The Zionist Legacy: Water and Agriculture Management in Israel.

(1)

Corso di Laurea Magistrale

in Relazioni Internazionali

Comparate

Tesi di Laurea

The Zionist Legacy:

Water and Agriculture

Management in Israel

Relatore

Ch. Prof. Matteo Legrenzi

Correlatore

Ch. Prof. Massimiliano Trentin

Laureanda

Erika Ingami

Matricola 831505

Anno Accademico

2011 / 2012

(2)

ii

Acknowledgments

Firstly, I would like to thank my supervisor, Professor Matteo Legrenzi, for his prompt advice and his constant encouragement during the course of the research and writing process of this thesis. A special consideration also goes to Professor Massimiliano Trentin for his support and suggestions.

I want to express my profound gratitude to my parents and to the rest of my family for having always believed in me. Their help and support goes well beyond the extent of this thesis, enduring through the course of my whole student career. I must say that without them, I would never have managed to achieve this goal.

Furthermore, I thank my closest friends and colleagues who, despite the distance, have always been present and supported me during these past two years.

Finally my endless thanks also goes to Kerry and Gerald for encouraging and motivating me during the past six months.

I dedicate this work to Christopher. Thanks for being with me through every challenge.

(3)

iii

Abstract

L‘elaborato si prefigge lo scopo di analizzare il legame esistente fra i valori dettati dal sionismo socialista e i problemi derivanti dall’odierna gestione delle risorse idriche in Israele, focalizzandosi sul ruolo specifico attribuito all’agricoltura nell’ambito della fondazione dello Stato.

Nel corso della tesi emergerà come il sionismo1, grazie ai suoi forti valori ideologici e religiosi, abbia offerto al popolo ebraico una via d’uscita dal processo di assimilazione europeo proprio attraverso il ritorno a “Eretz Israel”2. Il sionismo socialista si prefiggeva lo scopo di realizzare nella Terra d’Israele una società basata sulla collettività e sull’uguaglianza fra i propri membri. Il movimento, intendendo gettare le basi per la creazione di una comunità capace di essere economicamente autosufficiente, decise di promuovere il concetto di “uomo nuovo” attraverso l’esempio del pioniere sionista3, una figura capace di far fiorire una terra arida e ostile grazie al lavoro manuale e alla diffusione di comunità agricole.

Negli ultimi vent’anni dell’Ottocento giunsero in Israele migliaia di ebrei provenienti dall’Europa orientale (a causa dei pogrom in Russia). Inoltre il flusso d’immigrati verso la Palestina crebbe notevolmente nel periodo compreso fra le due Guerre al punto che, quando nel 1948 fu fondata la nazione, lo Stato già ospitava 800.000 abitanti, di cui 650.000 erano ebrei. L’unico capitale su cui lo Stato d’Israele4 poteva contare era dunque il “capitale umano”.

I kibbutzim e i moshavim5 ebbero un ruolo fondamentale nella formazione della nuova società ebraica, al punto che vi lavorarono anche personaggi di spicco quali Golda Meir 6 e Ben Gurion. Inoltre, sebbene ostacolata dalla scarsità di risorse idriche, l’agricoltura s’impose come settore trainante negli anni ’50.

1_{Il movimento sionista creò una sorta di “nazionalismo ebraico”.} 2_{Terra d’Israele.}

3_{L’obiettivo era creare una società basata sul lavoro manuale attraverso la diffusione degli insediamenti}

agricoli.

4_{Comunità ebraica in Palestina prima della fondazione dello Stato d’Israele.}

5_{I kibbutzim e i moshavim sono comunità agricole. A differenza dei kibbutzim, nei moshavim si pone}

maggiore enfasi sul concetto di “lavoro cooperativo”.

6_{Golda Meir fu insegnante e premier israeliano. Fu eletta primo ministro d’Israele nel 1969. Fu la prima}

(5)

v Inoltre, sarà spiegato come dagli anni Sessanta in poi, il Likud7 iniziò a farsi largo creando le premesse per la sconfitta elettorale del movimento politico laburista, che da quasi trent’anni si trovava al potere. Il Likud, sin dalla vittoria elettorale del 1977, ha accelerato un processo di privatizzazione economica e di alterazione dei valori laburisti, sebbene i pilastri del sionismo socialista fossero in discussione già da prima delle elezioni, a causa del rapido sviluppo economico e del cambiamento della società Israeliana.

La tesi esporrà alcune fasi centrali della storia dello Stato8, dall’inizio del XX secolo sino a oggi. Lo scopo dell’elaborato sarà di dimostrare l’influenza che l’ideologia sionista continua ad avere sulla gestione delle risorse idriche e sul settore agricolo, nonostante la crisi del sionismo socialista9. Per raggiungere quest’obiettivo la discussione partirà da considerazioni di tipo ideologiche e storiche (quali il concetto di “purificazione” legato al lavoro nei campi) sino ad arrivare ad analisi di carattere economico e ambientale.

È necessario aggiungere che, anche prima del 1948, l’espansione degli insediamenti territoriali legati all’attività agricola faceva parte di una valida strategia di “conquista territoriale”, ottenuta tramite la dispersione della comunità ebraica nelle aree più periferiche e rurali del Paese.

In conclusione, saranno enunciate le conseguenze dell’influenza del pensiero sionista sull’allocazione delle risorse idriche, risultante in un sistema centralizzato che, nonostante la scarsità d’acqua che affligge la nazione, prevede generosi sussidi al settore agricolo. A tal proposito, si analizzeranno le presunte ragioni per cui questo settore, che costituisce solo il 2-3% del Prodotto Interno Lordo del Paese, impieghi il 60% della quantità d’acqua disponibile.

L’elaborato è suddiviso in tre capitoli:

• Il primo capitolo mira a fornire un quadro storico del pensiero sionista e del fenomeno del “pionerismo” nella Terra d’Israele, soffermandosi anche sulle

7_{Il partito trae le sue origini dal movimento sionista riformista di Zeev Jabotinsky. Oggi il Likud è un}

partito nazionalista liberale. Inoltre, le elezioni israeliane del 2009 hanno visto un ritorno al potere del partito.

