Israeli Racism

Israeli Racism

ISRAELI RACISM

PALESTINE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY RESEARCH CENTERPALESTINE LIBERATION ORGANIZATION

BEIRUT-SEPTEMBER 1975

There is an element of irony in the racism which charac-cterizes Israeli society today. Zionism, the movement ofJewish nationalism which culminated in the establishmentof the Jewish State in 1948, was in large part the outcome ofthe anti-semitism, or more correctly the anti-Jewish per-secution, which pervaded Europe in the late 19th and 20thcenturies. For Zionist ideologues and apologists, the JewishState was the solution to the Jewish problem, the only meansby which the Jews of Europe could escape their centuries-old persecution at the hands of Gentile society by an "in-gathering" of Jews in an independent state which wouldjoin the international community on an equal footing. Theachivement of this goal demanded that Jews the world overdiscard their respective nationalities and adopt instead aJewish one. Every Jew was thus a potential citizen of theJewish State, and the sole criterion of his eligibility for citizen-ship would be his religion—whether or not he was Jewish.

The irony lies in the fact that this Zionist "solution" toanti-Semitism was no solution at all. It has not brought theJews living in Israel any measure of security; it has under-mined the position of those Jews who have chosen to remainin their natal countries: and it has turned the oppressed Jews ofEurope into oppressors.

For by opting for Jewish nationalism and seperatism, theZionists were obliged to adopt the very arguments which theiranti-Jewish oppressors had employed against them: Jews aredifferent, so different that as a group they are somehowunassimilable, and thus it is futile for Jews even to attemptto be accepted as equal citizens in Gentile society. Theonly significant difference between the Zionist argument andthe racist assertions of the anti-Semite is that while the latterwould add that the Jews are not only different, but somehowinferior, the Zionist position either implies or states explicitly

that Jews are somehow superior. Zionism then was not aprogressive movement to "liberate" the Jews from theiroppression, but rather a reactionary, pessimistic, andpotentially racist retreat from humanist ideals regarding theultimate ability of peoples to coexist peacefully.

Moreover the land which the Zionist leaders, in collabora-tion with European imperialism, ultimately chose for theJewish State, was not an uninhabited vacuum. It was not,despite the old Zionist slogan, a land without a people.The population of Palestine in 1896, one year before thefirst Zionist congress, was more than 500,000 people, ofwhom less than 50,000 were Jews. The remainder, Muslimand Christian Arabs, though living under Ottoman Turkishrule, were experiencing the first stirrings of political national-ism which was soon to sweep the entire Arab world.

Thus to achieve the Zionist dream of a Jewish State itwould be necessary to remove the bulk of the indigenous"non-Jewish" inhabitants, and in doing so to enter intoconflict with them: it would be necessary for the oppressedto become the oppressor. While Zionism succeeded in itsaim of creating a State with a large Jewish majority, thiswas achieved only by forcibly expelling most of the Arabpopulation and by adopting, in the new State, legal measureswhich would allow any Jewish person anywhere in the worldto become an "Israeli" citizen upon his arrival.

Today, the Israeli Law of Return (passed June 5, 1950)allows any Jew of any nationality to emigrate to Israel and,instead of having to undergo naturalization as is normalin other countries, immediately acquire Israeli citizenship.The hundreds of thousands of Palestinian Arabs who wereborn in and later expelled from Palestine have, in contrast,been deprived of their rights of citizenship. According toIsraeli law there are a variety of conditions which must be

met before a non-Jew can become eligible for citizenship,all of which effectively prevent the more than two millionPalestinian refugees and their children from obtainingIsraeli nationality. These include the provision that acitizen should have been present in the area which laterbecame Israel from the date of the U.N. Resolution on thePartition of Palestine (November 29, 1947) until the IsraeliArmy occupied the area; moreover, the Arab should havebeen registered in the population register of March 1, 1952,and have been residing in Israel both on April 1, 1952, andbetween the date of the establishment of the State of Israeland April 1, 1952.1 For the Palestinians who were forcedfrom their homes by the terror tactics of the Zionist forcesin the 1947-48 War, and who otherwise fled to escape thefighting, all of these conditions are impossible to meet,particularly as Israel has steadfastly refused to allow theirreturn to their natal homes in Palestine (in violation of suc-cessive U.N. resolutions).

