness to see out experts, listen, learn and incorporate. All easily doable, but nonetheless required.”

Mr. Herbits did not immediately return a call for comment, nor did another WJC official, Pinchas Shapiro.

The memo is essentially a strategy document for dealing with one of the most vocal opponents of Matthew’s presidential bid, a French-Tunisian leader of the European Jewish community named Pierre Besnainou. It opens by recounting some of Mr. Besnainou’s stated reasons for opposing the Bronfman candidacy – “He believes that the image of ‘dynasty’ is not appropriate for such an organization,” Mr. Herbits writes – but then quickly proceeds to characterize <le probleme Besnainou> in unflattering terms.

“He is French. Don’t discount this. He cannot be trusted,” Mr. Herbits advised.

Also: “He is Tunisian. Do not discount this either. He works like an Arab.”

The memo makes it sensationally clear what assets the Bronfmans would have at their disposal in their mini-campaign for the WJC leadership: money, connections and of course Mr. Herbits would all be deployed to assure Matthew the presidency.

In one section of the document, Mr. Herbits quite bluntly suggests “an infusion of cash – say $5 million” from Matthew’s father, uncle Charles Bronfman, siblings and friends to serve as a “‘transition vote of confidence’” in the heir. “You would, of course, have to make a substantial gift yourself,” he reminds the candidate.

In another section, he assures Matthew that, despite his opponent Pierre Besnainou’s apparent friendship with Israeli statesman Shimon Peres, he will be able to count on the Israeli leader’s support, thanks once again to “Charles and Edgar” and their long history with Peres. And in a clear nod to his Pentagon past, Mr. Herbits even outlines a strategy for fending off Besnainou titled, “Engage, fight and win” – a plan that includes using Edgar to “call in some ‘chits’” and “being sure enough of the results to avoid an election.”

Beyond the section on dealing with Mr. Besnainou, Mr. Herbits also dedicates a full paragraph to outlining how Matthew can deal with “the Liebler factor” – a reference to Isi Liebler, a longtime Bronfman nemesis and the man whose allegations of corruption sent the WJC into its three-year downward spiral.

Mr. Herbits dedicates five paragraphs, headlined “Singer’s role,” to dealing with Israel Singer, the fallen former leader of the World Jewish Congress who served as Edgar Sr.’s consigliere until the elder Bronfman fired him in March. (Singer was at the center of the Attorney General’s investigation into financial mismanagement at the Congress). In the section, he speculates that Mr. Singer, who still played a prominent role in the organization at the time, may not have been fully supportive of Matthew’s rise to president and concludes: “This is a subject that Edgar will need to put on the table with Singer at some point.”

Mr. Bronfman’s candidacy had already taken several hits in recent weeks, most notably in the form his forced resignation from the board of Israel Discount Bank following an investigation into whether he had used his position at the bank to advance his own interests. The memo may finally put an end to the possibility of the heir inheriting his father’s throne.

From <https://observer.com/2007/05/memo-from-old-rumsfeld-aide-may-sink-bronfman-heir/>

2007mar22 jta #wjc Sudden firing of longtime WJC exec explained

BY: MICHAEL S. ARNOLD JTA

Posted Mar 22, 2007 at 12: 00 AM

World Jewish Congress (WJC) President Edgar Bronfman says he dismissed Rabbi Israel Singer from the organization last week because Singer was taking money without proper authorization or documentation.

Bronfman made the allegations in a March 14 letter to European Jewish Congress President Pierre Besnainou. It came after WJC affiliates in Europe, Latin America and Israel expressed dismay about being notified in a conference call earlier that day that Singer n who had held a variety of top positions in the WJC over the past 30 years n had been fired.

Singer “helped himself to cash from the WJC office, my cash,” Bronfman wrote in the letter, a copy of which JTA obtained. “We thought we had that all cleared up, and then we discovered that he was playing the same game in Israel, taking cash from the office and never accounting for it.”

He continued, “The final blow came when we discovered that he was playing games with his hotel bills in Jerusalem.

“Please understand that this was much harder on me than anyone else,” Bronfman wrote. “It took me many weeks of crying to find out I was so badly used by a man I used to love.”

The latest developments come as the fallout from Singer’s abrupt dismissal last week continue to roil the Jewish world. Singer has been a major figure in Jewish life over the past three decades. A former chairman and secretary-general of the WJC n and a top official of the Claims Conference and the World Jewish Restitution Organization, positions that don’t appear to be affected by the WJC imbroglio n he played a major role in winning billions of dollars from European banks and governments in restitution for victims of the Holocaust.

He also helped uncover the Nazi past of Kurt Waldheim, a former Austrian president and United Nations secretary-general.

Attempts to reach Singer on Tuesday through his attorney Stanley Arkin were unsuccessful. On Monday, before JTA received the letter, Arkin had said: “Israel Singer has much to say and at the appropriate time will make sure that history will chronicle with accuracy the story of this organization and the people who worked with him.”

Officials at the Claims Conference told JTA that Singer’s status at the WJC has no bearing on his role there at least until July, when new directors and officers are elected.

The affair has brought to a head accusations by WJC affiliates that the organization suffers from a lack of transparency and democracy. Bronfman’s letter was intended to quiet unease among WJC affiliates over the way Singer was terminated, but several sources from WJC affiliates told JTA off-the-record that they found the letter unconvincing.

Israeli WJC officials, for their part, were incensed by Bronfman’s announcement on March 14 that Bobby Brown, director-general of the Israel branch, had been fired and the branch’s funding cut off.

Singer has been under a cloud since the revelation several years ago that he secretly transferred $1.2 million of WJC money to a Swiss bank account. The money subsequently was returned, but critics say the transfer was never fully explained.

JTA Editor Lisa Hostein and Staff Writer Ben Harris in New York and Correspondents Dinah Spritzer in Prague and Florencia Arbiser in Buenos Aires contributed to this report.

How do you feel about this article?

Choose from the options below.

1

© Copyright 2023 Cleveland Jewish News, 23880 Commerce Park, Suite 1 Beachwood, OH  | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy

From <https://www.clevelandjewishnews.com/archives/sudden-firing-of-longtime-wjc-exec-explained/article_0d3a088d-4cc9-5e35-9f17-ba77f59fef7d.html>  

2006jan31 #wjc nyAG World Jewish Congress Adopts Governance Reforms

January 31, 2006

Attorney General Spitzer today announced an agreement that resolves an investigation of possible financial improprieties at the World Jewish Congress (WJC) and its American affiliate.

Under the agreement, WJC, an association formed under Swiss law but based in New York City, and its affiliate, American Section, a New York not-for-profit corporation, will formalize a series of reforms undertaken during the course of the Attorney General's investigation.

"Today's agreement recognizes the obligation of all charitable organizations - particularly those funded through the donations of members of the public - to safeguard their assets through effective financial oversight and accountability," Spitzer said.

The Attorney General's office, which regulates all not-for-profit entities raising funds and/or maintaining charitable assets in New York, began an inquiry of WJC in late 2004 after receiving reports of possible misuse of funds.

After an extensive review of financial records and interviews with dozens of persons, the Attorney General's office concluded that the organizations lacked appropriate financial controls to safeguard charitable assets and failed to keep adequate records regarding their fund-raising activities. The investigation did not reveal criminal conduct.

The investigation focused particularly on an unusual transfer of funds by WJC's former Secretary General and Governing Board Chair, Israel Singer. In early 2003, Mr. Singer transferred $1.2 million from a bank account controlled by the American Section to bank accounts in Europe. The purpose of the transfers was to establish a pension fund for WJC employees. However, Mr. Singer's actions were not approved by any governing body of WJC and were undertaken without appropriate measures to protect WJC's ownership interest or ensure return of the monies.

Neither WJC nor American Section suffered losses from this transaction, but it did highlight major deficiencies in the organizations' administration and helped spark the adoption and implementation of previously-absent financial controls.

The investigation also revealed a series of inappropriate disbursements to senior to WJC employees. These disbursements consisted of payments for insurance for family members, car lease payments and personal credit card charges, as well as undocumented accrued vacation and sick leave, some of which already have been repaid. In the case of Mr. Singer, the inappropriate disbursements totaled over $300,000.

Earlier this month, Mr. Singer stepped down from his chairmanship of the Governing Board to chair WJC's newly created Policy Council, an advisory body. Under the agreement, Singer and Elan Steinberg - who currently is not affiliated with WJC or American Section but previously held senior positions at both organizations - will be able to assist WJC in efforts promoting its mission but will have no connection to the financial management, supervision or oversight of fund-raising activities of WJC, American Section or any affiliated entity.

