German-Israeli sociologist Moshe Zuckermann on the causes of the escalation in the Middle East, Israel’s domestic politics and the debate on anti-Semitism
Mr Zuckermann, Israel’s oldest daily newspaper, Haaretz, recently wrote that … it might have appeared as if “the Israeli-Palestinian conflict on both sides of the divided city was being carried out by young people”. Is that the reason for the current spiral of violence?
Moshe Zuckerman: You can take this day as a metaphor, but this argument overlooks the real problem. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict has many dimensions, but first of all it should be understood as a territorial conflict. Jerusalem is one factor, but not the central one.
The main problem is Israel’s settlement policy for half a century, which has not only permanently taken away Palestinian land in the West Bank but also made the previously envisaged two-state solution impossible.
The Western community of states gives Israel the right to defend itself in the face of rocket fire from the Gaza Strip, but at the same time avoids the question of whether the Syrian army can also fire on Israel according to this logic, because military strikes against Syria are regularly carried out from there. The Russian Foreign Ministry said that tensions should be expected to rise over the displacement of Arab residents from their ancestral homeland, the Sheikh Jarrah area, the advance of plans to build 540 homes in the Har Choma settlement and the killing of two Palestinians at a checkpoint near the town of Jenin. Which point of view would you prefer to agree with?
Moshe Zuckerman: The Russian point of view is closer to my heart. But one more thing has to be kept in mind. The escalation of violence was not the result of ideological pseudo-postulates like the right of self-defense. It was the result of a well-planned chain of provocations by the Israelis: police on the Temple Mount, blocking access to Jerusalem for Arabs, Sheikh Jarrah and many others. Hamas must respond in such a way that there is an inevitable escalation of violence.
Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, who is in trouble because of the trial (due to corruption allegations), and the failure to form a coalition, needed this escalation for his own benefit – and also achieved his goal…
There could be a fifth vote, this time with direct elections for prime minister, which Netanyahu should win. The fact that Hamas is also using the escalation of violence because it wants to raise its profile does not change anything.
The reasons for the current spiral of violence between Hamas and Israel can also be found in the events of the last few weeks. Tensions escalated in East Jerusalem in mid-April. On 7 May, Israeli border police clashed with Palestinians near the Temple Mount. To what extent is the shift to the right in Israeli society, which has been advancing for years, responsible for the current bloodshed?
Moshe Zuckerman: This is almost a rhetorical question. The shift to the right is undoubtedly the cause of the current situation. But you have to understand that this shift to the right is not secondary: about 80 percent of the Israeli parliament can be classified as right-wing or right-wing.
Politicians such as Avigdor Lieberman, Naftali Benet or Gideon Saar are ideologically even more radical than Netanyahu. Although they have united in a camp against Netanyahu, which is currently in the process of disintegration, ideologically they are undoubtedly on the side of Netanyahu or the right, even the radical right in Israel.
HAMAS AS GUARANTOR OF THE PALESTINIAN SCHISM
You recently said that Israel needs Hamas and Hamas needs Netanyahu. What exactly did you mean by that?
Moshe Zuckerman: The creation of Hamas some forty years ago was initiated and promoted by Israel because Israel wanted to drive a wedge between the Palestinian camps and make the Islamist Hamas strong against the secular Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) under Arafat. From the beginning, Hamas has been the guarantor of Palestinian division for Israel.
Hamas, for its part, needs Israel because it perpetuates its raison d’être. It is no coincidence that in all the wars in
Gaza, Israel has always only sought to weaken Hamas, not destroy it permanently. Israel also allows Qatar to fund Hamas.
At the end of March, following the recent Israeli elections, it seemed that the Arab parties would tip the scales. Mansour Abbas, leader of the conservative Arab Ra’am party, has taken on the role of potential ruler of kings, wooed by Prime Minister Netanyahu. What impact will the current conflict have on government formation and the political landscape?
Moshe Zuckerman: It remains to be seen whether Mansour Abbas will still be able to tip the scales. The escalation of violence has forced him to take action: he can no longer simply unite with right-wing anti-Arab parties, because his electorate will no longer be able to accept it quietly.
His recent visit to a synagogue set on fire by Arabs brought him some scolding from his own people. He now seems weaker than before. As I noted above, the recent conflict will have a decisive impact on government formation. But the bigger issue is its impact on internal Israeli relations between Jews and Arabs – civil society coexistence is believed to have been seriously affected. It will take a long time to “normalise” again.
In Israel itself there have been serious clashes between members of the Arab minority and the security forces in many places. What will be the consequences for the cohesion of a society that is already deeply divided, even among the Jewish population?
Moshe Zuckerman: Not only clashes between Arabs and security forces, but also between Arabs and Jews have shaken the population. It became clear the potential for hatred and related violence accumulated in society. This was no coincidence, because in addition to the sheer vandalism, these excesses reflected the frustration and anger of a large segment of the Arab minority, who for decades have lived in Israel as second-class citizens. Perhaps the outbursts during the crisis will be seen as red flags. But that is yet to be decided.
There is a lot of talk about anti-Semitism in Germany these days, especially in connection with the pro-Palestinian demonstrations. As an Israeli citizen and a Jew, you yourself have been accused of anti-Semitism by the Germans. Aren’t the terms ‘Jews’, ‘Zionism’, ‘Israel’ and ‘anti-Semitism’ confused in German society…?
Moshe Zuckerman: Yes, I hold this opinion and have often enough stated it theoretically and empirically in Germany. But in vain, it seems, and as it turns out in the face of the current crisis. It must be understood once and for all: Judaism, Zionism and Israel are three different categories, and anti-Semitism, anti-Zionism and criticism of Israel respectively.
This is obvious from the fact that not all Jews are Zionists, not all Zionists are Israelis and not all Israelis are Jews. It is understandable why these categories are all too often equated in Germany. It responds to the sensitivities of Germans and their need to pay their debts. But this equation is not only wrong in itself, it also objectively serves the interests of Israeli propaganda.
Ramon Schuck