Showing posts with label israel. Show all posts
Showing posts with label israel. Show all posts

Thursday, 9 October 2025

This Is Not The Way

"In the six decades of its existence, the State of Israel, far from solving the problem of anti-Semitism, has exacerbated it, and failed to increase the collective security of its Jewish citizens or alleviate the existential anxiety of Jews around the world."

So writes David Goldberg, Rabbi Emeritus of the Liberal Jewish Synagogue in London in his book This Is Not The Way: Jews, Judaism and Israel. I read it after a reference in an article by Max Hastings in the Times recently, knowing that I have strong instinctive and long-standing feelings about the actions of Israel in the Middle East but conscious that could represent an anti-Semitism which I didn't think I possessed.

“When Jewish representatives insist, as the Israel PR Lobby does, on an axiomatic linkage between anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism, as though they are two aspects of the same seamless, linear continuity, not only are we guilty of sloppy, ahistorical oversimplification but we are also failing to treat a subject vital to our well-being with the intellectual rigour it deserves.”

This book aims to apply that rigour and that is what attracted me to it; I needed to find out what Jews thought of the behaviour of the State of Israel. I have been shocked by its recent actions in Gaza, the West Bank and Lebanon but am I guilty of not understanding how Jews throughout the world feel existentially threatened?

Right from the beginning, Goldberg makes the distinction between the Diaspora and the state of Israel. Chapter 1 (of 8) is entitled “Zionism triumphant, the Diaspora subservient”. 

In Chapter 3 the author explores the history of anti-Semitism, firstly over centuries in Christian culture and more recently (particularly post-Holocaust, post-settlement) in the Muslim tradition, concluding that “we Jews do have justifiable cause to be concerned. Anti-Semitism has always been a light sleeper and requires constant monitoring." Nevertheless he asserts that "it should be possible to distinguish between anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism, particularly when the latter is not questioning Israel's right to exist but asking critical questions of government policy vis-à-vis Israel being the Jewish state rather than a state for all its citizens".

Goldberg scurries through the centuries to assess the causes and effects of declining Jewishness, through "marrying out", conversions to Christianity and the perceived need to sidestep (real or imagined) anti-Semitic barriers to acceptance, promotions and the like. He discusses the "absurdity" of the Law of Return granting automatic Israeli citizenship to such as immigrants from the Soviet Union but denying them the rights to Jewish marriage or burial. Israel's first government in 1948, under the secularist Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion, "granted control over Jewish status to the [ultra-Orthodox] religious bloc as its price for entering his coalition cabinet...hence the unseemly horse-trading that regularly ensues when a coalition government needs to to strike a deal between religious demands on the one hand and the civic expectations of the overwhelming majority of the Israeli electorate and world Jewry on the other...even though less than 20 per cent of the Israeli electorate ever votes for a religious party and in the USA, Israel's staunchest Diaspora ally, about 90 per cent of Jewry is resolutely non-Orthodox."

There are some middle chapters - "Who is a Jew?", "God is dead, long live Behaviourism" and "How 'holy' is Holy Scripture?" - which stretched my patience, being a philosopher-historian's analysis of what Judaism is all about. The author even ventures into whether and in what way God exists and the existence of the universe, things which interest me but which I can find discussed in other sources if I choose to. My primary interest was elsewhere and addressed by the final chapter "Jewish ethics and the State of Israel", which was central to my search for an answer to the question "I abhor the actions being taken by Israel; does that make me anti-Semitic?"

In order to decipher whether I am anti-Zionist I need to understand what Zionism is.

"For more than sixty years now, Judaism as the religion of the Jewish people has been sustained by Zionism, its secular alter ego. The early Zionists, led by Herzl, were adept at appropriating the metaphors of faith - the promise of a 'land flowing with milk and honey', the yearning for 'next year in Jerusalem' - and adapting them to their own secular purposes. In that way, Zionism, the newcomer among Jewish responses to modernity, positioned itself in the mainstream of Jewish history as a fulfilment of, not a rupture with, the Jewish past."

Returning to chapter 1, Goldberg asserts that "the voluntary liquidation of the Diaspora and the ingathering of the exiles in their ancestral homeland would be the consummation of the Zionist vision, not merely achieving Lebensraum but bolstering numbers. Since the state was established in 1948, the constant plaint of its leaders has been 'If only we had more Jews.' More Jews to populate the Galilee; more Jews to make the Negev bloom; more Jews to counter-balance the increasing numbers of Arab citizens of Israel; more Jews to provide a bulwark against the three-times-higher Palestinian birth rate in Gaza and the West Bank. All this because the greatest threat to Israel's long-term viability in a hostile environment is not the military but the demographic one."