The agreement recognizes and makes permanent other reforms instituted by WJC and American Section during the course of the investigation. These include:

• • Creation of an audit committee and Chief Financial Officer position;

  • Computerization of all financial records;

  • Creation of an employment manual outlining official procedures and policies;

  • Implementation of travel and reimbursement procedures; and

  • Creation of a new fund-raising entity to improve solicitation practices.

The Attorney General commended WJC for undertaking these reforms and cooperating with his office's investigation.

As part of the agreement, WJC and American Section will make periodic reports to the Attorney General's office on their compliance with the reform requirements.

WJC was founded in 1936 to foster the unity of Jewish people and fight persecution that was occurring in Nazi Germany. After the war, the organization was a leader in obtaining restitution for victims of the Holocaust.

The investigation was conducted by Section Chief Carolyn T. Ellis and Assistant Attorney General Tamar Eisenstat, with supervision from Bureau.

Attachments:

• • WJC AOD

From <https://ag.ny.gov/press-release/2006/world-jewish-congress-adopts-governance-reforms>

2005feb18 Machers in Meltdown

By Craig Horowitz FEB. 18, 2005

From <https://nymag.com/nymetro/news/politics/international/features/11158/>

Photo: Michele Asselin

Stephen Herbits has suddenly gotten angry. For the past hour, as a picturesque evening snow fell lightly on Madison Avenue, he has talked expansively about his background as a Washington insider, his twenty years as a key Seagram’s executive, and his current role as secretary-general of the World Jewish Congress.

Then I mention that several people from other Jewish organizations have said they were not at all surprised by the difficulties the World Jewish Congress has been facing, that its weak administration and sloppy record-keeping were an open secret. The WJC was, according to one insider, “a volcano waiting to erupt.”

Herbits, a tall, lean 62-year-old with gray hair and a gray beard, nearly levitates out of his chair, instantly going ballistic.

“As you talk to the leaders of the other Jewish organizations, check their accomplishments against their governance,” he says in a voice that’s rising to fill the room. “They’ve got perfect governance and no fucking accomplishments.

“If an investigation of Jewish organizational life takes place, I promise you that the last person standing will be Israel Singer,” he says, referring to the Brooklyn rabbi who is at the center of the controversy.

Since 1979, Singer and billionaire Edgar Bronfman have skillfully and productively run the powerful World Jewish Congress. But for the past eighteen months, the WJC has been embroiled in a vicious internal battle, fueled by money, politics, and vast egos. The fight has been so acrimonious and mean-spirited that it threatens the very existence of the 68-year-old institution.

Accusations of mismanagement, bizarre bank transactions, stolen e-mails and computer files, intimidation, and cover-ups, which stretch from New York to Geneva to Jerusalem, have reached a decibel level that has attracted the attention of the New York State attorney general’s office, which is in the midst of a preliminary investigation.Though the attacks focus mostly on Singer, Herbits, a longtime employee of Bronfman’s who was brought onboard six months ago to manage the crisis, seems to take it very personally. “There are no illegalities in Israel Singer’s behavior, and that is not true of some of the leaders of these other organizations,” he says, standing now.

“I know it and they know it and they better be careful, because if they cause enough problems in the press, then this organization won’t be the only one that has a preliminary inquiry from the attorney general’s office. Then you’ll see some real fireworks.”

Though the accusations he makes about other Jewish organizations are serious and sweeping—false IRS filings, misuse of funds, “outlandish” benefits packages, and lying to the government—Herbits refuses to name names. “You’re not going to get me to do that,” he snaps. “I’m not going to play that game.”

But given the chance, he doesn’t back down. Instead he ratchets up the rhetoric a notch. “I’m not going to sit by and let this organization take the rap for their behavior,” he says. “If we get into that kind of pissing match, this organization ain’t going down by itself.”

The man who built the organization, Edgar Bronfman, the street-smart, sometimes coarse, bullying businessman who took over the Seagram liquor dynasty started by his father, Sam, is commonly regarded as the king of Jewish philanthropy. In fact, there are some people who would simply call him king of the Jews.

Since he rescued the World Jewish Congress from the edge of extinction more than two decades ago, Bronfman, 75, has been its president, chief benefactor, and guiding force. Israel Singer has been with him since the beginning—he was a staff member in the New York office when Bronfman entered the picture, and the two formed an immediate bond. For the past 25 years, Bronfman and Singer have been the odd couple of organized Jewish life. Bronfman, the verbally clumsy, secular billionaire, who has been married five times to four different women (he even named one of his seven children Edgar Jr., a huge no-no for Jews of European ancestry), and Singer, the polished, smooth-talking Orthodox rabbi from Brooklyn who can, as one acquaintance put it without even a hint of irony, “sell sand to the Arabs.”

It is, according to people who know them, an unusual, interdependent relationship. “Bronfman sees Singer as his ticket to redemption,” says one peer. “Having been a secular Jew most of his life, he decided rather late that Judaism mattered to him, and Singer has, if you will, koshered him.”

For his part, Singer gets extraordinary access, which he has skillfully maximized to become one of the most powerful people in the organized Jewish world. In addition to the influence he wields as putative head of the WJC, he is president of the Claims Conference, which oversees distribution of German reparations, and chairman of the World Jewish Restitution Organization, which handles Holocaust money from other countries like Poland and Switzerland. Thus Singer effectively controls billions of dollars of Holocaust-related funds.

Image Whistle-blower or malcontent? Bronfman antagonist Isi Leibler.Photo: Michele Asselin

Under Bronfman and Singer, the achievements of the World Jewish Congress could hardly be more impressive. It was the WJC that exposed U.N. secretary-general Kurt Waldheim’s hidden past as a Nazi. When Carmelite nuns wanted to build a convent at Auschwitz, the congress waged a bitter but ultimately successful fight with the Vatican to stop the project. The WJC fought valiantly on behalf of Soviet Jews. And it was Bronfman and his organization that got the Swiss banks to own up to their role during World War II and pay more than a billion dollars in restitution.

Ironically, the root of the WJC’s troubles can be traced to its own Swiss bank account. Israel Singer deposited $1.2 million of WJC funds in a UBS account in Geneva. When the account was discovered—quite by accident—Singer was, particularly early on, less than forthcoming with an explanation. Still, the matter might have quietly gone away had it not been for a raucous political dispute that had erupted between Bronfman and a wealthy, irascible Australian Jew named Isi Leibler.

Leibler, 70, has been involved with the World Jewish Congress as long as Bronfman has. A leader in the Australian Jewish community who turned a local travel agency into a huge, international discount-travel business, Leibler moved to Jerusalem with his family five years ago. He and Bronfman have never really gotten along. In addition to their personal animus, they have passionate, deeply held political differences.

Bronfman, who is closely aligned with Israel’s Labor Party, believes peace between Israel and the Palestinians should be Israel’s overarching priority. He advocates significant compromise with the Palestinians, particularly on territory and the dismantling of Jewish settlements. Leibler takes a much harder line. He is far less interested in compromise with the Palestinians than he is in Israel’s security. Nevertheless, things had been relatively quiet between the two men—until the summer of 2003.

That summer, Bronfman wrote a letter to President Bush, which he got Lawrence Eagleburger to co-sign, urging him to take a more active role in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Though the letter was fairly evenhanded, it did urge the president to pressure Ariel Sharon to make concessions, and it criticized Israel’s construction of a security fence—referring to it, in what the right views as the language of Israel’s opponents, as a “separation wall.”

“Bronfman sees Singer as his ticket toredemption. He decided rather late that Judaism mattered to him, and Singer has, if you will, koshered him.”

Leibler, a senior vice-president of the WJC, went nuts. Though Bronfman wrote the letter on personal stationery, Leibler contended it still carried the weight and the implied imprimatur of the World Jewish Congress. He was not alone in this feeling.

Finally, in what has been his battle cry ever since, Leibler accused Bronfman (he later broadened the charge to include Israel Singer) of running the World Jewish Congress as a “personal fiefdom” to promote his own agenda and argued that the organization was wholly without accountability and proper governance. He called on Bronfman to apologize for his letter or resign. Of course, Bronfman did neither. Instead, he threatened to have Leibler banished from the WJC.

And then it really got ugly. In an exchange of e-mails with Leibler, Bronfman said, “I’m writing this note despite my distaste for getting into a pissing match with a skunk.” Two days later, he wrote, “When this is over, the person I will feel sorry for is Naomi, your long-suffering wife.”

