At
its birth in 1897 Zionism was a Jewish philosophy
of doom. How so? Its founding fathers were driven by the
belief that the Gentiles among whom most Jews lived in Europe
and North America could never be trusted, and that it was
only in a state of their own that Jews would be guaranteed
security and freedom from persecution.
Before
Zionism there was a Jewish philosophy of hope. It
was given concrete expression by the coming into being of
the Haskala (Enlightenment) movement of the 18th century.
The Haskala solution to the problem of anti-Semitism - the
persecution of Jews in their Eastern European (mainly Russian)
homeland - was emigration and assimilation. This, the Haskala
movement reasoned, was most likely to be the best form of
protection for Jews. The giant of anti-Semitism would never
die, but in the West he might well be encouraged to remain
asleep if Jews contributed to Western societies and demonstrated
their loyalty to the states of which they became citizens.
In other words, if Jews made the effort, they would in time
be accepted and permitted to lead fulfilling and secure
lives in the Western nations of which they became citizens.
It
is a matter of historical fact that prior to Hitler's unleashing
of the demons of anti-Semitism, most informed and thoughtful
Jews everywhere were anti-Zionists, meaning that, in addition
to their preference for the philosophy of hope, they were
opposed to Zionism and its colonial enterprise. And their
opposition was rooted in three fears.
One
was that the creation of a state for Jews would require
the doing of an injustice to another people - the Arabs
of Palestine - and would compromise the moral integrity
of Judaism. Another was that the creation of a state for
Jews in Palestine against the wishes of the entire Arab
and wider Moslem world would lead to great and possibly
unending conflict. The other and main fear was primordial
in origin. It was that the creation of a state for Jews
would provoke anti-Semitism in the mainly Gentile lands
of which the Jews were citizens. How so?
Between
1881 and 1915 about three million Jews left their Russian
homeland (the biggest mass migration in history) in search
of a more secure and better life in Western Europe and America.
They were taking the Haskala route to salvation. Experience
taught them that anti-Semitism was never far below the surface
in all the Gentile nations of which they became citizens.
That being so, and if a state for Jews was created, there
was a danger that the Gentiles of the host nations among
whom Jews lived would say something like: "We didn't
want you Jews here. Now you have a state of your own there's
no reason for you to be here. Go to your state." The
most publicly prominent "Jewish Englishman" to
put this fear into words (in a Secret memorandum to the
British Cabinet) was Edwin Samuel Montagu, Secretary of
State for India and the only Jew in Lloyd-George's wartime
coalition government. Montagu described Zionism as a "mischievous
political creed."
Also
a matter of fact, and as noted by Yehoshafat Harkabi in
his seminal book Israel's Fateful Hour, is that Zionism
- the physical return of Jews to the land of biblical Israel
by the efforts of men - was "proscribed" by Judaism.
According to one of three Talmudic oaths God required after
the Jewish state of the ancient Hebrews had ceased to exist,
there was to be no mass movement of the Jews from the
lands of the diaspora to the land of Israel. As Harkabi
put it, "the task of achieving statehood - the Redemption
- was assigned to divine providence and to the Messiah."
This law of Judaism was promulgated to prevent Jews taking
an initiative of the kind Zionism eventually took.
More
than 30 years before Hitler came to power, Zionism's founding
fathers decided that waiting for the Messiah to come was
not an option. In effect Zionism was to be the Messiah.
It
can be said without fear of contradiction that Zionism would
not have commanded sufficient Jewish support to achieve
its aims but for the obscenity of the Nazi holocaust. It
gave Zionism, for a while, the appearance of being right.
But it did much more than that. The slaughter of six million
Jews also closed down mainstream debate about the wisdom
or folly of Zionism's enterprise throughout the whole of
the Judeo-Christian world.
Because
the Nazi holocaust was a Gentile crime, there was nothing
any decent Gentile in publishing, the media in general and
politics feared more than being accused of anti-Semitism.
Zionism played on this fear by asserting that criticism
of its child, Israel (a unilaterally declared state for
some Jews but claiming to be the state of all Jews), was
by definition a manifestation of anti-Semitism - i.e. an
attack on all Jews everywhere. This was, as it still is,
propaganda nonsense, but it worked wonderfully well for
Zionism. I mean that out of fear of being falsely accused
of anti-Semitism, mainstream publishers, most media people
and virtually all in public life shied away from truth-telling
about Zionism and its contribution to catastrophe in-the-making.
It
was to force the re-opening of informed and honest debate
closed down by the Nazi holocaust that I spent more than
five years of my life researching and writing Zionism:
The Real Enemy of the Jews.
The
underlying thesis of the book is that because of the settlement
facts American support for Zionism right or wrong has allowed
to be created on the ground, in defiance of UN resolutions
and international law, it's now too late for any
U.S. administration to call and hold nuclear-armed Israel
to account; and that only the Jews of the diaspora have
the influence to do it - cause Israel to change its
ways and make peace on terms which almost all Palestinians
and Arabs everywhere can accept. But…
I
also say that it's unreasonable and unrealistic to expect
the Jews of the diaspora to play their necessary part in
bringing Israel to heel and averting a Clash of Civilisations
(Judeo-Christian v Islamic), unless and until they receive
the maximum possible in the way of reassurance about their
security in the lands of the mainly Gentile world of which
they are citizens. What, really, do I mean?
Though
I am myself a goy (non-Jew), I know that deep down
almost every diaspora Jew lives with the unspeakable fear
of Holocaust II (shorthand for another great turning against
Jews) and thus the perceived need, if only in the sub-consciousness,
for Israel as an insurance policy - the refuge of last resort.
