The body politic for which the state claims to exercise many national responsibilities and from which it expects many national services is not limited to the conventionally recognized citienry of the state. It is a claimed entitiy which historically Zionism has called THE JEWISH PEOPLE. The first three paragraphs of the STATUS law leave no doubt.

(1) The State of Israel regards iteslef as the creation of THE ENTIRE JEWISH PEOPLE and its gates are open, in accordance WITH ITS LAWS, TO EVERY JEW wishing to immigrate to it. (2) The WZO, from its foundation five decades ago, headeed the movementand efforts of THE JEWISH PEOPLE to realize the age-old vision of the return to its homeland and, with the assistance of other Jewish circles and bodies, caried the main responsibility for establishing the State of Israel (3) The WZO, which is also the Jewish Agency(JA), takes care as before of immigration and directs absorption and settlement project in the State(7)

The official ISRAEL GOVERNMENT YEARBOOK for 1953-54 (p.57) confirms the CLAIMED relationship.

The WZO/JA for Eretz Israel Law 5713-1952 was of great constitutional importance. The P.M. in submitting the Law to the Knesset, defined it as ONE OF THE FOREMOST BASIC LAWS. This Law completes the Law of the Return in determining the ZIONIST character of the State of Israel. The Law of Return established the right of every Jew to Settle in Israel, and the new LAW established THE BOND BETWEEN THE STATE OF ISRAEL AND THE ENTIRE JEWISH PEOPLE and its authorized institutions in matters of immigration into and settlement in Israel.

The official description of the legal relationship between the Zionist movement and the Israeli government, and the glimpse of the political/natioinal substance of the implementing legislation, make it clear that Zionism is an important - even an overriding - national interest of the Israeli state. It is, therefore, unrealistic to attempt to negotiate with the Israeli state about anything, PEACE INCLUDED, without taking Zionism into consideration even as it would be unrealistic to attempt to negotiate with any other state while ignoring or objecting, even implicityly to the fundamental value-system of the particular state. No democrartic state could be expected to surrender, voluntarily, its fundamental democratic values. No capitalist state can be expected , voluntarily, to abandon its comitment to free markets. No socialist state can be expected,volunarily to jettison its dedication to collectivitst values. Self-proclaimed protestations of pragmatism to the contrary, IT IS UNREALISTIC TO EXECT THE ADMITTED ZIONIST STATE, VOLUNTARILY, TO ABDICATE ITS PERCEIVED ROLE AS BOTH THE DYNAMO OF ZIONISM AND THE BENEFICIARY OF THE SUPRA-NATIIONAL MOVEMENT.

Whether or not such abandonment is essential to a peace between the Zioniststate and its Arab neighbors depends of course, on the substance and character of Zionist ideology. Regrettably, most examinations of the phenomenon have been done by , and their significance has been limited to academicians, theorists and others removed from the many negotiating formulas which, over the years, have been constructed in the search for peace. The accessible records of these many negotiations offer almost no evidence that the participating statesmen confronted this central factor.

It is at least a credible deduction that all the formulas to manipulate territory, compromise formulas for establishing THE LEGITIMATE RIGHTS OF THE PALESTINIAN PEOPLE, schemes for guaranteeing security of ALL STATES in the area HAVE FAILED BECAUSE, by design or ignorance, THIS VITAL INTEREST of one of the major parties has NEVER BEEN PUT ON AN AGENDA.

Any examination of Zionist ideology must begin with an exposition of the meaning of the claimed constituency of the Zionist state, THE JEWISH PEOPLE.

The term is one of the most deliberately deceptive identifications of a subject of international law in the vocabulary of modern politics. In the first place, it is a fact that subtantial numbers of Jews, perhaps a majority of all Jews in the world, CATEGORICALLY REJECT any identificatioin which would include them as constituent parts of a separate JEWISH nationality. There is a crucially important difference between the expression "Jewish People" and "THE Jewish People". (8) In Zionism THE JEWISH PEOPLE is the claimed nationality constituency. Consequently, it is necessary to know who or what "The Jewish People" is to comprehend the ideology with which Zionism proposes to meet the needs of this constituency, as Zionism perceives those needs. The functions and activities of the State of Israel, WHICH IS A ZIIONIST STATE, are determined by these same Zionist perceptions. In the Zionist/Israeli lexicon, "THE Jewish People" has a much more precise meaning than is generally indicated in the casual usage empoyed in the conventional media or by politicians, or even by those reputed to be serious statesmen or diplomats. In official or authoritative Zionist legal/political instruments THE JEWISH PEOPLE is intended to mean much more than a loose, amorphous collectivity of individuals who are Jews with nationality rights and responsibilities equal to those of other citizens or residents of whatever country may be their domicile. Historically, the term was a deliberately chosen, ambiguous synomym for JEWISH NATION.

Theodor Herzl, the architect of the Zionism which was parlayed into the Zionist state, and later leaders and propagandists of the movement, knew the majority of Jews in emancipated societies rejected any concept which REGARDED THEM AS A SEPARATE, POLITICAL NATIONALITY. One of Herzl's basic dogmas, asserted in his classic, THE JEWISH STATE, was :

We are a people - one people ( Ein Volk, also Clal Yisroel - Bill).