Bronfman was just as harsh in public. In an interview with The Forward that appeared on August 8, 2003, one day after the “long-suffering wife” e-mail, he called Leibler a “right-wing dog.” In the New York Sun that same day, Bronfman was quoted as saying that Leibler is an “arrogant twit” who “has decided that G-d is dead and he is taking his place.” In the same interview, he said Leibler is “to the right of Genghis Khan and a fool to boot.”

When a reporter from Canada’s National Post asked Bronfman if there were other members of the WJC who were unhappy about his letter to President Bush, he responded, “It’s just one idiot. He can go f— himself.”

“Bronfman doesn’t like me, and I don’t like him, but that’s not really the point,” says Leibler by phone from his apartment in Jerusalem. “Bronfman is considered to rule practically by divine right. Whenever he gets up and says anything, no matter how stupid, the prevailing attitude is, ‘This guy is paying for everything, so for God’s sake, keep quiet. Don’t upset him.’”

Image Stephen Herbits, Bronfman's designated mouthpiece and crisis manager.Photo: Michele Asselin

Leibler has a point. Justified or not, there is a fear of Bronfman and Singer in the organized Jewish world. It is a small community, and no one wants to risk getting shut out. “Those who know the WJC from up close,” says one insider, “understood long ago that it was being run as the personal agency of Edgar Bronfman and Israel Singer, with insufficient oversight, and no proper governing structure.”

It was almost impossible to get anyone to speak candidly on the record about either man. “There’s wholesale cowardice going on here,” says one Jewish leader with too much to lose to let me use his name.

This is undoubtedly one of the reasons why Leibler finds himself with so little public support. “Nobody takes Bronfman on,” he says. “But I don’t give a stuff about him. I’ve never respected him. There’s nothing there to respect. He’s not exactly a great intellect.”

For years, Bronfman single-handedly provided funding for the World Jewish Congress, writing an annual check to keep it going. He also used his power, prestige, and substantial personal contacts on behalf of the WJC, and it is difficult to imagine that the organization could’ve accomplished much without him.

There is a certain Wizard of Oz quality to the WJC. When you pull back the curtain, there’s not a whole lot there other than the implied power that comes from representing the world’s Jewish communities. Its primary mission is fighting anti-Semitism, and it responds, when crises occur, on a situational basis. Unlike the American Jewish Committee or the Anti-Defamation League, which have annual budgets that are at least four or five times that of the congress, the WJC does not run any ongoing programs or have any kind of infrastructure. The New York office, which is its world headquarters, has nine employees.

Leibler says that when Bronfman’s money was the only thing keeping the organization alive, you could make the argument that he was entitled to do whatever he wanted. “It’s still a public organization, and it’s still not nice, but I can see how he’d justify it.”

About fifteen years ago, the WJC began raising money through direct mail. Today, its annual budget is approximately $10 million, of which Bronfman kicks in about $2 million. The rest comes from contributors, just about all of them American. A lot of the contributions come in the form of $18 checks accompanied by notes in the frail handwriting of the elderly that say things like “Please help save the Jews.” (Jews often contribute in multiples of 18, the numerical equivalent of the Hebrew word chai, or “life,” which is considered good luck.)

Despite the ugly sniping over Bronfman’s letter and Israeli politics, the two men did come to at least a sort of temporary cold peace, if not quite a rapprochement. In fall 2003, a compromise was reached. To begin reforming the way the WJC was run, a three-man Operations Committee was appointed to oversee the workings of the organization. It included Leibler and Singer, as well as Elan Steinberg, another longtime WJC official.

Almost a year of relative calm followed the creation of the Operations Committee—and then the real problems started. In July 2004, a Swiss lawyer named Daniel Lack, who had suddenly been dismissed after 29 years in the WJC Geneva office, informed the Operations Committee of the $1.2 million Swiss bank account.

The story he told was essentially the following: Over a five-month period, Israel Singer quietly made five deposits totaling $1.2 million into a UBS account in Geneva. The last deposit, $200,000, was made in February 2003.

The money, according to Singer, came from a $1.5 million payment to the World Jewish Congress by the Jewish Agency in Israel. The two organizations have a historical link, and for years, whenever money was available, the Jewish Agency has contributed to the WJC.

As putative head of the organization, Singer—who relinquished the secretary-general’s title almost two years ago—had acted on his own. None of the people in charge of the WJC office in Geneva knew about the bank account.

However, when a young lawyer named Maya Ben-Haim Rosen was hired to run the Geneva office, she found that the bookkeeper was overpaying himself by $1,900 a month. She wanted to fire him immediately, but couldn’t because he was in the hospital recuperating from a heart ailment. At a meeting in London on June 29, 2003, she told the details to Singer and Avi Beker, who had replaced Singer as secretary-general of the WJC. The date is important because two days later, Singer flew to Geneva.

He located the bookkeeper and literally got him out of his convalescent bed. Singer took the bookkeeper to the bank, and had him sign off on a transfer of the funds to a London account held by an Israeli lawyer.

Leibler claims the people in the Geneva office only found out about the account several months later, in October, when the bank sent an overdraft notice. Since the account had been emptied, there were no funds to cover the $40 transfer fee.

Herbits argues vehemently, however, that the information was readily available to the people in the Geneva office. All they had to do was look for it.

Maya Ben-Haim Rosen was authorized to investigate the account. But over the next several months, she, along with Beker and Daniel Lack (the longtime legal adviser in the Geneva office), all of whom had pushed for a full investigation of the account, were dismissed. And the Geneva office, where the World Jewish Congress began 68 years ago, was closed. Beker, who had been secretary-general for only a year, was given a seven-figure payment that included a confidentiality agreement. Rosen also received a buyout that stipulated silence.

Herbits has an explanation for each of these events that has nothing to do with the $1.2 million. The Geneva office was actually closed, he argues, not by Singer but by the Operations Committee. However, like many of the details in this story, truth is in the eye of the beholder. Leibler counters, of course, that the committee closed the office because they were talked into it by Singer.

Similarly, according to Herbits, the employee terminations had nothing to do with any of them seeking a full accounting of the $1.2 million. He says Lack and Singer never got along and Lack was a disgruntled employee. Beker simply wasn’t working out as secretary-general, and so on. His bottom line is this: No one thought anything was amiss until after getting fired and being angry about it. Then, he claims, they tried to stoke the fires of controversy to get even. But as someone once said, it all seems too coincidental to be coincidental.

“Look,” Herbits says, “you can make an issue out of this because it smells. It looks bad. And it wasn’t perfectly done. There’s not a board of director’s signature on each transaction. But is there anything illegal? Is there anything criminal? Absolutely not.”

The issue, however, may not be so clear. Though Leibler has been very careful not to accuse Singer of anything illegal, he says, “you can read my mind.” One insider told me Singer’s strategy has been to promote the notion that after a lifetime of hard work devoted to the Jewish community, he is entitled to be compensated, that he has earned the money. And the mom-and-pop governance style Bronfman fostered gave Singer license to operate in a gray area.

“You have to understand,” this source says, “that Singer would say things like, ‘Maybe I wasn’t as careful with the administrative things as I should’ve been, but I was too busy defending the Jewish people.’ It sounds so noble, but the truth is to be found elsewhere. Proper administration of the organization would only have diminished his power and access to funds.”

In fact, in September, Singer told The Forward , in an attempt to explain the $1.2 million account, that the Jewish Agency placed the money in a New York account, “in recognition of his work on behalf of the Jewish people. The idea,” The Forward reported, “was to establish a fund that possibly would be used to fund his pension.” (The Jewish Agency has repeatedly denied this.) In August 2004, at the insistence of Leibler and Steinberg, the other member of the Operations Committee, the $1.2 million was finally returned to the WJC in New York. Leibler, meanwhile, wrote a fifteen-plus-page memo he planned to give to Bronfman, detailing what he believed were the organization’s key problems with administration, transparency, and accountability.

Leibler is adamant that the memo was for internal use only. Somehow Singer got his hands on a copy before Leibler formally presented it to Bronfman and the board, and he took it to The Jewish Week, which ran a significant story. Leibler claims that computer experts have confirmed his suspicion that someone hacked into his computer and stole the memo.

Singer refused to answer any questions from The Jewish Week editor Gary Rosenblatt about how he got the memo.

“Singer must’ve believed he could control the debate by doing this,” Leibler says. “He must’ve believed he could portray me as a madman who was trying to destroy his reputation and the organization because I was power hungry. And because I was jealous of him and Bronfman.”

