Sammy Smooha

The mass immigrations to Israel: A comparison of the failure of the Mizrahi immigrants of the 1950s with the success of the Russian immigrants of the 1990s

The two mass immigrations to Israel are compared, demonstrating the failure of the Mizrahi immigrants of the 1950s versus the success of the Russian immigrants of the 1990s. Almost in every respect the Russian immigrants had advantages over the Mizrahi immigrants: they arrived with greater human resources, the state was more affluent and less discriminatory against them, the society was more culturally open and socially tolerant, and their proportion in the total population was much smaller and hence not threatening. Whereas the Mizrahim lost their culture and ended up in the lower strata of society, Russian immigrants are in the process of entering the middle class and in control of the pace and rate of their assimilation.

Transforming settler states : communal conflict and internal security in Northern Ireland and Zimbabwe

In the past two decades, several settler regimes have collapsed and others seem increasingly vulnerable. This study examines the rise and demise of two settler states with particular emphasis on the role of repressive institutions of law and order. Drawing on field research in Northern Ireland and Zimbabwe, Ronald Weitzer traces developments in internal security structures before and after major political transitions. He concludes that thoroughgoing transformation of a repressive security apparatus seems to be an essential, but often overlooked, precondition for genuine democracy. In an instructive comparative analysis, Weitzer points out the divergent development of initially similar governmental systems. For instance, since independence in 1980, the government of Zimbabwe has retained and fortified basic features of the legal and organizational machinery of control inherited from the white Rhodesian state, and has used this apparatus to neutralize obstacles to the installation of a one-party state. In contrast, though liberalization is far from complete. The British government has succeeded in reforming important features of the old security system since the abrupt termination of Protestant, Unionist rule in Northern Ireland in 1972. The study makes a novel contribution to the scholarly literature on transitions from authoritarianism to democracy in its fresh emphasis on the pivotal role of police, military, and intelligence agencies in shaping political developments.

The Diverse Modes of Conflict-Regulation in Deeply Divided Societies

A review of some contemporary and historical deeply divided societies shows a great diversity of modes of conflict-regulation consisting of variations of partition, violence, domination and accommodation. This wide range of alternatives suggests that unilateral or violent management of communal conflicts is not inevitable. Four options for dealing with deep internal ethnic conflicts are presented. Partition is suitable only in certain cases where the groups have incompatible nationalisms and they are largely territorially separated. Ethnic democracy combines genuine democratic institutions with ethnic dominance and appears when strong majorities espouse integral, exclusionary nationalism and a commitment to democracy. Consociational democracy is a compromise which grants equal status and veto power to the constituent groups and hence fits situations of lack of a clear majority or a strong dominant group. A liberal democracy is another mode which is also possible to apply to highly split societies in which large sections of the population deny or wish to diminish ethnic affiliations. These four options are illustrated by applying them to four high conflict areas: partition to the West Bank and Gaza, ethnic democracy to Israel, consociational democracy to Lebanon and liberal democracy to South Africa. It is concluded that deeply divided societies differ markedly in the appropriate form of conflict-regulation which varies according to the history and specific patterns of intercommunal relations.

Control of Minorities in Israel and Northern Ireland

The central question of this article is why the minority problem has remained under control in Israel but has led to an internal war in Northern Ireland. This question is explored within the analytic frame of the notion of a plural society.

Existing and alternative policy towards the Arabs in Israel

It is possible to classify policies towards minorities in terms of the three major ways to achieve stability in pluralistic societies. These are consensus-building, consociationalism and domination. The policy of consensus -building is reflected in a sustained effort to do away with ethnic divisions, the weakening of primordial ties and the formation of common national culture and identity. The most important measures used to implement this option are the inculcation of shared core values, crosscutting affiliations and resource allocation according to merit. Based on the uni-cultural, uni-national ideal of the nation-state, the consensus-building policy usually takes the form of assimilation, either voluntary or imposed. Typical examples are the policies of Americanizati on and Russification as well as endeavours at nation building by many new states (Eisenstadt and Stein, 1973). In contrast, the policy of consociationalism intends to retain the ethnic division and to legitimize the ethnic cultures and identities. An attempt is made to secure political integration through crystallization of broad operative consensus, compromise in controversial issues while depoliticizing irreconcilable areas and cooperation among the ethnic elites. Rather than individual achievement, proportional group representation is practised to attain equal opportunity. Similarly, legal-cultural self-rule and sometimes territorial autonomy are granted to minorities instead of personal competition and ethnic integration. Consociationalism is carried out with considerable success in the Netherlands and Switzerland, with some headway in Canada and Belgium, but failed in Cyprus and Lebanon (Lijphart, 1977).

