Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, July 1987, page
4
Special Report
From Dreyfus to Pollard
By Lutfi Al-Abed
According to the Encyclopedia Britannica,
Alfred Dreyfus was the son of a wealthy Jewish textile manufacturer.
He entered the French Army in 1882 and by 1889 he had risen to the
rank of captain. In 1894, while he was assigned to the French War
Ministry, he was accused of selling military secrets to the German
military attache. On December 22, 1894, he was convicted and sentenced
to life imprisonment. A massive public campaign was launched for
his release. Consequently, he was retried in 1899 and was again
found guilty. He was then sentenced to 10 years imprisonment. In
1904 a retrial was granted, and two years later all previous convictions
were reversed.
Herzl: Assimilation Impossible for Jews
The Dreyfus Affair, which dominated French political
life for nearly 12 years, was attributed to what came to be called
anti-Semitism. The perception that Dreyfus' second conviction resulted
not from evidence of his guilt but from an unwillingness by the
French court to admit the first conviction had been erroneous also
paved the way to widespread acceptance of Zionism. The affair attracted
the attention of Austrian-born Theodor Herzl, a non-religious Jew
who at the time was the Paris correspondent of the Vienna Neue
Freie Presse. The Dreyfus case led Herzl to conclude that if
such an injustice against a Jewish officer could go uncorrected
for so long, even in free, republican France, one of the few countries
in Europe to grant Jews full citizenship, then assimilation was
impossible for Jews even in Western democracies, and that Jews must
therefore organize a state of their own. In 1897 Herzl convened
the first world congress of Zionists in Basel, Switzerland. After
that he entered into unsuccessful negotiations with Turkey and Britain
for a mass Jewish settlement in Palestine or the Sinai Peninsula.
Herzl was willing to accept Britain's alternative offer of land
in Uganda, East Africa, but this scheme was violently opposed by
other delegates to the Zionist Congress of 1903.
Now, nearly a century after the Dreyfus case, an American
Jew, Jonathan Jay Pollard, has been sentenced to life imprisonment
by a Washington, DC court for passing Israel hundreds of top secret
documents he obtained as a civilian intelligence analyst for the
US Navy. During the interval between the Dreyfus and Pollard cases,
many significant developments have taken place, starting with the
first Zionist Conference's premise that Jews cannot be assimilated,
even in Western democratic societies like France. In fact, this
basic tenet of the Zionist ideology has contributed to the alienation
of many Jews in the societies where they are living, and to the
rejection or scapegoating of Jews by the general public or the ruling
party in some of those countries. In Hitler's Germany and some of
its World War II allies, Jews became the victims of waves of persecution
and mass murder. However, the Zionist movement not only survived
those tragic events, it even used them to mobilize support for a
Jewish state, not in Uganda but in Palestine. This had become possible,
thanks to Britain's Balfour Declaration of 1917 which, just 20 years
after the first Zionist Congress, was originally proposed to the
British government as a means to secure backing for the Allies in
World War I from Jews in Russia, the United States, and even in
Germany and the Austro-Hungarian Empire. Just 30 years after the
Balfour Declaration, the United Nations passed its resolution of
November 29, 1947, which partitioned Palestine between its Arab
and Jewish inhabitants. This gave Jews the right to have a state
of their own in part of Palestine. Just 20 years after the Partition
Resolution, Israel seized the remainder of Palestine during the
Six-Day War of June 1967.
Has Zionism Made Jews Any Safer?
The rationale for all of these developments was to
provide for the safety of Jews in one country. The unasked question
is whether these actions made the Jews living outside Israel more
or less secure. The facts are that, nearly 40 years after the establishment
of the state of Israel, there are still far more Jews in the so-called
diaspora than in Israel, and the Jews leaving Israel to return to
the diaspora outnumber those leaving the diaspora to settle in Israel.
Now, after the Pollard affair, will Jews leaving Israel
to join their more numerous brethren in the West find things changing
as a result of Israel's recent actions? American Jewish leaders
say no, in public, but clearly are exasperated with Israel, in private.
Whereas the innocent Dreyfus found Christian intellectuals and prominent
personalities to launch a campaign for his release, no such thing
has occurred in Pollard's case. On the contrary, the fact that Israel
took advantage of his willingness to transfer his loyalty from the
land of his birth to the Jewish State has alerted both security
officials and ordinary citizens in the US and Europe to the possibility
that Jews working in sensitive positions can be manipulated, either
through appeals to Zionist idealism or coercion, by an Israel that
has demonstrated a willingness to do so. The Pollard affair has
introduced elements of alienation and suspicion into the Jewish
experience in the West in general and the US in particular.
Israel Increasingly Isolated
Who is responsible? Is it the Americans, whose unquestioning
support for Israel is well established? Is it the Europeans, who
since World War II have gone out of their way to atone for the reservations
their fathers once expressed openly about the Jews in their midst?
Or is it the Zionist movement itself that is endangering the status
of Jews everywhere, and particularly in the US, where so many Jews
openly declare that their "promised land" is the land
of their birth. The Zionist enterprise to attract Jews to their
own "land of milk and honey" has never attracted much
more than financial and moral support from American Jews, few of
whom have settled permanently in Israel. Nor, it seems, can it retain
those Jews who leave the Soviet Union with exit visas for Israel,
but then change destinations when they arrive in Vienna. The state
that 40 years ago managed to mobilize international support for
its establishment, and to win the sympathy of large sectors of people
around the world in its initial battles with the Palestinians and
other Arabs, now finds itself increasingly isolated after betraying
its staunchest friend, the US. Whereas the Dreyfus case was the
catalyst for and precursor of Zionism, the Pollard case may signal
the beginning of the end of the Zionist dream. The loss of international
moral support would inevitably lead to the decrease of the external
material support upon which Israel has become so totally dependent
since its creation 39 years ago. It is by no means certain that
the Pollard case signals the moral failure of Israel, but if the
tide of Western public opinion has finally turned against Israel,
it certainly will not take another 40 years for the world to find
this out.
Lutfi al-Abed, a Palestinian-born resident of
Lebanon, is a consultant on Arab political affairs. |