By late last summer, the still-unexplained Swiss account, the problems at the WJC, and the feuding among its leaders became a major story in the Jewish media. Leibler was ranting to anyone who’d listen, while Singer and Bronfman hunkered down and ignored the calls for a comprehensive independent audit. Stonewalling made them look guilty of something, even if they weren’t.

“They can say whatever they want about me,” Leibler says, “but if they had nothing to hide, why was there such a hysterical response to my calls for a full audit?”

Herbits came onboard just before Labor Day. It is easy to see why Bronfman called him, even though Herbits hadn’t worked for him in seven years. Herbits, a longtime confidant of Donald Rumsfeld, has the kind of prodigious political talent that enabled him to be openly gay and sometimes outspoken on gay-rights issues and still serve at the highest levels of the Defense Department for every Republican president since Richard Nixon. His Pentagon specialty is personnel, and he played a key consulting role in helping Rumsfeld fill more than 40 critical positions.

Herbits says that, like the fired Geneva employees, Leibler has acted out of anger. He didn’t begin writing his memo until after he knew the Operations Committee was going to be disbanded and he would lose his power. “The idea that he wrote the memo as a white knight,” Herbits says, “that he’s a whistle-blower who just wanted to fix the institution and they wouldn’t let him, is pure bullshit.”

A disinterested third party with inside knowledge sees it differently. “The attempts to paint Isi Leibler as power hungry and as a right-wing nut are nothing more than a distraction,” says the source. “It’s simply an effort to discredit him and take the focus off the issues he’s raised.”

The World Jewish Congress was started in 1936 by Nahum Goldmann as a way of mobilizing Jews to protest the Nazis. Goldmann, a legendary figure in twentieth-century Jewish history, was also president of the World Zionist Organization, and he negotiated the early postwar reparations with Germany.

By the mid-fifties, as president of the World Jewish Congress, he was recognized by the U.N. as the spokesman for the world’s Jewish community. Though times have changed, it is a mantle of responsibility and authority that Bronfman now holds.

The congress is an international confederation of Jewish communities. There’s a European section, a Latin American section, and so on. These regional sections are made up of the Jewish communities in their part of the world. Other countries have officially recognized and designated Jewish communities—like the Board of Deputies in England and the Creif in France.

When Goldmann retired in the late seventies, he was briefly succeeded by Philip Klutznick, who went on to become Commerce secretary under President Carter. Bronfman took over in 1979. “He told me at the time,” says Leibler, “that he wanted the job for a year. He said he was not a religious Jew and being president of the congress for a year was his way of saying a kind of secular kaddish for his father. But he fell in love with it.”

It has always been an issue for the WJC that the one country other than Israel that matters most, the U.S., does not have an official Jewish community. Instead, it has a collection of Jewish organizations. To try to overcome this gap in the appearance of legitimacy, Bronfman moved the headquarters of the WJC from Europe to New York. (There is an American Jewish Congress, but it’s never been especially significant.)

“Rather than increasing their legitimacy,” says J. J. Goldberg, editor of The Forward , “they cut themselves off from their base. So, for the last twenty years, they’ve had a problem because they’re running this thing in New York that represents the Latin American Jewish Congress, the European Jewish Congress, and the Asian Pacific Jewish Congress.”

The shadow now cast on the World Jewish Congress is particularly difficult for Bronfman because it threatens to darken his legacy as a Jew, which he has worked tirelessly over the past quarter-century to build.

“You can make an issue out of this because it smells. It looks bad,” says Herbits.“But is there anythingillegal? Is there anythingcriminal?Absolutely not.”

Bronfman belongs to one of the world’s most exclusive clubs, an impossibly elite gathering known as the “mega group.” It consists of about a dozen inconceivably rich Jews who get together several times a year—often in either Bronfman’s or Larry Tisch’s apartment—with an invited religious scholar to talk about ways to make Jewish culture in America better.

As part of the mega group’s work, Bronfman almost single-handedly revived Hillel, the campus organization for Jewish students that had become irrelevant. According to Singer, who agreed to speak to me one afternoon recently about anything other than the WJC dispute, Bronfman has visited more than 100 campuses in the past two or three years. The very successful Birthright program, which pays for young Jews to visit Israel, was also conceived and developed in these meetings.

Like some of the other members of the mega group, and many other assimilated Jews as well, Bronfman’s religious observance is as much a matter of personal style and taste as are the clothes he wears. He picks what appeals to him and ignores the rest. According to Singer, Bronfman has started his own shul, which meets in a social hall in his New York apartment building. Being a billionaire, he likes to run things his own way, and that includes religious services. “He doesn’t like the formal, ceremonial nature of most synagogues,” Singer says. “He likes the readings from the prayer books done and then explained and talked about.”

Similarly, though his diet is not kosher by any formal definition, like many Jews, he doesn’t eat what he refers to as “biblically prohibited” food, such as pork and shellfish. “He’s unsophisticated in his language and he probably needs help reading the Hebrew when he’s at a service,” says The Forward ’s Goldberg. “But he has a heart of gold and he will fly anywhere and do anything to help Jews.”

Separate and apart from whether he’s right or wrong, there is intense anger with Leibler in some quarters of the Jewish community. They blame him for this unseemly fight’s becoming public. Airing the dirty laundry of a scandalous internecine battle with plenty of craven behavior will always upset people, no matter what group or organization is being exposed. But the feeling is particularly acute in this instance because of the Swiss and the issue of Holocaust restitution.

Bronfman and Singer played a kind of high-wire act with the Swiss. The Swiss never liked the fact that an American billionaire was flying over in his private jet to plead the poverty of the Jewish people.

“It’s tough enough,” says Goldberg, “to say, ‘Give me money because of something your great-grandparents did two generations ago.’ The Swiss think that Bronfman and Singer shook them down. It has generated a lot of resentment against Jews, and it isn’t helpful when Isi Leibler then starts implying that the key people are stealing.”

Even some Swiss Jews weren’t happy when the restitution negotiations began. They viewed Bronfman and Singer as American cowboys, Goldberg says, coming over to stomp on their rights. Herbits, who was involved in the negotiations, agrees. “They said, ‘You’re humiliating us and creating anti-Semitism.’”

Herbits was on the first trip with Bronfman when he met the Swiss bankers in 1998. “The bankers there have a club which is in a great, grand old building,” he says. “We were shown to a waiting room, which was very ornate and very beautiful, as you can imagine. Singer, Edgar, and I stood there waiting for 30 minutes.”

The reason they stood, he says, is there were no chairs in the room. “Then the bankers walked in, six or eight of them in a perfectly straight line, just like in a movie,” Herbits continues. “And the first one pulls a statement out of his jacket pocket and reads it to Edgar. No introductions, no handshakes, nothing. We’re about to have lunch with these people, and this is what they do.”

In the statement, they offered Bronfman $37 million if he would simply go away. “The entire world of Swiss restitution would be different if they hadn’t insulted him that way,” Herbits says.

In fact, it didn’t improve much as negotiations moved forward. A little later on, Bronfman, Singer, and Avraham Burg, the former head of Israel’s Labor Party who was then running the Jewish Agency, were seated across the table from the chairman of the Swiss bankers’ association and the chairman of Credit Suisse.

“One of the bankers leaned across the table,” Singer remembers, “and said, ‘You must be mad if you claim that you had hundreds of millions of dollars in our banks. You know, as I do from having seen all the pictures of the Jews of Europe during World War II, that they were all clothed in rags. They were impoverished.’”

Singer, an accomplished, engaging raconteur, believes it was one of the most critical moments in the negotiations. “Edgar looked at them and very quietly but very firmly said, ‘That’s a disgusting thing to say about an entire people. It’s an insulting remark, and I’m very sorry you made it because it will color the nature of our negotiations.’”

“Edgar wasn’t there to negotiate money,” Herbits says. “It was all about the principle, about moral restitution. He wanted an admission that the Swiss had a role in the problem. Their behavior was abominable.”

Herbits has no doubt that a big part of the reason this controversy involving the WJC and Leibler has received so much attention and lasted this long is due to the Swiss component. “There’s just too much glee among some Jews about this. Isn’t it funny, they say, that Singer gets caught up in a secret Swiss bank account. Ultimately, does it hurt the Jews? Of course it does.”

Negotiating an agreement with the Swiss, however, illustrates how effective Bronfman and Singer can be. They know how to play hardball. In Venezuela, there is a small remaining Jewish community of perhaps 25,000 people that has been having problems of late with the government. A couple of months ago, the State Police stormed into the Jewish school and the athletic club. Though the official reason for the raids was that the police were searching for weapons, the real purpose, according to Herbits, was intimidation and harassment.