He concludes that there comes a point at which all Jews worldwide that want to come to live in Israel have done so. Hence Zionism morphs from the original desire for a Jewish homeland in Palestine to an assertion of its national identity by pushing robustly against any perceived boundaries to its geographical and philosophical existence. He analyses the development of West Bank settlement into effectively an unwarranted land grab. In June 1967 Israel "conquered the Territories [Sinai, Gaza, the Golan Heights and the West Bank] in a justified war of self-defence....settlement building began almost by default...soon though religious zealots overturned the likelihood of selective settlement construction based on military requirements....ever since then, settler pressure groups either of the aggressively nationalist or the religiously fundamentalist variety, or a combination of both, have been the tail wagging successive government dogs. The natural order has been overturned...an original settler population of a few hundred on the West Bank in 1968 has grown to around 230,000 today."

Israeli politicians of all hues have backed themselves into a corner from which they don't know how to extricate themselves, after years of lazy acceptance of the status quo, sneaky admiration for the new breed of Zionist pioneers planting the Israeli flag on remote West Bank hilltops... [so can they] face down settler-posturing and convince a dubious public that a solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict is at least attainable; that it is in Israel's best interests to have for a neighbour a stable, demilitarised Palestinian state [that] marginalises the the irredentist agenda of extremist factions such as Hamas?

The author concludes that only a "leap of the imagination" in the form of a partnership of its own citizens and Diaspora Jews can change the mindset of the nation.

For me, this has been a been a very worthwhile read. Despite the author's obvious despair at so much of Israeli government policy and action, he analyses all the issues as fairly as he is able and gave me a great deal of enlightenment on an issue which has been brought so vividly to the world in these last two years.

"Whether a Jewish state was the solution to the 'Jewish problem' or merely the new Jewish problem has yet to be decided."

Wednesday, 1 October 2025

A century

In Japan, you get a silver sake cup when you turn 100. Some Swiss cantons give engraved cowbells. Ireland gives a €2,540 "centenarian bounty" - not a once-off, you get it every year until you die.

I asked ChatGPT how many centenarians the Irish currently have, who is the oldest living example and who holds the longevity record. Apparently around 600 currently alive. As for examples, you can imagine records might be a bit patchy - and maybe private; a woman died last year aged 111, another born in 1911 died aged 113. Women worldwide average around 5 years longer lives than men.

More generally around the world, centenarians get a letter from the monarch/President/local Mayor and sometimes elaborate public celebrations/raucous parties. In Israel centenarians are invited to the President’s Residence for tea, group photos, and a party with other 100-year-olds. Sounds a riot.

The 600 Irish centenarians cost their taxpayers €1.5 million a year in total. Peanuts in overall terms. Good for them. Despite UK politicians' best efforts, we could probably afford that. Better than a letter/telegram/WhatsApp message from the King.

By the way, Japan (123 million population) has over 92,000 centenarians. That’s by far the highest per capita anywhere in the world. It's the sake.

Thursday, 19 June 2025

We’ve got some but you can’t have any

"Iran will not be allowed to develop nuclear weapons". The nations which say this just happen to be those who already have such weapons. “It’s OK for us but not for you” seems to be the mantra. If it’s fine for “us” to demand you forgo such weapons should not “we” get rid of ours?

The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) has been signed by 191 countries since its inception in 1968. Five of those countries were given special recognition for already having nuclear weapons - USA, Russia (earlier the Soviet Union), China, France and the UK. Since the Treaty has disarmament as one of its three pillars, it is suggested that these five were expected to get rid of their nuclear weapons over time [some hopes!]. North Korea left the Treaty in 2003 after years of trying to have it both ways by continuing to contravene the Treaty whilst remaining a member, and conducted a nuclear test in 2006. Three major nations never signed the Treaty: India and Pakistan actually conducted nuclear tests in the 1990s, Israel has never confirmed whether it has nuclear weapons. Which leads us to Iran.

In 2010 Iran's Supreme Leader Ali Hosseini Khamenei issued a fatwa declaring the use of nuclear weapons as forbidden by Islam and stated that Iran was not pursuing them. Iran remains a member of the Treaty and has consistently maintained it has the right (under the Treaty) to enrich uranium to the level required for the production of peaceful nuclear energy. Three days ago Iran announced that its parliament was drafting a bill to withdraw from the NPT.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) passed its latest resolution regarding Iran on June 12, formally declaring Iran non‑compliant with its nuclear safeguards obligations. As Israel is not a member of the Treaty, the IAEA has no jurisdiction to inspect its facilities.

Does anyone actually know whether Iran has nuclear weapons or is imminently planning to build and use one? Israel believes they could have the capability soon and is determined that that shouldn't happen. That's easy to say if you've already got your own. I don't want Iran to have nuclear weapons. Neither do I want Israel to. Or India or Pakistan for that matter.

I fear the Non-Proliferation Treaty is pointless.