8_{L’elaborato partirà dalla storia dell’Yishuv, la comunità ebraica in Palestina.}

9_{Il sionismo socialista rappresenta la corrente di sinistra del movimento sionista che sosteneva la}

creazione di uno stato ebraico in Palestina attraverso il lavoro della classe operaia tramite la diffusione d’insediamenti agricoli quali i kibbutzim e i moshavim.

(6)

vi cause della migrazione di massa che vide migliaia di ebrei stabilirsi in Palestina. I nuovi immigrati volevano creare un’immagine di “popolo ebraico” capace di rovesciare quelle limitazioni professionali cui erano stati a lungo sottoposti nel corso della diaspora. L’analisi dimostrerà che il movimento sionista riteneva che non vi fosse alcun futuro per la comunità ebraica in Europa, e che quindi fosse necessario stabilirsi in Palestina per creare una società basata sul lavoro manuale e sull’uguaglianza. Nel corso del capitolo saranno anche spiegate le differenze esistenti fra i membri della Prima, Seconda e Terza Aliyah. A tal proposito, sarà illustrato come gli immigrati della Prima Aliyah, non avendo alcuna esperienza in campo agricolo, impiegarono la forza-lavoro locale, invece di coltivare la terra indipendentemente. Inoltre, particolare attenzione sarà dedicata alla natura della collaborazione fra la comunità ebraica e il mandato britannico, iniziata formalmente con la Dichiarazione Balfour10, documento che stabilì in maniera ufficiale il supporto britannico per la creazione di una “sede nazionale” o “national home”11 per il popolo ebraico in Palestina. Saranno inoltre esaminate le idee digli esponenti principali del movimento sionista quali A.D. Gordon. In conclusione, il capitolo anticiperà la natura del ruolo giocato dall’Histadrut, istituzione le cui competenze saranno descritte in maniera più dettagliata nel capitolo seguente.

• Il secondo capitolo fornisce un’analisi storica, economica e sociale della nazione partendo dal ruolo dell’Histadrut, elemento essenziale per comprendere il diretto controllo del governo sulle strutture sociali ed economiche del Paese. Inoltre, questa sezione si soffermerà sull’analisi dei cambiamenti introdotti dal rapido sviluppo economico e dalle elezioni del 1977, cui seguirà una descrizione dei problemi riguardanti la bilancia dei pagamenti e le pressioni inflazionarie che hanno afflitto il paese sino alla metà degli anni ‘80. Nello specifico il capitolo verterà sull’analisi dei seguenti elementi:

-L’economia dell’Yishuv durante il mandato. -L’economia araba ai tempi del mandato.

10_{La Dichiarazione Balfour risale al 2 novembre 1917. Il documento, una lettera scritta dall'allora}

Ministro degli esteri inglese (Arthur Balfour) diretta a Lord Rothschild, vedeva il governo britannico impegnarsi ufficialmente nel fornire il proprio supporto alla creazione di un “focolare” ebraico in Palestina.

(7)

vii -L’Histadrut e lo Gdud Haavoda12.

-L’economia d’Israele dal 1948 sino a oggi.

-Il controllo dello Stato sulle risorse nazionali e naturali. -Progetti idrici caratterizzati da un particolare “ethos”.

• Il terzo capitolo si propone di analizzare le questioni ambientali legate alla gestione delle risorse idriche nel paese, con un focus specifico sulle attività di ricerca e sviluppo nel campo dell’agricoltura sostenibile. In questa sezione della tesi si discute anche dell’importanza attribuita al controllo dei corsi d’acqua, considerati un bene di rilevanza strategica sin dalla fondazione dello Stato. La discussione tratterà alcuni aspetti in particolare:

-Descrizione delle risorse idriche di superficie e sotterranee. -Gestione delle risorse idriche nazionali.

-Prospettive future legate allo sviluppo di un’agricoltura “sostenibile”. -Risorse idriche non convenzionali.

Inoltre da questo capitolo emergerà che, nei primi anni di vita dello Stato, la mancanza d’acqua era avvertita come diretta conseguenza dell’assenza di strumenti di ricerca e di tecnologie avanzate, mentre oggi il Paese è a conoscenza della reale disponibilità di questa risorsa. Come sarà più volte menzionato nel corso della discussione, all’inizio degli anni ‘80 le pressioni inflazionarie costrinsero molti kibbutzim a contrarre debiti, specialmente in seguito al programma di stabilizzazione finanziaria del 1985 (che ebbe un duro impatto sul settore agricolo)13. Il capitolo prenderà anche in esame le conseguenze dei generosi aiuti destinati alla lobby degli agricoltori, sebbene la crisi degli anni ‘80 contribuì a cambiare sostanzialmente i valori di molte comunità agricole, le quali si sono di recente dedicate più al turismo che alla produzione agricola con lo scopo d’incrementare i propri profitti14. La sezione, verso le conslusioni, sarà dedicata ad alcune riflessioni riguardanti il ruolo del

12_{Il Gdud Haavoda fu fondato dagli halutzim della Terza Aliyah (1919-1923). L’organizzazione voleva}

fondare una singola grande comune basandosi su una vera ideologia socialista. L’Histadrut vedeva questo progetto come una possibile minaccia.

13_{Israele: Gerusalemme, Tel Aviv, Galilea, Golan, Cisgiordania il Negev e il Mar Morto, Touring}

Editore, 1998.

(8)

viii MARD15nello sviluppo di un’agricoltura sostenibile. Inoltre, sarà chiarito che in Israele le superfici agricole occupano 1/3 del territorio nazionale e che tutta la terra coltivata, appartenente allo Stato o al Fondo Nazionale Ebraico, è solo “ceduta” per un periodo di circa novant’anni alle comunità agricole o a singoli agricoltori. Infine, si dimostrerà che, per raggiungere un’agricoltura sostenibile, lo Stato non necessita solo di attività di ricerca e di nuove tecnologie, ma anche di ricalcolare il sistema dei prezzi e delle allocazioni. A tal proposito, nel corso del capitolo si tratterà anche di risorse idriche convenzionali e non-convenzionali (quali la desalinizzazione).

