 |
Al-Ahram Weekly 15 - 21 July 1999 Issue No. 438 
|
||
Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 |
| ||
|
Al-Ahram Weekly 15 - 21 July 1999 Issue No. 438
|
||
| Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 |
| ||
Egypt Region International Economy Opinion Culture Profile Features Travel Living Sports Time Out Chronicles People Cartoons Letters A people like any other
By Abdelwahab Elmessiri *In attempting to define Zionism, I did not follow the normal course, namely choosing one or two definitions. Instead, I developed what I term the "basic comprehensive Zionist formula". This formula, in my view, includes all the elements of Zionism that form the basis of Zionist consensus, regardless of the strain of apologetics (socialist, religious, liberal, fascist, etc.) used to justify it. This formula could be summarised in the following elements:
1. The Jews form an organic people (a Volk) that is organically attached to Palestine, and therefore does not belong to Western civilisation.
2. They are also a functional group without a function, a pariah Volk, a parasitic people in Zionist or anti-Semitic parlance.
3. To transform this parasitic people into a useful one, it should be transferred to any area outside Europe (Palestine eventually became the targeted area, on account of its strategic importance to the West).
4. The pariah Volk would then be settled there, replacing the indigenous population (that should be either exterminated or expelled, as is always the case with similar settler colonial projects).
5. In its new habitat, the pariah Volk would reconstitute itself as a state that would serve as a base for Western powers and a fortress defending Western interests in the region. In exchange, Western powers would support the new state and guarantee its survival and continuity, as long as it discharged its function, namely serving Western interests. In this way, the Jewish Volk would achieve through the Western imperialist formation what it failed to achieve through the Western cultural formation.
This formula was "Judaised" through "the addition" of various apologetics. The pariah Volk, for instance, became "the chosen people" for the religious, "the proponents of democracy" for the liberals, "the parasitic people that needs to be reformed and made productive" for the labour Zionists.
The area where the pariah Volk was to be resettled became "Eretz Israel" for the religious, "the homeland where the democratic Jewish people would fulfil its democratic mission" for the liberals, or "the territory where the parasitic pariah Volk was to be made productive" for the labour Zionists. The apologetics varied from one "school" of Zionist thought to the other, but the structure of the formula stayed the same. The Zionist state was the lowest common denominator among all Zionist trends of thought.
This new state could safely be called a "functional state", a reproduction of the Jewish functional group in the form of a 20th-century state that has all the traits of functional groups. Here, we must address two questions. The first regards the choice of the Jewish communities, as opposed to any other, for transfer to Palestine and instrumentalised in the service of the West.
To answer this question, we have to remember the event that figured prominently at the time on the political horizon of the Western world, namely, the then imminent demise of the Ottoman Sultanate, and its consequent dismemberment (described as the "Oriental Question").
Imperialist Europe solved most of its problems by "exporting" them to the East. The same panacea applied to the Jewish and Oriental questions. The people without a function could be functionalised by resettling them in Palestine. This would solve both the Jewish and the Oriental questions, for the new settler state would absorb the extra Jews and would at the same time be a vehicle used in dismembering the Ottoman empire (and the Muslim world in general). Still, the question remains: why the Jews? The following reasons may be considered as possible explanations.
1. There is a "Zionist" tendency of sorts deeply rooted within Western civilisation. Members of the Jewish communities were always viewed as means, not ends (first "a witness people" in the Catholic vision, then a people whose gathering at the end of time is essential for eventual salvation and for the second coming of Christ).
2. Members of the Jewish communities are a pariah Volk. Their final destiny is tied up with Palestine, which happened to be at the heart of the Ottoman empire, separating the Asiatic from the African part of the Arab nation, overlooking the Mediterranean and the Suez Canal. All these mundane geopolitical facts were seen as providential signs.
3. Members of the Jewish communities were basically functional groups freely invited in, then expelled by the powers that be. They were transformed into the pariah Volk, expelled from the Western world then invited to settle in Palestine. Undoubtedly, the view of the Jews as people always exiting from Egypt (Exodus) and always ascending to Canaan, encouraged this view.
4. By the end of the 19th century, the vast majority of the members of Jewish communities in the West were either concentrated in Eastern Europe (especially Russia/Poland) or descended from Polish Jewry. The system of arenda ("settler feudalism" as we term it) was the most decisive element in their historical experience; settler colonialism, therefore, was not an alien experience to them.
5. When modernisation started to falter in eastern Europe (especially in Czarist Russia), hundreds of thousands of Eastern European Jews began migrating to the countries of Western Europe, jeopardising the social security of these countries and the more settled status of the Jewish communities there. They, among other segments of society, were called "human surplus", which had to be disposed of by resettlement in settler colonial enclaves.
The second question that needs to be answered involves the choice of the functional state rather than the functional group as a frame for the settlement of members of Jewish communities. Perhaps the main reason is the very imperative of the situation, namely, the need for a settler colonial enclave that would act as a fortress to defend Western interests and as an outpost of Western civilisation and military campaigns.
Moreover, in modern society, where the ideals of social justice and democracy have gained some centrality, and where modern means of communication (the press, TV, etc.) are available, to have a group of people living in a society, yet completely isolated from it, is virtually impossible.
