-------------------------------------------------------------
The Religious Right and Israel: A Relationship That Cannot Hold"
by S.R. Shearer Antipas Ministries
December 30, 2000
"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act."
-
George Orwell
SCHIZOPHRENIA IN THE JEWISH COMMUNITY (PART IV)
"And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two
hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.
"These are the two olive trees, and the two candlesticks standing before the God of
the earth. (Rev. 11:3-4)
[This is the fourth in a series of articles dealing with the fighting in the Middle East;
the first article, Part I, dealt with the question of who the REAL enemy of Israel is in
the Middle East, which is to say, the United States. Part II dealt with the
Scriptural basis for Israel in God's "Plan and Purpose in the Ages" -
espec-ially as it relates to the fighting that is currently raging in the Holy Land
over the question of Jerusalem. Part III dealt with the unavoidable rupture that will
ultimately and inevitably occur between the Religious Right (on the one hand), and Israel
and the Jewish people (on the other hand). This article, Part IV, deals with the a
new kind of schizophrenia that has developed in Jewish society, not only in Israel, but in
the world-wide Jewish community - and what it all means insofar as "God's Plan and
Purpose in the Ages" is concerned.]
"Behold, I will make Jerusalem a cup of trembling unto all the people round about,
... And in that day will I make Jerusalem a burdensome stone for all people: all
that burden themselves with it shall be cut in pieces, though all the people of the earth
be gathered together against it." (Zech. 12:2-3)
INTRODUCTION
In our last article, "The Religious Right and Israel: A Relationship That Cannot
Hold" (Part III in our series on the fighting in the Middle East), we spoke of the
great social and CULTURAL chasm that has developed in the United States between the Left
and the Right, and the impact all this is having on Israel. But what most American
evangelicals do not know - or if they do "know," they do not comprehend - is
that this same phenomenon is occurring in Israel as well, a phenomenon which, like its
counterpart in the United States, is cleaving Israeli society right down the middle. All
this, of course, is having a very intense effect not just on Israel, but also on the
entire world-wide Jewish community - an effect which is impacting Jews in a very PROFOUND
and FUNDAMENTAL fashion. And how is that? - it is driving Jews everywhere (both in Israel
and elsewhere in the world) back to their own "Jewishness" and forcing them to
confront what it means to be a "Jew."
BACKGROUND
Let's back up a little and see. We begin by reviewing what's happening in the United
States. You will be shocked as to how similar the processes that are at work in the
United States are to those that are at work in Israel - except that in the one instance
(Israel's), God means it for good, while in the other instance (the United States), it is
perverting evangelicalism and turning the church into nothing more than a spiritually
pathetic instrument of the state. [Again, please see our last article, "The Religious
Right and Israel: A Relationship That Cannot Hold."]
In our previous essay, we reported that there is a high-intensity legal and political
battle raging in the United States between the cultural Left and the cultural Right that
may very well engulf all Americans by the time it is finished. It has been going on
now for several decades in front of abortion clinics, gay bath houses in San Francisco,
Los Angeles, and New York, in academia, etc., and from time to time it has even broken out
into violence and bloodshed in such divers, out-of-the-way places as Ruby Ridge in Idaho;
Mount Carmel near Waco, Texas; and the Federal Office Building in Oklahoma City.
It's a "grassroots" war that is being driven on both sides by "TRUE
BELIEVERS" who very much understand that when it is finished ONLY ONE SIDE WILL BE
LEFT STANDING. As far as each side is concerned, it is a conflict between the "FORCES
OF LIGHT" and the "FORCES OF DARKNESS." As a result, there is no middle
ground; no room for compromise - EACH SIDE IS PUSHING FOR TOTAL VICTORY!
Scholars who have studied the differences that divide the two sides report that much of
these differences can be attributed to each sides' differing concepts of the state.
The Left in the United States [essentially, the Jewish community, labor activists,
feminists, white liberals, gays and lesbians, black activists, Latino activists, the
"Hollywood set," the "arts community," etc. (i.e., those who are
"outsiders" insofar as the "majority culture" is concerned)]
subscribes to a UNIVERSALIST concept of the state which holds that ALL inhabitants within
the geographic boundaries of any given state - regardless of race, religion, or ethnic
affinity - are citizens thereof; that is to say, that citizenship in a state has very
little to do with a common heritage or a common set of values, and everything to do with
geography (i.e., the fact that people occupy a common geographic area). Thus, the
kind of state the Left subscribes to is one which is multi-ethnic and multi-cultural wher!
e "flag-waving," nationalism, and patriotism (as it has been commonly understood
in the West, or for that matter, most anywhere else) has very little place. Indeed, words
like "patriotism" and "nationalism" lie pretty much outside the Left's
lexicon - and it is important to note in this connection that it is precisely this concept
of the state that the Jews of the Diaspora (i.e., those Jews living outside the nation of
Israel, and most particularly, liberal Jews living in the United States) subscribe to
(more about this later).