In conclusione, l’elaborato si prefigge lo scopo di spiegare come l’agricoltura israeliana affondi le proprie radici in un passato segnato da sfide continue, quali l’immigrazione di massa, la “conquista della terra”, le guerre e le ripetute crisi. Per comprendere l’odierna gestione delle risorse idriche e delle politiche agricole è necessario capire il passato di questo Stato “fuori dall’ordinario” e interrogarsi sull’eredità del pensiero sionista.

(9)

1

Introduction

The Zionist legacy plays an integral role and gives an insight into understanding water management in today’s Israel. The object of this dissertation is to highlight the ideological features that are the basis of the disproportionate water allocation to the Israeli agricultural sector operated by the State.

This thesis will examine the role that agriculture played in the creation of a nation, beginning with an assessment of the aspirations of the halutzim16 in a time before the State had been founded. The dissertation will then move through some of the crucial events that shaped the nation's history and the life of the Yishuv. The analysis will take into account the sociopolitical realities, the fundamental institutions and the main historical events.

A careful study of these elements shows that in Israel the ideas of the past have left their legacy on the present in a unique country where Jewish people form a religious group but also a nation.

Starting with historical and ideological assessments, (the importance of manual labor and the bond between the pioneers and the land) the study will evaluate economical and environmental features in order to determine the potency of the Zionist legacy on water and agricultural management in Israel. In fact, it was through Zionism that the quest for the land was turned into a tool for the achievement of a sovereign State.

The key to understanding Israel’s history is hidden in the endured dialectic between mythos and reality. In fact, myths are engraved in the land as much as the land belongs to the myths17.

Garfinkle defines the Jewish people as the “most successful trans-territorial civilization in the human history”18_{, because even though vulnerably exposed to}

discrimination and limitations during the course of the Diaspora, they later found the strength, through Zionism, to take their myths and transform them into something

16_{The Jewish “pioneers”.}

17_{See: Adam M. Garfinkle, Politics and Society in Modern Israel, M E Sharpe Inc, 2000.} 18_Ibidem.

(10)

2 distinctive: a “rebirth”. For the first time in history, an exiled people managed to gain its sovereign state after a long Diaspora19_.

Zionism is often defined as a family with many members (among them Religious Zionists, Political Zionists, Labor Zionists and so on)20. It will be argued that consensus among the Zionists was found in the necessity of establishing a Jewish State in Palestine for the self-emancipation of the Jewish community. But the Zionists disagreed on many aspects of the future Jewish society and in specific on its ultimate form21. Zion was never considered an ordinary place where land is just land: it was instead, the land for Jewish people and a place of unity where ideology served as the cementing factor.

This thesis will dedicate particular attention to the patterns of development of the period immediately following the Independence through the analysis of several strategies adopted in order to meet the country’s challenges. The essay will also provide ideological, economical and historical considerations of the nation-building process, mainly trying to address the following questions:

-Who were the halutzim?

-What stood behind “the redemption of the land”?

-Which elements contributed to the transformation of Israel from a historical mythos into an imposing modern State?

In order to understand the approach of this thesis it is important to acknowledge that from 1903 to about 1923 a new wave of Jewish immigrants from a diverse background arrived in Palestine. In fact, the term “halutzim” in Hebrew is translated as “avant-garde” – “the ones who go before the collectivity”22. It is also interesting to know that the word “halutz” was used for the first time in the Zionist context in 1919, during the Third Aliyah (as a retroactive use towards the pioneers of the Second Aliyah).

19_{See: Adam M. Garfinkle, Politics and Society in Modern Israel, M E Sharpe Inc, 2000.}

20_{See: Dan Horowitz, Moshe Lissak, Trouble in Utopia: The Overburdened Polity of Israel, Suny Press,}

1989.

21_Ibidem.

22_{See: Shmuel Noah Eisenstadt, Explorations in Jewish Historical Experience: The Civilizational}

(11)

3 The halutzim migrated to Palestine in order to change the course of the Diaspora, renouncing wages and material privileges, with the scope of working for the collectivity23_{. The halutzim believed that “being in the Land of Israel” was a primary}

necessity. It was their longing for this land that, apart from socioeconomic, ideological and political speculations, pushed them to set for the “conquest of land”. The halutzim were aware that they came to Palestine in order to become manual laborers; a remarkable task that even Ben Gurion defined as “possible only for two categories of people: the strong and young ones and the persons of great will”24.

Labor Zionism in particular looked at the pioneer venture as a form of an elite society committed to the achievement of a national goal. This ethos differed from the one of the right wing faction within Zionism. From the viewpoint of Labor Zionism, the collective settlement experience was a specific pillar of the ideology (essential to rebuild the Jewish people and their world).

Garfinkle defines the Israeli political system as a mixture of hybrid and organic elements. Hybrid refers to those aspects developed by many former colonies (Israel for instance, inherited its parliamentary system from the British), which once independent import their system from the outside; meanwhile, organic elements derive from the country’s social and economic reality. “Jews have a long collective history as a people”. This history is echoed in the present political life of a country where politics is at the top of the iceberg and is the mirror of the Israeli society25.

Many aspects of today’s Israel have roots in the pre-state period (before 1948); this heritage can be explained through the creation of institutions such as the Histadrut (General Federation of Labor) as it will be argued in Chapter I. In Israel there are many state-owned enterprises and an extensive public sector providing a full range of public services. As a result of the significant concentration of economic resources in the hand of the public sector: the State is the main owner of land and water resources. Immediately after the Independence, the human capital alone was seen as capable of overcoming the environmental challenges (such as water scarcity) as well as the economical challenges.

23_{See: Boaz Neumann, Land and Desire in Early Zionism, Brandeis University Press, 2011.} 24_Ibidem.

(12)

4 Another crucial question that will be addressed in the course of the dissertation is that the establishment of a Jewish homeland in Palestine substantially changed the life of the Arab laborers in the land. The growth of the Jewish economy before the establishment of the State of Israel had already led to Arab protests on several occasions (1920, 1921, 1929 and 1936). The waves of Jewish immigration and the Jewish land purchase activity had strained the relations between Arabs and Jews in the pre-state period. The Arab community was faced with the loss of land and job opportunities, furthermore, the British mandate failed to promote cooperation between the two communities.