Community members called the regional office of the Latin American Jewish Congress, which issued a statement and then immediately called New York. Singer, according to Herbits, then called the Venezuelan ambassador to the U.N. and told him there was a problem. “Do you think it would be helpful if Mr. Bronfman flew down and met with President Chávez?” he asked. “Perhaps they can meet and then hold a joint press conference with the international media where they can issue a statement that your country is beating the shit out of its Jews.”

The ambassador got the message. “That’s how this organization takes care of small communities,” Herbits says. “That’s the mission, and they do it all over the world.”a couple of weeks ago, the World Jewish Congress held an emergency session in Brussels. It was the organization’s first worldwide meeting in more than four years. Though no one will admit it, it was called because of l’affaire Leibler. Bronfman, Singer, and Herbits knew they couldn’t stop the attorney general’s investigation, but they could at least put an end to the battle within the organization.

Leibler knew he’d be overmatched if he went to Brussels, but he was determined to have his say. As he drove through the streets of Jerusalem on his way to the airport, he could see the posters that had been put up all over the city calling him a traitor to the Jewish people for telling tales about the community to outsiders.

In Brussels, where Leibler was promised 30 minutes of speaking time, 40 minutes were spent debating whether to let him talk at all. In the end, he got less than 10 minutes from the floor, not the podium, and he could barely be heard over those trying to shout him down. As he expected, he was not reelected to his post as vice-president.

When Bronfman addressed the organization’s assembled representatives, he didn’t mention the conflict at all. He talked only about the future. And he left no doubt about his feelings for Singer. Near the end of his remarks, he said no one has done more for the Jewish people than Singer. Then, in full view of Israeli TV cameras, he walked over to Singer, kissed him, and said, “I love you.”As far as Herbits, Bronfman, and Singer are concerned, they have put the entire matter behind them. Though Herbits says the WJC has instituted a host of changes in its administrative practices, he will not give Leibler any credit for the changes. He argues they would have happened anyway.There is still the looming problem of the New York State attorney general’s inquiry. To date, the WJC has spent more than $1 million on the crisis, including PR reps and several audits, the latest by PricewaterhouseCoopers. Leibler says, however, it’s a gloss over the books, not an in-depth look.

Herbits says he wants a definitive statement from the attorney general’s office that will end the discussion once and for all. Somewhat surprisingly, he adds, “Then we’ll know if Leibler was right or wrong.”

But even if the World Jewish Congress is cleared, the damage may already have been done. “These are difficult times,” says one insider, “and it pains me greatly that everyone in the Jewish community will pay a price for what’s happened. All we have is our credibility, and it’s very tough to get it back.”

LEAVE A COMMENT

From <https://nymag.com/nymetro/news/politics/international/features/11158/>

1993oct24 nyt #lauder Ronald Lauder, Leader Of Term-Limit Band

Steven Lee Myers

By Steven Lee Myers   nytimes.com

Oct. 24, 1993 

From <https://www.nytimes.com/1993/10/24/nyregion/ronald-lauder-leader-of-term-limit-band.html>

Four years ago, Ronald S. Lauder stumbled through an improbable campaign for the Republican nomination for mayor of New York City. A political neophyte and an heir to his family's cosmetics fortune, he spent an unheard-of $14 million out of his own pocket, only to be disdained by the political establishment and routed by Rudolph W. Giuliani.

Now, after largely vanishing from the arena of city politics, he has returned as a major figure in this year's elections. He has mounted a campaign that has shaken the foundations of the city's political establishment. Only this time, he's not a candidate, but rather the leader of another improbable effort: a referendum that would limit the city's elected officials to two four-year terms in office and could help pave the way for another run at elected office, if he chooses.

Although the concept of term limits has not achieved the prominence in New York that it has elsewhere, particularly in the West, Mr. Lauder has single-handedly brought the referendum to a vote. Given the general popularity of such measures as well as Mr. Lauder's willingness to spend hundreds of thousands more to promote it, it appears to have a fair chance of passing.

If it does, it would bring about one of the most significant changes in government in the city's history, restricting the terms of the Mayor, Comptroller, Public Advocate, borough presidents and City Council members. And it would be a remarkable accomplishment for a man who has been dismissed as a dilettante dabbling with the family's fortune, a political naif in a city of street-smart operatives. 'All of Us Are Frustrated'

"I think all of us are frustrated with what is happening with our elected officials," Mr. Lauder said the other day. "As a New Yorker, I feel the gridlock strangling the city, and I can think of nothing that could revolutionize the city like term limits. There would be sweeping changes."

Whatever happens on Election Day, Mr. Lauder, who is 49, appears to have now reached the plateau he has long desired. With the decision last week by the state Court of Appeals to permit the issue to be placed on the ballot, Mr. Lauder has suddenly surged onto the public stage as New York's variation of Ross Perot, stirring up the roost and tapping voter discontent.

As Gene Russianoff, a senior lawyer for the New York Public Interest Research Group, put it, "Ron Lauder is back in the mayor's election, in the city's and the state's politics."

And he has done so in much the same way he made his first run at elected office in 1989, spending a huge amount of his own money to overcome a political establishment that considered him with disdain.

When Mr. Lauder launched his drive in February to put the referendum on the ballot, few took him seriously -- even when he opened his own wallet and hired a staff of six, even when he collected the necessary signatures, and even when he spent $800,000, most of it to finance the legal fight after the city's lawyers challenged the measure in court.

"It was arrogance," he said of the city's leadership, in particular the Speaker of the Council, Peter F. Vallone, who fought or ignored the referendum. "They didn't think we would get this far."

To his friends and colleagues, most of them part of a conservative coterie in an overwhelmingly liberal town, Mr. Lauder has dealt an enviable blow to the establishment that has left them and their ideas perpetually on the fringes.

"That he could have started from nothing and done this is a masterful accomplishment," said Thomas L. Rhodes, the president of The National Review and a friend. "This gets an awful lot more done than the typical politician does in a career." Motives Questioned

But his opponents question his motives, seeking to portray Mr. Lauder as an opportunist posing as a populist, using a relatively safe, hot-button issue to propel himself to higher office.

"I think he's continued to look for a good place for a run at elected office," said George Humphreys, a political affairs consultant in Atlanta, who has ties to state politics going back to Gov. Nelson A. Rockefeller and who worked for Mr. Lauder before his race for mayor. "There's no doubt in my mind that he's attaching himself to term limits to position himself for a statewide office."

For his part, Mr. Lauder denies he has sponsored the referendum as a springboard. "I have no plans to run for governor or lieutenant governor," he said. Perhaps then, senator? "Or senator," he added, smiling a bit impatiently. "My entire focus is on term limits."

It has not always been.

In the midst of his race for mayor in 1989, executives of his family's cosmetics business recalled Mr. Lauder confiding that he would someday be the first Jewish President of the United States after proving himself in business. From Business to Politics

While such a goal remains lofty, Mr. Lauder has moved a long way out of the shadow of the company that his mother, Estee Lauder, and his older brother, Leonard, torqued into a family fortune, recently estimated by Forbes to be at least $3 billion.

Mr. Lauder left the business in 1983, after serving as chairman of one of the subsidiaries, Estee Lauder International. He then received an appointment in the State Department and went on to serve as Ambassador to Austria, a position he held for 18 months.

His first effort at elected office, in the Republican primary for mayor in 1989, sputtered and stalled despite the money he spent. He ran a fierce campaign, which some people still say cost Mr. Giuliani the general election against Mayor David N. Dinkins. In the end, though, he won just 36,905 votes -- at a cost of about $350 each -- to Mr. Giuliani's 75,720.

And though he remained on the ballot that November as the Conservative Party's candidate, he hardly campaigned, spending much of the month before Election Day in Europe. Since then, he has quietly pursued a variety of philanthropies and investments in Eastern Europe, including the construction of a center for American businesses at Checkpoint Charlie in Berlin.

Mr. Lauder acknowledges that he is newly arrived in the term limits issue. As he tells it, he began the referendum drive only last February, after reading an article in The New York Post about $250,000 the City Council allocated for bonuses to members' staffers.

"It's not a level playing field," he said of the difficulty of challenging the city's incumbents. "Many times you have people running with no opponents." 'You Can't Win'

As for outsiders -- like, say, himself -- he said, "It's a fallacious argument to say, 'Just run against them and beat them.' You can't win."