The Right, on the other hand, subscribes to a wholly different concept of the state - a
concept which places much more value on a common ethnicity, a common heritage, a common
set of values, and where kinship, religion, nationalism, and "patriotism" play
much more prominent roles in the life of the nation than they do in the
"universalist" state of the Left. It's here - in the Right's world-view -
that concepts like "patriotism" and "nationalism" find their home, and
where "flag waving" is part of the "game" - and contrary to, and in
almost total juxtaposition to the Jews of the Diaspora, this is the concept of the state
that the majority of Jews in Israel (at least "observant" Jews and those that
form the opposition to Ehud Barak's present left-wing government in Israel, i.e., the
Likud, etc.) subscribe to (more about this later).
THE CIVIC NATION vs. THE ETHNIC NATION
Expanding on all this, Paul Hockenos, in his book Free to Hate: the Rise of the Right in
Post-Communist Eastern Europe, writes:
ÒIn the lively academic discourse that has grown around nationalism, scholars distinguish
two general concepts of the nation: (1) the civic or democratic (i.e., the
"universalist" state of the Left), and (2) the ethnic (i.e., the
"nationalist" state of the Right). The civic def-inition (i.e., the Left's
definition), with its roots in the French Revolution, uses ÒnationÓ to refer to a body
of citizens whose collective sovereignty constitutes a state ... referring to all of the
people who live within a state, regardless of their ethnicity, language, (religion), or
other characteristics ...
ÒThe ethnic nation (i.e., the Right's definition), on the other hand, is a ... community
bound (together) not by a common ... border (so much) ... as by descent, language, customs
... history ... (and RELIGION) ... Rights and privileges are acquired by birth into the
ethnic nation (and/or by the acceptance of the culture and religion of the majority group
by the "outsider"), and not upon citizenship [based on birth within a given
geographic boundary; for example, in Germany - even today - being born within the borders
of the German state does not automatically confer German citizenship on a person (as it
would in the United States). One must also possess a blood relationship to the
German people through either one's birth mother or one's birth father. The same is
true for most other European states]. For ethnic nationalists, the (ethnic) nation
is a natural unit ... (and) ... each nation has its own unique, mystical destiny towards
which it aspires, and which other nations !
impede at the cost of war ..."
Moreover, in connection with this - and contrary to a lot of what one hears in academia
today - it's not the idea of the "civic nation" or "universalist"
state that is the most widely accepted definition of nationhood in the world today, but
the description of the "ethnic nation" or the "nationalist" state that
is the most widespread. For example, that's what Israel is today - an ethnic state; a
state, the citizenship of which is based on membership in the Jewish "race" and
the Jewish religion. There are exceptions, of course, but for the most part, that is
what being an Israeli is all about! - and not just Israel, but Germany (i.e.,
"Germany for the Germans"), Russia (i.e., "Russia for the Russians"),
the Japanese (i.e., "Japan for the Japanese"), China (i.e., "China for the
Chinese"), ad nauseum. ETHNICITY COUNTS IN THIS WORLD - AND THAT'S THE FACT OF
THE MATTER!
Hockenos then makes a very profound and exceedingly insightful observation - one which has
very crucial and acute consequences for the cultural war (Kultur Kampf) that is being
waged right now between the Left and the Right in both the United States and Israel; he
says:
ÒTHE ETHNIC NATION IS AT ODDS WITH THE PREMISES OF ... (THE CIVIC) NATION ... AND
PRESENTS A ... RECIPE FOR CONFLICT IN THE COMBUSTIBLE (WORLD OF TODAY) ...
In other words, when a large or influential segment of a country's population subscribes
to one of these concepts (for example, the Left's concept of a "universalist"
state), and another equally large or influential segment subscribes to the other view (for
example, the Right's concept of an "ethnic" state), a cultural explosion will be
the inevitable result - and that is precisely what the fighting in the United States
between the Left and the Right is all about: the definition of "nationhood" and
the fundamental understanding of what the state is all about. But more, THIS IS ALSO
EXACTLY WHAT THE SPARRING BETWEEN THE LEFT (i.e., the "party of peace" in Israel
which is centered around Barak) AND THE RIGHT (i.e., the "hard-liners" which are
centered around Benjamin (Bibi) Netanyahu and Ariel Sharon) IN ISRAEL IS ALL ABOUT TOO.
THE FISSURE THAT'S BEEN CREATED IN
THE WORLD-WIDE JEWISH COMMUNITY
The split in Israeli society over this issue (i.e., the definition of
"nationhood") is particularly acute because it illuminates the growing fissure
between those Jews who live in Israel as opposed to those who continue to reside in the
Diaspora (again, those Jews who live outside Israel, and most particularly, those who
reside in the United States). The very real fact of the matter is, the
"political" and "life" strategies for those who live in Israel and who
want to see Israel continue to exist as a "Jewish state" must - OF NECESSITY -
be diametrically opposed to the "political" and "life" strategies of
those Jews who continue for one reason or another to reside in the Diaspora.
In the Diaspora, the Jews are "Outsiders" looking in; in Israel, however, Jews
are the "Insiders" who in a very real sense occupy a position analogous to the
position white, Anglo-Saxon Christians occupy in this country: they are "The
Establishment," the "Insiders" who enjoy the "inside track"
socially and politically and have things pretty much their own way.