It will emerge that the need for putting the nation before the individual (in the Labor movement) was embodied by the conception of the agricultural settlements and by the substantial shift “from class to nation”2627. It is important to know that, Labor Zionism was still profoundly influential in 1948 although the social and economic circumstances of the years following the independence determined a slight change in its ideology. In this respect, it is crucial to mention that the first forty years after 1948, were characterized by intense Jewish immigration to the country and by the insurgence of several conflicts28.

According to Horovitz and Lissak, the ethno-national criteria of the state lie at the basis of Israel, a country with its symbols and traditions. The law of return was the essence of the Zionist program of immigration and conquest of the land29. Meanwhile, the Six-Day War is considered to be the real turning point for the fate of Israel: the country’s territory had grown by a factor of three. Furthermore, Israel’s control over the Golan Heights meant increasing the nation’s water potential through the appropriation of a key region for the State’s water supply.

There are many similarities between water and oil: water like oil can be over-exploited (through over-pumping); furthermore, similar to oil, water is essential to human activities but it is not infinite. Both for oil and water, the increase in population and higher standards of living may lead to a higher demand. Due to water scarcity in Israel, like in the rest of the Middle East, these similarities are even more acute. The

26_{As wished Ben Gurion wished.}

27_{See: Dan Horowitz, Moshe Lissak, Trouble in Utopia: The Overburdened Polity of Israel, Suny Press,}

1989.

28_Ibidem. 29_Ibidem.

(13)

5 persistency of the Zionist ideology in the Israeli water policy has often been the object of the analysis of many scholars who (like Clive Lipchin) have repeatedly criticized the Israeli agricultural lobby for opposing any attempt to reduce subsidized water allocations related to agriculture30.

About the Chapters

The dissertation is divided into three chapters:

• Chapter I provides an insight into the historical background of the Jewish community in the Land before the establishment of the State of Israel and of the forces that determined the mass immigration from Europe at the end of the XIX century.

As explained in the course of the chapter, by the end of the 1880s, the Jewish people in Europe would either assimilate to the European societies or choose the Zionist option; the assimilation process would have posed a threat to the endurance of the Jewish identity. The analysis will show that the Zionists believed that there was no viable future for the Jewish people on the Continent and that the establishment of a homeland was the right answer to the Jewish problem (as it was called in Europe at the time).

This section is also focused on:

-The differences existing between the values of the pioneers of the First

Aliyah and those of the Second and Third Aliyah.

-The nature of the British-Zionist relationship.

-The significance of the role played by the General Jewish Labor Federation in Palestine.

Indeed the settlers of the first Aliyah tried to form a class of Jewish laborers, but they failed in this task. These immigrants still relied on hired Arab workers for the establishment of Jewish landed estates. Other differences are best exemplified in their approach towards the land; for instance, the Second

30_{See: Giuseppe Azera, Barbara Marniga, Geopolitica dell’Acqua: gli Scenari Internazionali e il caso del}

(14)

6

Aliyah propagated the central role that farming played within its ideology. The

effective attempt to form a Jewish working class can be credited to this third wave of immigration.

This paper will point out how Ben Gurion was determined to avoid the emergence of a class of Jewish colons31: the construction of agricultural settlements such as the “exemplary moshavot” of Metula and Qastina and the kibbutzim were viewed as a national goal (here the Jewish farmers had to prove their knowledge of agricultural techniques in order to be selected).

Attention will be also given to the nature of the British-Zionist relationship, a bond initiated with the Balfour Declaration. The Chapter will also survey the nature of the role played by the General Jewish Labor Federation in Palestine (created in 1920): a Labor Union that served as an umbrella for workers, who were provided with a full range of services and a health insurance system. Furthermore, it will be explained that the Histadrut (tightly connected to the Mapai party) was a useful element for the building up of the nation and conquest of the land. The role of the Histadrut will be explicitly emphasized in the second chapter.

• Chapter II also focuses on the history of Israel and provides a more economical and social analysis of the country up until nowadays. The communalism features of the Israeli social institution come from the Yishuv’s necessity to be self-sufficient: the Jewish community had to rely on its resources. In specific the dissertation will outline:

-The Jewish economy under the mandate.

-The contrasting perspectives - the Arab Laborers’ viewpoint as opposed to the Jewish Economy.

-The frictions between the Histadrut and the Gdud Haavoda. -The economy of Israel after 1948.

-The government’s centrality.

-The State control over natural and national resources. -The “ethos” that marked the National Water Carrier project.

31_{As colonial farmers or plantation owners.}

(15)

7 The first frictions between the Histadrut and the Gdud Haavoda emerged between 1922 and 1923. The Gdud was seen as a threat for the Histadrut because the organization tried to establish an alternative society based on moral, social and labor value in order to achieve a “socialist utopia”.

The section will also address the changes introduced by the British presence in the land (that spread hope among the Zionists who finally had the support they needed for the establishment of a National Home); and the issue concerning Arab labor. In this respect, it will be discussed how the British departments for agriculture, public health and education were mainly focused on supporting the Arabs, because the British government considered the Yishuv much more independent and self-sufficient than the Arab community.

The Law of Return of 1950 transformed Israel into a “Homeland” opening the country to every Jewish immigrant. The Jewish Agency (since 1929) and the Israeli government provided housing, agricultural settlements and employment. It was in the 1950s that the government tried to achieve a successful agricultural program in order to accomplish “self-sufficiency”.

The National Water Carrier will be outlined as the main water project in the country due to its enormous proportions: its length corresponds to 2/3 of the country’s length.

Nearing the end of the chapter, we will examine the 1977 elections (considered to be a political turning point in the history of the country since Labor lost office), as well as the chronic balance of payment crisis and the several devaluations implemented towards the end of the 1970s up until the beginning of the 1980s.

