Jewish state
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Image:DE Herzl Judenstaat 01.gif
The term "Jewish state" is sometimes used to describe the State of Israel and refers to its status as a nation-state for the Jewish people. This concept of an ethnic Jewish homeland is enshrined in Israeli national policy and reflected in many of Israel's public institutions. The concept was codified in the Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel on 14 May 1948 as well as in the Law of Return, which was passed by the Knesset on 5 July 1950, and stated "Every Jew has the right to come to this country as an oleh," an "oleh" being a Jewish immigrant.<ref>Text of Law of Return</ref> This is intended to make citizenship easier to acquire for Jews.
Contents |
[edit] Jewish state or a state of Jews?
There has been growing debate in Israel on the character of the state, if it should enshrine more Jewish culture, encourage Judaism in schools, enshrine certain laws of Kashrut and Sabbath observance within Israel. This debate reflects a historical divide within Zionism and among the Jewish citizens of Israel, which has large secular and traditional/Orthodox minorities as well as a majority which lies somewhere between the two.
Secular Zionism, the historically dominant stream, is rooted in a concept of the Jews as a people and in a concept of international law as premised on the self-determination of peoples through the nation-state structure. Another reason sometimes submitted for such establishment was to have a state where Jews would not be afraid of anti-Semitic attacks and live in peace, although such a reason is not a requirement of the self-determination right and therefore subsidiary to it in secular Zionist thinking.
Religious Zionists, who believe religious beliefs and traditional practices are central to Jewish peoplehood, counter that assimilating to be a secular "nation like any other" would be oxymoronic in nature, and do more to harm than to help the Jewish people. They seek instead to establish what they see as an "authentic Jewish commonwealth" which preserves and encourages Jewish heritage.[1] Drawing an analogy to diaspora Jews who assimilated into other cultures and abandoned Jewish culture, whether voluntary or otherwise, they argue that the creation of a secular state in Israel is tantamount to establishing a state where Jews assimilate en masse as a nation, and therefore anathema to what they view as Jewish national aspirations. Zionism is rooted in a concept of the Jews as a nation, in this capacity, they believe that Israel has a mandate to promote Judaism, to be the center of Jewish culture and center of its population, perhaps even the sole legitimate representative of Jews worldwide.
Partisans of the first view are predominantly, though by no means exclusively, secular or less traditional. Partisans of the second view are almost exclusively traditional or Orthodox, although they also include supporters who follow other streams of Judaism or are less traditional but conservative and would not object to a more prominent state role in promoting Jewish beliefs -- although not to the point of creating a purely Halakhic state.
The debate is therefore characterized by significant polarities. Secular and religious Zionists argue passionately about what a Jewish state should represent. Anti-Zionists and Zionists argue about whether a Jewish state should exist at all. Having been created within the sphere of international law as the instrument for Jewish self-determination, the question of whether Israel is to maintain and strengthen its status as a state for the Jewish people, or transition to being a state purely for "all of its citizens", or identify as both -- and, if both, how to resolve any tensions that arise from their coexistence -- captures these polarities. Israel has, to date, steered an imperfect course more or less between these poles, waxing and waning between secularism and Jewish identity, usually depending on who controls the Israeli High Court of Justice.
[edit] A Jewish commonwealth
Advocates of Israel becoming a more narrowly Jewish commonwealth face at least the following practical and theoretical difficulties:
- How to deal with the non-Jewish Arab minority in Israel (and the non-Jewish majority in the West Bank and Gaza).
- How to alleviate concerns of Jews in Israel who favor a relatively secular state. [2]
- What relationship should official Judaism hold vis-à-vis the Government of Israel and vice versa? [3]
- What role do schools play in supporting Jewish heritage, religion, culture, and state?[4]
- How will the government be organized (theocracy, constitutional theocracy, constitutional republic, parliamentary democracy etc.)?[5]
- Should the Justice system be based on secular common law, secular civil law, a combination of Jewish and common law, a combination of Jewish and civil law, or pure Jewish law?[6]
- On what mandate or legal principles should the constitution of a Jewish state be based? [7]
- How to integrate the economy of the state in line with Jewish law.