To many Jews, however, this rather new and somewhat novel turn of events has been very
disturbing and troubling. It runs counter to everything they have worked for in the
so-called "Christian West" for almost 250 years since the French Revolution: the
creation of a concept of "citizenship" where "race" and
"ethnicity" play little or no part, and where Jews can be granted
"full-citizenship" rights alongside Christians while not at the same time being
forced to "convert."
Indeed, so successful have the Jews of the Diaspora been in pushing this concept of
citizenship in the West, and especially in the United States, that Benjamin Ginsberg, a
Jewish political scientist, can write:
"... (Christian) religious symbols and (Christian) forms of expression that Jews find
threatening have been almost completely eliminated from schools and other public
institutions (in the United States). Suits brought by the ACLU, an organization
whose leadership and membership are predominantly Jewish, secured federal court decisions
banning officially sanctioned prayers in the public schools and creches and other
(Christian) religious displays in parks and public buildings." [Please see
Benjamin Ginsberg, The Fatal Embrace (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993)]
THE PATHOLOGY JEWS UNLEASHED AGAINST CHRISTIANS
IN THE U.S. IS NOW WORKING AGAINST THEM IN ISRAEL
However, in employing the strategy Ginsberg describes above insofar as the U.S. is
concerned, Jews may have painted themselves into a corner in Israel insofar as public
opinion in the world at large is concerned - a corner that they may find there is no way
out for them on any kind of philosophical (or "public relations") basis.
Why? - because, as the saying goes, "What is good for the goose is also good
for the gander." In other words, how can the Jews argue with a straight face
that multi-culturalism is okay for them as a minority in the United States, but not okay
for "minority" Palestinians in Israel? Why is it WRONG to make Christianity and
"euro-centraism" the philosophical basis around which the institutions of
America are arranged, but it's RIGHT to make Judaism and the Jewish "race"
(i.e., "ethnicity") the basis around which the institutions of Israel are
arranged? Why are "religion" and "ethnicity" wrong for the
United States, but right for Israel?
The Jews in America, of course, would retort that they are not "anti-Christian,"
and that their sole aim in helping to create a multi-cultural society in the United States
has been merely to provide an atmosphere in which they and other minorities (like the
blacks, the Latinos, gays and lesbians, etc.) can also FULLY participate in the affairs of
the state; that the civilization in the United States remains for all practical purposes a
ÒChristianÓ civilization if only because the great majority of those living in the
United States remain Christian; that all they have aimed at is the removal of the
civilizationÕs Òrough edges.Ó BUT THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT THE PALESTINIANS ARE SAYING TO
JEWS IN ISRAEL! - and it appears to most "outsiders" to be pretty hypocritical
for Jews to argue otherwise.
INCONSISTENCIES: PEOPLE
NOTICE THESE KINDS OF THINGS
Jews of the Diaspora, as well as countless numbers of Jews in Israel, are left reeling at
the implications of all this. AND MAKE NO MISTAKE ABOUT IT! - CHRISTIANS EVERYWHERE, MANY
OF WHOM ARE NOT AT ALL FRIENDLY TO THE JEWS AND THE STATE OF ISRAEL - HAVE RECOGNIZED THE
INCONSISTENCY HERE AND HAVE TAKEN NOTE OF THAT FACT, and are, as a result, making use of
this inconsistency to undermine Jewish opposition to their efforts to create
("re-create") a Christian society in the United States. [Again, please see
our last newsletter, "The Religious Right and Israel; A Relationship That Cannot
Hold."]
And not only that, but Palestinians and Arabs (as well as Islamists everywhere) have also
noticed what's occurring, and are likewise using this inconsistency against the Jews -
that is to say, they (i.e., the Arabs and the Palestinians) are beginning to employ the
same strategy against Israel that the Jews of the Diaspora employed against Christians in
the West by urging the creation of an Israel where "religion" and
"race" count for little or nothing - the kind of "secularized" state
that the Jews in the United States have pushed; the kind of state where Judaism would be
reduced to the same status that Christianity in this country has been reduced to; in other
words, the creation of a religiously "neutral" Israel. After all, say the
Arabs, what's the difference in this instance between what they (i.e., the Palestinians)
are urging on Israel as opposed to what Jews in the Diaspora have urged on the United
States and the other nations of the West.
The fact is, today in Israel religion and racial ethnicity are the means through which
"Outsiders" are differentiated from "Insiders." They are the
means through which Israel seeks to maintain Israel as a "Jewish state" - a
homeland to Jews seeking to flee persecution elsewhere in the world. Liberal Jews -
especially those Jews clustered around Barak's peace coalition - seek to minimize this
fact. But there it is! - and to deny the fact that today in Israel members of the
Jewish religion and the Jewish "race" are very obviously given an
"insider" track to those who are not Jews by birth and / or religion is to deny
reality itself - and all this despite the fact that some small concession with regard to
citizenship has been made in the direction of those Arabs who refused to "cut and
run" during and after Israel's War of Independence.