The clear intention of all these conditions is to preventas many Palestinians as possible from acquiring Israeli nation-ality. In addition, an estimated 60-70,000 Israeli Arabs bornin and now living in Israel, about 20% of the total, are deniedfull rights of citizenship because for one reason or anotherthey could not meet fully the stringent stipulations of theNationality Law for non-Jews. Their status as "permanentresidents" allows them to travel outside Israel only for thestrictly limited period of one year and one day. If theyoverstay this period by even twenty-four hours they arenever allowed back.2

1. Article Three of the Nationality Law, 5712-1952, Laws of the State ofIsrael, Vol. VI. 1951/52.

2. Israel Shahak, the Israel League for Human and Civil Rights (TheShahak Papers), Beirut, 1973, pp. 35, 42-47.

7

It is difficult to do justice to the full extent of Israeli racismin a limited space such as this; nevertheless, it should beclear that because Israel is an explictly Jewish State, whosemain object is to serve the interests of the "Jewish people",all non-Jews living in Israel are by definition second-classcitizens. This element of racism which is contained in theideological foundations of the State—as expressed, forexample, in the Law of Return—receives numerous otherconcrete expressions.

The main victims of Israeli racism are, naturally, IsraeliArabs. But racism extends also to the large Oriental Jewishcommunity in Israel, that is those Jews of non-Westernorigin who have emigrated to Israel, mainly since 1948.The basis of this racial discrimination lies in the history ofthe Zionist movement. Zionism was and is not simply amovement of Jewish nationalism: more specifically, it wasa movement of European Jewish nationalism, born in Europein the minds of European Jews, led throughout its history byEuropean Jews, and primarily serving the interests of asmall group of European Jews. Today Israeli society isdominated by this western Jewish minority in all sectors.In our discussion of Israeli racism we will treat first racialdiscrimination against Israeli Arabs and second againstOriental Jews.

The Israeli historian Aharon Cohen wrote in his bookIsrael and the Arab World: "From the point of view of the law,the Arab citizens are equal to all citizens of the State; theyparticipate in parliamentary elections and enjoy manyrights of a democratic state. However no such statementcan obscure the fact that the Arab minority in Israel lives inconditions of painful discrimination." (p. 496; emphasisadded). The main instrument of this systematic discrimina-tion and often outright oppression are the Defence Emergency

8

Regulations (1945). These regulations, which amount to acontinual state of martial law, allow the military governor(after 1966, the police) to deprive any Israeli of his elementalcivil rights, including right to trial, freedom of movement andresidence, and even the right to one's property. While intheory this military rule (which is the same as was appliedby the British before 1948 and was regularly denounced byZionist leaders as fascist, etc.) can be used against Jews, therehave not been more than four or five such cases in the historyof the State.

The Defence Regulations are used regularly against Arabcitizens, not only to restrict movement, place of residence,right to assembly, and other elemental democratic rights,but also to expropriate Arab land and to imprison (in officiallanguage "detain") Arab citizens without charge for monthsor even years at a time. There is no appeal to any higherauthority concerning actions taken in respect of these regu-lations; while, formally, appeal to the judiciary is pos-sible, in practice it will not interfere in any actions of theauthorities if taken for "security reasons". Thus, usingArticle 125 of the Regulations the Israeli authorities canand do declare that an area is a "closed area", which decla-ration is in fact "the prelude to the expropriation of landswhose owners are forbidden to enter them for securityreasons."3 The injustices perpetrated against the Arab popu-lation of Israel through the application of the DefenceRegulations are too numerous and varied to cover adequatelyhere, and have received detailed attention elsewhere.4

The approximately 375,000 Israeli Arabs suffer discrimi-nation in all areas of life: Employment, education, politicalactivity, cultural expression, etc. The average monthly

3. Jiryis, the Arabs in Israel, Beirut, 1969, pp. 44-46.4. S. Jiryis. Democratic Freedoms in Israel, Beirut, 1972.

income of the Arab family is half that of the Jewish family,and even less than that of the European Jewish family.Since the non-Western Jewish family's income is only tenpercent higher than that of the Arab5, it is clear that discrimi-nation in this sphere is more racial in nature than religious.The content and quality of education provided Israeli Arabsreinforces their inferior socio-economic status. The Israelihistorian Cohen has observed that "in institutions of higherlearning, there were, in the year 1966-67,112 Jewish studentsper 10,000 Jewish population, while the Arabs had some-what less than 10 for every 10,000 persons. (In 1963, therewere in Egypt 50 university student for every 10,000, inSyria, 60, in Lebanon, 74. The proportion is continuing torise in these countries.")6 In the ten years from 1961-1971only 300 Arabs graduated from Israeli universities.7 Israeliracism finds its way even into the textbooks used in govern-ment schools. One such history text used in a number ofgovernment institutions is criticized by an Israeli writer:

The worst of it is not the concealment of the fact that thearea under cultivation at the time of the "redemption oflands" [i.e. the establishment of Israel] was 5.5 milliondunams, which is somewhat more than the area undercultivation at present; neither is it the concealment of thefact that in every place where Islam arrived during itsexpansion, close relations between Islam and Judaismdeveloped... The worst is the style. For throughout thewhole length of the book, except in some isolated instances,it is impossible to find the noun Arab without modifierssuch as: Occupants, muderers, robbers and thieves.8

5. Jewish Currents, N.Y., April 1971.6. A.Cohen, Israel and the Arabs, London, 1970, p. 501.7. Ha'aretz, (Israeli newspaper), August 16, 1971.8. Information Bulletin, Tel-Aviv, Sept. 1968, pp. 38-42.

