The Zionism Debate at the UN is Beside the Point

By Rachelle Marshall

Using one of the murkiest non sequiturs in the history of international discourse, President Bush told the UN General Assembly at its opening session on September 23 that to equate Zionism with racism is to "forget the terrible plight of Jews in World War II and indeed throughout history. " He did not explain why the past suffering of the Jews of Europe entitles the current government of Israel to be beyond criticism for its racial policies. On the other hand, the US position in the UN debate over Zionism has never been based on logic. In 1975, when the General Assembly passed Resolution 3379 that described Zionism as "a form of racism and racial discrimination," the US ambassador to the UN, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, complained that the resolution was unfair to Israel because Israel "was founded to be a Jewish state" (italics in the original). Supporters of apartheid in South Africa might just as logically argue that the Republic of South Africa was founded to be a white nation and therefore should not be accused of racism.

A major reason why supporters of the Israeli government are able to spread a smokescreen over Israel's racist practices is that the two sides in the UN debate over Zionism are arguing at cross purposes. The question that most vitally concerns the survival of the Palestinian people and the nature of Israel's future is not whether Zionism is a racist philosophy but whether Israel is a racist state.

As a concept, Zionism has been endlessly debated among Zionists as well as between Zionists and others. To many Jews Zionism means primarily the movement to establish a homeland where Jewish people could find refuge from persecution. Its founders saw Zionism as providing the only means of escape from the pervasive anti-Semitism of nineteenth-century Europe. Some of the early Zionists, such as Theodore Herzl and Chaim Weizmann, advocated a Jewish state in which the Arabs of Palestine would play only a subordinate role. Weizmann, in fact, recognized that Arabs were in the great majority in that country but hoped most of them could be made to leave.

Others, like Martin Buber and Judah Magnes, believed that since the Arabs of Palestine as well as the Jews had national aspirations, the Zionist movement must be concerned with finding a solution equitable to both peoples. Saying, in Isaiah's words, "Zion will be redeemed with justice," Buber urged that Palestine become a haven for Jews fleeing persecution but with a bi-national political structure. To Buber, Ahad Ha'am, and other advocates of a bi-national state, Zionism meant a chance for Jews to experience spiritual and intellectual renewal, in a society based on justice, equality, and hard work.

Like Magnes himself, their vision of Zionism died in 1948, when Israel became a Jewish state and Palestinian Arabs were forced into exile or into subservience. UN Resolution 2106, adopted in 1965, defines racial discrimination as "any distinction, restriction, or preference based on race, color, descent or national origin. " Under this definition Israel has been a racist state since its beginning.

With 92 percent of Israel's land considered to be the "inalienable property of the Jewish people" (under the Development Authority Law), Arabs are prevented from living in any but limited areas. Although Israeli Arabs theoretically are entitled to equal treatment, their houses are demolished to make way for Israeli Jews. Last June, for instance, the Arab residents of Ramyah, in the Galilee, were ordered to evacuate the town by September 16, when it was to be demolished to make way for the expansion of the Jewish city of Carmel. More than a hundred similar Arab communities in the Galilee are also threatened with obliteration.

For the nearly two million Palestinians in the occupied territories the harshness of Israeli rule recalls the darkest days of South Africa's apartheid regime. Inhabitants of the West Bank and Gaza must obtain permits for almost every activity, from traveling to another town to planting a fruit tree. These permits are issued arbitrarily and frequently refused. Through stifling restrictions on movement, land confiscations, and almost constant curfews, Israel has made it almost impossible for most Palestinians to earn a living. Unemployment in the occupied territories is now close to 75 percent.

The Israeli government demonstrates its most blatant racism in the value it places on human lives. The official consensus in Israel is that a Jewish life is far more precious than a Palestinian's. A Palestinian who murders an Israeli Jew is either killed on the spot or disappears into prison forever. Israelis who kill Palestinians are punished lightly if at all. Early in September two members of the security forces were sentenced to six months in prison for the deliberate murder of a Palestinian prisoner in 1989. Rabbi Moshe Levinger served three months in jail after shooting to death a Hebron storekeeper. Israeli settlers who rampage through Palestinian villages terrorizing the inhabitants are almost never punished—indeed, they are armed by the government.

Finally, who can question Israel's official racism when the Law of Return allows anyone in the world born of a Jewish mother to settle permanently in Israel, whereas native-born Palestinians forced into exile are either barred from returning at all or allowed only brief visits?

In his speech to the opening session of the UN, President Bush asked for the "reaffirmation of faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women in nations large and small. " As a starter, the Bush administration should take a hard look at what is happening in the state of Israel today. If the US is to take the lead in promoting a reaffirmation of human rights, it has no option but to withdraw support from a government that systematically and defiantly violates those rights. Such a move would be welcomed not only by Palestinians but also by the many Israelis for whom Zionism still means building a just society, in which Jews can live side by side with their neighbors in peace and security. It isn't Zionism that should be branded as racist, but those who commit oppression in its name.

Rachelle Marshall is a free-lance editor living in Stanford, CA. She is a member of New Jewish Agenda and writes frequently on the Middle East.