No doubt the founder of the political/national Zionist movement made the declaration with such unqualified dogmatism because the prevailing perception of Jews about themselves , and to a lesser extent perhaps of other's about Jews, was different from the concept he offered of A SEPARATE NATIONALITY. But the perception of Jews as a NATIONAL ENTITY was indispensable to Herzl's embryonic campaign to obtain a turf for the Jewish nation he wanted to believe existed and which he wanted the INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY TO RECOGNIZE. That Herzl, and his colleagues of the time, KNEW NO SUCH ENTITY EXISTED IS EVIDENT INT HE BASLE PROGRAM, which was the operative platform for the Zionist movement until it was superseded by the BILTMORE PROGRAM of 1942.

The Basle Program was adopted at the first Zionist congress in Basle Switzerland in (August) 1897. It recommended a four part strategy for eventual realization of the movement's ultimate objective "TO CREATE FOR THE JEWISH PEOPLE A HOME IN PALESTINE SECURED BY PUBLIC LAW". The third of these strategies was :

The strengthening and fostering of JEWISH NATIONAL SENTIMENT and CONSCIOUSNESS (9)

The declaration of the necessity to develop programs for "national...consciousness" was an admission that THE Jewish People NATIONALITY did not yet exist. IT NEEDED TO BE CREATED.

It is not necessary for present purposes to engage in the polemic of whether or not such a nationality entity exists even now. It is sufficient to acknowledge that, despite consistent historic rejections of the concept by many Jews, the international community of nations has often acted AS IF the entity does exist. Chaim Weizmann rejoiced at such international perception as early as 1922. The Balfour Declaration and the Mandatehad TEXTUALLY acknowledged the existence of Jews who rejected Zionist nationality and who respected the "Civil and religious rights" of Palestinian Arabs (the non-Jewish community). Both documents, therefore, were less qualified in their commitment to full Zionist aspirations than Zionist leadership had hoped. In 8/25/22 /Weizmann who had been a principal negotiator for the Declaration and the Mandate told the Zionist Conference in Carlsbad, Germany:

The value of the mandate, apart from being a great success of Zionism, consists in the RECOGNITION OF THE JEWISH PEOPLE. This is of immense value, which will bear fruit and will open up new perspecties as yet hidden from our weak eyes...(10)

RECOGNITION OF THIS "JEWISH PEOPLE" NATIONALITY CONCEPT IS THE FIRST PRIORITY OF ZIONISM'S DIPLOMACY. It is the cornerstone of the Zionist state's system of nationality rights and obligations. Appreciation of the centrality of this factor is INDISPENSABLE TO ANY ASSESMENT OF ISRAEL'S LONG-RANGE ADAPTABILITY TO THE MIDDLE EAST. It is therefore indispensable to any evaluation of any formula touted to solve the Palestine problem with the desired "just and enduring peace."


(7) Joseph Badi, Ed. Fundamental Laws of the State of Israel, Twayne Publishers, N.Y. 1961, p. 285. (8) It is curious how often in Zionist history the definite article "THE" has played an important political/legal role. The Balfour Declaration, for example, referred to "A national home for the Jewish people". The generaly accepted version of Resolution 242 omitted the definite article eore the language, "territories occupied in the recent conflict." The result of the deliberate use of "a" instead of "the" in the BAlfour Declaration ws an interminable debate about whether the "national home" ws to be considered a repository of Zionist rights and obligations for ALL Jews orsimply one collectivity of Jews among many, in many other ntions, with Paletinian nationality atachments limited only to those Jews who opted for Palestinian citizenship. The deliberate ommission of the "the" in 242 has been the source of continuing debate as to whether Israeli military forces are required by the resolution to withdraw from ALL territories occupied in 1967 or whether the extent of required withdrawal is negotiable. The deliberate Zionist use of "the" before "Jewish people" is intended to imly clearly that ALL JEWS are constituents of ONE entity which is to be invested with the political/territorial/national rights which are the essence of Zionism. Few statesmen, and almost no commentators or media personalities make the distinction. (9) Nahum Sokolow, History of Zionism, Longmans, Green and Co. London, 1919. Vol. 1, p. 268. For a detailed examination of the legal and political steps taken by the Zionist movement to estaablish the concept of JEWISH PEOPLE nationality into international law, see W.T. Malison, Jr., "The Zionist-Israel Juridical Claims to Constitute "the Jewish people" Nationality Entity and to Confer Membership in IT: Apraisal in Public International Law", THE GEORGE WASHINGTON LAW REVIEW, Vol.32, June 19643, Nov.5 Washington DC, pp 983ff. See also Elmer Berger, THE JEWISH DILEMMA, Devin Adair, N.Y. 1945 pp. 71ff. (10) Chaim Weizmann" Tribute in Honour of his 70th Birthday. Ed. Paul Godman, Victor Gollancz, Ltd, London, 1945, p. 179