Perchè Netanyahu vuole gli ebrei europei in Israele?
They don’t need the security, and most aren’t eager for a complete cultural makeover.
washingtonpost.com
Sintesi personale
GERUSALEMME
L'anno scorso, a Bruxelles , Parigi e Copenaghen ci sono stati i attacchi letali contro gli ebrei da parte di giovani islamisti dalla appartenenzaa incerta . Le morti hanno innescato repulsione nelle capitali europee, ma anche una particolare risposta a Gerusalemme. Dopo Copenhagen, il primo ministro Benjamin Netanyahu ha dichiarato che "gli ebrei sono stati uccisi di nuovo sul suolo europeo solo perché sono ebrei", e, come ha fatto a Parigi
, ha esortato gli ebrei europei - in realtà, tutti gli ebrei, tra cui
gli americani - a emigrare in Israele , "la casa di ogni Ebreo."
"Israele vi aspetta a braccia aperte" . La maggior parte degli ebrei in
Occidente non ha bisogno della sua protezione o concepisce
Israele come "casa".
Si tratta di una cultura ebraica radicalmente
diversa, generata da una lingua straniera solo molto vagamente familiare
agli ebrei occidentali .
Israele non è il 21 ° arrondissement. Nel neo-sionismo popolare della destra la vittimizzazione di ebrei innocenti trascende la storia: la Pasqua Haggadah predice persecuzioni "in ogni generazione" come inestirpabile risposta alle 'elezione divina degli ebrei e raffigura lo stato ebraico risorto come redenzione.Il premier ,in vista delle prossime elezioni non divine, punti a rassicurare gli elettori che lui solo esprime dure verità contro le minacce eterne verso gli ebrei. Potrebbe anche essere che il messaggio in realtà sottintenda questo : annettere i territori occupati, con i loro residenti palestinesi, sarebbe molto più facile se milioni di coloni ebrei europei e americani si presentassero . E' inutile cercare di indurre gli ebrei a trasferirsi qui, per diversi motivi.
Innanzitutto i luoghi dove gli ebrei vivono ora avrebbe dovuto essere insopportabilmente pericoloso per loro, quando è completamente astorico credere che si stia prefigurando il ritorno agli anni 1930 e '40 - .
Atteggiamenti pubblici confermano un'era senza precedenti di tolleranza. Secondo un recente sondaggio Pew
, quasi il 90 per cento delle persone in Francia, l'82 per cento dei
tedeschi e il 72 per cento degli spagnoli afferma di avere un parere
favorevole sugli ebrei. I sondaggi in Gran Bretagna dimostrano che l'atteggiamento verso gli ebrei non si differenziano da quello verso i cristiani ed più positivo di quelli verso gli "asiatici".
Partiti razzisti sono aumentati in Francia, Austria, Ungheria e in altri paesi come il Fronte Nazionale . Questi partiti prendono di mira i musulmani, ma implicano anche l'antisemitismo. L'atteggiamento del pubblico nei confronti di Israele , in particolare con Netanyahu come suo volto, si è inasprito negli ultimi anni.
Questo è, senza dubbio, una reazione all'occupazione e agli
insediamenti, e la frustrazione si riversa sulle organizzazioni
ebraiche della diaspora che difendono tali politiche. Questo non è anitsemitismo, è in crescita la condanna morale. La stragrande maggioranza degli ebrei in Belgio, Francia e Danimarca non vive sotto la persecuzione. Attacchi spettacolari, ma rari non sono segni di sventura esistenziale.
Allo stesso tempo, potrebbe Israele sembrare un santuario per gli ebrei europei che, per qualsiasi motivo, si sentono insicuri? Tra il 2000 e il 2004, circa 1.000 israeliani sono stati uccisi in diversi attentati e attacchi.
Il muro che Likud ha costruito per separare i palestinesi e lo scudo
missilistico finanziato dagli Stati, hanno
drasticamente ridotto il numero delle vittime, ma non l'intenzione di
una minoranza decisa a uccidere: e i razzi degli Hezbollah non sono sulla Rive Gauche. Questa situazione contribuisce a spiegare perché circa il 15 per cento dei 1.000.000 ebrei russi che arrivarono in Israele nel 1990 hanno lasciato Israele per i paesi occidentali . Negli ultimi anni sempre più israeliani si sono trasferiti a Berlino Dalla Francia dei circa 700.000 ebrei ,6.000 ,soprattutto ortodossi, sono venuti in Israele lo scorso anno . E' difficile parlare di "immigrazione di massa."
La vera domanda è se potrebbero essere felici in questa cultura
israeliana . La maggior parte degli immigrati ebrei
occidentali deve attuare un progetto di
auto-trasformazione impegnativo . La diaspora di oggi è costituita da una generazione benestante economicamente e cresciuta in repubbliche liberali
Gerusalemme è ancora la casa della Hebrew University, agenzie governative e altre istituzioni israeliane,ma solo il 19 per cento dei suoi adulti sono ormai secolari.
