Liberalism vs Zionism
"The Declaration of the State of Israel is a schizophrenic document!"
Rabbi Meir Kahane
Most Jews are liberals, and most Jews love Israel, so most are also Zionists, even if they do not describe themselves with that word. The trouble is that it is increasingly difficult to be both, so many Jews are conflicted about developments in Israel.
Among the core principles of liberalism are:
1. There should be no legal distinctions among citizens on the basis of race, religion, or ethnicity.
2. Government policies should not be based on religious beliefs.
Before the 1967 Six Day War, in which Israel seized the West Bank (including Jerusalem), Gaza, the Golan Heights and the Sinai, there was minimal conflict between these two principles of liberalism and strong support for Israel. Major non-Jewish American liberals, such as Senator Hubert Humphrey, were staunch supporters of the Jewish state, then threatened by Egypt and Syria, both aligned with the Soviet Union. The appointment of Arthur Goldberg to represent this country at the UN by President Lyndon B Johnson in 1965 was an unmistakable sign of American solidarity with the Jewish state.
Today, only the West Bank and the Golan remain in Israeli hands. It is in the West Bank that "the rubber meets the road" in the conflict between liberal principles and Zionism. The unpleasant fact is that Israel is ruling over a hostile foreign people who want the Israelis out. Moreover, about a quarter of a million Israelis now live in the area seized from Jordan in 1967, and they show no signs of leaving.
From a liberal perspective, Principle 1 would indicate that Israel should treat Jews and Arabs equally. Indeed, Arabs living within the "Green Line" (1948 border) are citizens of Israel and some even serve in the Knesset. The trouble is that they increasingly view themselves as Arabs who happen to live in Israel, rather than Israelis who happen to be Arabs. To the extent that Israel is a Jewish state, Israeli Arabs are like "guest workers." Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman urged that Arab members of the Knesset who met with Hamas should be executed, and all Arabs in Israel should be required to swear allegiance to this country to keep their citizenship. (1) (His views have not been adopted by the Government, but he is still in the governing coalition.) Except for the Druze, Arabs are not generally accepted (let alone drafted) into the Israeli Defense Forces. Distinctions based upon ethnicity prevail in Israel, in defiance of Principle 1, as they must if Israel is to be a Jewish state at all.
Although Israel has accepted the concept of setting up a Palestinian state in the West Bank, opinion within the country remains deeply divided. For example, Effi Eitam, Prime Minister Netanyahu's special emissary to American youth, proposed that most West Bank Arabs be expelled from the territory and Israeli Arabs be "removed from the political system." (1) Neither of these things are going to happen, but it is just as unrealistic to try to absorb over a million Palestinians into Israeli society, which they hate with a passion. The only real alternative to establishing some kind of Palestinian state (even with limited sovereignty) is ruling the West Bank by force indefinitely, which is repugnant to most Israelis, most American Jews and the international community.
But this where the faith of the settlers (shared by many other Israelis) that the West Bank is part of the land promised to the Jewish people by God in the Torah crashes head-on into the practical necessity of ceding at least some of this land to Arab rule. Not all the settlers are orthodox, but most of them are, and the orthodox are the most determined to hang on to their homes. Liberal Principle 2 would impel Israel to ignore Torah in setting public policy (as many secular Israelis insist), but the fact is that orthodox power within the Israeli government has been growing. While secular Zionism is fading fast among younger Israelis (as well as among Jews in the US and Europe), the desire to settle in the Biblical Holy Land (including East Jerusalem and the West Bank) has drawn religious Jews from around the world. The trend is for religious Zionism to become the only Zionism around.
The effect of this split between orthodox and secular is also felt here in the United States: 79% of orthodox Jews under 40 feel "very close to Israel", while only 16% of non-orthodox in the same age cohort feel that way. (2) This implies that in the near future, American Zionism will also be increasingly religious Zionism, which means more solidarity with the settlers and other orthodox factions ("haredim") in Israel.
This is not your father's AIPAC.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) The Failure of the American Jewish Establishment, by Peter Beinart in the NY Review of Books, May, 2010.
(2) Survey by the American Jewish Committee in 2006, quoted in the article (1) cited above.