Once again, Mr. Lauder finds himself facing questions about the money he has spent on an issue that barely registered on the city's public consciousness until last week. (He maintains that the issue has the support of an "amazing number of people," citing polls he has commissioned but will not release.)

He defends the expense, even the fact he has the money to spend, by saying only deep pockets could have brought the issue to the voters. "I don't think anybody could have done it besides me," he said, and many of his supporters agreed.

"Most people don't think of people in his income bracket as a populist," said Tom Carroll, the president of Change NY, a conservative group in Albany that supports the term limits referendum in the city, as well as another in Suffolk County. "But the fact is this is a populist idea that has spread across the country."

Sitting in his 42d floor office in the General Motors building, overlooking Central Park, Mr. Lauder talked easily about his passion for its artworks, in particular an expressionist painting by Oskar Kokoschka. The issue, Mr. Lauder said, is not that he is out of touch with the voters.

"I'm a New Yorker," he said. "I live in New York City. I walk the streets like everybody else does."

Instead, he said, it is the city's elected officials, protected by the powers of incumbency, that have lost touch. "The government is not hearing the cries of the people," Mr. Lauder said. "They're not hearing the cries from the streets."

A version of this article appears in print on Oct. 24, 1993, Section 1, Page 33 of the National edition with the headline: Ronald Lauder, Leader Of Term-Limit Band. Order Reprints | Today’s Paper |

https://www.nytimes.com/1993/10/24/nyregion/ronald-lauder-leader-of-term-limit-band.html

1989Apri15  Lauder’s Run for Mayor- NEW YORK'S SHRINKING CANDIDATE

By Howard Kurtz | April 15, 1989 | Washington Post

NEW YORK -- Ronald S. Lauder, heir to a cosmetics fortune, former ambassador to Austria and candidate for mayor of New York City, had just finished a speech to an education group when a handful of reporters surrounded him in the hallway. 

• Lauder had vowed to replace Schools Chancellor Richard Green, only to be reminded that the mayor doesn't have that power. 

• He tried again, declaring that Green had accomplished little in "the last couple of years," obviously unaware that the new chancellor had been in office barely 12 months.

• As the questions continued, a Lauder aide nervously pressed the elevator button. Another grabbed Lauder by the arm and announced that he was late for a meeting. The $10 million candidate was whisked away. 

• Despite his obvious need to lift himself out of obscurity in the September Republican primary against Rudolph Giuliani, the heavily favored former prosecutor, Ron Lauder has been something of a media recluse.

Shattering the tradition of every city council candidate who ever thrust a stack of position papers at a bored journalist, the 45-year-old son of Estee Lauder has largely ducked newspaper reporters and television interviews in the three months since he declared for mayor. In characteristic fashion, the Lauder campaign -- minus Lauder -- released the candidate's tax returns yesterday.

At a news conference in its luxurious new campaign digs (the old office was sublet from the Este'e Lauder firm), a thick stack of documents revealed that Lauder and his wife Jo Carole expect to pay $9,932,000 in federal, state and city taxes this year. Lauder's estimated 1988 income: $30 million, much of it dividends from his Este'e Lauder holdings. This was an improvement over the lean year of 1987, when Lauder paid $2.6 million in taxes on $9.5 million in income. That year, however, he got to deduct $410,000 for donating his furnishings and security system to the U.S. Embassy in Austria, including a $3,500 dinette set, three $2,500 "log cabin" quilts, a $60 doorstop and two $15 American-flag potholders.

His financial adviser, Jim Griffin, put Lauder's net worth at $227 million. Asked why the candidate was not present, press secretary Nelson Warfield said: "Ronald Lauder makes the money and Jim Griffin counts it." News of Lauder's eight-digit income could help shift the focus from what has been a bumpy political voyage for Lauder. It began in January when he declared his candidacy in Albany, a faux pas so self-evident that he might as well have announced in Vienna. He eventually had to schedule a second announcement in New York City.

Campaign Consultant Ailes Quits on Lauder--says Lauder campaign is a "JOKE"

The latest blow came when media man Roger Ailes, who handled George Bush's presidential campaign ads last year, bailed out of the Lauder campaign, calling it "a joke." In short, after spending more than $1 million of his family fortune on this floundering effort, Lauder seems to have bought himself a sizable dose of ridicule. After a week-long delay, Lauder agreed to break his silence in a telephone interview, calling his alleged reclusiveness "an unfair rap." He said he is starting to talk to more reporters but that "once you get this so-called rap that you're not available, it's kind of hard to prove that you are." Lauder said he is "running as a conservative Republican businessman," but conceded he had "a great deal to learn" about city government.

"I didn't feel it was really necessary to go out with all kinds of proposals and ideas from day one ... The most important thing a candidate can do is understand the problems by going out and speaking to people. The first thing you do not do is call a press conference."

To New York's hard-boiled media types, however, this is tantamount to admitting that you can't play in the big leagues. "It's the buzz among reporters that this guy won't talk," said WCBS-TV commentator Ken Auletta, one of those who tried to question Lauder after the education speech.

"Everyone's tried to get him." While some presidential candidates have carefully limited media access, he said, "at least you could tell they were living. What evidence do we have that Ron Lauder even exists?" "Obviously they're afraid to put him out there," said veteran media adviser David Garth, whose Democratic client, Mayor Edward Koch, is not quite as reticent with the press. "He is not cut out for retail politics ... He's far from a natural candidate."

Sen. Alfonse D'Amato (R-N.Y.), a longtime friend, is widely believed to have enticed Lauder into the race because of the senator's continuing feud with Giuliani, which began when Giuliani passed up a Senate race last year rather than let D'Amato name his successor as U.S. attorney.

Even in defeat, Lauder's plan to spend $10 million of his money on the race could leave Giuliani bloodied for the November general election, according to this reasoning. Ailes' abrupt departure leaves Lauder "with an amorphous ball of nothing," said GOP political consultant Jay Severin. "He loses the credibility that Roger brought him, which deflected attention from the painfully transparent fact that this is a D'Amato operation ... It's a shame. He's a nice fellow. He's just in over his head."

Lauder Blames Fox's Roger Ailes for Failed Campaign, Finkelstein Spends Lots of Money (and will later help Bibi & Orban win & other fascists!)

Lauder blamed Ailes' resignation on a power struggle with campaign pollster Arthur Finkelstein, a D'Amato confidant.

 But Ailes has told friends he was dissatisfied with Lauder's failure to articulate a coherent message. The $750,000 worth of Lauder ads that he produced should never have been aired, Ailes told the New York Daily News last week. "I said we don't have time to produce good commercials, but Finkelstein insisted. They're so busy trying to keep the media buy going, they were willing to put that crap on the air."

Rep. Guy Molinari (R-N.Y.), now a key Giuliani supporter, said he met with Lauder and D'Amato at the 21 club last winter to explore a Lauder candidacy.

Molinari was not impressed. "He was quite nervous in talking about running for mayor," Molinari said. "He said that when he was ambassador, before he made any public statement he'd have a three- or four-day period to prepare for it." After the session, Lauder was supposed to call reporters, who had been tipped to the story, to say he was seriously weighing a mayoral bid, Molinari said. Not only did Lauder fail to make the calls, he said, but reporters who tried calling him reached a spokesman who said Lauder was unavailable. Lauder, a graduate of the Bronx High School of Science, holds business degrees from the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School and the University of Brussels. He began his career with the family company in 1966 and is now chairman and president of Lauder Investments, the investing arm of the Este'e Lauder firm. He became a major fundraiser for Ronald Reagan in 1980 and raised substantial sums for the New York State Republican Party during a two-year stint as its finance chairman. In 1983 he was rewarded with the post of deputy assistant secretary of defense for NATO and Eastern Europe.

MR. ANTI-SEMITISM AMBASSADOR

In 1986 Lauder began an 18-month tour as U.S. envoy to Austria, where his most notable accomplishment was to openly criticize anti-Semitism there.

Lauder, who has been working with a speech coach, appeared in his first TV ad this week as part of a $250,000-a-week blitz. A serious-looking Lauder says he would cut "waste, fraud and corruption" in the city's $25 billion budget. Asked for details, however, he retreated to bromides about less government and better management, saying: "I'll be putting out various position papers on exactly what we're talking about." Lauder also appears uncomfortable playing defense.

When Giuliani criticized Lauder for tapping his family fortune rather than observing the city's new campaign spending limits for those taking public funds, Lauder accused him of making "personal attacks on my mother" and came off sounding whiny.

