Israeli immigration practices stir up
debate
By rmarquez@media.asucla.ucla.edu">Roxane
Márquez
Daily Bruin Senior Staff
JERUSALEM — As any knowledgeable blues musician will tell you,
it all goes down at the crossroads.
And since the dawn of Western civilization, the Promised Land
has functioned as the nexus of people and ideas from the East and
West.
It’s now 1996, and in some ways, contemporary Israel serves much
the same role. And both worlds’ ideas clash over questions
regarding immigration, ethnicity, religion and economics – issues
which foster apprehension and optimism about the country’s
future.
Debate over immigration, for instance, erupts daily from the
coffeeshops on Ben Yehuda Street to the chambers of the Knesset.
While most, if not all, Israelis agree that past immigration was
essential to the country’s development, opinion varies over current
waves of incoming Ethiopian and Russian Jews.
Currently, the Israeli government requires new immigrants to
reside in absorption centers for anywhere from six months to two
years, explained Zippora Liben, an absorption center
administrator.
At the centers, immigrants immediately begin instruction in
Hebrew, the national language, and acquire job skills to help them
to assimilate easily into the mainstream.
"If we do not give them the tools to begin, they will become a
subculture," Liben explained. "If we do not help them, we’ll have a
dependent, welfare population and we do not want that to
happen."
Furthermore, providing refuge for Ethiopian and Russian Jews is
viewed by many Israelis as an obligation. Known as the "law of
return," most Israelis commit themselves to providing safety to any
persecuted Jews.
"I truly believe that immigration is a positive force that will
empower us as a people," Liben continued. "We would not be moving
toward the peace process if we didn’t have these numbers of
people."
Despite this mission, recent reports have shown the fractured
will of Israelis in accepting refugees, particularly from
Africa.
In one major case, Israel’s health agency disposed of all its
blood donations from Ethiopian Jews, claiming an abnormally high
risk of AIDS for that population. Protests immediately ensued, and
Israel drew international criticism for what some deemed a racially
– and not medically – motivated policy.
Internally, some resentment toward recent arrivals exists on the
part of native-born Israelis. Immigrants currently receive
substantial benefits from the Israeli government, including
subsidized housing and university education.
However, optimists believe that integration between non-European
and European Jews has been met with overall success. For instance,
successful army service by all Jews and increased intermarriage
indicates that "in many ways, Israel is a model of ethnic
integration," according to Rabbi Chaim Seidler-Feller, director of
UCLA’s Hillel chapter.
"Of course there’s a residue of conflict and tension – it’s only
to be expected," Seidler-Feller said. "But more than anything,
Israelis have celebrated their racial diversity.
"When (recent Jewish immigrants) arrived, there was almost a
sense of redeeming a distant community of Jews. That sense was so
overwhelming. That doesn’t mean that there aren’t cultural and
immigrant problems, but the skin color of ethnic Jews plays no
role," he concluded.
Although immigration is a formidable concern for Israeli
citizens, recent terrorist attacks in the region have thrown the
Arab-Israeli peace accords into the immediate political
foreground.
Within the past 10 days, three separate Israeli cities –
Jerusalem, Ashkelon and Tel Aviv – have been bombed by Hamas, a
militant Palestinian group, working together with Islamic Jihad, a
fundamentalist Islamic terrorist unit. The blasts killed 61 people
and injured 212 more.
In addition, Hamas claimed responsibility for a Feb. 26
incident, in which a Palestinian-American tourist drove his car
into a crowded Israeli bus stop, killing one bystander and injuring
22. An Israeli mob subsequently pulled him out of his car and shot
him to death.
With the Knesset elections quickly approaching, security
concerns are foremost on the public’s mind. And polls indicate that
each bombing caused Prime Minister Shimon Peres’ popularity to
plummet – and buttress support for Peres’ opponents in the right
wing of Israeli politics.
Traditionally, two parties dominate Israel’s political scene.
The Labor Party, which Peres leads, generally supports varying
degrees of government intervention in both economic and social
spheres.
Members of the Likud Party, on the other hand, advocate
free-market economics and are skeptical of the current peace
accords. However since neither maintains a majority in Knesset,
they must build coalitions with lesser parties to control the
legislative body.
This, in turn, has allowed smaller, more extremist groups from
both the right and the left to influence Israel’s political
landscape.
Because of the interplay between economic and political
ideology, Israeli citizens must keep in mind that opting for one
party’s security strategy will inherently include support of their
financial and social ideologies, said Ehud Spriznak, a professor at
Hebrew University in Jerusalem and an expert in terrorism and
extremism.
For this reason, he cautioned against hasty decision-making on
any issue when going to the polls.
"The ideology of Israel is kind of like the old American idea of
a melting pot," Spriznak explained. "As such, we must pay attention
to means and resources."
Peace in the region would open countless doors of economic
opportunity for the country, Spriznak continued. Arab nations – and
countries with whom they had exclusively traded – would reverse
their anti-Israel policies in light of the peace accords.
"The political debate has to do with, among other things, the
nature of Israeli democracy," he added. "Both parties have a
different conception of civil and human rights."
Come the May elections, Israeli voters will determine what
ideology will predominate. But if it’s peace they want,
Seidler-Feller purported, Jews must let the "humanistic aspects of
the Jewish tradition" guide them.
These include "the commitment to social justice, religious
pluralism, a universal concern for the other – these ideas emanate
from the basic sources of Judaism," he said.
Moreover, religious leaders must work to rise up above the
highly polarized political realm and lead where politicians will
not – to reasonable compromise, said Seidler-Feller. He added that
would not be easy, and would necessitate wholehearted rejection of
violence on the part of both Israelis and Arabs.
"Peace requires the abandoning, for the time being, of dreams
and a grand design," Seidler-Feller concluded. "They have to come
down to earth and learn how to maintain their dreams while at the
same time adjusting to a reality that is less than the whole of
their ideals."
Previously published: On Monday, Feb. 26, Zionism and its
impact on the State of Israel. On Wednesday, Feb. 28, the Intifada
and the rise of Palestinain nationalism. On Friday, March 1, the
struggle of two peoples claiming hereditary rights over Israel. On
Tuesday, March 5, security issues in the region and their role in
land settlement.