Rabbi Meir Kahane
Most Jews are liberals, and most Jews love Israel, so most are also Zionists, even if they do not describe themselves with that word. The trouble is that it is increasingly difficult to be both, so many Jews are conflicted about developments in Israel.
Among the core principles of liberalism are:
1. There should be no legal distinctions among citizens on the basis of race, religion, or ethnicity.
2. Government policies should not be based on religious beliefs.
Before the 1967 Six Day War, in which Israel seized the West Bank (including Jerusalem), Gaza, the Golan Heights and the Sinai, there was minimal conflict between these two principles of liberalism and strong support for Israel. Major non-Jewish American liberals, such as Senator Hubert Humphrey, were staunch supporters of the Jewish state, then threatened by Egypt and Syria, both aligned with the Soviet Union. The appointment of Arthur Goldberg to represent this country at the UN by President Lyndon B Johnson in 1965 was an unmistakable sign of American solidarity with the Jewish state.
Today, only the West Bank and the Golan remain in Israeli hands. It is in the West Bank that "the rubber meets the road" in the conflict between liberal principles and Zionism. The unpleasant fact is that Israel is ruling over a hostile foreign people who want the Israelis out. Moreover, about a quarter of a million Israelis now live in the area seized from Jordan in 1967, and they show no signs of leaving.
From a liberal perspective, Principle 1 would indicate that Israel should treat Jews and Arabs equally. Indeed, Arabs living within the "Green Line" (1948 border) are citizens of Israel and some even serve in the Knesset. The trouble is that they increasingly view themselves as Arabs who happen to live in Israel, rather than Israelis who happen to be Arabs. To the extent that Israel is a Jewish state, Israeli Arabs are like "guest workers." Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman urged that Arab members of the Knesset who met with Hamas should be executed, and all Arabs in Israel should be required to swear allegiance to this country to keep their citizenship. (1) (His views have not been adopted by the Government, but he is still in the governing coalition.) Except for the Druze, Arabs are not generally accepted (let alone drafted) into the Israeli Defense Forces. Distinctions based upon ethnicity prevail in Israel, in defiance of Principle 1, as they must if Israel is to be a Jewish state at all.
Although Israel has accepted the concept of setting up a Palestinian state in the West Bank, opinion within the country remains deeply divided. For example, Effi Eitam, Prime Minister Netanyahu's special emissary to American youth, proposed that most West Bank Arabs be expelled from the territory and Israeli Arabs be "removed from the political system." (1) Neither of these things are going to happen, but it is just as unrealistic to try to absorb over a million Palestinians into Israeli society, which they hate with a passion. The only real alternative to establishing some kind of Palestinian state (even with limited sovereignty) is ruling the West Bank by force indefinitely, which is repugnant to most Israelis, most American Jews and the international community.
But this where the faith of the settlers (shared by many other Israelis) that the West Bank is part of the land promised to the Jewish people by God in the Torah crashes head-on into the practical necessity of ceding at least some of this land to Arab rule. Not all the settlers are orthodox, but most of them are, and the orthodox are the most determined to hang on to their homes. Liberal Principle 2 would impel Israel to ignore Torah in setting public policy (as many secular Israelis insist), but the fact is that orthodox power within the Israeli government has been growing. While secular Zionism is fading fast among younger Israelis (as well as among Jews in the US and Europe), the desire to settle in the Biblical Holy Land (including East Jerusalem and the West Bank) has drawn religious Jews from around the world. The trend is for religious Zionism to become the only Zionism around.
The effect of this split between orthodox and secular is also felt here in the United States: 79% of orthodox Jews under 40 feel "very close to Israel", while only 16% of non-orthodox in the same age cohort feel that way. (2) This implies that in the near future, American Zionism will also be increasingly religious Zionism, which means more solidarity with the settlers and other orthodox factions ("haredim") in Israel.
This is not your father's AIPAC.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) The Failure of the American Jewish Establishment, by Peter Beinart in the NY Review of Books, May, 2010.
(2) Survey by the American Jewish Committee in 2006, quoted in the article (1) cited above.
Labels: Israel, liberalism, Zionism
posted by Gerald S Glazer at 10:44 AM
1 comments
