Search

The concept of Mamlakhtiyut, defined by Bareli and Kedar as the Israeli version of republicanism, has shaped Israeli political system and civil culture from the 1950s onward. This article examines how this inter-Israeli concept affected David Ben-Gurion’s inter-Jewish policy toward the Jews of the Diaspora during the constructive era of the first year of statehood. The discussion focuses on the journey of Ben-Gurion to the USA during the spring of 1951 and the launching of the Bonds campaign as an alternative Israeli fundraising tool. The study of the journey’s context and a deep analysis of Ben-Gurion’s speeches during the journey demonstrate the importance of the Mamlakhtiapproach in the setting of Israel–Diaspora relations. I argue that the Mamlakhti-republican discourse was needed by both sides to deepen the relationship during the 1950s, point its deep influence on both policy and discourse, and suggest that today too it may foster the discourse and reframe some of the fundamental subjects that divide Israel from the Diaspora.

This article investigates the spread of Zionism in the Jewish communities of Transylvania devoting special attention to the cultural mediation of the Jewish newspaper, Új Kelet(New East). Considering representative issues of the Jewish daily, Új Kelet, within 10 years of its inception (from the 1920s), will allow me to describe its key role as the foremost communications outlet for the promotion of Zionist ideas and activities in Transylvania. I will further trace the impact of this newspaper on the life and writings of Isaiah Tishby (1908–1992), one of the preeminent scholars of Kabbalah in the twentieth century, who was exposed to the Jewish daily in his youth and became indelibly transformed by it after its precipitous launch in 1918 on the heels of World War I.

This article is based on over a decade of field research among Bedouin tribes of the Negev as well as historical and geographical research. Its central argument is that the main social, cultural, and geographical processes within the Negev Bedouin groups are impacted by three major forces: nomadism and the social structure; formal Islam; and the rise of the modern state. This argument is illustrated by the geographical concept of “mental maps”, and its various manifestations in Bedouin society. The article focuses on the historical developments of the twentieth century, which took place alongside the rise of the Zionist movement and the establishment of the State of Israel.

Since the early days of Israeli independence, there has been a continuous dispute over land rights and settlements in the Negev region, between the Bedouins and the State of Israel. Its most notable manifestation is unauthorized construction dispersed over vast tracts of land, with no consideration for existing zoning plans and in locations undesignated or unfit for human habitation. As a result, the Bedouins, one of Israel’s most impoverished population groups, experience significant difficulties in benefitting from public services available to other citizens. The situation also impedes the development of the Negev for the benefit of all its inhabitants. This article will trace the dispute back to its roots, outline the main public actions taken, and suggest an explanation.

In 1950, Israel enacted the Law of Return and 2 years afterwards passed its Citizenship Law. These measures reflected the Zionist goal of encouraging Jewish immigration to Israel/Palestine, so citizenship was mostly limited to Jews. In other words, an ascriptive/ethnic classification was at the foundation of Israeli citizenship. This article explores the construction of the citizenship laws in relation to various forms of categorization—biological descent, cultural belonging, racial classifications, and voluntary affiliation. It asks how the Israeli citizenship policy was presented and which mechanisms were employed in order to justify the incorporation of all Jews, including those from Arab countries, while attempting to exclude non-Jews. After analyzing official state policies and parliamentary debates in Israel regarding the citizenship laws, I present the mechanisms employed to present the ethnic immigration policy. Those mechanisms include emphasizing the positive and democratic sides of allowing Jewish immigration; repeatedly avoiding the usage of racial terminology; highlighting the willingness to incorporate non-Jewish residents; and employing security justifications when prohibiting non-Jewish immigration. Being the Jewish State, Israel wanted to favor Jews in its immigration and naturalization policies. However, being also committed to democratic values and principles, it desired to disassociate itself from racial attitudes.

This article sheds light on the salient and far-reaching pattern of association-forming among Jewish immigrants from Muslim countries in Israel during the 1950s and 1960s. They were formally established associations that operated by means of representatives and spokespersons and strove to mediate between the population group that they represented and the state authorities that dealt with immigration and its integration. Interestingly, although few of the members or leaders of these entities have lived under democratic regimes, they established organizations that operated on the basis of democratic principles: election of representatives, holding members’ assemblies, and freedom of expression. They articulated their positions publicly and openly and were not deterred from criticizing policymakers, even those in the highest of echelons.The extent of the phenomenon challenges the conventional image in research on immigration to Israel from the Islamic countries—that of a passive, dependent population that has no voice of its own. Additionally, it suggests that the volunteer organizations’ pressure and contacts with the authorities paid off and influenced policymakers’ agendas—leading to an additional assumption that immigrant absorption policy was crafted via exchange and interaction and not solely in a “top-down” manner.

In the political reality of Israel, some symbols lie at the heart of the political, religious, national, and historical discourse that characterize the peoples and cultures living on the Israeli-Palestinian soil. Among these, the Temple Mount in Jerusalem is one of the most complex and conflictual symbols. The multiple religious claims to the Temple Mount—Jewish, Christian, and Muslim—are the subject of extensive study, but this article focuses on their reflection in contemporary Israeli art. In traditional Jewish art, the visual representations of the Temple or of Jews praying nearby expressed the longing of the Jews for generations to return to the Mount. In contrast, Yael Bartana and Nira Pereg view the multiple socio-political currents and religious rituals surrounding the Temple Mount as a reflection of the internal public debate regarding the face of the Israeli society today. This article discusses the contribution of their visual art to a conscious and aware discourse about the Israeli society and the underground currents that shape its contemporary identity. The analysis of their work tracks a “politics of aesthetics”—interpretation of the images within a socio-political context—and draws upon Israeli sociology, art history, and visual culture. In-depth personal interviews with the artists also inform the analysis.