AMERICA'S OIL ELITES SEIZE UPON THESE
INCONSISTENCIES AND USE THEM AGAINST THE JEWS
The inconsistency between what the Jewish community is pushing in the United States and
what it is pushing in Israel is so glaring that one would have to be blind not to see it -
AND IT IS EXACTLY UPON THIS INCONSISTENCY THAT ISRAEL'S GREATEST ENEMY - THE OIL ELITES IN
THE UNITED STATES - HAVE POUNCED ON TO "NEUTRALIZE" THE JEWISH CHARACTER OF
ISRAEL AND NULLIFY IT AS A HOMELAND FOR THE JEWS.
And, again, why is it exactly that America's oil elites are so anti-Israeli? Well, it's
not necessarily because the oil elites are anti-Semitic on any kind of philosophical or
religious basis (the elites are empty of all such thoughts). It has do with MONEY!
Specifically, OIL! The Arabs have it and the Jews don't - and, as we
indicated in the first article of this series, "The Real Enemy of Israel; It's Not
Who You Think," if one is going to pump oil out of a region whose inhabitants despise
the Jews, some consideration to the passions of the region must be displayed if one
doesn't want his project to go up in flames.
The fact is, to deny that the oil companies are anti-Zionist (if not anti-Semitic) is
tantamount to looking at the color black and calling it white. And, furthermore, to
say that the oil elites don't call the shots insofar as American foreign policy in the
Middle East is concerned is absolute nonsense. [Please see Joseph Churba, The Washington
Compromise, 1995; please also see our first newsletter in this series, "The Real
Enemy of Israel; It's Not Who You Think."]
It is precisely these oil elites who have seized upon the inconsistency between what the
Jews advocate in the United States (i.e., multi-culturalism and a religiously and racially
neutral state) and what they are advocating in Israel (a state, the basis of which is
"race" and "religion"), and are using this inconsistency as a
battering ram to push "secularization" on the Jewish state.
THE AMERICAN ELITES ARE MORE THAN COGNIZANT OF THE FACT THAT NO ACCOMMODATION WITH ISRAEL
OVER JERUSALEM AND THE OTHER "HOLY SITES" IS POSSIBLE WITH A JEWISH STATE WHERE
RELIGION PLAYS AN IMPORTANT ROLE IN THE CULTURE OF THE PEOPLE. The fact is, as far
as the oil elites are concerned, if there is ever to be the kind of peace in the Middle
East that would leave them free to pump oil (and make money) without the fear of seeing
their investment go up in flames in a war between the Jews and the Arabs, then the
Israelis must be made to accede to the demands of the Arabs over the issues of Jerusalem,
the "Holy Sites," etc.
To this end, elites in both Republican and Democratic administrations in the United States
- supported under the table by "Big Oil" - have in recent years supported Labor
governments (which are much more open to "secularization" as a policy than are
Likud governments), even to the point of interfering in Israeli elections to a degree that
would be considered utterly illegal in this country - i.e., sending millions and millions
of dollars to Israel in order to ensure a Labor victory over the more hawkish Likud; and
even sending American experts at "voter manipulation" like James Carville to
Israel in order to doubly guarantee a Labor win.
And not only that, they have managed to secure a great deal of support for this policy
from liberal American Jews, to wit: Stanley Greenberg, Philip Gould, Robert Shrum,
etc. (as well as almost the entire leadership of Reform Judaism in this country), all of
whom joined Carville in helping Barak defeat Netanyahu and the Likud by assisting him in
the development of a well-honed election campaign, and funneling liberal Jewish (i.e.,
"Diasporic") money to the Barak forces.
Barak, of course, won by a landslide: 56 percent for Labor to the Likud's 44 percent - but
in this connection, it is important to note that insofar as the Jewish vote itself was
concerned, Barak lost: 44 percent to the Likud's 56 percent. In other words, the key
to Barak's (and the "peace coalition's) victory was the support of
"Israeli-Arabs." [More about this later.]
THE MULTI-CULTURAL PROCESS: STRIPPING
"RELIGION" AND "ETHNICITY" FROM THE PUBLIC FORUM
All of these people - Carville, Greenberg, Gould, Shrum, etc. - have been intimately
involved in pushing liberal political agendas in the United States aimed at the creation
of a multi-cultural society stripped of its religious and/or ethnic content. Moreover, all
of them are adept in creating "outsider" alliances (in the case of the U.S.,
blacks, Latinos, gay and lesbians, feminists, etc.; in the case of Israel,
"Arab-Israelis," secularized Jews, and so forth) aimed at neutralizing
"insider" blocs (i.e., those people who belong to majority religious and racial
groupings). And one needs to be clear here, this is no haphazard process that Greenberg,
et al have been involved in, in the United States or that they are pushing in Israel - it
is one which is carefully crafted and which contains its own inner dynamic and rationale.
The process has been described in detail by liberal guru Joseph Raz (a Jew). Raz
describes it as a three-staged process. Raz calls the first stage ÒToleration.Ó
He writes,
ÒIt consists in letting minorities conduct themselves as they wish without being
criminalized, so long as they do not interfere with the culture of the majority. To
a considerable degree this means restriction of the use of public spaces and public media
by the minority. It also usually means that all its activities are to be financed
out of the resources of the minority community itself - in addition to its contribution
through taxation to the maintenance of the general culture.Ó [This is pretty much
where Israel's "minority culture" (represented narrowly by
"Israeli-Arabs," and perhaps on a larger scale by Palestinians in both the West
Band and the Gaza strip under the control of the Palestine Authority) is at present.]
