Alik Bakhshi
Israel and the simple truth
"The simple pure truth is rarely
is pure and never simple"
Oscar Wilde
The experience of civilization shows that all human interventions in nature turned out to be a mistake. Human society is also a part of nature, and although man carries within himself the possibility of all-round creativity, civilization has developed according to its own laws, independent of man. One historical formation was replaced by another without meaningful, purposeful human participation, that is, the ideology of a social formation was not first created, which humanity then followed. Philosophers and historians could only state the fact of the transition from a slave system to a feudal system and further to capitalism without prior theoretical justification for the inevitable emergence of a future formation.
At the end of the 19th century, among other major discoveries in natural science, the world was offered two ideologies (communism and Zionism), which, although they did not turn out to be valuable from the point of view of philosophy in relation to the first or universal social significance in relation to the second, but which left a significant mark on history those that have been put into practice.
One is K. Marx, suggesting the inevitable replacement of Capitalism by the era of Communism as a new social formation, a kind of earthly paradise for humanity. An attempt to put this ideology into practice was carried out in Russia using a violent method, which required the destruction of the Russian intelligentsia and active business executives. The experiment on society turned out to be no less bloody than the era of medieval obscurantism, lasted 70 years, with the club of the proletarian revolution raised over the World, and ended in complete collapse. It should be noted that initially the initiators of the experiment were mainly representatives of Jewish nationality; they later became dissidents and fled from the country of “communist paradise” they created.
I don’t want to examine in detail the mistakes of communist ideology, but, in my opinion, the main reason for its failure was that it provided for the creation of a new person, a certain individual of the communist type, based on the absurd assumption that the environment and conditions of upbringing can change the very nature of man. Therefore, the ideologists of Communism praised the scientific schemer Academician Lysenko to the skies, rejecting genetics, calling it a capitalist pseudoscience.
The other, the ideology of T. Herzl’s Zionism, was less global in nature and contained the goal of creating a state for the Jewish people. It was assumed that Jews from all over the World would gather in one place on Earth. Incredibly and in some ways even funny, when searching for territory for the future Jewish state, South America, Africa, and Crimea were considered before settling on Palestine. True, it should be noted that instead of Crimea, Stalin allocated land for Jews in the Far East, organizing the Jewish Autonomous Region there. This fact suggests that the idea of Zionism also took place among the leaders of the Great October Socialist Revolution in Russia, the majority of whom were Jews. It can be assumed with a high degree of probability that if in the confrontation between Stalin and Trotsky (Bronstein) the latter had the upper hand, then Crimea would become a Jewish republic.
In the end, after significant financial expenses and diplomatic efforts, after a fairly long period of time, including two World Wars and the Holocaust, the idea of Zionism was brought to life by the decision of the UN to allocate part of the territory of Palestine to the Jewish state. However, the Zionist program was not fully implemented because it was not possible to gather all the Jews in Israel. Jews did not want to leave prosperous countries for the sake of the Promised Land, and Israel was mainly settled by Jews from Eastern European countries, North Africa and the Middle East, relying on the full assistance of Jewish organizations encouraging repatriation, if this term can be used at all in this case. The fact is that all those who profess Judaism are Jews, but this does not mean at all that Jews represent an ethnically united people. European Jews differ from Moroccan Jews not only in appearance and traditions, but also in mentality; moreover, even in Israel the Faith has not united them, if we take into account that they pray every day in their own synagogues. Well, there’s no need to talk about Ethiopian Jews. For example, the Khazars, before accepting Islam, were Jews for a short time, so did they cease to be Khazars? Therefore, the word “repatriation” here is not identical to returning to the homeland. It’s the same as saying “repatriation of Christians.” So where should they repatriate? True, to a first approximation, the times of the Crusades can also be interpreted as the repatriation of European Christians to the homeland of the Faith in the Promised Land.
But let’s leave such reasoning aside and turn to the facts, because only they reflect reality: the state of Israel exists and it is strong economically and even more powerful militarily when compared with the surrounding Arab countries. Here we must take into account a very important circumstance that as strong as Israel is, it is also dependent on its only powerful ally - the United States, an ally without whose help it is difficult to imagine the possibility of the existence of a Jewish state. The fact is that, for well-known reasons, from the day of its formation Israel has been in a state of war with the Arabs and, introduced half a century ago, martial law has not been lifted to this day. It is clear that such a small state as Israel cannot withstand a hostile environment alone for so long, and America’s role as an ally is invaluable.
