by Roger Garaudy

I fought Christian
fundamentalism in "Towards a war of religion" at the risk of displeasing
those who don't like me to say: "The Christ of Paul is not Jesus."

I am fighting
today Jewish fundamentalism in "The founding myths of the israeli policy,"
at the risk of attracting the thunder of those Israeli-Zionists who did
not like Rabbi Hirsch's reminder: "Zionism wants to define the Jewish people
as a national entity ... which is a heresy."

SOURCE: "Washington Post," October 3, 1978.

What is the Zionism
that I denounced (and not the Jewish people) in my book?

It has often defined
itself: it is a political doctrine.

"Since 1896, Zionism refers to the political movement founded by Theodore Herzl."

SOURCE: Encyclopedia of Zionism and Israel. "Herzl Press." New York,
1971, volume 2, p. 1262.

This is a nationalist doctrine which was not born out of Judaism but out of the European nationalism of the 19th century. Herzl, the founder of political Zionism, did not claim to belong to a religion: "I do not obey a religious impulse."

SOURCE: Th. Herzl: "Diaries. Ed. Victor Gollancz, 1958. "I am an agnostic." (p. 54)

He was not interested in the "Holy Land" in particular: for his nationalist objectives, he would have equally accepted Uganda or Tripoli, Cyprus or Argentina, Mozambique or the Congo.

SOURCE; Herzl, Diaries (passim).

But in the face of the opposition of his Jewish friends, he realized the importance of the "Mighty Legend" (June 9, 1895), Diaries I, p. 56) as "a rallying cry of irresistible power."

SOURCE: Herzl, p. 45.

This is a mobilizing slogan that this eminently realistic politician could not ignore. Transposing this "mighty Legend" of the "Return" into historical reality, he declared: "Palestine is our unforgettable historical homeland ... The name alone
will be a powerful rallying cry for our people."

SOURCE: "Letat Juif," p. 209.

"The Jewish Question is for me neither a social question
nor a religious question ... it is a national question."

This is a colonial
doctrine. Here too, the lucid Theodore Herzl does not hide his objectives.
The first step is to set up a "Charter Company" under the protection of
England, or any other power, as a stepping stone toward the formation of
"the Jewish State." That is why he called on the master of this type of
operation, the colonial trafficker, Cecil Rhodes, who used his Charter
Company to carve out of South Africa a subsidiary bearing his name: Rhodesia.

Theodore Herzl
wrote him on January 11, 1902:

"Please send me a letter stating that you have examined
my program and that you approve it. You may be wondering why I am calling
on you, Mr. Rhodes. It is because my program is a political program."

SOURCE: Herzl, "Tagebuch," Vol. III, p. 105.

The Zionist doctrine
adopted at the August 1897 Basle Congress had three dimensions: political,
nationalist, colonial. Due to his Machiavellian genius, Theodore Herzl
could justifiably say:

"I ftheJewish State."

SOURCE: "Diaries," p. 224.

Half a century
later, his disciples applied exactly the same policies, used the same methods
and followed the same political line to create the State of Israel (after
W.W. II).

But this political,
nationalist, colonialist enterprise was never a fulfilment of Jewish faith
and spirituality. At the same time as the Congress of Basle, which could
not be held in Munich (as predicted by Herzl) because of opposition from
the German Jewish community, another conference was held in Montreal (1892),
where Rabbi Isaac Meyer Wise, the most representative Jewish personality
in America, initiated a motion against the political and tribal Zionist
interpretation of the Bible and for a spiritual and universalist interpretation
of the Prophets.

"We totally disapprove of the initiative aiming at
the creation of a Jewish State. Attempts of this type highlight an erroneous
conception of the mission of Israel ... that the Jewish Prophets were the
first to proclaim ... It aims at a Messianic time when men recognize belonging
to one great community for the establishment of the Kingdom of God on earth."

SOURCE: Confrence Centrale des Rabbins Americains. Yearbook VII, 1897, p. xii.

This opposition to
political Zionism, inspired by the attachment to the spirituality of the
Jewish faith, did not cease from expressing itself. Following W.W.II, using
the U.N. and at the same time taking advantage of rivalries among nations
and, especially, of the unconditional support of the United States, Israeli
Zionism managed to impose itself as a dominant force. Thanks to its lobby,
it succeeded in reversing an admirable prophetic tradition. But it did
not manage to stifle the criticism of great spiritual men.

Martin Buber,
one of the great Jewish voices of this century, during his entire lifetime
and until his death in Israel, did not stop denouncing the degeneracy and
even the inversion of religious Zionism into political Zionism.

