IF SOME COMPELLING justification was required for bringing a most
controversial book, with a most unorthodox approach, before a world in
which the human psyche has become far more attuned to the pleasant process
of being softly lulled by Big Brother than to the painstaking task of
absorbing upsetting, nonconsensus material, then the astounding November
19-20, 1977, pilgrimage of Egyptian President Anwar el-Sadat to Jerusalem
supplied the reason. The Middle East imbroglio, always complex, had now
become "curiouser and curiouser," to borrow words from Alice in
Euphoric Americans clung to their video sets over
that weekend. Sadat was addressing the Knesset--Egyptians and Israelis
were not only talking to one another, but smiling. The "A-rabs"
were at last willing to give up war. Peace, surely, must be on the way.
This wishful thinking of course overlooked the fact
that since 1948 there had been two wars going on simultaneously in the
Middle East. The one between Israel and the Arab states was only a
secondary consequence of what Syrian President Hafez al-Assad has called
the "mother question"-the conflict between the Israeli Zionists
and the Arab Palestinians. While there was some possibility of a separate
agreement ending the Egyptian-Israeli war, a solution for the core of the
dangerous Holy Land conflict seemed as distant as ever.
The November 10, 1975, U.N. resolution equated
Zionism with racism and racial discrimination, and for the first time
placed the genesis of the continuing Middle East struggle squarely before
a startled American public. But fervent supporters of Israel, Christians
as well as Jews, reacted with unprecedented furor to the overwhelming U.N.
censure and stirred the media to direct an equally unprecedented onslaught
against the U.N., the Arab states, and the Third World bloc. The
supporters of the resolution were denigrated with the charge
"emulators of Hitler." The pro-Israel American public was led to
believe that this was indeed but another attack on Jews and Judaism, a
Nazi renaissance. The pertinency of this U.N. action to the continuing
Arab rejection of the State of Israel was totally covered over by
What is Zionism, and what is its connection with the
Middle East conflict? How, if at all, is it differentiated from Judaism?
Why has Organized Jewry, invariably an unequivocal exponent of the
separation of church and state, condoned their union in an Israeli state
demanding the allegiance of everyone everywhere who considers himself a
Jew, whether he be an observant practitioner or not? What validity is
there to the insistence of a persistent minority that anti-Zionism is the
equivalent of anti-Semitism? Such questions may mystify 90 percent of
Americans, yet the answers go to the very heart of the Middle East
It was the serious confusion between religion and
nationalism that led directly to the 1948 establishment of the Zionist
state of Israel in the heart of the Arab world, causing disastrous
consequences for all concerned, including Americans whose government had
played a major role in that nation-making. The resultant uprooting of
Palestinian Arabs, whose numbers today have swollen to more than 1.6
million, many exiled for thirty years to refugee camps living on a U.N.
dole of seven cents per day, brought down on the U.S. the enmity of an
Arab-Muslim world, eroding a measureless reservoir of goodwill stemming
from the educational and eleemosynary institutions America helped found.
The creation of Israel, likewise, led to the penetration of the area for
the first time by the Soviet Union, endangered the security interests of
the U.S., and thrust the burden of a premature energy crisis into every
However much the essence of Judaism may have remained
as distinct as ever from Zionism, the nationalist shadow has so overtaken
the religious substance that virtually all Jews have, in practice, become
Israelists, if not Zionists. Many who mistrust the Zionist connotation can
still have their cake and eat it, through Israelism.
While the vast majority of Jews in the Diaspora (the
aggregate of Jews living outside of Palestine) do not believe in Zionist
ideology, out of what is mistaken for religious duty they have given
fullest support, bordering on worship, to Israel. Such worship of
collective human power is just about as old as Pharaonic Egypt, and was
practiced by the Sumerians, pre-Christian Greeks, and Romans as well. As
Dr. Arnold Toynbee pointed out in A Study of History.
The prevalence of this worship of collective human power is a
calamity. It is a bad religion because it is the worship of a false god.
It is a form of idolatry which has led its adherents to commit
innumerable crimes and follies. Unhappily, the prevalence of this
idolatrous religion is one of the tragic facts of contemporary human
And these Jewish Zionists-Israelists have been joined by a large
segment of articulate Christian opinion in the new worship of the State of
Israel, which has been accorded the same privileges and immunities that
have been vouchsafed to religionists who follow a genuine faith.
On every other issue of concern to Americans, both
sides have invariably been publicly presented, no matter how
controversial: the cigarette lobby vs. cancer research, the drug alarmists
vs. the upholders of pot, traditionalists-oldsters vs. Beatles-hippies,
civil rights gradualists vs. extremists, hawks and doves over Vietnam,
pro-Watergate outcome vs. Nixon apologists-to mention but a few. It has
only been on the subject of Jews, Zionism, and Israel that the U.S. and
most of the Western world have had a near-total blackout. The mere
presence of the powerful Anti-Defamation League, even before the fearsome
"anti-Semitic" label might be brandished, has imparted a
sensitivity so powerful as to smother any idea of private discussion, let
alone public debate, on the grave issues involved.
