By Alan Perlman
August 22, 2005
The secular founders of Israel had two goals. The first goal was to establish a country like any other, one in which there would even be Jewish criminals in jails and Jewish prostitutes. The second goal was to create the "New Jew" -- a secular Jew who would neither fear nor be obsequious to the non-Jews. Builder, farmer, fighter, lover of the land, the New Jew would stand tall and proud in the face of adversity and the enemy. Of necessity, the New Jew had to toss away the backwardness of Torah observance.
Were they still alive, the founding fathers could rejoice that their first goal was finally achieved last week. Until then, no matter how much Israel resembled the other nations, there was always one difference -- Israel was a land of refuge for Jews, where the homes, livelihoods and basic rights of Jews were protected. This past week, as it totally razed Jewish village after Jewish village to the ground, Israel eliminated the last difference between itself and the nations of the world, to the joy of those nations. A Europe that for the last half century could not face its past can now rationalize that it did no different than the Jews did themselves.
And what of the second goal, the New Jew?
It seems that transmission of the ideology of the New Jew has been less successful than the founders would have hoped. In several generations, the pride, fearlessness, love of the land and dedication of the New Jew has all but disappeared. All that is left is secularity. In 1985, the mothers of several captive soldiers cried to Defense Minister Yitzhak Rabin, who buckled and released 1100 terrorists from prison in exchange for three soldiers. These terrorists launched the first intifada that brought Israel to its knees and led Israel to sign the suicidal Oslo accords. Several years ago, a "Four Mothers" movement cried over casualties in Lebanon, resulting in Israel surrendering to Arab steadfastness and retreating from Lebanon in the dark of night, inspiring the Arabs to launch the current Oslo war.
And Gush Katif? The Arabs do not err when they call Israel's withdrawal from Katif a retreat. The Prime Minister himself stated there were too many attacks and casualties for Israel to remain in Gush Katif. Once again, the New Jew is fleeing from Arab terror.
And as the New Jew Israeli soldier destroys Jewish villages in Katif, the New Jew supporters of the expulsion wax poetic about how the world will love us for it. What is the driving force of the retreat? Even the Left recognizes that Israel's New Jew Prime Minister does whatever President Bush tells him to do. And oh how this Prime Minister reveled in the approval he got from an anti-Israel Jacques Chirac. Ah yes, the pride and fearlessness of the New Jew. No obsequiousness there!
All the while, the Torah observant Old Jew tenaciously clings with determination and pride to his G-d given land that he loves so much, and refuses to surrender, even in the wake of mounting casualties or disapproval of the nations. G-d fearing, Jewish children give up their free time and vacations, day after day, week after week, to defend their land.
This past week, both sides in the struggle over Gush Katif looked on in dismay as events unfolded. Those who supported the destruction as a practical necessity no doubt focused on the violent resistance of the youth on the roof of the Kfar Darom synagogue, the "hooligans" "trouble-makers," and "extremists." As New Jew Israeli soldiers dragged Jews from their homes before razing their villages, Israeli New Jews were outraged that young people dared pelt the expulsion forces with all manner of things.
In fairness, their outrage is largely attributable to the enormous mistakes of the Yesha council and the Rabbis, who played directly into the government's hands. The leadership of the Right exhausted the opponents of expulsion in one pointless demonstration after another, instead of organizing serious resistance. And most damaging, they promoted that ridiculous, defeatist message that "our love will win out." Some, still enamored of the sacred cow ethos of the Israeli army, went so far as to say that Israeli soldiers should not refuse orders, as if the army was somehow above any moral considerations.
Sharon, of course, couldn't be happier. Let 300,000 people protest the expulsion in Tel Aviv. With his coalition of Likud sellouts, post-Zionist Jews and anti-Zionist Arabs, Sharon knew the bulldozing of Jewish villages was unstoppable, so long as New Jew soldiers followed orders and protesters sang "We love you, soldiers. We are brothers."
No wonder the nation, including much of the Right, was shocked when young people didn't greet the soldiers with chants of "We love you." No wonder we were treated to the surreal spectacle of whole villages of people waving Israeli flags, singing Hatikvah, and hugging soldiers in the moments before they became refugees. Waving the flag and singing the anthem of the country that was razing your villages and giving your land to your enemy? Hugging the soldiers who would drag you from your home if you did not make it easy on them by just walking away? Is there any greater insanity?