Raz continues,
ÒToleration is eventually supplemented ... by a second liberal policy toward minorities -
one based on the assertion of an individual right against discrimination on national,
racial, ethnic, or religious grounds ... Nondiscrimination rights go well beyond
toleration. They have far-reaching consequences that affect the way the majority
community leads its own life. Most obviously, it is no longer free to exclude
members of the minority from its schools, places of employment, residential neighborhoods,
and so on ... Under a regime of scrupulous nondiscrimination a countryÕs public services,
its educational system, and its economic and political arenas are no longer the preserve
of the majority, but common to all its members as individuals.Ó
Finally, the third step is reached: the affirmation of "multi-culturalism" and
"diversity." Raz writes,
ÒMulti-culturalism emphasizes the importance to political action of two evaluative
judgments. First, the belief that individual freedom and prosperity depends on full
and unimpeded membership in a respected and flourishing cultural group. Second, a
belief in value pluralism, and in particular in the validity of the diverse values
embodied in the practices of different societies. Given those beliefs,
multi-culturalism requires a political society to recognize the EQUAL STANDING of all the
stable and viable cultural communities existing in that society. This implies the
need for multi-cultural political societies to reconceive themselves. There is no
room for talk of a minority problem or of a majority tolerating the minorities. A
political society, a state, consists - if it is multi-cultural - of diverse communities
and belongs to none of them.Ó
BARAK'S "ARAB-ISRAELI" BASE
It's towards this last stage of multi-culturalism that the Left is pushing in Israel.
Most on the Left in Israel would, of course, deny that this is what they are
pushing towards. Barak certainly would. But stop and think about it for a
minute! - where else does he think that the process he is currently engaged in is
ultimately heading? Consider just for a minute the dynamic that is driving him!
The "hard-core" of Barak's "peace coalition" is made up of
"Israeli-Arabs" - about 17 percent of the population. Think about it: 17
percent of the population! That's one-third of the necessary votes Barak needs to
form a government. And all these people - ALL OF THEM - are committed to a
religiously neutral state!
What this means is, starting with the implicit guarantee of 17 percent of the vote, Barak
needs to garner the support of only about 40 percent of the Jewish vote in Israel to
maintain the viability of his program. Put another way, that means that Sharon and
Netanyahu must secure the vote of at least 61 percent of the Jewish inhabitants of Israel
in order to stop Barak - something which, no doubt, is NOT an easy thing to do given the
long-standing and relatively widespread support in Israel for the Left; after all, most of
Israel's "founding fathers" come out of the "Labor tradition."
You say, this is crazy! How could this be? - an Israel shorn of its Jewish
heritage? Certainly no responsible Jewish leader could support such a program - but that's
precisely what the Deputy Speaker of the Israeli Knesset seemed to be favoring when she
declared herself last Summer to be in favor of a "SECULAR REVOLUTION" which
would make Israel a "secular state" like "all the other nations of !
the West," and one which, presumably, would give Islam the same rights in the Jewish
state that Judaism alone holds today.
The "hard core" of "Israeli-Jews" and "Israeli-Arabs" that
make up the center of Barak's present-day "peace coalition" is made up of
secularized Hebrew activists steeped in Israel's socialist-labor tradition, together with
a large group of "Arab-Israelis." It first surfaced at Hebrew University
as a mixed group of Jews and Arab students opposed to Israel's incursion into Lebanon
during the Lebanon Crisis of the early 1980s.
The group is dedicated to the coexistence of both Arabs and Jews in Israel - and by
coexistence, the peace coalition does not mean a coexistence based on a partnership
between unequals, but a coexistence between equals where citizenship in Israel would show
no favor between Jew and Arab. In other words, it is dedicated to a
"secularized" Jewish state. Not everyone, of course, who supports the
peace process is dedicated to "secularization, or has really thought through the
implications of such a process, but the "hard core" of the "peace
coalition" knows precisely where it is headed. But even here, it is doubtful
that most of them (at least the Jews if not the "Israeli-Arabs") have realized
that "secularization" would be nothing more than a short stop towards
"Islamization" - they don't want to think about such things! It's simply
too painful for them to do so.
The coalition received its first real spurt of growth after Menachem Begin declared his
invasion of Lebanon a failure and pulled his forces out of most of Lebanon. Israel's
Lebanon failure added to the pressure among countless numbers of secularized Jews that
"peace needed to be given a chance." The beginning of the Intifada in 1988
simply added fuel to the fire and to the conviction that "peace had to be given a
chance." This kind of thinking led eventually to the Oslo Accords - a process that
put off most of the hard decisions regarding peace (i.e., the status of Jerusalem and the
"Holy Sites") to the end of the process.
Those who were behind the process on the Israeli side - i.e., the American government
[acting as the agency of the American oil elites (and which provided the financing and
"coalition-building" techniques that Rabin, Peres and now Barak have employed so
successfully against the Likud)], the "hard core" of Israel's secularized Jewish
community, and finally Israel's Arab citizens - hoped that by the time decisions would
have to be made over the status of Jerusalem, etc., the momentum towards
"secularization" and a religiously neutral Israeli state would be so great that
it would be impossible for people like Netanyahu and Sharon to stop it.