• Chapter III is dedicated to the analysis of the Israeli water management and environmental issues, with a specific focus on Israel’s future R&D32 within the field of sustainable agriculture. Under discussion is the importance of water since the very establishment of the State, and that water has always been considered an essential asset for the state’s development and for agricultural expansion33. In particular the following aspects will be addressed:

32_{Research and Development.}

33_{See: Gila Menahem, Water Policy in Israel: Policy Paradigms, Policy Networks and Public Policy,}

(16)

8 -Israel´s water resources.

-Water management and mismanagement.

-Future perspectives for the expansion of a sustainable agricultural sector. -Non-conventional water resources.

Special attention will be paid to the 1980s and to the effects of the inflationary pressures leading to a highly indebted agricultural sector. The subject matter will deal with the financial recovery program, which was implemented in order to stabilize the Israeli economy, but had the side effect of weakening the financial stability of the Israeli agricultural settlements. As a consequence, there was a cut in government spending and subsidies that saw most of the Israeli farmers nearly bankrupted.

On one hand, the analysis will show that there has been an effective change in the perception of water scarcity in the land. In fact, at the time of the State’s foundation water shortage was connected to the lack of research and technology; meanwhile today, there is a different awareness concerning the real quantity of water available; and for this reason, Israel´s water supply is now obtained both from conventional and non-conventional water resources.

On the other hand, it will be outlined that (despite this awareness) land ownership, government-owned enterprises and a strong public sector are still the effects of the governmental centralization. The Israeli government is involved in most natural and national resources. Submitting to the strategy initiated with the construction of the National Water Carrier, the government has set up a highly centralized organ for water distribution and allocation.

On conclusion, the chapter will highlight that the work of the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development in Israel is focused on a specific challenge: the achievement of a “sustainable agriculture capable of limiting any environmental hazard”. It will also be argued that the country’s most urgent needs are: reconsidering water subsidies to agriculture, the static protection of water prices and establishing more rational water allocations.

(17)

9

Research and Method

The thesis’s literary review, the data collection and analysis process were mainly carried out at Tel Aviv University (TAU) during an academic semester for research and study activity abroad. Access to the catalogue of the university libraries, TAU online resources and attendance to courses in Israeli Economy and Politics have substantially contributed to the outcome of this thesis. Books, reports, articles and web sources have been largely consulted, serving as crucial sources of information during the research process.

(18)

10

Chapter I

The Process of Nation Building in Palestine and the

Zionist Ideology

1.1 Land and Identity: a New Beginning

The land of Israel was under Ottoman occupation until 1917. The Jewish migration towards Palestine began in the last quarter of the nineteenth century. When talking about Israel we enter a dimension where ideas and ancient myths lay the foundation of the modern State to a point that, still today, they influence the Jewish contemporary reality. It is, therefore, not erroneous to say that Israel is “no ordinary country”.

Israel is a country of immigrants. The origins of the Jewish migratory phenomenon have economic, ideological and historical values. The Jewish people have always been firmly connected to the Land of Israel34_{. Their self-identity could be partly}

defined through their connection to the “Land”35. This bond can be understood through a deep analysis of the Jewish situation in Europe at the end of the 1800s.

An active movement calling for the return of the Jewish people to Palestine appeared only in the second half of the nineteenth century. The emergence of Zionism as a political force represented a real turning point: Zionism appeared in response to the wave of anti-Semitism spreading in Europe and it soon became more than a national ideology. At that time Jewish people had been feeling that, for them, there was no viable place or role in Europe. This led them to believe that a genuine integration process would never happen. The result was a Jewish identity crisis. The advent of the Russian pogroms and the anti-Semitic policies of the Tsarist government provoked an exodus of Jewish people from 1882 until 1914 that migrated to North or South America. Only 1% of them decided to go to Palestine36. Between 1882 and 1947 543,000 Jews settled in Palestine37. Their presence enriched the one of the 24,000 Jews that were

34_{See: Boaz Neumann, Land and Desire in Early Zionism, Brandeis University Press, 2011.}

35_{See: Shlomo Avineri, The Making of Modern Zionism, Basic Books Inc. Harper Torchbooks, 1981.} 36_{See: Shlomo Avineri, The Making of Modern Zionism, Basic Books Inc. Harper Torchbooks, 1981.} 37_{The pogroms in the Russian Empire included the Odessa pogroms, Warsaw pogrom (1881), Kishinev}

(19)

11 already living on the land and had mainly settled in the cities of Hebron, Jerusalem, Safed38_{and Tiberias. On the other hand, the Arab inhabitants in the region constituted a}

majority of 1,000,000 million of individuals who mainly relied on agriculture39_.

Figure 1 Russian Pogroms 1881. From http://www.zionism-‐israel.com/dic/pogrom.htm

Sholomo Avineri describes the Jewish migration to Palestine in terms of a “push” and “pull” mechanism: Jewish people felt the push to leave Europe and the pull that attracted them to the Land.

The “French revolution” and the “emancipation process” through the impact generated by their revolutionary ideas had given Jewish people the chance to attend universities in Europe and to gain access to new positions within the job market. It was a remarkable change, considering that at the beginning of the nineteenth century Jews living in Europe were still placed on the margins of society. They were socially emarginated due to the centrality of the Christian religion in Europe (for instance, not

38_{Safed is located in the northern part of Israel.}

39_{See: Gershon Shafir, Land, Labor, and the Origins of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, 1882-1914,}

(20)

12 being Christian, they were excluded from most professions within the public service). It was only at the beginning of the twentieth century that the life of the Jewish community began to change. Years of emancipation and Enlightenment had resulted in cities like Vienna, Warsaw and Berlin having a high density of Jewish inhabitants who were in higher professions (some of them were employed as doctors, lawyers, philosophers, etc.).

The mechanism of “push and pull” can be better exemplified through the definition of what was the Jewish problem. The problem deals with how the Jews used to perceive their community and with how others used to perceive them. Taking the Enlightenment as a turning point it is possible to distinguish their self-perception before and after this historical event. Before this milestone, Jews used to see themselves as belonging to the “gens Christiana”40.

At that time, Jews were automatically excluded from politics because Christian states envisaged a political body reflecting its Christian attitude. What was even more detrimental for the Jewish problem was that a non-Christian in a Christian state could not own any land.

