Published: 31 March 2018
Last updated: 4 March 2024
If people who lived in, say, in 1880 would have had a chance to peep into our world today, they would clearly be clueless and puzzled by what they would see; more so Jewish people. In 1880, most of the Jews were concentrated in eastern and central Europe: 6.7 million out of a total of 7.7 million Jews, that is 87%, resided in that part of the world. In the same year, there were only 24,000 Jews in Ottoman-ruled Palestine, 600,000 in Asia and Africa and 245,000 in North America. Australia and New Zealand were hosts to 12,000 Jews.
This was the Jewish people at that time. This group, with all its diversities, saw itself as a Diaspora. The homeland, to which Jews related to, was pretty much devoid of Jews. In other words, the Jewish people was a Diaspora without an active homeland. Modern definitions of ‘Diaspora’ would question the Jewish argument that Jews around the world are worthy of the status of ‘Diaspora’ given the fact that the vast majority of Jews in modern times were not uprooted from the homeland to which they were associated with. The Jewish Diasporic identity was based on theological and spiritual properties.
READ
REUVEN RIVLIN: We need a partnership with the fifth tribe of Israel - the Diaspora
RABBI BENJAMIN ELTON: A secure Israel and robust Diaspora need each other
POLLY BRONSTEIN: Israel carries a responsibility to the entirety of the Jewish people
The Zionist movement strived to change this anomaly. Following modern nation-state formulations, the Zionists imagined a world that has one Jewish nation-state whereby most of the Jews would be citizens of that State. The Zionists argued within themselves on the extent of the decline of the Diaspora. Some envisioned the continuation of Diasporic life with dependency on the new State, while others either dismissed the value of the Diasporic experience or simply predicted its demise.
Many of the Zionist predictions came to fruition. The State was established and recognised by the international community, the cultural renaissance around the revival of Hebrew was achieved and masses of Jews settled in the State, flipping the demographic pyramid. After 70 years of Israel’s existence, close to 50% of world Jewry is present in Israel. This is a new phenomenon.
But the current reality did not exist in 1948 when Israel was established. When David Ben-Gurion read Israel’s declaration of independence on May 14 in Tel Aviv, less than 10% of world Jewry was present in the newly declared State. The rest were scattered around the world, many in transit, post traumatic, others were already established in new communities in the western democratic world. In other words, the Diaspora was still significantly larger than the number of people in the newly formed “homeland”.
The Israeli Zionist leadership was well aware of this anomaly. The formulation of Israel as the state of the Jewish people assumed the existence of an active Diaspora and that a relationship would need to be cultivated between the new state and its (older) Diaspora. Moreover, Diaspora communities were asked to help in developing the new State and stand behind it. The same Diaspora was also considered as the reservoir for new immigrants who would move to Israel and change the demographic imbalance.
To date, about half of world Jewry resides in Israel. Demographers anticipate that in the not-so-distant future ,the majority of all Jews in the world will consist of Israelis.
Seventy years have passed and Israel’s Jewish population grew more than 10 times in size. Diaspora Jewry also grew, albeit at a much lower pace. To date, about half of world Jewry resides in Israel. Demographers anticipate that in the not-so-distant future, the majority of all Jews in the world will consist of Israelis.
How do these demographic and other changes affect the relationship between Israel and world Jewry? What is Israel’s responsibility toward Jews in the Diaspora? What is a "Diasporic Jewish identity" and how should it be nurtured? How can Jews in the Diaspora express their positions toward issues that pertain to Israel? What are the institutional mechanisms that are needed for managing this relationship?
Israel’s 70th anniversary offers an opportunity to examine these questions. There are also visible areas of contention in the public discourse around these questions. These areas revolve around the ongoing conflict between Israel and the Palestinians, the relations between religion and state in Israel, the role of democracy in a Jewish state and more. These issues have added another layer of tension to a Jewish people that is divided by countries, cultures, religious expressions and generations.
In this publication we received essays from around the Jewish world, all addressing these questions. We are honoured to have received words of wisdom and vision from Israel’s president, Reuven Rivlin. President Rivlin is leading a lively public discussion in Israel and around the Jewish world on collective identities and inter-group relations. His article that was especially written for our publication is a show of support and respect to our effort.
I wish to thank the editorial team of The Jewish Independent: Uri Windt, Shahar Burla and Michael Visontay for the dedication to this process and ability to think broadly and globally. Special thanks to Shira Halberstad for the design and for setting the tone for a rich discussion. It is our hope and desire that the various articles in this publication will stimulate a fruitful discussion around the Jewish world.
Elan Ezrachi, Jerusalem, April 2018
