At the end of the festive "seder" meal on Passover night, we sing the joyous tune whose words mean "Next Year in Jerusalem", for Passover is a time when Jews from around the world used to travel to Jerusalem to partake of the feast at the Temple. The placement of the yearning for Jerusalem at the end of the seder is important. For all that has preceded its mention describes the contrasts that are brought together on this holiday. By placing the yearning for Jerusalem at the end of the service, we indicate that the common thread to Jewish history and future, remembrance and renewal, and all the other contrasts is the primacy which the Jewish nation places on Jerusalem -- its eternal capital. And thus its placement.
The paragraph before Jerusalem is mentioned is a concluding paragraph to the entire seder. It outlines briefly that in the preceding few hours, we have discussed slavery and freedom, history and future, poverty and wealth, bitterness and joy. We have used items symbolizing these contrasting elements, and we now sit with just one more item of unfinished business. We haven't yet achieved our presence in Jerusalem as dictated by our status as a free nation ready to approach its future from its past.
How real this statement is. For ever since Israel's independence its leaders and citizens have claimed as one that Jerusalem is the eternal unitary capital of the Jewish state and the Jewish nation. The major effort in Israel's war of independence was the effort to win Jerusalem. It was an effort that finally proved successful nineteen years later, and which has since been a source of unending joy and awe. But it is an achievement which, sadly, remains incomplete.
I recently discussed the situation in Israel with a professor in Toronto. Our discussion surrounded the question of a state's right to dictate the placement of other states' embassies in its country. The professor, who teaches a course in international law, told me that Israel is well within its rights to demand that any country place its embassy in a city of Israel's choosing. This is the prerogative of any host state, and it has been used often. I then wondered out loud why, if Jerusalem's status as Israel's capital is so important to Israeli leaders, they have not demanded that all foreign embassies be placed there. I was surprised when the professor asked, "But isn't Tel Aviv the capital?"
Israel has an image problem. Other states, international institutions, and the world media, some of these very powerful in determining the course of events in the region, have great difficulty in recognizing the real dangers faced by Israel. These forces have been for decades intent that Israel trade away its meagre resources and area for peace agreements that are not necessarily sufficient guarantees of Israel's safety. The ability of these forces to equate Israeli land with Arab peace speaks volumes to the problem Israel has in projecting an image that more resembles the truth of its predicament. But the difficulties experienced by the world powers are not the problem; they are a symptom. The problem is Israel's alone, and it is a problem of image.
Israel is a state with a rich history, and an even richer population base. Its cultural diversity, owing to vast immigration, is equalled only by North American society. Its technological and scientific advancement, in such a short span of time, is unparalleled in human history. The level of education among its population is possibly the highest in the world. With all that Israel has going for it, one would think that the name of its capital city would be as common a piece of knowledge as that of Washington or Moscow.
Yet no Israeli government has insisted that Jerusalem be universally recognized as its capital. No Israeli government has made such recognition a condition of normal relations with its neighbours. No Israeli government has made Jerusalem the focus of the Jewish world that it is meant to be. In fact, we now see the exact opposite.
The current Israeli administration has made it plain that the future of this focal city will be open to negotiation with a group that is still committed to the destruction of all that is Jewish. The PLO has taken Jewish history, which we celebrate on Passover, and which is possibly best represented by Jerusalem, and turned it on its head, usurping it to suit their own needs. The Holocaust has become a method of attaining Jewish statehood. The diaspora is now a Palestinian phenomenon. History's most oppressed people are now the Palestinians. Jerusalem is now to become their capital.
Instead of allowing for this to happen, Israel's government should be demanding that all foreign representation outside of Jerusalem's municipal boundaries be limited to the level of Consulate. Israel shares diplomatic relations with 154 states, but only two have their embassies in Jerusalem. All others claim that since they do not recognize Israel's claim to Jerusalem as superseding that of the Palestinians, they cannot place their embassies there. This actively interferes with the domestic governance of the State of Israel, and necessarily predetermines any negotiation with the PLO by supporting their claim, and through it, their incorrect version of history. The biggest tragedy of all is that the Rabin administration allows this travesty of history to continue unabated.
What Yitzchak Rabin has done, by allowing Jerusalem to be included in the negotiations with the PLO, is to grant legitimacy to this historical revisionism, and to deny the common thread between the Jewish nation's history and its future. Our origins are not remembered, and our future is not ensured. Our rightful place in our homeland has not been taken. We cannot taste freedom, and cannot invite others to join us in this joy. Our religion and culture are threatened with the removal of their focus. We cannot fully begin our future, our renewal, without keeping a firm hold on our past, and on the central aspect of that history -- Jerusalem. Israel's wealth remains incomplete. It is threatened with a renewal of the poverty that comes with the theft of its capital.
On Passover, Jews around the world insist that Rabin is wrong in this. What remains to be seen is whether that insistence carries on after Passover, and whether it results not in a Jewish return to Jerusalem, but in Jerusalem's return to the Jewish nation. This is the essence of the Jewish peace.
Copyright 1995. Reproduction in electronic or print format by permission only.
