How is it that the nation of Israel, whose fifty-four year history is replete with stunning victories over its neighbors, which secured its survival, has resorted to launching nominal counter assaults to its enemy?s current attacks? Israeli responses have almost become routine exercises for both the army and the Palestinian Authority. The army fires back in retaliation to devastating terrorist attacks and members of the PA, who are often warned in advance, run for cover. What prompts the same nation that once invaded Lebanon in 1978 following one major terrorist attack - a Saturday afternoon attack upon a bus - to allow the many acts of terror as witnessed recently? How is it that day after day that the people of Israel watch with horror the seemingly unending terrorist attacks and yet show so much patience? Israelis readily come out in numbers in protest for the right to higher wages or better benefits. However, the fundamental right of survival has not brought out the masses.
Maybe it has something to do with the collective sense of self-esteem of the people? The Biblical commentator, Ibn Ezra, comments on the reaction of the Israelites at the Reed Sea to the pursuing Egyptian chariots. Ibn Ezra asks why the Israelites possessed such fear and panic at the sight of the chariots? Why did they not simply stand up and fight? They were six hundred thousand adult men. Shouldn?t they have defended themselves, their wives and children against the pursuing Egyptians? Ibn Ezra answers that the Israelites were slaves, who were accustomed from their early youth to serving their Egyptian masters. Their life experiences humbled them and created within them a sense of inferiority. Ibn Ezra also states that they were not trained in, or accustomed to, warfare. In other words, they were not prepared to fight. Despite the experience of the Exodus and all the open supernatural miracles that accompanied their freedom from Egypt, the Israelites were the products of the humiliating experiences of servitude that impacted each individual. They were still slaves in some respects, even though they were now freed.
There were many times throughout history when Jews could have defended themselves but chose not to do so, because the notion of self-defense was unfathomable. Existing under oppressive rulers for centuries in their host countries, Jews were conditioned to survive not by confronting powerful foes, but rather by cooperating with and not provoking their potential enemies. That is not to say that there were never times when Jews stood up to their enemies and defended themselves. That did occur on some occasions. However, it was the norm for the community to accept whatever happened to them as their fate. Russian historian and author W. Bruce Lincoln noted that it was one of the ironies of Russian history that, "the most oppressed minority of all, the Jews, remained largely passive." Lincoln continues, "a minority group, so incessantly persecuted and so unjustly treated by imperial officials, remained basically loyal to the government until the late nineteenth century."
Can the same be said for modern Israel? The nation that has not been passive and has survived repeated onslaughts from the Arab world? A nation that has defied the odds by its mere survival? Clearly, Israel?s experience is very different from the history of Jewry in the Diaspora, but still the question beckons as to why Israel has permitted the continuation of the recent violence as no other nation would? Who would tolerate dozens of daily attacks? Who would tolerate the devastation of its economy by terrorists?
Although the Jews have left their former lands of oppression, the collective memories of the past remain. The mellahs of North Africa, the Ghettos of Europe, the Pale of Settlement in Russia, all part of the past, still exist in the Jewish psyche. The psychological impact of centuries of oppression doesn?t just fade away. In the shtetle of the Pale of Settlement in Russia, persecution was a part of the existence of the Jew for generations; it was accepted that this was the fate of the Russian Jew. To hope for better times, one might hope for the death of the current ruling Czar and that maybe his successor would be a lesser despot. Modern day Israelis have defied the past and have proclaimed to themselves and to the world many times that the modern Israeli is a new Jew, one who is truly free. Many times in Israel?s brief history the image was portrayed of the new post-Diaspora Jew and maybe it bears some truth, but deep in the recesses of their national psyche, the Israeli Jew still wears the scars of centuries of oppression. There still exists that feeling of inadequacy, of lowliness, that allows for the acceptance - although with deep regret - of the current abuse day after day.
In some cases, individuals will even engage in self-flagellation, believing that the actions of their fellow Israelis have earned them the hatred of others. Israel?s Left continues to blame the Palestinian hatred of Israel on Israeli policies. As if to say, if Israel only gave the Palestinians everything they demand then somehow they would not posses their deep hatred of Jews and Israel.
Exile, enslavement, is a psychological condition that does not simply disappear when the Jew leaves those lands of oppression. Just as the Israelites who exited Egypt took with them the memories of the bitter years of oppression, the same applies to their descendants. The Israelites would have to spend forty years in the Sinai Wilderness before they wrested themselves of their Egyptian past. Bitter memories linger, their impact remains.