10

It is this sort of blatantly racist education, received in-cidentally by both Arabs and Jews, which reinforces racistattitudes towards the Arab population. Such attitudes arewidespread among the Jewish population. The Israelisociologist Peres reported in the American Journal of Sociologyof May, 1971, that 91% of his sample of Israeli Jews agreedthat "It would be better if there were fewer Arabs." 70%agreed that "the Arabs will never reach the level of progressof the Jews", and 86% said they would not "rent a room toan Arab".

Our assertion that Israeli Arabs suffer racial discriminationin all aspects of life is further borne out by the citation ofsome elemtnary statistics on government services providedeach community. In the twenty years 1948-1968, 32 Arab vil-lages were connected to the electricity network; more thantwo-thirds of the Arab villages in the country—containing45% of the Arab population—had not yet received electricity,while there was virtually no Jewish settlement which fell in thiscategory.9 In 1971 only 1% of the general developmentbudget of Israel was allocated to the Arabs in Israel, whoconstitute 15% of the population.10 In agriculture, whichflourishing before 1948, the Arab population works about 20%of all cultivated land but only 2% of the irrigated area. Thevalue of produce per dunum (1 dunum= 1000 sq. meters)is about one-fourth of the average for Jewish agriculture.The gap between Jewish and Arab agriculture continues togrow.11

Large areas of land in Israel which were acquired beforeand after 1948 by the various Zionist land acquisition fundsare inalienably the property of the "Jewish people". That

9. Cohen, Op. Git., p. 499.10. Davar, (Israeli newspaper), Sept. 3, 1972.11. Cohen, Op. Cit, p. 499.

11

is, they cannot be rented or sold to Arabs. This undisguiseddiscrimination is rigidly enforced, so much so that the onlyknown case of the State confiscating land from a Jew involveda Jewish settler of the Nitsan O'z agricultural settlementwho rented some of his land to an Arab. The confiscationwas enforced by the Ministery of Agriculture and the Settle-ment Section of the Jewish Agency.12

There are endless such examples of the material and ideo-logical discrimination prepetrated against the Arab popula-tion of Israel. Suffice it to say here that much of this discrimi-nation stems directly from the concept of the Jewish State.This cannot be said of the discrimination against non-Euro-pean Jews. While the racism against Arabs is in some sensethe inevitable yet peculiar product of their status as a non-Jewish minority in a Jewish State, the racism against OrientalJews is of a more classical, albeit no less oppressive, nature.Jews are the objects of racial hatred because they are dark-skinned, speak Arabic or Persian rather than German orYiddish or Russian as a first language, as do European im-migrants, and share none of the cultural traits of theirEuropean co-religionists. It is precisely because Judaismis a religion, not a common culture or race, that discriminationbetween the two Jewish communities is so marked in Israel,even today, 25 years after the last significant wave of OrientalJewish immigrants.

Oriental Jews are the pawns of European Zionism. Liketheir Arab cousins they draw the worst jobs, inferior educa-tion, enjoy only minimal representation in the upper echelonsof government, and are considered inferior by the WhiteJewish establishment. Irene Beeson, currently a correspon-dent for the British Guardian newspaper, summed up thefeelings of Israel's Oriental Jewish community in this articlewritten from Israel (reprinted in Resistance, December, 1971):

12. Ma'ariv, (Israeli newspaper), October 29, 1971.

12

Israel's "second class citizens," as they call themselves,claim that although Oriental Jews represent 60% of thetotal Jewish population of Israel, they are not represented inParliament, in the administration and the municipalities,the Civil Service Commission, the Jewish Agency, or theHistadrut [the government-controlled labor federation.]All senior posts in government, with a few rare exceptions,are held by Ashkenazi—"White Jews"—and while "whiteimmigrants" are housed in new luxurious apartments,they say, Oriental Jews who came to Palestine as pioneers arestill living in slums and shacks, often ten or more to a room. . .They claim that half a million Arab Jews who came to Israel20 years ago are discriminated against educationally, econo-mically, and socially. They are housed in developmenttowns where adults have no opportunities for economicimprovement and children lack good elementary educationand are completely deprived of higher education.

