![remo conference remo conference](https://www.theiaconference.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Remo_Main_Conference-1024x711.png)
![remo conference remo conference](https://s3.amazonaws.com/cdn.freshdesk.com/data/helpdesk/attachments/production/63005005953/original/scEaohnCZgx6GcvFPxzZsf7uCZN1iuv7Dg.png)
From the clash of arguments truth may emerge but the advocate is not primarily concerned with arriving at the truth. The writer who sets forth a version of events designed to convince an invisible judge and jury of the rightness of his client’s cause is also an advocate, whether his client be a party, a nation, a class, a church, or a continent. Advocacy is not confined to courts of law. The advocate follows an honorable calling, at least when his character is clear and undisguised. My mentor, the late Bernard Lewis, described the difference:
![remo conference remo conference](https://www.mum-conf.org/2020/images/venue.png)
I am a historian, seeking to establish the truth about the past. He is an advocate, a legal scholar making a case for a present purpose. I’d just add that while Kontorovich and I share a lot of commitments, we have two very different vocations. Over at Mosaic, you can now read his response to me, and my rejoinder to him. Legal scholar Eugene Kontorovich decided to take up the challenge. I showed why, in the past, the Zionist movement, and later Israel, never entertained this interpretation, for good reason. Some people were claiming that San Remo, an event unknown to many Israelis and supporters of Israel, not only laid the legal foundation for Israel, but even pre-authorized Israel’s extension of its sovereignty over the Land of Israel up to the mandate borders. Readers will remember that back in December, I wrote an essay arguing that the hype around the centenary of the San Remo conference of 1920 was overblown and unjustified.