DUMPING JEWISH SYMBOLS
And just how far down the path of "secularization" have the Israeli
"peackniks" been able to take the Jewish people. Much further than most
people realize.
There is already a good deal of talk in Barak's "peace coalition" (at least in
the Arab portion of that coalition) that the very symbols of the Jewish state should be
changed. For example, many "Israeli-Arabs" already are saying that Israel
should change its flag and national anthem to reflect the reality that one million of its
citizens are Arabs. Some have suggested adding a crescent moon to the flag next to
the Star of David, or replacing the Hatikva (Israel's national anthem) - with its lyrics
about a "Jewish soul." To this end, "Arab-Israeli" Knesset
members recently presented two bills in the space of a few days, one denying Israel's
definition as a Jewish state, the other repealing the Law of Return.
"Arab-Israelis" say that the definition of Israel should be changed to
"the state of the Jews and all its citizens." "Israeli-Arabs"
describe the two bills as trial balloons that will set the discourse of
"Israeli-Arab" politics and prepare the Jewish public for inevit!
able future changes - i.e., the creation of a "secularized" state.
So far has this kind of thinking progressed in the Barak coalition that seats on Barak's
Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee (the body in the Knesset that oversees Israel's
security services and hears its military secrets) were recently opened to
"Israeli-Arabs." Following a heated public debate, two Arabs took their
seats on the committee for the first time about a year ago.
Secularists in Israel hailed this move as a sign of Israel's growing "maturity"
and "liberalism." Opponents wondered whether Arab Knesset members could be
trusted on a committee that is privy to Israel's military secrets. All this, of
course, prompts very serious security questions. For example, some wonder whether
Ahmed Tibi - who served as a top advisor to Yassir Arafat until running for the Knesset
(and who still maintains close contact with the Palestinian leadership) - should be
eligible to sit on such a sensitive committee or even serve in the Knesset.
DEVELOPING A MINORITY CONSENSUS
All this sheds a good deal of light on the uncomfortable fact that
"Israeli-Arabs" are gradually consolidating an identity as a viable voting bloc
in Israel dedicated to the "secularization" of the Jewish state, and as a
Palestinian state arises next door to Israel that is eagerly reaching out to them as an
ally in this effort, the question of Israel's ultimate condition - i.e., whether it will
become a "secularist" state, or it will remain a "homeland" for the
Jewish community (or, put another way, whether it will become the kind of "Civic
State" that the Jews of the Diaspora have historically pressed on the nations of the
West, or whether it will remain an "Ethnic State") - comes readily "into
play," especially to a population grown weary of war.
SECULARIZATION AS A SHORT
WAY STATION TO ISLAMIZATION
The problem with all this, of course, is that while left-wing Jews might be thinking about
a "secularized" national state, most "Israeli-Arabs" and their
Palestinian co-religionists have in mind an Islamic state as the end result of this
process - with "secularization" as nothing more than a short "way
station" on the road towards the "Islamization" of Israel; an Israel which
would eventually be joined to the emerging Palestinian state, and which would be forced to
accept the return of all those Palestinians who claim to have been displaced by the 1948
War of Independence; an Israel where the Jews would be forced to exchange their
"majority status" for a "minority status." And, of course, if
that ever happened, Jews in Israel would count it lucky to escape with their lives, all
promises from the Muslims notwithstanding. To be sure, not all
"Israeli-Arabs" are thinking along these lines - at least not yet. But the
very real fact of the matter is, that's the logical end to th!
e kind of thinking that has taken hold of the Arab community, not only in the West Bank
and the Gaza strip, but also among Israel's Arab citizens.
ISLAMIZATION
This process, as we indicated above, is called "Islamization," and it has
already progressed so far not only among Palestinians in general, but also among
"Israeli-Arabs" that today in some Israeli municipalities,
"Israeli-Arabs" that oppose the growing "Islamization" process (mostly
Arab Christians) are ostracized from the "Arab-Israeli" community by their
compatriots.
Haifa University sociologist Sammy Smooha, who has surveyed "Israeli-Arab"
public opinion every few years since 1976, says that research he conducted last Spring
shows a marked rise in "Islamization" among "Israeil-Arabs" -
reversing the earlier trend that had been leading to the gradual "Israelization"
of Israel's Arab citizens. For example, in 1995, one-third of "Israeli-Arab"
respondents had been opposed to the existence of a Jewish/Zionist state within the
so-called Green Line (Israel's pre-1967 borders); but by 1999, that figure had risen to 46
percent. Nearly a fifth denied Israel's right to exist altogether, up from 7 percent
in 1995. The proportion who saw some Israeli component to their identity fell
between 1995 and 1999 from 54 percent to 36 percent, while those who identified themselves
primarily as Palestinians doubled from 10 percent to 20 percent. Finally, and quite
ominously, the number who unreservedly support the use of violence against the Jewish
state ro!
se from 2.5 percent to 9 percent, while 18 percent supported violence with some
reservations, up from 10.5 percent.