Martin Buber declared in New York:

"The feeling I had 60 years ago when I entered the
Zionist movement is essentially the same feeling I have today ... I hoped
that this nationalism would not follow the path of others a beginning with
a great hope and degenerating later to become a sacred egoism, daring, even like Mussolini, to proclaim itself sacroegoismo,
as though collective egoism could be more sacred than individual egoism.
When we returned to Palestine, the decisive question was: Do you want to
come here as a friend, a brother, a member of the community of people of
the Middle East or as the representatives of colonialism and of imperialism?

"The contradiction between the end and the means to reach it divided the Zionists: some wanted to receive political privileges from
the Great Powers, others, especially the youth, wanted to be allowed to
work in Palestine with their neighbors, on behalf of their life together, and
for the future.

"All was not always perfect in our relations with the Arabs, but there
was, in general, good neighborliness between Jewish villagers and Arab
villagers.

"This organic phase of establishment in Palestine lasted until the time
of Hitler.

"It was Hitler who pushed the masses of Jews to come
to Palestine, and not an elite who came to carry on their lives and prepare
for the future. Thus, a selective organic development was replaced by a mass
immigration requiring a political force for its security ... The majority of
Jews preferred to learn from Hitler rather than from us ... Hitler showed that
history does not follow the path of the mind, but that of power, and that when
a people is quite strong, it can kill with impunity ... This is the situation
that we had to combat ... To "Ihud" we proposed ... that Jews and Arabs not
only coexist but cooperate ... This would make possible an economic
development of the Middle East, thanks to which the Middle East could bring a
great essential contribution to the future of humanity."

SOURCE: "Jewish Newsletter," June 2, 1958.

Addressing the 12th Zionist Congress in Kaarlsbad, September 15,1921, Buber said:

"We speak of the mind of Israel and we believe that
we are not like other nations ... But the mind of Israel is nothing more
than the synthesis of our national identity, nothing more than a justification
of our collective egoism ... transformed into an idol. We have refused
to accept any prince other than the Lord of the Universe. While we are
like all other nations and we drink with them from the same cup that intoxicates
them. The nation is not the supreme value ... Jews are more than a nation:
they are the members of a community of faith.

"Jewish religion was uprooted, and this is the essence of the disease
whose symptom was the birth of Jewish nationalism around the middle of
the 19th century. This new form of desire for land is the cornerstone of
what modern Jewish nationalism has borrowed from modern nationalism of
the West.

"What does the idea of 'chosen' have to do with all
that? Being 'chosen' does not indicate a feeling of superiority, but a sense
of destiny. This feeling does not originate from a comparison with others, but
from a vocation and responsibility to accomplish the task of which the
prophets keep reminding us: if you brag about being chosen, instead of living
in obedience to God, you commit a felony."

Evoking this "nationalist crisis" of political Zionism, which is a perversion of the spirituality of Judaism, he concludes:

"We hoped to save Jewish nationalism from the mistake of making an idol out of people. We have failed."

SOURCE: Martin Buber, "Israel and the World." Ed. Schocken. New York, 1948, p. 263.

Professor Judas Magnes, president of Hebrew University since 1926, considered that the "Biltmore Program" of 1942, requiring the creation of a Jewish State in Palestine:

"Will lead to a war against the Arabs."

SOURCE: Norman Bentwich. "For Zion Sake." Biography of Judas Magnes.
Philadelphia: "Jewish Publication Society of America," 1954, p. 352.

In his opening
address in 1946 at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, where he had been
president for 20 years, he said:

"The new Jewish voice speaks with the voice of guns
... This is the new Torah of the land of Israel. The world has been shackled
by the madness of physical force. May Heaven guard us from shackling Judaism
and the people of Israel to this madness. It is pagan Judaism that has
conquered a great part of the powerful diaspora. During the time of romantic
Zionism, we thought that Zion must be redeemed with honesty. All the Jews
of America bear the responsibility of this mistake, this mutation ... even
those who are not in agreement with the actions of the pagan leadership
but stand idly by. The anesthesia of the moral sense leads to its atrophy."

SOURCE: Ibid, p. 131.

In fact, since the
Biltmore Declaration, the Zionist leaders had the most powerful protector:
the United States. The World Zionist Organization had swept aside the opposition
of those Jews faithful to the spiritual traditions of the prophets of Israel,
and demanded the creation, not anymore of a "national Jewish home in Palestine,"
according to the terms (if not the spirit) of the Balfour Declaration of
the preceding war (W.W. I), but the creation of a Jewish State in Palestine.

Already in 1938,
Albert Einstein condemned this Declaration:

"In my opinion, it would be more reasonable to reach
an agreement with the Arabs based on sharing life peacefully together,
rather than to create a Jewish State with borders, an armyand a projof
temporal power, no matter how modest it is. I fear the internal damage
that Judaism will sustain due to the development, in our ranks, of a narrow
nationalism. We are not anymore the Jews of the Maccabees period. To become
again a nation in the political sense of the world will be equivalent to
turning away from the spiritualization of our community that we owe to
the generosity of our prophets."