Decine di migliaia di persone sono andate a Tel Aviv, cuore
pulsante di Israele,dove la vita laica è fiorente .La crescente disgiunzione
tra Gerusalemme e Tel Aviv riflette una lotta culturale sottile
Leader del partito Likud, da Menachem Begin a Netanyahu, hanno lavorato
per rendere Israele più uno "stato ebraico" che una democrazia
ebraica.
Elementi di destra si fanno beffe degli israeliani laici perché aprono uno
spazio civile per gli arabi israeliani, come lo scrittore
Sayed Kashua, che conosce la cultura israeliana e le norme che regolano la società (Kashua, esasperato per il razzismo vincente, ora vive in Illinois.)
In altre parole i pericoli per gli ebrei, il fallimento del liberalismo, le minacce esistenziali fanno parte della mitologica fondazione di Israele likudiana .Progressisti israeliani sono più scettici.
"Siamo ebrei danesi, ma siamo Danesi," ha dichiarato Jeppe Juhl, un portavoce della comunità ebraica in Danimarca.
"Non sarà il terrore che ci fa andare in Israele." Il che è un altro
modo per dire che la maggior parte resterà
Bernard Avishai teaches at Hebrew University and Dartmouth College. He is the author of “The Hebrew Republic.”
JERUSALEM
This past year, Brussels, Paris and Copenhagen
have been scenes of lethal attacks against Jews by benighted young
Islamists in uncertain international networks. The deaths have triggered
revulsion in European capitals but also a particular response in
Jerusalem. After Copenhagen, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared that “Jews have been murdered again on European soil only because they were Jews,” and, as he did after Paris,
he exhorted European Jews — actually, all Jews, including Americans —
to emigrate to Israel, “the home of every Jew.” With reporters present,
Netanyahu presented his Cabinet with a $50 million plan to accommodate
“mass immigration.” “Israel is waiting for you with open arms,” he said.
Netanyahu
is also, presumably, waiting for the messiah. But even if the summons
is sincere, most Jews in the West don’t need his protection — or
conceive of Israel as their “home.” Life in Europe is just not perilous
or alien in the way he implies, and even if it were, Israel is no easier
to move to than any other country. It is, as it was intended to be, a
radically different Jewish culture, engendered by a very foreign tongue
only vaguely familiar to Western Jews from their liturgy. Israel is not
the 21st arrondissement, and it cannot provide some comfortably Jewish
yet pluralistic idyll that worried Western Jews might be longing for
right now.
On some
level, Netanyahu may simply have defaulted to the neo-Zionist passion
play popular with his national-orthodox political allies, in which the
victimization of innocent Jews transcends history — the Passover
Haggadah predicts persecution “in every generation” as a venal,
ineradicable response to the Jews’ divine election — and which depicts
the risen Jewish state as redemption. He might be simply posturing for
next month’s less-divine election, reassuring voters that he, alone and
defiantly, speaks hard truths against perpetual threats to world Jewry.
He might even be implying what his party has said for years: that the
problem of annexing the occupied territories, along with their
Palestinian residents, would be much easier if millions of European and
American Jewish settlers showed up.
But instead, take Netanyahu at his word — that he sincerely cares
about the safety and happiness of diaspora Jews. Even so, it is futile
to try to induce them to move here, for several reasons.For “mass immigration” to make sense, the places where Jews now live would have to be insufferably dangerous for them, or at least Israel would have to be comparatively safer. Yet while European democracies are not without their hatreds, ethnic frictions and sociopaths (human beings live there), it is completely ahistorical to believe they are failing Jews, or any other group, in ways that are reminiscent of the 1930s and ’40s — a period from which Netanyahu draws dubious lessons, even as he understandably urges us to remember it. Any citizen of the European Union can freely travel, work and invest across member countries. This may make things easier for terrorists, too, alas, but it is a tribute to federal and liberal institutions that emerged after the war and remain resilient.
Public attitudes bear out an unprecedented era of tolerance — one that is in no danger of collapse. According to a recent Pew poll,
almost 90 percent of people in France, 82 percent of Germans and 72
percent of Spaniards say they have a favorable opinion of Jews. Polls in
Britain show that attitudes toward Jews are about as positive (and about as negative) as attitudes toward Christians and more positive than those toward “Asians.”
Racist fringe parties have risen in France, Austria, Hungary and some other European states; France’s National Front,
for instance, commands about a fifth of the electorate. These parties
largely target Muslims, but they also imply anti-Semitism. And public attitudes toward Israel,
especially with Netanyahu as its face, have soured in recent years.
This is, no doubt, a reaction to occupation and settlements, and the
frustration spills over to various diaspora Jewish organizations that
defend those policies. But this not anti-Semitism; it is growing moral
condemnation. Nor are the overwhelming majority of Jews in Belgium,
France and Denmark living under persecution. Spectacular but rare
attacks are not signs of existential doom.