And this is one of three related reasons why only a very
few diaspora Jews are prepared even to criticise Israel's
behaviour, let alone engage in activities to cause Israel
to be serious about peace based on an acceptable minimum
of justice for the Palestinians. Though they will never
say so in public, the vast majority of diaspora Jews, because
of the past, are too frightened to do or even say anything
which they think would be interpreted as antipathy to Israel
and could have the effect of undermining the wellbeing of
Israel as the refuge of last resort for all Jews. The second
reason for the silence of so many diaspora Jews on the matter
of Israel's behaviour is the fear that if they speak out
and appear to be divided, they will encourage anti-Semitism.
The third reason is fear of the reactions of fellow Jews.
So
what if anything can be done to encourage diaspora Jews
to play their necessary part in calling and holding Israel
to account?
In
my Epilogue, The Jews as the Light Unto Nations,
I call for a New Covenant, not between the Jews and their
God but between the Jews and the Gentiles.
The
New Covenant I propose is a deal between the two parties
- the Gentiles who are the majority in the many lands of
which most diaspora Jews are citizens and those Jewish citizens
(Jewish Englishmen, Jewish Frenchmen, Jewish Germans, Jewish
Americans and so on). And the essence of the deal is this.
In return for diaspora Jews using their influence to cause
Israel to be serious about peace on terms the overwhelming
majority of Palestinians and all Arabs can accept, and actually
accepted a long time ago, the Gentiles commit to destroying
the monster of anti-Semitism. (I write that it will not
be enough for us Gentiles to put the re-awakened sleeping
giant back to sleep, and that we must drive a stake into
the monster's heart, to kill it for all time).
What,
actually, is required of diaspora Jews in terms of their
New Covenant obligations?
They
must begin by recognising modern Israel for what it is -
a Zionist state, not a Jewish state. If it was a
Jewish state - i.e. one governed in accordance with the
moral principles of Judaism - Israel could not have behaved
in the way it has since its unilateral declaration of independence
in 1948; behaviour which can be described, objectively,
as (at times) brutal and cruel, driven by self-righteousness
of a most extraordinary kind, with contempt for UN resolutions,
without regard for international law and which, all up,
makes a mockery of the moral principles of Judaism.
Thereafter
the main New Covenant obligation for diaspora Jews would
be to make common cause with the forces of reason in Israel
for the purpose of changing it from a Zionist state into
a Jewish state.
Why
should diaspora Jews commit themselves to such action?
Part
of one answer is to be found in Israel's Fateful Hour.
When the English edition of it was published in 1988, Harkabi
was properly described as having been "Israel's foremost
authority on the Arab-Israeli conflict." (He was Israel's
longest serving Director of Military Intelligence). He wrote:
Israel
is the criterion according to which all Jews will tend to
be judged. Israel as a Jewish state is an example of the
Jewish character, which finds free and concentrated expression
within it. Anti-Semitism has deep and historical roots.
Nevertheless, any flaw in Israeli conduct, which is initially
cited as anti-Israelism, is likely to be transformed into
an empirical proof of the validity of anti-Semitism….
It would be a tragic irony if the Jewish state, which
was intended to solve the problem of anti-Semitism, was
to become a factor in the rise of anti-Semitism. Israelis
must be aware that the price of their misconduct is paid
not only by them but also Jews throughout the world. In
the struggle against anti-Semitism, the front line begins
in Israel. (Emphasis added).
The
other part of one answer, confirmed by events since Harkabi
wrote those words, is that the Zionist state's behaviour
- its arrogance of power - has become a factor in the rise
of anti-Semitism: in my view the prime factor.
The
other answer is that provided by a very remarkable and most
courageous Jewish lady, Cecile Surasky, director of Jewish
Voices for Peace. An article by her for The Jordan Times
under the headline SPEAKING OUT ABOUT ISRAEL TO SAVE THE
JEWISH SOUL included the following.
Remaining
silent is no longer an option. We can no longer let our
trauma, our deep fear of anti-Jewish hatred implanted in
us through generations of persecution, make us quiet at
the expense of truth. Our continued silence perpetuates
the fiction that all Jews are of one mind when it comes
to Israel - that we think it can do no wrong; that we believe
the Israeli government is innocent of war crimes… Our
silence puts us in more danger, not less. Through it we
give our consent not only to the obliteration of the Palestinian
people, but to the end of our own people. If not our bodies,
then certainly our spirit… The truth is that if we
don't "come out" about Israel now - speaking openly
and clearly about our heartache and outrage, about the injustice
we see, the unspeakable wrongness of Israel's pursuit of
land over peace - then in the future there will not be a
Jewish tradition left to defend… And Jews like me have
to ask: If we can no longer stand up for moral courage and
call injustice when we see it, regardless of who commits
it, then what do we stand for?
In
the Epilogue of my forthcoming book I offer the following
concluding observation of my own.
If
the Jews of the diaspora can summon up the will and the
courage to make common cause with the forces of reason in
Israel before it is too late for us all, a very great prize
awaits them. By demonstrating that right can triumph
over might, and that there is a place for morality in politics,
they would become the light unto nations. It is a prize
available to no other people on earth because of the uniqueness
of the suffering of the Jews. Perhaps that is the real point
of the idea of the Jews as Chosen People… Chosen
to endure unique suffering and, having endured it, to show
the rest of us that creating a better and more just world
is not a mission impossible.
© Alan Hart for use by arrangement with him. To request
permission click
here
