Not so very long ago, Israel used to be defined as a Jewish and democratic state, and the challenge was to try to sort out any clashes that might exist between the two parts of this definition.
Last week, Education Minister Yoav Kisch (Likud) announced a change of emphasis in the education program at the primary school level, regarding Israel’s identities. The new program was given the title: “Roots – the national plan for Jewish and Zionist identity.” There is no mention of the word “democracy” in this program.
There is no doubt that if one looks at all sections of the current Jewish education system in Israel, one cannot help but conclude that the situation is far from satisfactory in terms of defining Israel’s Jewish and Zionist identities.
In the case of its democratic identity, it cannot be denied that in the last two and a half years Israel’s vibrant liberal democracy has started to deteriorate in the direction of a non-liberal democracy, in compliance with a systematic government policy, introduced by Justice Minister Yariv Levin, of “reforming” Israel’s judicial and gate-keeping systems.
Perhaps that is the reason that the new program does not include any reference to strengthening the democratic identity of our children.
If one listens to Kisch’s rhetoric, and takes note of one of the first act he performed after announcing the new program – a visit to a school in the non-religious national education system in Tel Aviv, which was not coordinated in advance with the school’s principal, and the main goal of which appears to have been to check on the Bible classes provided to the school’s pupils – it is clear that the target of the program is not a general revamping of the system as a whole.
Its main goal appears to be to force the non-religious system to place greater emphasis on the children’s Jewish identity, as defined by the National-Religious sector of the society, and their Zionist identity, as also defined by the very same sector.
At the same time, it is clear that there is no intension to teach the children in the National-Religious school system a pluralistic approach to Judaism or a pluralistic definition of Zionism, which goes beyond the occupation and settlement of lands that at some point in history constituted part of the kingdom of Israel, and accepts the pluralistic make-up of the Jewish people and the pluralistic nature of its aspirations.
Nor is there any intension to get the elementary schools in the haredi (ultra-Orthodox) educational system – which well over a quarter of all Jewish children in Israel attend – to teach their pupils about Judaism as perceived by any of the Jewish communities other than their own, nor to mention Zionism, which is considered despicable ab initio in most haredi circles.
Why did Israel's education minister push this plan mid-war?
WHY KISCH decided to initiate his program at this particular time – in the midst of a controversial war – is not absolutely clear, though some commentators have suggested that the fact that primaries might soon be held within the Likud, toward new general elections, might have something to do with this. It has been suggested that Kisch believes his new program might improve his chances of gaining favor with potential voters.
Others have suggested that encouraging greater long-term national unity might also be involved, though if it is, the method seems to be patently anti-democratic – encouraging uniformity, rather than unity through pluralism.
I recall that several years ago, Kisch himself proved quite ignorant when it came to the essence of Zionism and its history. I do not remember what the exact issue at hand was, but Kisch declared in a speech in the Knesset plenum that the Balfour Declaration of November 2, 1917, had contained a promise to the Jewish people of a Jewish state in the whole of Eretz Yisrael.
In fact, the Balfour Declaration merely declared the support of the British Government for the establishment of a Jewish homeland in Palestine, “it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine.”
The declaration was made a month before Britain actually conquered Palestine, and several years before it was given control by the League of Nations over the Mandate for Palestine, which mentioned the Balfour Declaration in its text.
When Kisch spoke, Yesh Atid MK Meir Cohen – a former school principal from Dimona – was acting speaker of the Knesset session, and he immediately intervened to correct Kisch and put the record straight. Under the circumstances, Kisch is not exactly the person who should decide what elementary school children should learn about Zionism and its history, and not necessarily for ideological reasons.
Last week, Heritage Minister Amichai Eliyahu (Otzma Yehudit) spoke in the Knesset plenum about a UN proposal towards the end of the1940s that Jerusalem be internationalized (I believe the issue at hand was a motion for the agenda having to do with applying Israeli sovereignty in Judea and Samaria), while getting most of the facts wrong.
He claimed that the UN decision had been taken in 1949, after the State of Israel had been established and Jerusalem had been declared to be its capital. In fact, the idea was first proposed in the UN Partition Plan for Palestine of November 29, 1947 (General Assembly resolution 181) – before the British Mandate for Palestine had come to an end.
On December 9, 1949, General Assembly Resolution 303 repeated the proposal to internationalize Jerusalem. However, by then, the facts on the ground – the de facto partition of Jerusalem between Israel and Jordan – made internationalization irrelevant, and Resolution 303 turned into a dead letter. On December 13, the Israeli government declared Jerusalem (the part that was in Israeli hands) to be the capital of the State of Israel.
Eliyahu also stated in the plenum that the US had threatened David Ben-Gurion that if Israel were declared a Jewish state, the US would apply severe economic sanctions to it (that is not what happened). In addition, he referred to Israel’s foreign minister at the time – Moshe Sharett – as Moshe Shartuk.
So, before the current government takes it upon itself to reformulate the identities of our children, perhaps they ought to get their facts straight. No doubt for the sake of building a better future for our beloved embattled state, Israel’s Jewish, Zionist, and democratic identities ought to be redefined, or at least refurbished, in a manner that will preserve both the diversity and unity of the state.
The writer has written journalistic and academic articles, as well as several books, on international relations, Zionism, Israeli politics, and parliamentarism. From 1994-2010, she worked in the Knesset Library and the Knesset Research and Information Center.