The extent to which the "Islamization" of Israel's Arab citizens has progressed
can also be measured by the number of mosques that have been built in recent years in
Israel. In the first decade after the Six Day War, the number of mosques in Israel
increased from 60 to 150; by 1993, 25 years after the war, the number had quadrupled to
240; since 1993 the number has shot up astronomically - and all this does not take into
consideration the number of "house mosques" that have developed.
Underlying these facts is a sense that, especially since the 1988 Intifada,
"Israeli-Arabs" have been overcoming their disparate local identities to
crystallize into a "national minority."
Most Israelis continue to feel (perhaps "hope" is the better word) that
"Israeli-Arabs," in the end, will not be willing to give up the economic and
political benefits of Israeli citizenship in order to join the entity taking shape under
the Palestinian Authority. Nonetheless, that appears to be precisely what is
happening. Moreover, if Israeli Jews think they will be able to reverse the
"Islamization" of their Arab citizens by agreeing to a Palestinian state in the
West Bank and Gaza, they are probably mistaken - it will then be the
"Israeli-Arabs" turn to press for greater rights, the annulment of Israel's
definition as a "Jewish state," (which means, of course,
"secularization"), or - failing that - perhaps autonomy or even secession in
areas where they constitute a majority.
THE ORIGINS OF THE ISLAMIZATION PROCESS
As we indicated earlier, the origins of "Islamization" can be traced back to the
Islamic Revolution in Iran. Following the 1979 Islamic Revolution, Israeli Islamists
organized a group known as the Holy War Family which began a campaign of violence and
incitement against Jews, and Arabs who "collaborated" with Jews. In 1981,
Israeli authorities imprisoned all 70 members of the movement, including its leader,
Sheikh Abdullah Nimr Darwish. But the movement surfaced again during the outbreak of the
Intifada in 1988, and it was strengthened by the growing Islamic trend among the
"Israeli-Arabs," as well as a parallel and sometimes overlapping process of the
"Palestinianization" of Israel's Arab citizens, a process (i.e.,
"Palestinianization") that began to involve Christian Arabs. While the
"Israeli-Arabs" who were involved (especially the Christians) by and large
shunned violence, they began distributing printed pamphlets for the PLO and using their
bank accounts to funnel mone!
y to families of jailed Palestinians. Moreover, and more ominously, the Islamic
movement's press began to mirror the viciously anti-Semitic and anti Israeli propaganda of
Hamas.
Sheikh Darwish has stressed that his call for a"Holy War" by Israel's Arab
citizens against Jews and the Jewish state was meant allegorically, as a spiritual
struggle for the hearts and minds of Israeli Muslims. But when a gang of Islamists
from the Galilee hacked sleeping Israeli soldiers to death in 1992, the movement's true
intentions surfaced. This was the first time that "Arab-Israelis" had ever
been caught in a violent act against the state. Since then, this trend has
escalated. For example, there is evidence that "Israeli-Arabs" were behind
several bombing attempts in Haifa and Tiberias and the murder of a number of Jews in the
upper Galilee.
GROWING COLLUSION BETWEEN "ARAB-
ISRAELIS" AND THE PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY
Sheikh Darwish also supports the Islamic movement's 1996 decision to aid Arabs who want to
run for the Knesset. Until then, most "Arab-Israelis" had shunned the
"democratic process" in Israel - but all that has changed now. Islamists
in general (both in Israel and on the West Bank and Gaza) now believe that they can use
the "democratic process" in Israel to their own advantage. Indeed, Barak's
"peace coalition" in Israel would be impossible without the aid of Israel's Arab
community - and to this extent, one can say that Barak is actively colluding with the
"Israeli-Arabs" in the creation of "secularized Israel" - again, his
protests to the contrary notwithstanding. The Palestinian Authority also strongly
encourages the collaboration between Barak and the "Israeli-Arabs" - and so much
so that it has actually created a department in Arafat's office - the Committee for
Contacts with the Residents of Occupied Palestine - which orchestrates these efforts and
which presses for t!
ighter cooperation between the Palestinian Authority and the "Israeli-Arabs."
And just how tight has this cooperation progressed? - one can get an idea from what
happened recently at a cultural festival in Umm el-Fahm, an Arab municipality in Israel
which local Arabs and the PA's Ministry of Culture co-sponsored. The event began
with the playing of the Palestinian national anthem (the Israeli anthem was not played).
ISRAELI JEWS: RETURNING TO THEIR ROOTS
It's not without reason, therefore, that "secularized" Israelis who wish to
retain the definition of Israel as a "Jewish state" are worried. On the
one hand, they want to maintain the Jewish character of Israel, but if that character has
to be defined in "religious" terms, then there is a problem! Most Jews are
simply not very religious, and while most of them are more or less willing to show a
certain distant respect for the tenets of Judaism (i.e., respect for the Sabbath, the
maintenance of certain dietary restrictions and the like), they are not at all willing to
be governed in their personal lives by these traditions.