The soldiers are our brothers? Excuse me. Something is amiss here. To rephrase Nadia Matar's analogy, does your brother drag you out of your house and then burn it down? And if he does, do you hug him? And if you ask him why he did it and he tells you that he feels your pain but his boss told him to do it, do you sing "I love you. You're my brother," or do you sever all ties with him? And doesn't the fact that he's your brother actually make the deed worse than if it was done by a stranger, tears or no tears.
The wholesale destruction of Jewish villages was a political decision, to which the army should not have been party. And the refusal should have started at the top. The Defense Minister should have told Sharon that the Israeli army is a defense force, not a Jewish expulsion force. But since Sharon fires anyone who gets in his way, Mofaz kept silent.
When Sharon saw a potential problem with the former Chief of Staff, Sharon showed him the door and replaced him with a Yes man (as he did the attorney general). Sharon's military cadre even dared to outrageously call the expulsion "A hand to our brothers." When Sharon's Yes men held their tongues, the officers under them should have spoken up. And when the officers didn't speak up, Israeli soldiers should have just said "No!"
The last utter destruction of Jewish communities, those in the Arab countries, took place about half a century ago. Perhaps this long lull led us to forget that such destruction is the norm, not the exception, in Jewish history.
One cannot compare the razing of whole Jewish communities by the Israel Expulsion Forces to actions of the Nazis. The Nazi program was one of genocide, of mass extermination. But a comparison of the actions of the IEF to the actions of the non-Nazi Europeans, who expelled Jews from their homes, is definitely appropriate.
When studying the Holocaust, one comes away with several important lessons. First, that legal orders issued by a government and upheld by the courts may well be immoral. Second, that "I only followed orders" is not a legitimate excuse for following immoral orders, and one must refuse them, despite the obvious national illegality of such refusal. Third, though not as guilty as the German Nazis, Europe was nevertheless guilty -- simply for taking the expedient path of expelling Jews from their homes.
To this we can now add a fourth lesson: Empathy and tears do not mitigate the crime. Who cares if Europeans cried tears for the Jews they expelled? The Jews needed heroism, not empathy and tears.
The media and supporters of the expulsion are full of praise for the empathy, restraint, and kindness the Israeli soldiers showed, for the tears they shed, as they expelled their Jewish victims, as if the tears somehow mitigate the enormity of the crime. But where was the heroism of this New Jew Israeli soldier?
The Europeans had an excuse -- under German occupation, a refusal to expel Jews could cost one his life. Nevertheless, many righteous gentiles risked life and limb to help Jews. What risks did the New Jew Israeli soldier face by refusal? A month in prison? A demotion? A mark on his army record? Yet, with few exceptions, the soldiers of IEF chose not to pay that price, and instead followed orders.
Let them now live the rest of their lives with the honor of being the first soldiers of the 21st century to utterly destroy whole Jewish villages -- homes, synagogues, businesses, and people's lives. Years from now, when their children ask them where they were and what they did, they can respond that yes, they expelled Jews and destroyed their villages, but they felt their pain and shed tears.
The New Jew calls this policy a disengagement from the Arabs, but really, it is just a further disengagement from Zionism, Torah, and the G-d fearing, Zionist Old Jew. And now is the time for the Old Jew to reciprocate and disassociate from a country capable of such things. The Old Jew shares no common values with the New Jews that comprise half the State of Israel, no unity of purpose with a country that so blithely surrenders and gives away its eternal Jewish heritage, and no brotherhood with an army that drags Jews from their homes and destroys Jewish villages.
Many voices on the Left today call for the disbanding of the Hesder Yeshivas [where religious Jews combine Torah study with army service - ed], and I agree. To date, the national religious community provided a disproportionate number of soldiers to the most elite and dangerous units of the Israeli army. Appropriate though this may have been when the Israeli army was the IDF, in its new incarnation as the IEF, moral, religious, Jewish boys do not belong in this army. Hesder Yeshivas should become full time yeshivas, and parents, grandparents and Rabbis should instruct their youth to study Torah full time and refuse to serve in this army. Young Jewish men who have already served should tell the army that they can no longer do reserve duty in such an army. The time has come for the Old Jew to stop singing Hatikvah [the Israeli national anthem] and to stop flying the Israeli flag.
And when the children and grandchildren of this Old Jew will ask him where he was and what he did when Jews were expelling Jews, the Old Jew can answer with pride "I refused to be a part of it. I said No!"
Views expressed by the author do not
necessarily reflect those of israelinsider.
 
|
|
|
|
Click on the blue headline to read a Talkback comment and respond to it. Click on the  icon to send a private email to the talkback writer. The icon appears only if the writer has decided to be contacted. If no popup window appears, please make sure your popup blocker allows israelinsider.com.
|
|
| |
|