At the same time,
might Israel seem like a sanctuary for European Jews who, for whatever
reasons, feel unsafe? I have often landed at Ben-Gurion Airport and
heard passengers break into applause. But, surely, this is hardly like
landing on a Haganah ship in 1947. Indeed, the frictions with
Palestinians that make for political tensions in Europe make for actual
violence in Israel: Between 2000 and 2004, about 1,000 Israelis
were killed in various bombings and attacks. The wall that Likud built
to separate Palestinians, and the missile-protection shield funded by
the United States, have dramatically reduced the number of casualties
but not the intention of a determined minority to kill: Hezbollah’s
thousands of rockets are not, after all, trained on the Left Bank. This situation helps explain why about 15 percent of the 1 million Russian Jews who came to Israel in the 1990s have left for Western countries. In recent years, more Israelis have moved to Berlin than French have moved to Jerusalem: Out of France’s 700,000 Jews, perhaps 6,000 mainly orthodox immigrants came to Israel last year — three times the number from the United States, but hardly “mass immigration.” Until the rise of fascism, no exodus of Western Jews came to the Yishuv. Since fascism’s defeat, the same pattern holds true.
If
security, then, will not move diaspora Jews to emigrate, the real
question for them is whether they could be happy in this fractured
Israeli culture, which, among other things, disputes even such terms as
“diaspora.” Most Western Jewish immigrants will not even begin to
appreciate the complexity of this question until they become fluent in
Hebrew, a project of self-transformation as challenging for them as it
was for Jews from the Russian Pale of Settlement in the 1890s to become
English-speaking Americans. Previous generations of immigrants came out
of dire need, with no other options; today’s diaspora Jews are
comfortable Westerners with iPhones, frequent-flier programs and private
schools — and a feel for liberal commonwealth. (Is Bernard-Henri Lévy
not, for God’s sake, French?)
Netanyahu implies that the Law of
Return, which renders Jewish immigrants into citizens, can make them
Israelis as well. And some aspects of life here make it seem like
inhabitants simply transplanted their cultures wholesale: Owing to
ultra-orthodox Haredi Yiddish speakers and modern orthodox arrivistes
from New Jersey or Paris, there are pockets of Jerusalem in which Hebrew
is hardly spoken. (From their perspective, Israel is a bit like a
wondrous museum of Judaism, with archeological digs finding — or trumping up
— traces of David’s reign and settlers spreading out to biblical
places.) The once secular, middle-class neighborhood I live in, the
German Colony, is sprouting vacation apartments, yeshivas, synagogues,
New York delis and French restaurants. How easy it would be to move
there!
Jerusalem is still the home of Hebrew University, government agencies and other Israeli institutions. But only 19 percent
of its adults are now secular. Tens of thousands have left for Tel
Aviv, Israel’s beating heart, where the country’s unique secular life is
thriving and the transformation immigrants must undergo is much more
challenging than Netanyahu advertises. (I know; I went through it myself
after 1967, when Israel still seemed a pristine adventure.) In fact,
the growing disjunction between Jerusalem and Tel Aviv reflects a subtle
cultural struggle that most Western Jews, lacking Hebrew, can miss
completely.
Likud party leaders, from Menachem Begin to
Netanyahu, have worked to make Israel more of a “Jewish state” than a
Hebrew democracy. They’ve implied that the secular Israeliness born of
Labor Zionist state-building — kibbutz harvest festivals, the historical
scholarship of Hebrew University, modern Hebrew poetry — has produced
something inauthentic. On the settlements, “Israeliness” is an epithet, a
modern vision in which the innovations of the Hebrew enlightenment and
the promise of political normalcy falsely presume to overcome
persecution and religious law. Rightists also scoff at Israeliness
because it opens civil space for Israeli Arabs, such as the writer Sayed
Kashua, who know Israel’s language, music, celebrities, geography and
rules of the road, or lack of them more thoroughly than new Jewish
immigrants do. (Kashua, exasperated to see racism winning the argument,
now lives in Illinois.)
In other words, Europe’s dangers, the failure
of its liberalism, the murder of its Jews just for being Jews, the
intractability of existential threats — all of these Netanyahu fixations
are part of Israel’s founding mythology as Likud sees it. Progressive
Israelis are more skeptical. (That conservative vision of Europe is
common in Israeli street culture but often disputed in its literary
culture, dramatized in national remembrance days but ignored when
Israelis look for vacation spots.) And Netanyahu’s rhetorical bows to
Jewish statehood risk distracting from the imperative to become a
Hebrew-speaking Israeli. Apart from those in certain Jerusalem enclaves,
this imperative hits new immigrants hard once they start making their
lives. To be sure, the satisfactions of Hebrew culture are very great.
But they cannot be acquired without a struggle. What, for most Western
Jews, is the incentive to undertake that struggle?
“We’re Danish
Jews, but we’re Danish,” said Jeppe Juhl, a spokesman for the Jewish
community in Denmark. “It won’t be terror that makes us go to Israel.”
Which is another way of saying that, for most, nothing will. Then again,
terror can apparently draw Israelis to Europe — at least for a couple
of weeks. After Netanyahu’s exhortation, the mayors of Kiryat Gat and
Beit She’an, each running deficits, seized on the pretext of recruiting
French immigrants to organize Parisian junkets
for themselves and other municipal officials . Apparently, there is
some beauty in the West. You can take your Zionism only so far.
Commenti
Posta un commento