In short, they do not want to be defined in religious terms. They are - like their
brethren in the Diaspora (and most particularly in the United States and Western Europe) -
children of the "Enlightenment" - at least those who emigrated to Israel from
out of the West. "Science and rationalism" - not "religion" - is
the language most Jews (at least most influential Jews) understand. As a result, despite
the growing presence of the Orthodox community in Israel, it's not to the Bible or the
Rabbinical tradition that most Jews look for guidance, but to the "liberal"
tradition of the Enlightenment - the tradition of Voltaire, Rousseau, Locke, Condorcet,
Bayle, Hume, Diderot, D'Alembert, Kant, etc., which is to say, the tradition that
Diasporic Jews have pushed in the West for the past 250 years.
While Jews of the liberal or "secularized" tradition are not necessarily
atheists and are not necessarily in favor of abolishing religion as such, they do believe
that religion should not be forced on others. Jews from this tradition believe that
religion - if it is worn at all - should be worn lightly, without the impulse to force
others to accept their particular religious views. Religion is best left as a private
matter; it should be kept out of the public arena. To those passionately moved by faith,
the kind of religion that liberal Jews find acceptable is an indifferent and dispassionate
faith. When such people meditate upon God, they do not dwell on "God's Plan and
Purpose in the Ages," Israel's part in God's plan, their need for salvation, or any
other such thing; to the extent that they think at all on such matters, they envision the
"Supreme Being," the "natural laws of society," the "rational
nature of man," and the ethics of the harmony of enlightened self-interes!
t and social well-being.
That God might have a purpose in them as a people; that by choosing to live in Israel they
might be playing a vital role in "God's Plan and Purpose in the Ages;" that the
end of the age is close at hand; that their Messiah may be coming in their life-time (or
that there is even such a thing as the Messiah); etc. - these things do not much cross
their minds.
Still, for whatever reason, even the most "secularized" Jews find it difficult
to give up their own Jewishness. It seems to be written in their genetic code -
something God has placed deep in their hearts. They may run from it, they may
sublimate it, they may suppress it, they may even be enraged at it - but it's still there:
the gnawing feeling that they are Jewish, and there is a purpose in their being Jewish.
Nonetheless, most Jews find it convenient to deny all this - i.e., what's written
on their hearts. After all, it would seem that all that their Jewishness has done
for them is to separate them irretrievably from their fellow man, and bring them an untold
amount of grief. It would seem that nothing good has ever come of it. No,
better to forget about it - or at least sublimate it - and that's what "Enlightenment
Thinking" has enabled them to do over the centuries. It has helped them to
forget! It has given them a way to live at peace in the Diaspora.
But now God is bringing the Diaspora to an end - whether they want it to end or not.
They are being driven home, and as they return home from the Diaspora, they are
being forced to face the fact of their own Jewishness. And how is God making them
face this fact? By confronting them with the loss of their precious Jerusalem
["If I forget thee, O Jerusalem, let my right hand forget her cunning ..." (Ps.
137:5)], the "secularization" of Israel (and, ipso facto, the loss or Israel as
a Jewish homeland), the loss of the Temple Mount and all those other things that shouldn't
matter to them at all - after all, all these things are nothing more than religious
symbols, and such things should be of no consequence to men of "Science" and
"Rationalism."
But as the reality of having to give up these things begins to sink in, most Jews - even
"secularized" ones - are finding it hard to do so. Moreover, as the new
Intifada progresses, even those "secularized" Jews who still may be willing to
consider the "secularization" of Israel (and, ipso facto, the loss of Israel as
a "Jewish homeland"), the loss of Jerusalem, the loss of the Temple Mount, etc.
are finding that that's only the beginning of what they will have to give up.
Ultimately, what the world wants is their eradication! That's what the world
really wants! And for the first time, Jews - at least Jews of this generation - are
having to face up to this stark reality. So what does being a Jew really mean?
WITHOUT THE INTIFADA AND THE SO-CALLED "PEACE PROCESS," MOST JEWS WOULD
HAVE NEVER BEEN FORCED TO FACE THIS QUESTION. Most would still be hiding their heads in
the false illumination of the Enlightenment. God knows what He is doing!! Eetta
Prince-Gibson, a freelance!
writer in Jerusalem, a "secularist," and someone who has been active on
the Left in Israel and has worked for many years with feminist peace organizations around
the world, writes:
"I am not comfortable talking to my Palestinian friends and colleagues anymore.
Suddenly, we do not seem to have anything to say to each other. Each
conversation seems to end in misunderstandings, and we seem incapable of comprehending
each other's fears, convictions, or aspirations. Trust has collapsed, everyday life
has been disrupted, and our political options seem limited."
Eetta - perhaps for the first time in her life - is being forced to confront her heritage,
and on a RELIGIOUS basis. She is being forced to confront what being a Jew is really
all about - not because she wants to, but because she has to. She is passing through
a metamorphosis, so to speak. God is calling her back to her "roots" - not
to the "Enlightenment" which has permitted her and others like her to hide from
God for so long, but to her own Jewish heritage and ultimately to the Bible (or at least
the Old Testament). She may not want to go, but she will have to go anyway.
Let's all pray for Eetta, and all those like her - not only in Israel, but in the
Diaspora as well - as they prepare to meet their God in the "Valley of Dry
Bones!" (Ezek. 37:1-14)
More text time!
God bless all of you.
S.R. Shearer
Antipas Ministries
===================================================
![]()