Why has Israel not responded with greater force to the assaults upon its civilians? Why has Israel waited before it offered any potent retaliation. Certainly there is international pressure on Israel not to respond. There are also other political considerations. None of that changes the unusual tolerance of the violence and acceptance of the present status quo. It is the basic instinct of man to survive. It is the basic obligation of a government to protect its citizens? lives and property.
Perhaps, this issue has more to do with the past then the present.
----------------------------------------
Larry Domnitch is an author and educator who resides in Efrat.
Maybe it has something to do with the collective sense of self-esteem of the people? The Biblical commentator, Ibn Ezra, comments on the reaction of the Israelites at the Reed Sea to the pursuing Egyptian chariots. Ibn Ezra asks why the Israelites possessed such fear and panic at the sight of the chariots? Why did they not simply stand up and fight? They were six hundred thousand adult men. Shouldn?t they have defended themselves, their wives and children against the pursuing Egyptians? Ibn Ezra answers that the Israelites were slaves, who were accustomed from their early youth to serving their Egyptian masters. Their life experiences humbled them and created within them a sense of inferiority. Ibn Ezra also states that they were not trained in, or accustomed to, warfare. In other words, they were not prepared to fight. Despite the experience of the Exodus and all the open supernatural miracles that accompanied their freedom from Egypt, the Israelites were the products of the humiliating experiences of servitude that impacted each individual. They were still slaves in some respects, even though they were now freed.
There were many times throughout history when Jews could have defended themselves but chose not to do so, because the notion of self-defense was unfathomable. Existing under oppressive rulers for centuries in their host countries, Jews were conditioned to survive not by confronting powerful foes, but rather by cooperating with and not provoking their potential enemies. That is not to say that there were never times when Jews stood up to their enemies and defended themselves. That did occur on some occasions. However, it was the norm for the community to accept whatever happened to them as their fate. Russian historian and author W. Bruce Lincoln noted that it was one of the ironies of Russian history that, "the most oppressed minority of all, the Jews, remained largely passive." Lincoln continues, "a minority group, so incessantly persecuted and so unjustly treated by imperial officials, remained basically loyal to the government until the late nineteenth century."
Can the same be said for modern Israel? The nation that has not been passive and has survived repeated onslaughts from the Arab world? A nation that has defied the odds by its mere survival? Clearly, Israel?s experience is very different from the history of Jewry in the Diaspora, but still the question beckons as to why Israel has permitted the continuation of the recent violence as no other nation would? Who would tolerate dozens of daily attacks? Who would tolerate the devastation of its economy by terrorists?
Although the Jews have left their former lands of oppression, the collective memories of the past remain. The mellahs of North Africa, the Ghettos of Europe, the Pale of Settlement in Russia, all part of the past, still exist in the Jewish psyche. The psychological impact of centuries of oppression doesn?t just fade away. In the shtetle of the Pale of Settlement in Russia, persecution was a part of the existence of the Jew for generations; it was accepted that this was the fate of the Russian Jew. To hope for better times, one might hope for the death of the current ruling Czar and that maybe his successor would be a lesser despot. Modern day Israelis have defied the past and have proclaimed to themselves and to the world many times that the modern Israeli is a new Jew, one who is truly free. Many times in Israel?s brief history the image was portrayed of the new post-Diaspora Jew and maybe it bears some truth, but deep in the recesses of their national psyche, the Israeli Jew still wears the scars of centuries of oppression. There still exists that feeling of inadequacy, of lowliness, that allows for the acceptance - although with deep regret - of the current abuse day after day.
In some cases, individuals will even engage in self-flagellation, believing that the actions of their fellow Israelis have earned them the hatred of others. Israel?s Left continues to blame the Palestinian hatred of Israel on Israeli policies. As if to say, if Israel only gave the Palestinians everything they demand then somehow they would not posses their deep hatred of Jews and Israel.
Exile, enslavement, is a psychological condition that does not simply disappear when the Jew leaves those lands of oppression. Just as the Israelites who exited Egypt took with them the memories of the bitter years of oppression, the same applies to their descendants. The Israelites would have to spend forty years in the Sinai Wilderness before they wrested themselves of their Egyptian past. Bitter memories linger, their impact remains.
Why has Israel not responded with greater force to the assaults upon its civilians? Why has Israel waited before it offered any potent retaliation. Certainly there is international pressure on Israel not to respond. There are also other political considerations. None of that changes the unusual tolerance of the violence and acceptance of the present status quo. It is the basic instinct of man to survive. It is the basic obligation of a government to protect its citizens? lives and property.
Perhaps, this issue has more to do with the past then the present.
----------------------------------------
Larry Domnitch is an author and educator who resides in Efrat.