The Kehilla41 (theocratic organizational structure in the ancient Israelite society)42 found the root of the actual dilemma in the fracture caused by the Enlightenment. For instance, “Jewish children could now be sent to a secularized school (…) and schools were opened on Saturday”43 but the liberal approach had not solved the Jewish problem. Jewish people felt as if they were “succumbing” to an assimilation process: they were losing their Jewish identity. Trying to resist such a process was seen as an act of “individual heroism”. Every decision, such as sending one’s children to school on Saturday or letting them eat at a non-Kosher school cafeteria, became vital44.

It is astonishing to acknowledge how Jews for more than one thousand years were mainly exiled and did not have the chance to share the same land (a time in which Jewish people were waiting for the Messiah)45.

40_{See: Shlomo Avineri, The Making of Modern Zionism, Basic Books Inc. Harper Torchbooks, 1981.} 41_{Generally the term is translated into “community”. The Kehilla was a form of organization used in}

order to face the dispersion of the Jews.

42_{http://www.wikipedia.com.}

43_{See: Shlomo Avineri, The Making of Modern Zionism, Basic Books Inc. Harper Torchbooks, 1981.} 44_Ibidem.

45_{The destruction of the Temple, the exile of the Jewish people, and other events were seen as}

opportunities for the fulfillment of Judaism's "mission" to all mankind. The events of Western world, in its liberalism, the subsequent emancipation, social and educational reforms, were seen under the

(21)

13 Zionist’s main concern was the existence and preservation of the Jewish people as a whole. Therefore, the aspirations of the Jewish people in Europe found an answer in the perspective of Zionism. An example of perfectly emancipated and secularized Jewish individual was Theodor Herzl. He was a Jewish speaking journalist living in Germany who used to write for the Neue Freie Presse.

The fathers of modern Zionism (Theodor Herzl, Max Nordau and Leo Pinsker) all embraced the idea that “Liberalism and nationalism would have been the beginning of a new self-awareness for the Jews in Europe”46. It is of interest to note that all of them lacked a traditional religious background. Their main idea was to form a normal social structure that had to be headed by peasants. Agriculture was the center of this revolution whose motto was “going to the land to build it and be built by it”.

Moses Hess was the one who managed to incorporate socialism within the Jewish national thought. The author was raised in a Jewish Orthodox environment in the Rhineland, and subsequently joined a group of left Hegelians. Hess had become a socialist as a result of the industrial revolution and his works always earned Karl Marx´s approval. At times, Karl Marx himself used to call him “my communist rabbi”47. His 1862 book entitled “Rome and Jerusalem” called for the establishment of a Jewish Socialist Commonwealth in Palestine. The Jewish question appears in all of his early writings.

Hess distanced himself from the religious Orthodox environment where he had been raised because, on one hand, he was convinced that the Jewish integration into the revolution of the socialist movement could be a solution to the Jewish problem; and, on the other hand, in his “Rome and Jerusalem”, he believed that not this form of integration but rather the establishment of a homeland in Palestine was the right answer to the Jewish issue.

Hess saw Judaism as a nation and often stated that the Jewish problem is a “national problem”. He saw Jewish people as a nineteenth-century-liberation movement and wanted the establishment of a Jewish Socialist Commonwealth in Palestine with a Jewish proletariat48_{. Hess was well aware of the fact that not the Jewish bourgeoisies of}

perspective of the messianic age of which the prophets had dreamed. See: http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org.

46_{See: Shlomo Avineri, The Making of Modern Zionism, Basic Books Inc. Harper Torchbooks, 1981.} 47_{See: Shlomo Avineri, The Making of Modern Zionism, Basic Books Inc. Harper Torchbooks, 1981.} 48_{See: Gershon Shafir, Land, Labor, and the Origins of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, 1882-1914,}

(22)

14 Central and Western Europe, but rather the Jewish people from the Muslim and Eastern European world would have settled there. The scholar was also deeply convinced that public ownership of the land and of the means of production had to be considered the pillars of this Commonwealth based on cooperation and on the community. There is no doubt that Hess, thanks to his approach, anticipated a trend that later would become a milestone of the Labor Zionist ideology. His thought could be synthesized in this statement “realization of the emancipator principle of socialism (…) applied to the specific context of the Jewish existence”49.

A new Jewish National consciousness arose at the end of the nineteenth century, the outcome of which was a search for a new type of Jewish identity. This was a process that interested “the first generation of emancipated Jews”. Zionism was all about this awareness.

Even on the Orthodoxy side The Sephardic Rabbi Yehuda Havi Akalai and the Ashkenazi rabbi Zvi Hirsh Kalisher showed how there could be a shift towards a more pragmatic approach. The Orthodox world was split: on one side, those who continued on the path of redemption, and, on the other side, those who had a new secular approach. Alkalai and Kalisher reflect on the atmosphere deriving from the pressures imposed by the non-Jewish society. It is interesting to not that both rabbis wrote in rabbinical Hebrew50.

Alkalai tried to transfer the redemptive vision onto a theoretical perspective: the redeemer would come only after a “preparatory” phase. He was really pragmatic and basically took into account the conditions of Palestine: a country with harsh climatic conditions. Without a preparatory phase, a mass migration to the Holy Land would have been unfeasible. Palestine had to be gradually built and prepared for this aim. So, buying land and reviving Hebrew as a language were necessary aspects of this phase.

The Jewish bourgeoisie in Europe was essential: it had to provide financial aid in the form of donations to the poor settlers in Palestine. They had to be involved in the process of buying land. Meanwhile, the creation of a Perpetual Fund to purchase land in Palestine was only a product of the subsequent Zionist activity.

Kalisher like Alkalai believed that the redeemer would not reveal himself soon51. He envisaged raising money through offers and the establishment of a fund

49_{See: Shlomo Avineri, The Making of Modern Zionism, Basic Books Inc. Harper Torchbooks, 1981.} 50_{See: Shlomo Avineri, The Making of Modern Zionism, Basic Books Inc. Harper Torchbooks, 1981.} 51_Ibidem.

(23)

15 aimed at purchasing land. Rich Jewish families, like the Rothschild family, had to provide financial support. His idea of settlement reflected the importance given to a public and cooperative dimension. And, last but not least, agriculture had to become private.

