American Jews and American Muslims have a pressing moral imperative to talk to each other.

Yet even a statement as obvious as that is controversial in the current climate of fear and loathing. Self-appointed "experts" on Islam like Daniel Pipes and commentators like David Horowitz, Dennis Prager, and Michelle Malkin fill newspapers, television, and the Internet with distorted and spurious attacks on virtually every significant American Muslim leader and organization.

This sustained and highly effective media offensive has created an atmosphere in which the entire three-million-strong American Muslim community is increasingly under suspicion of supporting violence, despite myriad unequivocal statements by Muslim leaders condemning the 9/11 attacks and subsequent acts of terrorism by Islamic extremists.

A few Jewish leaders like Rabbi Eric Yoffie, president of the Union for Reform Judaism, have denounced the fearmongers and advocated building ties with mainstream Muslim organizations like the Islamic Society of North America.

Yet others, with long traditions of supporting civil liberties and civil rights, have been silent in the face of the ongoing efforts of Pipes and company to create a herem against virtually any contact with Muslim leaders — however moderate and open to dialogue they may be.

There was a decidedly different message at the first National Summit of Imams and Rabbis, held in New York on Nov. 7 under the aegis of the Foundation for Ethnic Understanding. The conclave brought together 12 imams and 12 rabbis from New York; Boston; Philadelphia; Baltimore; Dallas; Connecticut; Dearborn, Mich.; and Orange County, Calif.

All were committed to returning home and "twinning" their houses of worship. They were joined by a raft of experts on Muslim-Jewish relations who shared their experiences in nurturing ties between the communities.

The summit was cohosted by Rabbi Marc Schneier, president of the FFEU and senior rabbi of the New York Synagogue and Hampton Synagogue, and Imam Omar Abu Namous, senior imam at the Islamic Center of New York, the largest mosque in New York City. Appearing at a celebratory dinner after the event were figures like Russell Simmons, chair of the FFEU; Ronald Lauder, president of the World Jewish Congress; Sayyid M. Syeed, national director of the ISNA; and Ambassador Abdul Wahab, permanent observer of the Organization of the Islamic Conference to the United Nations.

Schneier, the driving force behind the summit, called the bluff of the opponents of dialogue by making clear he is ready to talk to any American Muslim leader who opposes terrorism and violence. Indeed, Schneier's cohost at the summit, the Palestinian-born Abu Namous, created a sensation in his first public dialogue with Schneier last year by stating he would prefer a one-state-solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict to a two-state one. Yet rather than breaking communication with Abu Namous over that incident, Schneier made clear his total disagreement with his interlocutor on the Israel-Palestine question. He then proposed that the two put aside further public discussion of the Middle East and instead focus on how American Muslims and Jews can work together on the domestic front. Abu Namous accepted that challenge, and the two began reaching out to imams and rabbis around the country to attend the national summit.

The summit also featured the participation of mainstream Jewish leaders like Rabbi Bob Kaplan, intergroup relations director of the Jewish Community Relations Council of New York, and William Rapfogel, chief executive officer of the Metropolitan Coordinating Council on Jewish Poverty. They dialogued with Muslim counterparts on how the two communities can work together fruitfully in areas like fighting poverty, helping children secure health insurance, and creating joint programs for Jewish and Muslim youths.

The willingness of Lauder, a political conservative who is hawkish on Israel, to endorse the summit will likely undercut the opponents of dialogue and move the consensus in the Jewish community in favor of increased contact with American Muslims.

Some have questioned whether a meeting of American Muslims and American Jews that avoided discussion of the Middle East can have a positive long-term impact. In fact, the summit amounted to a vital first step, which, if followed up in a timely manner, will be remembered as a win-win for both communities.

Hard-pressed American Muslim leaders feel their community is literally under siege (the day after the conference the Los Angeles Police Department came under fire for a plan to map Muslim communities). They believe the Jewish community can become a powerful ally in preventing overzealous law enforcement officials from violating the rights of innocent Muslims and causing ambitious politicians to think twice before launching demagogic attacks on the Muslim community.

American Jewish leaders are justly fearful that embittered American Muslim youth may one day launch "homegrown" terrorist attacks similar to those that have taken place in Britain and Spain. Building communication and trust with moderate Muslim leaders offers the hope of positively impacting thinking in the Muslim community and limiting the appeal of extremism.

Which scenario is better for the Jews: an American Muslim community that is demonized and isolated from the rest of America and, as a consequence, is filled with a growing number of young people desperate enough to embrace violence as their best option; or a secure Muslim community well-integrated into American society with which Jews develop cordial, mutually beneficial relations? For the safety of our children, as well as out of adherence to basic Judaic values, American Jews should embrace the tolerant and inclusive approach to American Muslims being advocated by Schneier and Lauder and reject the mean-spirited and profoundly shortsighted course spearheaded by the likes of Daniel Pipes.