Pressed during the interview about his free-spending approach, Lauder got a bit tangled in his rhetoric. "The only issue in this race are the issues. That's the issue, not how much you spend," he declared.

Campaign manager James Murphy, a veteran of Sen. Bob Dole's presidential effort, declared his strategy in one sentence: "We feel Ron Lauder is the conservative and Rudy Giuliani is the liberal." He believes the city's small universe of mostly Catholic, mostly conservative Republicans -- only 67,000 voted in the last GOP primary -- will be receptive to that message, especially since Giuliani's embrace of the Liberal Party endorsement.

Lauder's first attack on Giuliani backfired badly. The campaign sent out a scathing letter over the signature of Vincent Lentine, an elderly Brooklyn Republican leader who later apologized to Giuliani and claimed he had been misled about its content.

Although Lauder still claims him as a supporter, Lentine appeared at a recent Giuliani event and said he is backing the former U.S. attorney. The letter charged that "Rudy Giuliani admitted he plans to raise taxes ... admitted he proudly worked for lots of Democratic left-wingers, including George McGovern ... Rudy Giuliani might be tough on crime but in every other way he's a Liberal. In fact, I don't even know if he supports the death penalty." This raised a few factual problems.

While Giuliani voted for McGovern, he never worked for him and says that McGovern's candidacy prompted him to leave the Democratic Party. Giuliani never said he would raise taxes, only that he doesn't rule it out. And he has repeatedly voiced support for the death penalty. Lauder said he stands by the letter. "Lies and distortions," thundered Giuliani spokesman Russell Schriefer.

"The Lauder strategy is to say nothing about Ron Lauder, to keep him in the closet as long as possible and try to tear down Rudy Giuliani's record." Why is this genial multimillionaire subjecting himself to such indignities?

Daily News columnist Jack Newfield suggests that Lauder "has been drugged and taken prisoner by a ruthless gang of political consultants" who "will not let him out of his headquarters until they've fleeced him of all his money." Asked whether he feels like the hostage of high-powered operatives, Lauder said: "You go out and you find the best and brightest people -- invariably they're the most expensive -- and you listen to their advice."

From <NEW YORK'S SHRINKING CANDIDATE - The Washington Post> 

2023nov12 #lauder | Penn at center of fight over control by donors: Several contributors have tried to direct how the university operates, threatening to withhold their giving.

Snyder, Susan

Philadelphia Inquirer Philadelphia, Pa.. 12 Nov 2023: A.1.  

 From <https://www.proquest.com/docview/2888862013/E5101014D3D4BB5PQ/1?accountid=6749&sourcetype=Newspapers>

In mid-September, Ronald S. Lauder, of the Estée Lauder cosmetic company, made a special trip to Philadelphia to see the president of the University of Pennsylvania, his alma mater, to which he and family members have given many millions over the decades.

The school in two weeks was scheduled to house the Palestine Writes Literary Festival, billed as a celebration of Palestinian culture and arts, but criticized by some for invitingspeakers who had a history of making antisemitic remarks.

He wanted it canceled. As is now widely known, Liz Magill, Penn’s president, didn’t comply, citing academic freedom and free speech.

That set off one of the biggest — if not the biggest — backlashes from donors that an American university has ever seen.

Chief among the critics was Lauder, who told Magill in an Oct. 16 letter that he was re-examining his financial support of the university. He wrote that he "had two people taking photos and two more who listened to the speakers" at the festival and found them to be "both antisemitic and viscerally anti-Israel."

Lauder, a Wharton alumnus, gave Magill a directive involving the Lauder Institute of Management and International Studies that he and his brother, Leonard A. Lauder, also a Wharton grad, founded at Penn in 1983 with a $10 million gift. They created the institute in honor of their father, Joseph H. Lauder, co-founder of Estée Lauder Inc.

"Let me be clear as I can," he wrote, "I do not want any of the students at the Lauder Institute ... to be taught by any of the instructors who were involved or supported" the festival. He also wrote to Steven J. Fluharty, dean of Arts and Sciences, asking to meet with students and faculty involved in the festival, though he said in the letter that he never heard back.

In effect, a member of one of Penn’s biggest donor families gave an order on how personnel at the Ivy League institution should be deployed.

A spokesperson for Lauder, 79, said he was not available to comment.

‘Not a commodity that can be bought or sold’

Penn has declined to comment on Lauder’s letter specifically, but the sentiment expressed has raised concerns on and off Penn’s campus about how much influence deep-pocketed donors should have.

"Let us be clear," wrote the tri-chairs of Penn’s Faculty Senate. "Academic freedom is an essential component of a world-class university and is not a commodity that can be bought or sold by those who seek to use their pocketbooks to shape our mission."

The chairs — political science professor Tulia Falleti, law professor Eric A. Feldman, and child development and education professor Vivian Gadsden — also warned about "individuals outside of the university who are surveilling both faculty and students in an effort to intimidate them and inhibit their academic freedom."

Risa Lieberwitz, professor of labor and employment law at Cornell University and general counsel for the American Association of University Professors, called Lauder’s demands an "extreme example of a donor interfering at a completely unacceptable level."

"This is an issue that’s long overdue for close attention," Lieberwitz said. "What’s happening now should lead to ... everybody within universities saying ‘let’s look closely at the way in which donor relations are structured and consider reforms ... to strengthen the independence of the university and the academic freedom of faculty.’"

Universities need to be independent from pressures from donors and legislators, she said.

"If donors want to support higher education, ... they should do that because they support higher education," she said.

But Michael Poliakoff, president and chief executive officer of the American Council of Trustees and Alumni, defended the donors’ actions.

"They are doing exactly what they should be doing and really calling to account their alma maters for moral and intellectual failure," he said. "These people own that money and it is their absolute right to direct it to the things that align with their moral and intellectual vision. It makes absolute sense for them to be articulating that their hearts are broken and their wallets will be shut until significant changes happen."

The Council for Advancement and Support of Education, a nonprofit that focuses on educational philanthropy, declined to comment on Penn’s situation, but pointed to its standards, which describe donors’ appropriate role.

"Donors provide funds to help a university service its vision or fulfill a specific purpose, providing capital to empower innovation and provide more access to students, ... but in giving that gift it does not ‘buy them a say’ in how the university runs," CASE says.

The standards also cite specific examples in which donors should not have influence, including faculty appointments, admissions decisions, coach selections, program priorities, and investment policies.

A reputational hit

Although Penn has received hundreds of letters from donors, alumni and others expressing concern, the actual impact on the Ivy League university’s finances is small. Scott L. Bok, chair of the board of trustees, said those expressing concern represent a minority of donors.

"We can survive this, but we don’t like what we’re going through," Bok said. "And we want to win all those donors back over time."

He also noted that "on the positive side, we have received some meaningful contributions from alumni who wanted to show solidarity at this time."

Penn said donor contributions represent only about 5% of overall operating revenue. Major revenue sources include tuition and fees, research funding, income from auxiliaries and commercialization, and investment income off Penn’s $21 billion endowment, which covers about 17% of the academic operating budget.

The bigger concern for Penn is the reputational hit delivered from within its university family. It was alumnus and Apollo Global Management CEO Marc Rowan, currently chair of Wharton’s board of advisers, who spearheaded the campaign, encouraging alumni to "close their checkbooks" until Magill and Bok stepped down.

While Penn has made clear that Magill and Bok are not leaving, Penn leaders have said they are committed to mending relationships.

Magill at a trustees meeting earlier this month said she regretted that anyone doubted her position on antisemitism — she has since released a plan to combat it — and vowed to regain the trust of alumni. And last week, Wharton dean Erika James, speaking at the Economic Club of New York, said Penn must repair relationships and address the harm to its reputation, according to Bloomberg.

Bok said he doubts the university could have done anything that would have changed the outcome. Canceling the festival "would have been contrary to decades of policy," he said. He also maintained that the school quickly condemned some festival speakers. No one could have predicted, he said, that the festival would be followed so quickly by Hamas’ attack on Israel, which further inflamed concerns.

The current Middle East crisis isn’t the only issue that has impacted philanthropyto colleges over the years. In 2021, alumni at the University of Texas-Austin threatened to pull back funding after students urged the school to change its fight song, "The Eyes of Texas," which is linked to Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee, according to Inside Higher Education. Although the university kept the song, alumni were upset the president didn’t take a stronger stance.

Closer to home, that same year, a small group of St. Joseph’s University alumni said they would withhold funds, citing the school’s "wokeism."