These claims are borne out by other Israeli sources. TheJewish Agency, which handless immigration and absorption,does not have a single Oriental Jew in its top-level leader-ship; the leadership of the Histadrut is void of Oriental Jews;in the Knesset (parliament) itself there were only fivemembers of Oriental origin in 1971.13 Even on the kibbutz,where the supposed ideals of Zionist socialism are reputed toreach their highest expression, there exists racial discrimi-nation against Oriental Jews. Melford E. Spiro, writes inKibbutz, Venture in Utopia that "the prejudice against theOriental Jews has racist overtones. The youths from Moroccoand Iraq, who were living in the kibbutz, were often referredto contemptuously as hashechorim , the dark ones; andsnobbish reference was made both to their origin and theirprimitive behavior. . . "14

13. Davar, (Israeli newspaper), 11/4/71.14. N. Y., 1963, p. 108.

13

Perhaps the racial discrimination against Oriental Jewscan best be described by one of its victims: Avi Bordugo isan Israeli of Moroccan origin and a fifth-year law studentat the Hebrew University in Jerusalem. Even though Avihimself has experienced considerable discrimination inemployment during the period of his studies, it is not himselfthat he worries about. Speaking to an Israeli newspaperhe explained:

I am in a position where I can take care of myself. I'll beable to graduate and become a lawyer. But I am worriedabout my comrades, the children of the Oriental Jews. TheState is built of communities; the lowest are the Arabs,above them, Oriental Jews, above them, Ashkenazis [Jewsof western origin]. They claim that we Oriental Jews hateArabs. This is a lie that was fabricated by the Ashkenazis. . .The State pays attention to every new immigrant, but theimmigrants who have been here for ten, fifteen or twentyyears, nobody cares about. A serious social problem has beencreated—the problem of the lower classes—but because99% of those are Oriental Jews, the problem becomes acommunal one.15

The racism which so clearly characterizes Israeli societyis not a transitory phenomenon. It has existed since beforethe creation of the State, and as we have indicated, has itsroots deep in the ideology of Zionism and the Jewish State,as well as Israel's organic relationship with western imperial-ism. It is no accident then that Israel maintains the closestof ties with the largest remaining bastion of settler-colonial-ism in the Third World, South Africa. The bond betweenthe two countries dates back to a close personal and politicalrelationship between Chaim Weizmann, Zionist leader andfirst President of Israel, and General Smuts, the legendary

15. Yediot Ahronot, (Israeli newspaper), March 12, 1971.

14

white supremacist South African leader. Both accorded theother the greatest possible political support in their respectivedealings with British imperialism up until World War Two.The common historical basis of the two states is conciselydescribed in this quotation from the Madison Area Com-mittee on South Africa's report on Contemporary Links BetweenSouth Africa and Israel (Oct., 1971):

. . . the fact of common origin of South Africa and Israelas settler states appears to be one which is useful in helpingto explain the formation in each case of somewhat similarinternal and external policies. In each case the governmenthas developed policies to deal with indigenous peopleswithin their borders and with independent Afro-Asianstates outside their borders in the interest of the survival ofa regime which represents immigrants and their descendants,(p. 20)

Israel and South Africa not only share similarities inhistorical development and contemporary structure. Atpresent important trade and politico-military links bind thetwo countries. Israel continues to trade heavily with SouthAfrica despite the United Nations boycott, Israeli-SouthAfrican trade has grown significantly since 1967, and in recentyears, after Israel was expelled from virtually every Africancountry for her aggressive Middle East policies, it has becomeeven more pronounced.

C.L. Sulzberger, writing in the New York Times of April30, 1971, described the intimate though carefully concealedrelationship which prevailed between the two countries atthe time (it has since become more explicit). Sulzbergernotes that South Africa manufactures the Israeli Uzi sub-machine gun under special license. He reports that duringthe 1967 War a South African military mission flew to Israelto observe tactics and weapons-use. He also cites uncon-

15

firmed reports that Israel has passed on to South Africa theblueprints of their improvements on the French Miragefighter. Sulzberger concluded that "The basic truth remainsthat this country, which has few friends abroad, regardsIsrael as one of them." Elsewhere, the Jewish TelegraphicAgency reported on January 20, 1970, that South Africa wasplanning to export to Israel their own version of the Britishheavy Ghieftan tank to Israel.

In the words of South African Prime Minister Vorster,quoted in the Sulzberger article, "We view Israel's positionand problems with understanding and sympathy. Like usthey have to deal with terrorist infiltration across theirborder; and like us they have enemies bent on their destruc-tion." What Mr. Vorster failed to add was that in bothcases, guerilla action was being taken against their respectiveregimes by the dispossessed indigenous inhabitants who havebeen deprived of any democratic nonviolent means ofsecuring their legitimate rights to self-determination in theirhomeland. Such is the inevitable result of Israeli, and SouthAfrican, racism.

16

v