HOME / the book club: New books dissected over e-mail.

Books on New Israeli History

Shaping a Post-Zionist Israel

Posted Wednesday, Feb. 9, 2000, at 4:47 PM ET

Dear Hillel,

I think that the real difference between you and me is that you like your patriotism really well done, while I like mine medium-rare.

Acknowledging Israel's partial responsibility for the Palestinian tragedy of 1948, yes, even feeling guilty about it, does not make one an "anti" or "post" Zionist. Nor does one's willingness to accept an agreement involving compensation for the Palestinian refugees and recognizing their right of return. Not even one's willingness to reach an agreement on the political and administrative partition of Jerusalem contradicts the Zionist dream. Did you know that Theodor Herzl himself was willing to accept a Jewish state without Jerusalem? I sometimes think that Herzl was probably the first real post-Zionist. The Jewish Agency in 1947 enthusiastically accepted the U.N. partition plan, which also left Jerusalem outside the Jewish State.

I think, however, that we should not unnecessarily alarm the good people on the Web who are following this discussion: What you call "post-Zionism" is a rather vague notion that may or may not become relevant in the future but carries no weight in any serious discussion today. We are debating in Israel the best way to achieve peace with the Arabs. We are debating whether settlements on the West Bank and the Golan Heights are worth more than peace. At times the debate places law and democracy vs. religion. We debate numerous human-rights issues, including a law that, if passed by the Knesset, would legalize the use of torture by the Secret Service. We debate basic values, in an atmosphere of great tension. But so far all this takes place in a clearly defined Zionist framework. Anti-Zionism is so marginal in Israel's public discourse that it is hardly worth mentioning.

Here and there, it is true, we start to ask ourselves what kind of a people we can and should be, once the peace process will have been concluded successfully. No guarantee that it will, but the prospects of peace lead us to play with the idea of a normal existence, European-American style. It is at present rather like playing with the money one hopes to win in the big lottery.

Yes, Hillel, you may dread a "normal" country. Many people in Israel do. I understood from the article you wrote for Commentary that you are particularly apprehensive about the idea that Israel one day will become a state of all its citizens, in which Jews and Arabs are equal. But this also does not make you a better Zionist than those people you try to discredit as "post-Zionists." Let me remind you that there was nothing the Zionists wanted more than normalcy, thereby bringing the Zionist struggle to a successful end. That "post-Zionist" era may come, to use Theodor Herzl's words, in five years, or in 50 at the latest.

A few years from now, Israel will for the first time in 2,000 years become the largest Jewish community in the world. Those Jews who intended to settle in Israel will have done so. The others will remain in their countries, or disappear, also in accordance with Herzl's original vision. Presumably, Israel will by then have reached peace agreements with the Arabs. At any rate its existence will no longer be in danger; in fact, it no longer is even today. Zionism will have fulfilled its goal. The question will then be, what now?--it is a nuclear power, after all. With Zionism a reality, rather than a dream, Israelis will have to decide whether they want to live in a democratic country that guarantees the equal rights of all citizens, at least 20 percent of them Arabs, or whether they want to live like Americans prior to the civil-rights movement.

I certainly hope that in spite of their damnable new textbooks, today's ninth-graders will in due cause choose democracy and equal rights. Something tells me that they might do so at least in part as a result of those damnable textbooks, incorporating the work of Benny Morris, Avi Shlaim, and others. There must be something wrong with me, but for some reason I don't really feel damnable about it at all.

Shaping a Post-Zionist Israel

Posted Wednesday, Feb. 9, 2000, at 4:47 PM ET
Print This ArticlePRINTEmail to a FriendE-MAILShare This ArticleRECOMMEND...Get Slate RSS FeedsRSS
The Iron Wall, by Avi ShlaimThis week, a discussion of Avi Shlaim's The Iron Wall (click here to buy it) and Benny Morris' Righteous Victims (click here to buy it). Hillel Halkin is an American-born author and translator who has been living in Israel since 1970. He is the author of, among other works, Grand Things To Write a Poem On (click here to buy it). Tom Segev is an Israeli journalist and historian. He writes a weekly column for Ha'aretz and is the author of 1949: The First Israelis (click here to buy it).
COMMENTS

Highlights from The Fray:


As a descendant of Arabs who left Palestine to avoid being drafted into the Ottoman army, I believe that what we're seeing here is a positive trend: states and wars are not made in a clean manner only. History does not deliver "justice", it is a set of human circumstances. I think that the most important thing is to expose pupils and students to the subjective materials of BOTH sides. Israel will not cease to exist because of people like Morris and Segev. It will be more open, eloquent and serious. I hope Arafat's Palestine can afford people like them sometime. I still feel, as a Palestinian living in the West, that I would never live under his rule and feel safe and free to write a book like those by Segev and Morris.

--Odeh Nasrallah

(To reply, click
here.)


The problem with the "normalization" of Israeli society - the fulfillment of the 19th century secular Zionist dream - is that it is uniquely unfulfilling for Jews. By this I do not mean that modern and post-modern Western society is empty. The real difficulty stems from the fact that dressing Jewish existence in the mantle of secular nationalism creates a hybrid form of Jewish life which seems to satisfy fewer and fewer Israelis. History may have forced Jews to seek quick solutions rather than develop better solutions over time but modern Zionism was a synthetic rather than organic solution and the forced marriage was bound to have problems.

If there is a navigable course, it might first require acknowledging that the "Jewish Question" cannot be answered with simplicities and slogans. It places the burden for the Jewish future squarely on our own shoulders. Not as victims without rights, quite the reverse, as a collective who whether by choice or fate or history or faith are traveling a slightly different path. We share much in common with the Western Culture of which we perceive ourselves to be a part, but on the other hand there are differences, also, in a concern for our past, an emphasis on group values and an acknowledgement that there is a spiritual/religious aspect to Jewish/Israeli existence.

When children are faced with the reality that sometimes others may get things that they cannot, they seem to have the capacity to acknowledge that there are differences among people. They may claim the situation is not fair but ultimately, they understand that not everyone is treated identically without their feeling ultimately deprived. I think it may be a good starting point for adults.

--Ed Prince

(To reply, click
here.)

(2/11)

What did you think of this article?
Join The Fray: Our Reader Discussion Forum
POST A MESSAGE | READ MESSAGES
TODAY'S PICTURES
TODAY'S CARTOONS
TODAY'S DOONESBURY
TODAY'S VIDEO
Costume parties.53/TP.jpg
Cartoonists' take on government spending.23/TC.jpg
More TK. 1/122939/2183724/DoonesburyPlaceholder.jpg