He wanted the establishment of an Agricultural School in Palestine. The Alliance Israelite Universelle subsequently implemented his idea52 and established the Mikveh Israel Agricultural School near Jaffa in 1870. This school became essential to the development of agriculture in Palestine. Both rabbis did not deal with the identity issue.

Within the Zionist perspective Peretz Smolenskin (1842-85), who lived in Odessa, is considered to be a remarkable personality. In the nineteenth century, most Jews in Eastern Europe lived in Lithuania, Russia, Poland, Ukraine and other countries. There was a huge gap between the Jews living in Eastern Europe and those in Western Europe. For instance, the Jews living under the Tsarist regime were excluded from public service. French revolution ideas had not managed to get through to Russia. However, Odessa (a very unusual city for Russia), was the exception. It was a place for Jewish poets, writers, doctors and maskilim (the enlightened ones).

At a certain point in his life, Smolenskin decided to move to Vienna, a city where he came into contact with the 1881 disturbances of the anti-Semitic riots in Tsarist Russia. It must be considered that the Pogroms had provoked a massive Jewish migration from Russia (about 3 million people). In his works, the attention of the scholar was mainly focused on the issue of the Jewish identity. In this regard, he wrote a series of essays entitled “It´s time to plant”53_{denouncing how the only reliance on}

religious observance cannot be used as the only method to define a Jewish identity. Smolenskin believed that: “The Jewish people differ from all the other peoples. Just as a territory protects other peoples, the spiritual heritage protects the Jews”54.

He identified four good reasons to explain why Palestine was the only suitable country for a “Homeland”. Among them, he remarked that the country had the potential to develop beyond an agricultural economy and towards a commercial one. It should also be said that the experience of the pogroms marked the works of Moshe Leib as

52_{See: Gershon Shafir, Land, Labor, and the Origins of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, 1882-1914,}

University of California Press, 1996.

(24)

16 well. He was a Lithuanian maskil who moved to Odessa in 1869. Due to the events of 1881, he had realized that the city had not remained invulnerable to the anti-Semitic pressures. He imagined an Israeli state where the plurality of differences among Jewish people would be preserved within a single Jewish identity. Within such a Jewish state there should be no form of oppression.

The first one to move from emancipation to the concept of “autoemancipation” was a Russian Jewish doctor named Pinsker. Among his works he wrote a pamphlet entitled “Autoemancipation”.

It should be stressed how this publication became central to revolutionary ideas of a whole generation of Jews. Pinsker had studied medicine in Moscow but lived in Odessa. He criticized the concept of emancipation both in a pragmatic and in a theoretical way. Emancipation, according to him, involved Jews as passive subjects; meanwhile “autoemancipation” saw them as active participants. Thus, “autoemancipation” meant self-determination55.

“A utopian or messianic solution” could not be a concrete answer to the Jewish problem. He wanted to provide Jews with a new pragmatic solution, moving beyond the concepts of assimilation and integration. He first pointed out how Jews differ from other peoples because they lacked the allegiance to a sovereignty, but he also highlighted how “they are seen by others as a nation (...) Jews lived for too long in a limbo”56. Furthermore, as a doctor, he tried to provide a clinical explanation for the phenomenon that he defined Judeophobia. In his studies, he gave priority to the issue of the Jewish people rather than to the land. The act of settling was for him more important than the destination.

For another scholar, Ben Yehuda (1858-1922), the focus was rather on Hebrew (as an everyday language spoken not only by the enlightened-ones but also by every Jewish person). His own migration to Palestine was a “radical” decision. He was the only Hebrew Russian among the maskilim57 who managed to migrate to Palestine. He

settled there before the 1881 pogroms. He believed that no national culture is created without the social background of national life. He took as an example the “linguistic renaissance and national political revival” of other countries. His main targets were the Hebrew language, the Jewish people and the Land. His ideas, in this respect, became

55_Ibidem.

56_{See: Shlomo Avineri, The Making of Modern Zionism, Basic Books Inc. Harper Torchbooks, 1981.} 57_{Title of honor standing for "scholar" or "enlightened man". See: http://www.wikipedia.com.}

(25)

17 fundamental for the creation of a national thought. Jewish people saw auto emancipation as the only possible solution to the Jewish problem.

Nathan Birnbau58_{, a Viennese Jewish writer, coined the word Zionism. Only}

later, the Zionist movement of Herzl would have politicized this term. Theodor Herzl (1860-1904) was the convener of the first Zionist congress held in Basel from 29th to 31st of August 1897. The congress was meant to set the basis for negotiating with the Powers about the recognition of the Jews as a people and for the implementation of a plan for a Jewish state by means of migration waves and land development. Two hundred people attained the congress that established the creation of a parliament, an executive, an electoral system, and a division between local and regional organizations. The Basel program set the main goals to be accomplished59.

Through the Balfour declaration and the S. Remo conference the Jewish people were given confirmation of a “Jewish National Home”. Chaim Weizmann60 leader of the Zionist organization together with others managed to convince the British to support this project61.

Only after Herzl’s death, we could see the instigation of the settlement program, through waves of immigrants coming to Palestine (1904-5). Theodor Herzl, the visionary of Zionism, founded the World Zionist Organization and became the father of political Zionism. His writings “The Jewish State” and “Alteneuland” deal with all the Jewish dilemmas that other scholars dealt with. But the real novelty of his works, which so deeply influenced the history of Zionism, was in their capacity to make an impact on public opinion. He distinguished himself for his realistic and anti-romantic approach, especially concerning the Jewish Question62_.

The scholar managed to transform what was a general debate on the fate of Jewish people within the Jewish world into a worldwide debate. Substantially the

58_{In 1890, Birnbau coined the terms “Zionist” and “Zionism,” and, in 1892, “Political Zionism.” In 1893,}

he published a brochure entitled Die Nationale Wiedergeburt des Juedischen Volkes in seinem Lande als Mittel zur Loesung der Judenfrage (“The National Rebirth of the Jewish People in its Homeland as a Means of Solving the Jewish Question”), in which he expounded ideas similar to those that Herzl was to promote subsequently. See: http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org.

