Following my previous post about Zionism and Israel, it is important to point out that, while I clearly state that Zionism and a Jewish State of Israel go hand-in-hand, I am not overtly stating whether that is good or bad, at least from a world political perspective. Clearly, the preservation of Judaism is advanced, or assisted, by the existence of a religious Jewish State of Israel.
But is 1948 post WWII preservation politics applicable today?
First, one should note that not everyone within Judaism agrees in the validity of a Jewish State in Israel. For one thing, it contradicts the Torah and the teachings that the Jewish State of Israel will be founded by the Messiah. As such, a man-made state cannot truly be considered a Jewish State without either (A) believing that David Ben Gurion was the Messiah, or (B) dismissing the notion that the true State of Israel will be founded by the Messiah.
So the notion of a truly Jewish state is not, by many accounts, possible today. However, the world leaders who fought for establishment of Israel didn't have that in mind anyway. The Socialist Zionists like Ben Gurion who founded Israel weren't looking to acheive anything that the Torah or Talmud predicted. After all, pure Zionism and pure Socialism are, theoretically, diametrically apposite political views.
So what about Palastine?
In 1918 the Ottoman empire (read: modern-day Iraq) was dismantled, and in 1920 the League of Nations estblished the British Mandate of Palastine in the area now under disagreement, including modern day Israel. The term "Palastine" then, however, did not imply an Arab or Muslim land ... in fact it envisioned a "Palastine" consisting of Arabs, Middle Eastern Muslims (including displaced Persians) as well as Jews living together in the land. Middle Eastern and European Jews were migrating to the area to "set down their flag" - and were establishing state-like infrastructure there. Nobody was talking, at least very loudly yet, about the establishment of a Jewish State in the Middle East.
Most American and European Jews opposed Zionism, arguing that the West offered a safe homeland for Jews - the absorption of two million Jews in America during this time, for example, gave some fringe groups ammunition to argue that in fact America was Zion. But all of this debate, and indeed even the settling of Palastine by Jews, was relatively small potatoes compared to what would happen next.
The rise of Adolf Hitler in Germany in 1933 dashed the idea of a Western European, or even American, Jewish homeland. As Nazi Germany began producing a flood of Jewish refugees worldwide, more Jews began to move toward the concept of Zionism as a matter of self-preservation. More Jews made Aliya (literally, "moved up") to Palastine, and the situation there grew worse as Arabs became uneasy with the loss of balance in the region. The Arabs rioted, and the British Mandate began restricting Jewish immigration to the area. The British Labour Party supported Jewish immigration. In 1944 the British Labour Party issued a public declaration in support of a Jewish majority in Palestine, and in favor of the population transfer of Arabs out of Palestine. The statement said "Let the Arabs be encouraged to move out as the Jews move in ... The Arabs have many wide territories of their own." While the British political elite may have supported the establishment of a Jewish state, the British rank-and-file civil servants did not, and pressed for troops to prevent Jewish immigration into the area as the Holocaust heated up.
This is a key point, and it is why denial of the Holocaust is so important to those who argue that Jewish Israel should be abolished or destroyed. It is virtually impossible today to "destroy" Israel by force... there is simply too much support for Israel worldwide, if even only in the U.S. So the only way that Anti-Israel groups feel they can achieve a true pre-1948 Palastinian state is to argue that the underlying reason for the establishment of the State of Israel - the Holocaust - did not happen.
The Jewish settlers within Palastine formed armies, and began openly fighting the British troops that were stationed in Palastine to prevent immigration. This prepared the land for an eventual flood of Jewish refugees as WWII ended; displaced Jews who did not want to return home to lands that had been prisons and death camps for them and their families and felt betrayed by France, England, and even the US had a new place to go... and armies waiting to protect them.
Sympathy grew for Jews as the depth and severity of the Holocaust became apparent. Guilt over not having stopped Hitler sooner, or doing more to help Jews out of the death camps, led to a fairly significant swing of public opinion toward establishment of a Jewish state in Palastine. The proposition that Jews could live in peace and security in non-Jewish societies was certainly a difficult one to defend in 1945. Harry S. Truman was this cause's champion, and was able to push his agenda through the United Nations. Britain at this point was desparate to pull out of Palastine, and the Soviet Union was looking to establish more influence there. The establishment of a Socialist State of Israel was perfect for all the main world players. Denying the Arabs, who had sided with Hitler during WWII, their "promised land" was an unfortunate side effect, but as the saying goes, "The Spoils of War..."
This is really a lot more than I wanted to write about this. But we must remember the historical reasons for the muddle we're in today before we jump to insensitive or historcially ignorant conclusions, such as "Israel's subsidising of land for Jewish immigrants hurts the peace process..." as Jimmy Carter proposes. I am also congnizant of the historical pain that Arabs feel, having been betrayed in the promise of a Palastinian homeland. But almost since Day 1, Palastinians have been offered some form of autonomous homeland side-by-side with Israel - and until fairly recently, have rejected any offer that fell short of complete territorial control. And since Day 1, Jews have had a safe haven (albeit, not as safe lately, due to regular attacks from Palastinians and Hezbollah) in Israel, as was the intention of the United States, Britain, and the United Nations from the start. Zion, meaning a safe haven for Jews, has always been the foundation of Israel. Jimmy Carter should re-study his history before laying blame.