Donors help Penn with major initiatives

While philanthropy may be a small part of Penn’s budget, it has funded major initiatives over the years, the Lauder family’sincluded. Penn declined to release the total from the family, which has sent three generations to Penn for their education.

Last year alone, LeonardLauder, 90, — who has a net worth of $16.7 billion, according to the daily Bloomberg Billionaires Index — donated $125 million to Penn for a tuition-free program to recruit, train, and deploy nurse practitioners to work in the nation’s underserved communities.

Penn’s $121 million College House was renamed the Lauder College House in 2019 in recognition of major financial support from the Lauders. Penn didn’t say how much they gave.

In addition to founding the institute, Ronald Lauder also funded a major renovation of the building that houses it, completed in 2018. Penn did not release the amount, but the work included all four floors, an expanded lobby, and a new event and dining space, Penn said.

Not every member of the Lauder family seems as disturbed by Penn’s response as Ronald Lauder. His nephew, William Lauder, 63, executive chairman of the Lauder company and a Wharton alumnus, continues to serve on Penn’s trustee board and was seen in what appeared to be friendly talks with Magill and Bok at the trustees’ meeting this month.

He did not return an email to his office for comment.

Ronald Lauder has been more involved in politics, once running as a Republican for mayor of New York and once serving as the U.S. ambassador to Austria. He has also been deeply involved in combating antisemitism and currently serves as president of the World Jewish Congress.

ssnyder@inquirer.com

ssnyderinq

215-854-4693

Word count: 1509

Copyright Philadelphia Media Network (Newspapers) LLC Nov 12, 2023

From <https://www.proquest.com/docview/2888862013/E5101014D3D4BB5PQ/1?accountid=6749&sourcetype=Newspapers>

Snyder, S. (2023, Nov 12). Penn at center of fight over control by donors: Several contributors have tried to direct how the university operates, threatening to withhold their giving. Philadelphia Inquirer Retrieved from http://ezproxy.lapl.org/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/newspapers/penn-at-center-fight-over-control-donors/docview/2888862013/se-2

2023dec10 #lauder #penn Penn Leaders Out After Genocide Response, Alumni Pressure

Janet Lorin, Heather Perlberg and Amanda Gordon

December 10, 2023·6 min read

(Bloomberg) -- University of Pennsylvania President Liz Magill and board chair Scott Bok resigned after coming under intense pressure from alumni, donors and lawmakers amid an escalating row over antisemitism on campus.

Magill’s departure was announced in a statement by Bok on Saturday. He then issued his own message emphasizing that Magill is not the “slightest bit antisemitic” and making clear that she was exhausted by relentless external attacks when she testified before Congress on Dec. 5 in a widely criticized performance.

“Former President Liz Magill last week made a very unfortunate misstep — consistent with that of two peer university leaders sitting alongside her — after five hours of aggressive questioning before a Congressional committee,” Bok wrote. “It became clear that her position was no longer tenable, and she and I concurrently decided that it was time for her to exit.”

Magill, 58, will stay on until an interim president of the Philadelphia-based school is appointed, but Bok, also the chief executive officer of investment bank Greenhill & Co., will depart immediately.

Julie Platt, vice chair of the Penn board and board chair of the Jewish Federations of North America, will serve as interim chair until a successor is appointed.

The resignations are the highest-profile response so far to a burgeoning crisis facing US academic leaders in the aftermath of the Oct. 7 attack on Israel by Hamas. Magill and Bok have faced calls for weeks to step down, led by Apollo Management Group Inc.’s Marc Rowan, who’s also head of the board of Penn’s Wharton business school, but the demands soared following the hearing.

Read more: Wharton Rebels Ramp Up Pressure to Force Penn President to Quit

Harvard University’s Claudine Gay and Massachusetts Institute of Technology President Sally Kornbluth have also been excoriated by politicians, business leaders and alumni since they testified alongside Magill before the US House Education and the Workforce Committee on Tuesday.

The three spent hours stressing the need to balance freedom of speech while providing a safe environment for students, but failed to say outright that calling for the genocide of Jews is against school policy. Instead they offered narrow legal responses that quickly went viral on social media.

Magill later released a video to clarify her remarks, saying she should have been focused on the “irrefutable fact”’ that such a call is “some of the most terrible violence human beings can perpetrate.”

“Worn down by months of relentless external attacks, she was not herself last Tuesday,” Bok wrote. “Over prepared and over lawyered given the hostile forum and high stakes, she provided a legalistic answer to a moral question, and that was wrong. It made for a dreadful 30-second sound bite in what was more than five hours of testimony.”

The resignation was welcomed by some lawmakers including House Education and the Workforce Committee Chairwoman Virginia Foxx, who reiterated criticism of Magill’s testimony.

“President Magill had three chances to set the record straight when asked if calling for the genocide of Jews violated UPenn’s code of conduct during our hearing on antisemitism. Instead of giving a resounding yes to the question, she chose to equivocate,” Foxx said Saturday. “I welcome her departure from UPenn.”

Representative Elise Stefanik, who had called for the resignation of the three leaders, vowed to continue scrutiny of Penn and the other universities.

“These universities can anticipate a robust and comprehensive Congressional investigation of all facets of their institutions’ negligent perpetration of antisemitism including administrative, faculty, and overall leadership and governance,” Stefanik, a New York Republican, said in a statement. “Harvard and MIT, do the right thing. The world is watching.”

Magill assumed the top job at the Philadelphia school in July 2022, replacing Amy Gutmann, who became the US ambassador to Germany.

She came to Penn from the provost’s job at the University of Virginia. A scholar of constitutional law, she’s also a former dean of Stanford’s law school. Magill, who grew up in North Dakota, clerked for Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

Magill’s first controversy over antisemitism arose before the Oct. 7 attack on Israel by Hamas, which the US and European Union deem a terrorist group. In September, the school hosted a Palestinian literature festival, despite concerns expressed by donors and alumni including Ronald Lauder and Rowan that some of the speakers were antisemitic.

The university defended its decision to host the festival, which fell close to Yom Kippur, the holiest Jewish holiday.

Opposition to Magill and Bok though soared after the Hamas attack, which killed 1,200 people with hundreds more taken hostage into Gaza.

Rowan, a Wharton alum who along with his wife Carolyn has donated $50 million to the school, led a campaign to oust them. He recommended donors close their checkbooks until they stepped down and broadened his criticism to the broader culture of the school, which he said had “favored speech” and not free speech.

The campus, which has multiple buildings and schools named for Jewish donors to the university including Walter Annenberg, Ronald Perelman and Stuart Weitzman, was roiled as Israel pummeled the Gaza strip.

Groups such as Penn Against the Occupation and the Philly Palestine Coalition have led protests with chants shouted on campus including “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free,” a phrase that has been interpreted as calling for the expulsion of Jews from Israel.

Images have been projected onto Huntsman Hall and Irvine Auditorium with phrases including “Liz Magill is complicit in genocide,” and “10,000 murdered by Israeli occupation since October 7.” The health authority run by Hamas, which the US and the European Union have labeled a terrorist organization, has said more than 17,000 people have now been killed.

Alongside protests, vandalism and graffiti have also increased, including swastikas and hate speech comparing Jews to Nazis, which Magill repeatedly condemned.

Magill also lost support of some Pro-Palestinian groups, faculty and students for apparently changing her stance after donors threatened to stop giving to the school.

Rowan had allies on Wharton’s board but Magill and Bok were initially able to brush away attempts to force them out with the widespread support of the Penn board of trustees, a larger group of almost 50 people.

While there is some crossover with Wharton, such as hedge fund manager James Dinan and Blackstone Inc.’s David Blitzer, Penn’s board is drawn from a much broader cross-section of American business, politics and education.

Trustees include heirs of cosmetics company Estee Lauder, Pennsylvania Governor Shapiro and William P. Carey II, whose family donations prompted a change to the name of the law school.

That support dwindled though after the hearing, in part because of the political pressure and the threat the school could lose access to some federal funding, said two people with ties to the school, who asked not to be named as the discussions were private.

A Penn board meeting was scheduled for Sunday afternoon, with expectations that Magill and Bok would have to defend their positions amid a divided board. Instead Penn now needs to find a new leader and board chair.

“Given the opportunity to choose between right and wrong, the three university presidents testifying in the United States House of Representatives failed,” said Platt, the interim chair. “The leadership change at the university was therefore necessary and appropriate.”

(Updates with Platt statement in last paragraph.)

Most Read from Bloomberg Businessweek

From <https://news.yahoo.com/penn-leaders-genocide-response-alumni-025026216.html>