On the other hand, the formation of a functional state, isolated from the region, entering into a contractual relation with the West, is quite feasible. Its existence and legitimacy could be defended by all manner of noble and romantic rhetoric. It could be seen as a Jewish state, with the Jews returning to their ancestral home, as a small state (little David) surrounded by Arab giants (Goliaths), or as a Third World country standing up to Arab imperialism. The isolation of the functional state became its Jewish identity. Instead of Turkish or Circassian (the language of the Mamelukes) as means of self-ghettoisation, the settlers speak Hebrew. Instead of the ghetto, or shtetl, they live in the ghetto- or shtetl-state.
We may now turn to the traits the Zionist functional state shares with Jewish functional groups and the functional groups in general.
Contractualisation (utility, neutrality, rationalisation and instrumentalisation): The functional state was founded by the Western powers to be utilised by them. It performed many functions (collaboration with the racist apartheid regime of South Africa, providing reactionary Latin American regimes with arms and information, etc.). But its most important function, until recently, has been military, not financial.
The dividends the functional state yields, from the Western standpoint, are strategic, not economic: the functional state is an advanced fortress for the defence of Western interests, and a cheap one at that. The US, as the Economist points out, pays some $30 billion to foot the bill for NATO; $4 billion in annual aid to Israel is a pittance in comparison.
The instrumentalisation of the Zionist functional state manifests itself in the various alliances if forms with Western states and the generous financial subsidies it receives. It cannot exist without the alliances and subsidies, which are bound to continue as long as the functional state continues to play its role and fulfil its function.
Isolation, alienation, powerlessness: Just as the Jewish functional group drew closer to the emperor and prince, seeking protection from the anger of the masses, the Zionist state, in preserving its hypothetical Jewish character, isolates itself from its surroundings and seeks protection from an imperial sponsor. Without the military alliance and the subsidies that flow from the imperial metropolis, the functional enclave would simply wither away (like all other enclaves).
The functional settlers, like members of the functional groups, develop a deep sense of insecurity because of the continuous threat of the indigenous populations. Therefore, their reliance on the imperial power increases over the years as the indigenous population's resistance to their very existence increases.
Separateness from time (history) and place (homeland); the illusory feeling of a separate identity: The Zionist slogan of a land without a people for a people without a land postulates that Palestine exists outside time and place, as a land waiting for its original inhabitants, and that the Jew is a member of a wandering, timeless people. The land without a people is Zion, the country of origin the functional group always dreams of going back to, at the end of time. But the end of time, in the case of the Zionist enclave, begins in May 1948.
It is a peculiarly Zionist idea: the very ideology that postulates an organic Volk with an organic identity demands to return to the land of a parasitic, rootless people without a land, so that this people can be normalised and productivised, becoming "a people like all other peoples". The organic, separate identity turns out to be an illusion, indeed a burden the Jew has to shed in order to become a normal human being.
Double standards: For Zionist thought, Jews and gentiles are entirely different species. What applies to one does not apply to the other. Palestine, for instance, becomes Eretz Israel, completely empty of its non-existent inhabitants. If they do exist at all, they have no rights compared to those of the Jews.
The same double standards are manifested in every facet of Israeli life. The "Law of Return", for instance, gives any Jew anywhere the right to "return" to Palestine, after a "temporary" absence of 2,000 years, whereas a Palestinian who was expelled from his homeland some 50 years ago has no such rights.
Mobility: The Zionist settler enclave is quite mobile. Israeli society is basically an immigrant society, whose demographic make-up is always changing. The mobility of the Zionist state is also shown in its ability to adapt its function to the exigencies of the moment and to the demands of the colonial sponsor.
The paradoxical combination of centricity around the self (subject/limitless freedom) and around the non-Me (object/ruthless determination-pantheism/immanence): The Zionist state has turned itself into the locus of divine immanence around which all Jews must rally; indeed, they should all sacrifice themselves to its defence and development. Many members of the Jewish communities tend to believe that Israel is a great synagogue, with the prime minister as its chief rabbi. The Zionist state was described by Ben Gurion as a light unto all nations, an expression of the will of the Jewish people, the chosen people.
This self-bestowed sanctity, this self-centricity, has led the Zionist settlers to feel absolute limitless freedom: their army annexes any Arab land, and they call the territory extending from Pakistan to Morocco a "security zone".
At the same time, the Zionist settlers are centred around an object: the ghetto- or fortress-state. Even though they won successive military victories, they still keep fighting for survival (for the indigenous population refuses to vanish or stop resisting). This phenomenon was labelled by an Israeli historian "the impotence of victory".
The Zionist settlers, their limitless freedom notwithstanding, are entrapped in an endless cycle of meaningless wars. Young Israelis, giving up their lives for their homeland, perceive this as a secular, senseless sacrifice of Isaac by a godless Abraham. This focus around the non-me (the object), this ruthless determinism, has translated itself into suicidal myths such as Samson and Massada.
* The writer is professor emeritus of philosophy at Ain Shams University.
Part one: The function of outsiders
Part two: The kindness of strangers
Part three: A chosen community, an exceptional burden