SOURCE: Rabbi Moshe Menuhim, "The decadence of Judaism in our time," 1969, p. 324.

The reminders did not miss, following every Israeli violation of international law.

To mention only
two examples of what was said loudly, expressing what many Jews think privately
but, under the intellectual inquisition of the Israeli-Zionist lobby, do
not have the power to express publicly: In 1960, during the Eichmann trial
in Jerusalem, the "American Council for Judaism" declared:

"The American Council for Judaism addressed a letter
yesterday, Monday, to Mr. Christian Herter, denying the government of Israel
the right to speak in the name of all Jews. The Council declares that Judaism
is a matter of religion, not nationality."

SOURCE: "Le Monde," June 21, 1960.

During the bloody
invasion of Lebanon by the Israelis, Professor Benjamin Cohen of Tel-Aviv
University wrote to P. Vidal-Naquet on June 8, 1982:

"I am writing to you while listening to a transistor
that has just announced that 'we' are in the process of 'realizing our
objectives' in Lebanon: to insure 'peace' for the residents of Galilee.
These lies worthy of Goebbels make me mad. It is clear that this savage
war, more barbaric than any of those preceding it, has nothing to do with
the attempt in London or the security of Galilee ... Jews, sons of Abraham
... Jews, victims themselves of so much cruelty, how can they become so
cruel? ... The greatest success of Zionism is the 'dejudaisation' of the
Jews.

"Dear friends, do whatever is in your power to prevent
Begin and Sharon from reaching their twin objectives: the final liquidation (a
fashionable expression here these days) of the Palestinians as a people, and
the Israelis as human beings."

SOURCE: Letter, published in "Le Monde," June 19, 1982, p. 9.

"Professor Leibowitz calls Israeli politics in Lebanon
Judeo-Nazi."

SOURCE: "Yediot Aharonoth," July 2, 1982, p. 6.

This is what is at
stake in the struggle between the Jewish prophetic faith and nationalist
Zionism, based, like any other nationalism, on the refusal to recognize
the other, and on making oneself sacred.

Any nationalism
has the need to hallow its pretensions. Following the fractionization of
Christianity, each of the nation-states claimed that it had received the
sacred heritage and the investiture of God.

France is the
"eldest daughter of the Church" through which it carries on the work of
God (Gesta Dei per Francos). Germany is "above all" because God is with
her (Got mit uns). Eva Person declared that "the mission of Argentina is
to bring God to the world," and in 1972, the prime minister of South Africa,
Vorster, celebrated the savage racism of "Apartheid" saying, "Let us not
forget that we are the people of God, invested with a mission." ... Zionist
nationalism shares in this exhilaration of all nationalisms. Even the most
lucid let themselves be tempted by this exhilaration.

Even a man like
Professor Andre

Neher succumbs to
this temptation. In his beautiful book, "L'essence du prophtisme"
(Ed. Calmann-Levy, 1972, p. 311), after recalling so well the universal
meaning of the alliance of God and man, he ends up writing that Israel
is "the sign, par excellance, of divine history in the world. Israel is the axis of the world, it
is its nerve, its center, its heart."

This comment recalls
the unfortunate "Aryan Myth" whose ideology was the foundation of panGermanism
and Hitlerism. This path is the opposite of the teaching of the Prophets
and the admirable "I and Thou" of Martin Buber.

Exclusiveness
bans dialogue: one cannot "dialogue" with Hitler or Begin, because their
racial superiority or their exclusive alliance with the Divine leaves them
nothing to expect from the other.

We are aware that
in our time, the only alternative to dialogue is war, and, as we keep repeating,
dialogue requires that from the start, everyone is aware of what is lacking
in his faith and that he needs the other to fill this void. This is the
condition of any desire for fullness (which is the spirit of any living
faith).

Our anthology
of Zionist crimes is part of a body of efforts made by those Jews who have
tried to defend a prophetic Judaism against a tribal Zionism. What nourishes
antisemitism is not the criticism of the policy of aggression, deception
and blood of Israeli-Zionism. It is the unconditional support of its policy,
which by literal interpretation of the great traditions of Judaism, selects
only whatever justifies this policy, elevates it above international law
by making sacred the myths of yesterday and today.

by Roger Garaudy - The Founding Myths of Israeli Politics [Electronic resources] نسخه متنی

The Founding Myths of Israeli Politics

by Roger Garaudy

Contents

Annex

Part I:Theological Myths

Part II:The Myths of the 20th Century

Part III:The Political Use of the Myth

Addendum:Right to Reply--A Pamphlet in Response to Attacks

Introduction