In order to gain this insight it is necessary to understand not only the trials and tribulations of the episode itself, but also the historical/political setting in which it occurred.

The First Temple in Jerusalem was destroyed by Nevuchadnezar, king of Babylon in 3338. The king of Judea, Yehoyachin, was sent into exile 11 years before. With him to Babylonia traveled Mordechai (Esther 2:6). When Corash (=Cyrus, a Persian-Median successor to the Babylonian empire) authorized the rebuilding of the Temple in Jerusalem in 3390, Mordechai returned with Zerubavel, the leader of the returning exiles to Israel (Ezra 2:1-2, see also Gemara Menachot 65a). Yet, again according to Esther 2:6, Mordechai is found in Shushan, in the year 3398 (at least the sixth year of the rule of Achashverosh [Esther 2:16]).

The question is, why? What compelled Mordechai, already quite advanced in age, to return, perhaps even voluntarily, from the land of redemption to the wanderings of the Diaspora?

The answer is Jerusalem.

In the book of Ezra, the Shomronim are called the "tzarei Yehuda u'Binyamin" the Antagonists of Judah and Benjamin (Ezra 4:1). From the outset, they were clearly not pleased at the sudden return of their old neighbors. Perhaps they were growing accustomed to having the place for themselves. Perhaps they thought that the world had seen the last of the Jews. Whatever their motive, they set out to reverse the situation. Their strategy was simple: stop the building of Jerusalem, and checkmate the Jews indefinitely.

Trying to stop the building in a forcible manner was not considered simply because the building effort was officially sanctioned and promoted by the superpower empire of the day. So they sent lobbyists, armed with petitions of antagonism (against the Jews) to the then king of the Empire, King Corash. The building of Jerusalem was stopped. The Jews tried to initiate the building once again in the days of Achashverosh, a successor of Corash, the Shomronim again sent a petition to the king. Achashverosh accepted the petition and withdrew the building permit (Ezra 4:6,7 and Rashi).

The big surprise was who the author of the petitions and the lobbyist that were dispatched were. The author was Haman's son(s) and the lobbyist was Haman himself! Rashi, quoting Seder Olam Rabba (also brought in Yalkut Shimoni #1068), clearly identifies the ten sons of Haman with "the ones who wrote the attack on Judah and Jerusalem mentioned in Ezra" (Rashi, Esther 9:10).

Second, the group which authored and dispatched the petition of antagonism was known as the "tzarei [=antagonists of] Yehuda u'Binyamin". Would not then a single member of this group be called "tzorer haYehudim [=antagonist of the Jews]", or "Ish Tzar [=a man who is antagonistic] as Haman was so called (Esther 9:10, 7:6)? And who were the "Tzarim" that the Jews prepared to avenge themselves from on the thirteenth day of Adar? Can we not guess that they were the ten sons of Haman, and the scheming Shomronim?

Finally, and perhaps most compelling, is the content of the petition of antagonism itself. The petition (Ezra 4:11-16) contains two basic arguments: The Jews will be rebellious and they will not pay taxes when they build Jerusalem. These same 2 arguments feature prominently in Haman's argument against the Jews to the king: "...neither do they keep the laws of the king and it is not for the king's profit to suffer them" (Esther 3:8). Rashi (Megilla 13b) even adds that Haman contended the Jews were not paying tribute, poll tax or land tax ("misim, gilgaluyot, ve'arnonot") in parallel with these same items of alleged non-payment in the petition in Ezra (4:13). In short, both argue that the Jews don't obey the king's laws and that they cause financial damage to the king. (For further scrutiny of this matter see M. Lehman's article "A reconstruction of the Purim Story" in Tradition, vol. 12 no. 3-4.)

"[You shall be punished] as a man who is running from a lion, and meets with a bear; later, when he finally arrives at the house and leans his hand on the wall, the snake bites him."

(Amos 5:19)

"Running away from a lion" - i.e., Babylon; "He meets with a bear" - i.e., the Persian-Mede kingdom; "When he arrives at the house" - when the Bnai Yisroel started to build the walls of the Beit Hamikdash ("he leans his hand on the wall"), the wicked Haman and his son Shimshi tried to stop them ("the snake came and bit him"). That was why Mordechai the messenger went [to Shushan] to try to lobby to continue the building of the Beit Hamikdash. At the same time, Haman went to Shushan to try to permanently stop the building of the Beit Hamikdash.

(Yalkut Shimoni, Amos 545)

Mordechai and Haman were veteran sparring partners from the old country. No wonder Haman was enraged at seeing Mordechai (Esther 3:4). One can envision two Political Action Committees feverishly lobbying at opposite purposes. Two opposing camps lobbying the superpowers of their day for control of Jerusalem and the Temple Mount.

CONCLUSION

The lobbying efforts of Mordechai were to no avail. In the political arena of international diplomacy and power brokering, the Jew has no grasp. The only strategy which had effect and literally reversed the entire impending catastrophe on our adversaries was one very humbling but courageous decision made by Esther, "Go gather all the Jews of Shushan and fast with me... for three days" (Esther 4:16). Esther instituted a fast of Teshuva [=repentance]. In this manner she was admitting that it is not our enemies that must be beaten and subdued. It is *we* who must change when faced with adversity. We must commit ourselves more strongly to our father in heaven. "When Yakov's [=the Bnai Yisroel's] voice is low, the hands of Esav can overpower him. But when his voice is heard [=in prayer], the hands of Esav have no power over him!" (Midrash Breishit Rabba 65:20). If Yacov uses his voice properly, for prayer, learning and repentance, then the hands of Esav -- and those of his descendants, such as Haman -- will be subdued. Our voice will supersede.

Is the political situation not the same in our day? By now, it is well known that control over Jerusalem is the objective of the Palestinian agenda. The parallel between the Palestinians and the Shomronim runs even deeper when we note that the Palestinians, like the Shomronim of the past, are recent transplants to the region (see "From Time Immemorial" by Joan Peters).

What can the Purim precedent teach us? What skilled negotiating tactics can we learn from Mordechai? The simple answer is that we, too, must commit ourselves more strongly to our father in heaven. With this in mind, let us humbly accept this responsibility in our present struggle. Let us courageously use our "voice of Yakov," crying out to Hashem in Teshuva!