The record of pressures, suppression, and
terrorization practiced against many-including Presidents of the U.S., who
in undisclosed memoranda, letters, and documents have entertained serious
doubts about the course upon which Zionism has embarked-is massive and yet
incomplete. The more submissive of the Victims of Jewish nationalist
pressure have usually been either too ashamed or too afraid to publicize
Rarely has the deceit of so few been so widely
practiced to the disastrous detriment of so many, as in the formulation
and implementation of U.S. Middle East policy. Guilt, fear, and the
preoccupation with domestic politics rather than consideration of policy,
justice, and security interests have molded the direction of the deep U.S.
involvement. And if John Q. Citizen was unmindful of what was really
taking place, it was largely due to the inordinate power of the media to
penetrate the inner sanctum of every home with its slantings, distortions,
and myth-information. "T'ain't people's ignorance," as Artemus
Ward once quipped, "that does the harm, 'tis their knowin' so much
that ain't so." Barnum notwithstanding, the media has been able to
fool the people most, if not all, of the time.
The Watergate cover-up has to play second fiddle to
the concealments in the Middle East fiasco for more than thirty years,
involving, as it has, the continuous serious threat to world peace
manifested by four regional wars and three serious Big Power
confrontations, which only narrowly missed becoming World War III. The
stationing of American technicians in the Sinai to help supervise the
second Egyptian-Israeli disengagement accord may have been a step in the
making of a new Vietnam. "One day," predicted a senior U.S.
diplomat, according to Newsweek magazine, "there will be a
congressional investigation into how we lost the Middle East that will
make the great China debate seem trivial."
This book, it is hoped, will contribute to a great
Middle East debate that should take place before, rather than after,
catastrophe strikes again in that already harassed portion of the globe.
Certain basic questions require. answers: "Whose legal and moral
claim to Palestine is stronger, the Israeli Zionists or the Arab
Palestinians? How, if at all, may these claims be reconciled? How may the
U.S. protect its vast political and economic stake in the area and
simultaneously continue to foster its special, unique relationship with
Israel? Will the undeniable, overwhelming public statement of "never
again," as to another Vietnam, be meticulously regarded in our
pursuit of Middle East peace? And above all, this clincher: Will President
Reagan and his policy advisers cease avoiding and openly face the central
issue in the entire problem--not the existence of an Israeli state, nor
even the nonexistence of a Palestinian state, but the kind of a state
Israel has to become so as to bring lasting peace to the area?
For some time it has been apparent that someone would
have to assume the burden of carefully examining the historical record of
the Arab-Israeli conflict, starting with the "original sin" in
uprooting the indigenous Arab Palestinians, and daring to articulate
conclusions seldom aired. As Norman Thomas once observed, one of the
Jewish faith is perhaps able to speak with "the necessary moral
authority that no Gentile can express."
However strong the temptation may be for any author
to succumb to the prevailing mood of his surroundings and to indulge in
indiscriminate stereotyping, heightened by cliche's and slogans, I have
tried to maintain a fair perspective and not to allow personal experiences
to dull the observer's vision, nor instill too deep-seated a passion. It
is out of sadness, not anger, that I am forced to conclude that in
embarking upon the new path that Organized Jewry has hewn for it,
prophetic Judaism has incurred an incalculable loss in moral values, which
author Moshe Menuhin has described as "the Decadence of Judaism in
Our Times." What else can account for the anomaly by which the
once-persecuted have adopted the philosophy of their chief persecutor?
In doling out incarceration and death while sweeping
through conquered Europe, did not the Führer undo the laws of
emancipation for which so many Jews had so long struggled, as he decreed:
"You are not a German, you are a Jew-you are not a Frenchman, you are
a Jew, you are not a Belgian, you are a Jew"? Yet these are the
identical words that Zionist leaders have been intoning as they have
meticulously promoted the in-gathering to Israel (Palestine) of Jews from
around the globe, even plotting their exodus from lands in which they have
lived happily for centuries.
If at times this book seems unduly critical of
Israel, and neglects to place in balance the oft-repeated arguments in its
favor, it is simply because the gigantic propaganda apparatus of
Israel-World Zionism has spun such extensive and deeply ingrained
mythology that there is hardly enough space to refute widely accepted
theses and expose the picture as it really is. The reader, however, is
particularly cautioned to keep in mind at all times the very vital
distinction between the State of Israel and the people of Israel. Nor can
he overlook the fact that one of Western man's most precious possessions
is the inalienable right to dissent. As Thomas Jefferson expressed it,
"For God's sake, let us freely hear both sides."
This new, updated paperback edition has been
published as an answer to the widespread demand to learn more about the
untold side of a subject, the understanding of which may be vital to man's
In giving fair consideration to what to many will
come as an astounding recital, my readers are asked to display what
William Ellery Channing once defined as the free mind:
"I call that mind free which jealously guards its
intellectual rights and powers, which calls no man master, which does
not content itself with a passive or hereditary faith, which opens
itself to light whencesoever it may come, and which receives new truth
as an angel from heaven."