However, politics is pragmatic and in this regard, the quite reasonable question of what America benefits from friendship with Israel can cause confusion and bewilderment. Is there a clear answer as to what specific positive dividends America has by being in a military-political alliance with Israel? Sometimes the arguments in favor of the union are seen in the fact that Israel is an outpost of Democracy in the Middle East. But can a country that does not have a constitution, a country in which there is no separation of executive and legislative powers, a country in which religion is not separated from the state, a country with socialist economic principles, when the main financial and production means are in the hands of the state, and, finally, a country , which implements the policy of apartheid towards part of its population, be called democratic? And if we take a fundamental approach to this issue, then the outpost of Democracy in the Middle East is not Israel, but Turkey. The reason for the alliance between America and Israel lies on a completely different plane and is explained by the significant share of participation of American Jews in the financial and, as a consequence, political life of the country. It is thanks to the Jewish lobby of Congress that the United States allocates considerable financial resources from the state budget to help Israel, while providing military and political patronage. For the American taxpayer, this money disappears without a trace in the sands of the Middle East, bringing no benefit to America. Moreover, being an ally of a warring state, America puts itself under attack from the enemy. Israel's permanent war with the Palestinians has crossed the ocean and the tragedy of September 11 is the result of a bloody Middle East spectacle staged by the Jewish lobby with American money. For the Jewish lobby, Israel's interests are more important than America's interests. By blocking completely fair decisions of the UN Security Council condemning Israel for the occupation of Arab territories, the United States is forced to use double standards in politics. With the decision to deal with al-Qaeda, a continuous series of political mistakes by President Bush begins, because of all that was undertaken by the American president, there is nothing worthy of a positive assessment.
If it were not for close ties with Israel, America would not have problems with the Arabs. America had and still has a big problem with the Russians. Moscow, using the Arab-Israeli conflict, tried to attract Arab countries to its side and change the strategic situation in the Middle East, the main supplier of oil to the West, in its favor. And even today the idea of strangling a strategic enemy with fuel hunger still lingers in the minds of Kremlin strategists. By the way, here I would like to note that if Israel makes peace with the Arabs, the Russians will finally lose hope in implementing this plan. And here’s a paradox: neither the Russians nor the Jewish right-wingers want real peace between Arabs and Jews, despite their mutual fierce hatred. Truly, from love to hate there is only one step.
In my opinion, the main factor hindering the establishment of peace between Israel and the Arabs is the overseas patriotism of American Jews, who, having created a Jewish lobby in Congress, influence both US policy regarding the Arab-Israeli conflict and political life in Israel. Far from the real situation in Israel, they support the aggressive intentions of the Israeli right in terms of obstructing the creation of a Palestinian state and the annexation of territories in neighboring Syria and Lebanon.
It is important to note here that in their aggressiveness towards the Arabs, the Jews of America surpassed the Israelis themselves. Over the past 10–15 years, Israeli society has noticeably moved to the left, and this despite the fact that it has received almost a million immigrants from the USSR, who are 99 percent completely ardent opponents of granting a state to the Palestinian Arabs. To complete the understanding, it is necessary to take into account a very important detail, which is that, unfortunately, Soviet Jews have an imperial worldview, which they acquired in the USSR and, burdened with this baggage, went to other countries. This fact at first glance seems like a phenomenon, but it is quite understandable. If the presence of an imperial worldview among Russians, as the state of the forming people (a creative discovery of Russian nationalists in the field of linguistics), does not raise objections, then Soviet Jews acquired it as a result of the revolution and the formation of the USSR. The fact is that the Jews perceived the USSR as a single whole, because they were not an indigenous people with a corresponding habitat. In addition, Jews stood at the origins of the socialist revolution and constituted the majority among communist leaders. Using the slogan “proletarians of all countries unite,” they managed to unite the peoples of the empire who believed in the “bright future of communism.” True, among the people who found themselves in power, mostly, let’s say, not of Russian nationality, there were not even close proletarians! If we consider that in the consciousness of the Russian people, in addition to the imperial worldview, there is also Great Russian chauvinism, which was pointed out by Stalin, so beloved by the people, then, undoubtedly, the other peoples of the empire were destined for the unenviable role of younger brothers. In such circumstances, Soviet Jews were the real cementing nation of the Soviet Union, which could not but affect their worldview, which they retained after leaving the collapsed country.
The following fact is interesting; Despite strong patriotic feelings and love for Israel, Soviet Jews flocked to America and, oddly enough, to Germany, a country that, due to well-known historical events, would seem difficult to prefer to the Promised Land. By the way, it is quite possible that if it had not been for the Holocaust, there might not have been a Jewish state in Palestine. It is difficult to accuse people who want a better life, which is the same for everyone, of lack of patriotism, if we take into account that for most of them Israel is not the Motherland for which it is worth risking their well-being, or even their lives. The place where Faith was born does not always coincide with the concept of Motherland. For example, let us once again remember the Khazars, who converted to Judaism for a short time. For them, Israel could in no way be the Motherland, however, they did not become Arabs either, having converted to Islam.
