The United States and Israel have always shared a passion for democracy. Both countries had similar foundations, established by a majority of immigrants claiming to create a better society, towards religious tolerance and democratic ideas. In 1948, both the United States and the Soviet Union immediately recognized the State of Israel. During a era where these two nations often fought against on another to claim a majority in support and power for either ideologies, the United States, firmly recognized but limited their support for Israel due to it’s alliances with Arab countries in the region and the growing demand for oil in the region.
In Identity and Religion of Palestine and The Accidental Empire, Lybarger and Gorenberg analyze the historical and political circumstances that gave rise to religious nationalism in the communities of Palestine and Israel. While Lybarger explores the rise of Islamist tendencies in Palestinian politics, Gorenberg explores the rise of the Israeli settler movement. In both cases, political stalemate and instability among secular powers fostered the development of religious nationalism. In the Palestinian case, religious nationalism emerged out of the destabilizing events in the Palestinian political landscape that weakened the PLO. Whereas in the Israeli case, religious nationalism grew out of political inaction on the part of the Labor party to address the settler movement. It is the purpose of this paper to compare the political contexts that gave rise to these distinct forms of religious nationalism in Palestine and Israel, and to evaluate how religious nationalism has shaped the political identities of the two communities. I hope to show that in both the Palestinian and Israeli case, the rise of religious nationalism can be attributed to a form of political paralysis.
In the years just after World War II, Zionism (the desire to rebuild a Jewish national presence in the Promised Land) became a popular Jewish cause all around the world. Many Jews who were not practicing Judaism at all with religion became involved with the establishment of the State of Israel. Even today, many years after the successful founding of the State of Israel, there are Jews whose only real tie to Judaism is their belief in Zionism and their support for the State of Israel. They are joined by many Jews who are members of synagogues and support a modern Jewish religious movement, but who also find their prime identity as Jews in the Zionist cause.
Since the inception of an Israeli nation-state in 1948, violence and conflict has played a major role in Israel’s brief history. In the Sixty-One year’s Israel has been a recognized nation-state, they have fought in 6 interstate wars, 2 civil wars, and over 144 dyadic militarized interstate disputes (MIDs) with some display of military force against other states (Maoz 5). Israel has been involved in constant conflict throughout the past half century. Israel’s tension against other states within the Middle East has spurred vast economic, social, and political unity that has fostered a sense of nationalism and unity in Israel not seen in most other states. Over the next several pages I will try and dissect the reasons for why the nation state of Israel has been emerged in constant conflict and how this conflict has helped foster national unity and identity among the people of Israel.
Jewish Religion is formally known as Judaism which can be described as a religion, race, culture, and a nation. Judaism is the original of three Abrahamic faiths, which includes Christianity and Islam. Judaism was originated in the Middle East over 3500 years ago. The religion was founded by Moses, although Jews trace their history back to Abraham. Jews believe that there is only one God with whom they have covenant. Judaism teaches that every person was created “b’tzelem Elohim”, which is Hebrew for “in the image of God”. For this reason, every person is equally important and has an infinite potential to do good in the world. They believe people have the freewill to make responsible choices in their lives.
During World War II, millions of Jews fled from Germany to escape the brutality of Adolf Hitler. A Zionist movement established that all Jewish refugees were to flee to Palestine, a concept founded by The Jewish State, by Dr. Theodore Herzl, in order to unite all Jews in one holy state. The British were convinced in 1917 by Chaim Weizmann that all Jews needed their own territory in Palestine, and in the early 1920s, the British were given a mandate over Palestine by the League of Nations. Palestinians felt threatened by the rise in Jewish presence in their state, causing widespread fighting in order to expel Jews from the Arabians’ sacred Palestinian land. Ben-Gurion (also known as a member to the World Zionist Congress) was leader of the Jewish peoples in 1947, whereas there was no single leader of the Arabs, there were several influential figures to the cause: Haj Amin el-Husseini – grand mufti of Jerusalem, Azzam Pasha – secretary-general of the Arab League, King Abdullah of Transjordan – only leader open to a Arab-Jewish compromise, and Glubb Pasha – commander of the British-trained Arab Legion.
The State of Israel, one of the youngest countries in today’s world, is no stranger to conflict. Prior to the removal of the British Mandatory Palestine tension between the Palestinians and the Jews were high as immigrants from Europe flooded into Palestinian territory.
A place where America’s influence over Israel is clearly visible is Iran. The leader of Iran, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, publicly and frequently calls for the destruction of Israel. Iran is also a sponsor of Hizballah, which is recognized by both Israel and the United States Department of States as a terrorist organization. Hizaballah is the organization responsible for kidnapping and killing the Israeli soldiers that led to the Lebanese war cited above. Iran is also accused of having a major role in the terrorists’ attacks against the U.S. such as those terrorist groups in Iraq who frequently kill U.S. soldiers. According to Israeli intelligence, Iran has the technical capability to build a bomb, but they do not yet have the necessary enriched uranium to build a bomb. Mike Mullen, Chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff who serves as one of the principal military advisors to the President, said on April 2009, “I think the Iranians are on a path to building nuclear weapons. Michael Hayden, the outgoing director of the Central Intelligence Agency, one of American’s main overseas intelligence organizations, said, “I’m amazed that Iran is willing to run the costs they are running if they are not trying to keep the option open for a nuclear weapon.” Agreement that Iran is pursuing the attainment of a nuclear weapon is not the sole belief of the United States. Israel is adamantly convinced that Iran is attempting to build a nuclear weapon. Israel’s military chief said that from the end of 2009, an Iranian nuclear bomb is a choice that they can exercise rather than a scientific feat that they have to overcome. So it is agreed that Iran is trying to build a bomb and would like nothing more than to exterminate Israel. America’s in...
1996: A Turbulent Year for Israel
1996 has been a very turbulent year for Israel. This lies in the
assassination of Yitzhak Rabin on November 4, 1995. Rabin's great work in the
peace process with it's Arab neighbors has been nearly reversed by Israel's
newly elected Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, who actively opposed the peace
process in the election. Netanyahu's term of service has not only affected
Israel politically but also socially, intellectually, religiously, and
economically.
Proceeding from a simplistic perception of regional stability, Washington utilized the surrogate strategy to control the outcomes of regional interactions in the Middle East and chose Israel to play the role of regional surrogate. But Israel, in many cases, instead of maintaining regional stability on behalf of the US, served its own interests which were not always consistent with US interest in regional stability. The Israeli violations, however, were either condoned or even approved by the US administrations. These reactions comprised what this chapter addressed as a pro-Israel model of intervention.