The Implications of the Transition to Peace for Israeli Society

Assuming that the Israeli-Arab conflict is coming to an end, this article spells out the main problem areas in Israeli society and makes projections for the coming 5-15 years. Israel will become a nonwarfare society, less mobilized and nationalistic, and more individualistic and conflict-ridden. More specifically, national security will continue to loom large because conflicts in the Middle East will not recede. Israels orientation toward the West will increase, making integration into the region unlikely. The state will remain Jewish-Zionist despite the strengthening of certain civic elements. Democratization will accelerate, and continued globalization and economic growth will enable Israel to join the capitalist core. Peace will have mixed effects for internal cleavages: political divisions will decline, tensions between religious and secular Jews will escalate, class disparities will be exacerbated, the situation of non-European Jews will worsen, Arab citizens will improve their status, and women will make headway. It is concluded that while Israel will become more Western, the impediments for its full westernization will remain substantial. Certain policy implications are suggested.

THE DYNAMICS OF ETHNIC INEQUALITIES: The Case of Israel

Three alternative trends of ethnic or racial inequality are formulated: diminishing inequality, rising inequality and stabilizing inequality. The last trend is hypothesized to hold for industrial ‘welfare states’ which lack both blatant discrimination against ethnic groups and systematic efforts to close the ethnic gaps. A comprehensive study of inequalities in income, occupation, education and power between Oriental (non-European) and Ashkenazi (European) Jews in Israel has shown that the thesis of ‘stabilizing inequality’ fits Israel best. The various areas of Oriental-Ashkenazi inequality are conducive to conflict not only because of their persistence, but also for being appreciable and discrepant. It is concluded that more radical means are needed if greater ethnic equality is desired.

The Arabs in Israel

Representative national surveys of Arab and Jewish populations and leaderships in Israel within the pre-1967 borders conducted in 1980 make it possible for the first time to examine in detail Arab-Jewish differences in attitudes toward the Israeli-Arab conflict. It was confirmed that Israels Arabs as a whole reject the Israeli national consensus of opposing the Palestinians as a nation, withdrawal to the pre-1967 borders, recognition of the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) as representative of the Palestinians, formation of a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, repeal of the annexation of East Jerusalem, and the right to repatriation of the Palestinian refugees. They equally object to the Rejection Front ideology which calls for the replacement of Israel by a democratic-secular state in all Palestine. They subscribe instead to the world operative consensus on these issues. In addition to the dissidence that the conflict engenders in Arabs, it reinforces their unequal status in Israeli society. On the other hand, the Arab minority has not as yet been a party to the Israeli-Arab conflict either as a fifth column, a bridge to peace, or a pressure group. The implications for peacemaking in the region are discussed.

The model of ethnic democracy: Response to Danel

This is a response to Adam Danels critique of my model of ethnic democracy. Danel argues that the model fails as an ideal type and as a comparative tool because ethnic democracy does not exist anywhere. I show, however, that there are indeed quite a few cases of ethnic democracy, although some are partial and some historical, including Estonia, Latvia, Northern Ireland from 1921 to 1972, Macedonia from 1991 to 2001, interwar Poland, Slovakia, and Malaysia. Danel does not address the real functions of the model as a theory of the emergence and stability of ethnic democracy and as a conceptual scheme for the comparative study of ethnic democracies. The theory accounts for the developments of ethnic democracy in these states and for the conditions for its success and failure. Danel also tries to show that Israel is a Western liberal democracy by overstressing its liberal traits and the non-liberal characteristics of Western democracies. I argue that Israels ideology, design, policies, and practices as the homeland of the Jewish people, most of whom are not its citizens, and as the “property” of the Israeli-Jewish majority, means that it has a second-rate ethnic democracy and as a state and society does not qualify as Western.

Distrust and Discord on the Israeli–Arab Conflict between Arabs and Jews in Israel

The Israeli–Palestinian conflict is deadly and intractable. Although both sides agree to a two-state solution, they are deeply divided on all issues of implementation as shown over the years by the futility of negotiations. Arab–Jewish deep distrust underlies the unwillingness to take risks, make concessions, and reach an agreement. The Arab citizens in Israel are a segment of the Palestinian people and part of Israel. Distrust and discord between them and the Jews are integral part of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. Data from the annual Index of Arab–Jewish Relations in Israel for the years 2003–2015 are analyzed to compare Arabs and Jews on distrust, narratives, the Palestinian question, regional disputes and Israel’s integration into the region. Two rival interpretations are suggested about the depth of the Arab–Jewish differences of opinion, reflecting opposing views on the intractability of the Israeli–Palestinian dispute.