In order to redirect the flow of Jewish immigrants to Israel, where it is vital to change the demographic situation, which is developing in the future not in favor of the state as a Jewish one, the World Jewish Congress managed to get America to allocate 10 billion dollars to Israel to receive repatriates from the Soviet Union and thereby close America. This is how the Great Aliyah of the 90s happened; About a million Jews came to Israel. Quite a few of them subsequently moved to the United States and Canada, not only maintaining patriotism, but also even more showing aggressive intentions towards the Palestinians, calling from overseas those remaining in Israel to tighten military action against the Palestinians. For example, a former Russian-speaking Israeli journalist, once in New York, literally goes out of his way to urgently convince the Israelis not to conduct peace negotiations with the Palestinians and not to leave the occupied territories. Yes, from a distance everything seems simpler and courage is immeasurable, especially when your warlike calls, leading to nowhere, must be carried out by others.
The Arab-Israeli conflict has been going on for more than half a century, in which neutral countries sometimes become unwitting participants, since scores between Jews and Arabs are settled wherever possible, regardless of borders and methods of struggle. Hostages are taken, planes are hijacked, hotels in Buenos Aires and Istanbul are blown up, cars and telephone receivers are blown up. Like a funnel, countries whose people are far removed from the Middle East conflict are being drawn into the depths of disaster. For example, the Afghan people became victims of this conflict because Bush, in pursuit of Bin Laden, started a war with the Taliban, who are very far from clarifying the relationship between Arabs and Jews. If we take into account that for Pashtuns there is no border between Afghanistan and Pakistan, then theoretically the theater of military operations could spread to Pakistan. But I don’t think it will come to that, because Bush doesn’t have time for this fatal mistake. Destabilizing the situation in a nuclear power is a very dangerous idea.
All attempts to suppress Palestinian resistance are in vain. At the same time, Israel used all possible military actions, except perhaps napalm and the atomic bomb. If any military action on the part of Israel could solve the problem, it would have been implemented long ago. It is simply not possible in nature to force the Palestinians to give up their freedom. The problem cannot be solved by violence. Moreover, there is a threatening tendency for Israel to surrender its positions both politically and militarily. After all, this is the only way to interpret the withdrawal from Gaza and the complete failure in the Second Lebanon. The right camp, having killed Yitzhak Rabin and recklessly rejected the Saudi peace initiative, is bringing the country closer to destruction. Without peace with the Arabs, Israel has no future, but this peace is becoming increasingly elusive.
In my opinion, the UN made a big mistake by deciding to divide the territory of Palestine into two states, without providing them with reasonable security and leaving the Jews and Arabs to maintain the border between the Jewish and Arab states themselves. The UN should have foreseen that confrontation was inevitable and the need for the presence of a third force on the border dividing line was obvious.
The time has come to correct the mistake and bring UN troops into Israel, dividing Jews and Arabs along the border provided for by the once famous decision. There is no other real option to end the Middle East conflict today. True, there is one hypothetical solution - to give Palestinians equal rights with Jews, but in order to preserve the Jewish character of the state, it is necessary that the bulk of Jews from America move to Israel. By the way, finally, the goal of Zionism to gather all Jews into one state will be fully realized. However, from this moment some unpleasant questions arise.
If American Jews move to Israel, they will lose their representation in the power structures of the United States and Israel will certainly lose the traditional support that it owed to the Jewish lobby. The departure of Jews from the political life of America cannot but affect the political and economic situation of the Jewish state. How will American politicians behave, freed from the pressure they experienced from the Jewish lobby? On the other hand, it is very doubtful that Jews, once in Israel, will retain the financial well-being that they had in America. The fact is that it was achieved among other nations and it is not a fact that in the Promised Land the Jews will maintain the same level of prosperity that they had in Galut.
Peoples differ in mentality: - a kind of hereditary constant that determines a people, its character, behavior, visual difference and even way of existence. For example, if you give the gypsies land, you say, cultivate it, let it feed you, build houses, in a word, live on it as you see fit. The next morning you won't find them there. They have a different way of being. They won’t “steal horses” from themselves.
However, history and fate do not tolerate a subjunctive interpretation, and everything is heading towards the fact that the world community will be forced to introduce international forces into Israel, which will establish a state border, dividing the two states. The UN must correct the mistake made half a century ago.
I would like to hope that Zionism will not suffer the fate of Communism.
“Fate and history are written with one hand”
Paulo Coelho
4.10.08
