Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin "Bibi" Netanyahu is responding to pressure from the Obama administration by stating that any negotiations with the Palestinians must be predicated on the acceptance of the idea that Israel is "the Jewish state" or, as reported in other outlets, "the national home of the Jewish people."
Diaspora Jews sometimes take offense to such language. It's not that we deny that Israel is a Jewish state or even that we (or most of us) deny that Israel should be a state in which Judaism and people of Jewish ancestry have certain privileges.
But my issue here is the specific language that has been used. Granted, Bibi probably made his remarks in Hebrew, but Hebrew does have a definite article in the language. (There is no indefinite article in Hebrew.) I.e., when one says in Hebrew that Israel is "the" Jewish state or "the" Jewish national home or whatever, it's clear in the language that the definite article is being used.
And that's a problem.
Why is this a problem?
First the realities: Obviously Bibi is playing this card to block against the issue of "right of return" coming up in negotiations. And on this point, I agree with Bibi and with most Jews, both Israeli and in the Diaspora. Actual implementation of the right of return would cease to make Israel a Jewish state. And most of us want it to remain a Jewish state. Thus the right of return cannot be implemented, even though it can (and should be) recognized and compensated for in other ways. So most Diaspora Jews don't take issue on this level.
Furthermore, it's not as if other states can make the claim of being "the" Jewish state. Sure there's Birobidzhan (look it up) and Borough Park (I kid), but Israel was founded as a Jewish state and no other member nation of the U.N. (using that, admittedly, as a flawed criterion) is so defined. So, at least in one sense of the term, Israel is "the" Jewish state because it's the only Jewish state.
It's when Israel presents itself as the spokesperson-state of all the Jewish people of the world that Diaspora Jews take offense. Obviously most readers of DailyKos are liberal or left-wing or whatever we want to call ourselves, so we find the policies carried out by various Israeli governments, be they Labor, Kadima, or Likud, as highly problematic. Thus we don't want Israel representing us, because when it does while implementing what we consider to be reactionary policies, it reflects badly on us. That's when the use of the definite article by Bibi and other Israeli politicians makes us uneasy.
Many Israelis, as a response or as a national reaction to loving their country, take offense at what we in Diaspora Jewry say and think about Israel. And they have their points: We don't have to live there, so we don't have to serve in the army or send our sons and daughters to do so or live under threat of rocket attacks, suicide bombers, or worse.
But if we are Jewish and we care about the fact that we're Jewish, then we care about Israel because we care about the well-being of other Jews. The inherent problem is that, as liberals, left-wingers, etc., we also care about the well-being of other people. And thus to not express our displeasure with what Israel does would be, in our point of view, irresponsible.
Yes, that's an uneven relationship, I'm aware. It's not inherently fair to say we don't want Israel representing us and, at the same time, we want the right to criticize Israel. I would suggest that we need to retain the right to criticize Israel because we in Diaspora Jewry are the only people that can do it with Ahavat Yisrael, i.e., love of our fellow Jews.
So my apologies to any Israelis reading this who take offense, but it's either we who will criticize you and do it because we care or the wingnuts who will eventually invade the comments section of this diary who will do it without us to express our support to mediate their hatred.
It's a lousy deal, obviously, but we don't always get to choose.