Theorists who grapple with these issues focus on the future of the State of Israel and realize that although the sovereign political state has been established, there is still much work to be done in relation to the identity of the state itself. [8]
[edit] Criticism
Like most nation-states, the notion that Israel should be constituted in the name of and maintain a special relationship with a particular group of people, in the case the Jewish people, has drawn much controversy vis-à-vis minority groups living within the country -- in Israel, the large number of Muslim and Christian Palestinians residing in Israel and, to the extent that those territories are claimed to be governed as part of Israel and not as areas under military occupation, in the West Bank and Gaza. For example, the Israeli National Anthem, the Hatikvah, refers to Jews by name as well as alluding to the concept of Zionism, and it contains no mention of Palestinian culture. This anthem therefore excludes non-Jews, including the Palestinians, from its narrative of national identity. Similar criticism has been made of the Israeli flag which resembles the Tallit (a Jewish prayer shawl) and features a Star of David, generally acknowledged as a symbol of Judaism. This situation is perhaps more complex than in other nation-states whose national anthems and flags speak to a particular ethnic group, such as most European countries, because of the state's recent creation: both the flag and anthem derive from the Zionist struggle to create a nation-state, a struggle in which Arabs who were opposed to such creation therefore figure as defeated opponents rather than as active participants.
Supporters of Israeli multinationalism have suggested that the State of Israel adopt more inclusive and neutral symbolism. The concept of the Jewish state has been called racist and ethnocentric by critics, both internationally and inside Israel signified by the UN General Assembly Resolution 3379 linking Zionism to racism (later revoked by UN General Assembly Resolution 4686) but brought up again by the new Durban Declaration. In his book Blood and Religion: The Unmasking of the Jewish and Democratic State, journalist Jonathan Cook makes another criticism: that Israeli governments, in upholding the Jewishness of the state, have been unable to deal with the demands of non-Jewish minorities for political equality, particularly in their rejection of a campaign for "a state of all its citizens" begun in the late 1990s. Other critics, particularly those concerned with broader questions of international law, assert that the idea of an ethnic state so ordinary under that system of law is itself racist and the ethnicity in question (or its history) does not matter. This view has been expounded by Noam Chomsky, himself Jewish, in an interview on C-SPAN where he said:
- "I have always supported a Jewish ethnic homeland in Palestine. That is different from a Jewish state. There's a strong case to be made for an ethnic homeland, but as to whether there should be a Jewish state, or a Muslim state, or a Christian state, or a white state — that's entirely another matter."
Opponents of this view who argue from a secular basis counter that the Jewish people constitute a nation who have the right to their own state under international law -- in other words, that whatever the merits of post-ethnic and multi-ethnic "homeland" states, the state of Israel should not be held up as a test case for international law more broadly when countries less embroiled in conflict might prove simpler starting points for reordering the world according to post-nation-state principles.[citation needed] Indeed, persons arguing this point of view often hold that singling Israel out from or uniquely excluding it from laws supporting self-determination is anti-Semitic[9], offering examples of other nation-states which claim affiliation with particular ethnic and religious groups, and claiming that the very idea is enshrined in the concept of the nation-state and the international legal order based on that concept.[citation needed] Some Jewish nationalists further base this line of argument on the Balfour Declaration and historical ties to the land, both of which play particular roles as evidence under international law, as well as a fear that a hostile Arab world might be disrespectful of a Jewish minority -- alleging a variety of possible harms up to and including genocide -- were Israel to become a post-national "state for all its citizens."
Opponents to this view who argue on the basis of Jewish religious arguments, on the other hand, are less concerned with international law, and therefore found their assertion on the Torah's promises of Israel to the Jews.
A third line of argument, often advanced as a rhetorical point by those arguing against it, is the apparently-held belief that a Jewish state in the Jews' historical homeland is fair compensation for centuries of persecution by non-Jews.[citation needed] Arabs reply that they should not have had to pay this compensation for European persecution.[10]
One final argument for a Jewish state as opposed to a Chomsky's idea of a Jewish "homeland" within a non-Jewish state is that many such "homelands" have been attacked or destroyed by the states containing them. Historically, this has occurred at one point or another in the majority of countries of Europe, from the English massacre of Jews at York Castle in 1190 and the Edict of Expulsion in 1290, to the Tsarist pogroms and the Nazi Holocaust of the 20th century. The argument then follows that only with a Jewish state can Jews be certain that the state itself will not be a threat to their lives or their way of life.
[edit] References
<references/>