59_{See: Alex Bein, The Jewish Question. Biography of a World Problem, Fairleigh Dickinson Univ Pr,}

1990.

60_{In 1918, Chaim Weizmann was made head of the Zionist Commission and was envoyed to Palestine by}

the British government in order to advise on the future development of the region.

61_{See: Alex Bein, The Jewish Question. Biography of a World Problem, Fairleigh Dickinson Univ Pr,}

1990.

(26)

18 Jewish issue stopped being a marginal phenomenon. Herzl could only rely on his profession and personality; he had no financial resources and lacked that support he needed from the Jewish establishment. He understood the importance of public opinion and used it as an instrument. It was, in fact, thanks to this implementation, that the Zionist movement would manage to achieve results such as the Balfour Declaration or the UN Resolution of 1947.

As a semi-assimilated person, with scarce knowledge of early Zionist writings, he managed to give a new perspective to the Jewish question. According to him, this sense of hatred towards the Jewish people may always have been present being deeply rooted in society. He knew that assimilation would have not stopped the anti-Semitic feeling towards the Jews.

Only politics and a nationalist approach could provide Jews with a solution. Land was his first goal: he foresaw the establishment of a Jewish state proving to be more open and goal-oriented than his predecessors. In “Der Judenstaat” (The Jewish State) of 1986 Herzl argues that the essence of the Jewish problem was not individual but rather “national” and that “The Jewish question persists wherever Jews live in

appreciable numbers. Wherever it does not exist, it is brought in together with Jewish immigrants”63. The introduction of his book is dedicated to the concept of sovereignty over a territory and, even at the beginning, defining an exact location seemed to be a secondary objective, he was already thinking of Argentina or Palestine as suitable states. Due to its more binding relations with the Zionist groups, Palestine became its only target.

He envisaged the “Homeland” as a democratic country based on cooperation and capable of applying all the technology required in order to make the desert bloom. For too long, Jewish people had been subjected to restrictions by others. He therefore foresaw a healthy cultural and national Jewish renaissance in Palestine.

Herzl understood that the formation of a Jewish state would have involved a radical change within the Jewish society. Jews had to be transformed from a “class into people” they would have been employed in industrial agricultural and scientific fields with no limitations. He realized the deep transformation of the social structure could not be achieved through a simple market economy64.

63_{See: A.N.U.S “Theodor Herzl”, http//www.anus.com.}

(27)

19 The state had to be central and a public ownership of land had to be imposed “No private property in land and natural resources”. The Jewish National Fund would become owner of the land possessed by the Zionist Organization. The Jewish State had to provide workers with public housing and social welfare institutions. “We shall march

into the Promised Land carrying the badge of labor”65.

Herzl´s socialism is of a humanitarian and reformist kind: it is a constructivist approach. He based the establishment of a Jewish state on socialistic and cooperative features because he knew that starting a State from scratch meant creating a mutualistic kind of society. To him we due the implementation of a program aimed at raising funds from the Jews living around the world by a company of stockholders (the World Zionist Organization).

Another activist, Max Nordau, was a journalist and one of the most remarkable writers from the late nineteenth century. His family was very religious he distanced himself from the family environment and only later entered the Zionist movement influenced by his friend Herzl66. His speech opened the Congress in Basle. He was of the opinion that emancipation had been a real failure and that “the western Jew has bread, but man does not live on bread alone”67.

Emancipation had proved to be an abstract idea and Jewish people found themselves trapped between leaving behind their old identity and having to visualize a new one not yet attainable.

Moses Hess analyzed how the critique of modern society could be applied to the Jewish situation through social considerations. He was the only one of his own generation to develop this theory. But within modern Zionism and his main approach socialist Zionism became a leading trend and to the point that Labor Zionism was the leading approach until the 1977 elections.

Another scholar to be born in Russia was Nachman Syrkin. His involvement in the German Socialist Democratic movement and his participation in the Zionist congress made him a central figure within the debate over the Jewish problem. To the critique of Jewish integration he added a socioeconomic analysis. He also discussed the

65_Ibidem.

66_{See: Zeev Sternhell, The Founding Myths of Israel: Nationalism, Socialism, and the Making of the}

Jewish State, Princeton University Press, New Edition, 1999.

(28)

20 existing connection between the socialist movement and Jewish nationalism68. The Socialist movement saw Judaism merely as a religion and analyzed why Zionism had to be socialist. Developing an Israeli State in Palestine on the basis of laissez-faire approach would have been unfeasible. The Jewish settlement had to be planned on a large scale using a socialist model. A capitalist market economy would have not been compatible. Israel would have been a country capable of employing sophisticated agricultural techniques but the land had to be publicly owned. What Syrkin managed to foresee is what could be later found within the Labor Zionism scheme.

Meanwhile, Borochov tried to find a legitimate explanation for socialist Zionism within Marxism. In his works he describes how a Jewish upper bourgeoisie naturally leans towards assimilation and does not feel the urgent need to find an answer to the Jewish question. He identifies just one class within the Jewish society that does not have the luxury to choose but feels compelled to look for a new economic dimension. According to the scholar, the groups of interest (the Jewish working class and the lower middle class) had to be part of an “active” process. These two categories had to migrate to Palestine in order to create a new revolutionary society and new infrastructures69. There, the Jewish peasantry and working class would find a future. This goal might have been achieved both in a spontaneous and in a conscious way. The spontaneous course sees the masses forced to leave Eastern Europe. The conscious effort is the will of the masses to transform the social pyramid of the new Jewish society. This is reflected in Borochov´s words “the emancipation of the Jewish people either will be brought by Jewish Labor or it will not be attained at all.”70_{The Jewish proletariat would}

have become the center of this national revolution. Israel would be a semi-agricultural country and not a highly industrialized one.

Ben Gurion distinguished himself for his controversial approach. He was a socialist who tried to apply socialist ideas to the Jewish labor71. He was also an agnostic who enjoyed referring to the Bible and created the political connection between Labor and Zionism. He managed to create the Zionist dream of Jewish sovereignty; he was a charismatic person who was at the same time very complex. He believed that Zionism