For the last two or three generations the National- Religious
have woven a golden dream of forming an inseparable bond with
the national-nonreligious. With Torah-based religious life in
the background, they envisioned a bridge of unbounded love
for Eretz Yisroel and a partnership in building the Land that
would unite both groups despite the wide gap between the
religious and non-religious themselves.
Now it has become clear that this was utterly mistaken. Not
that the religious-nationalists have any regrets over the
links they formed. They have yet to reach the conclusion that
they made a poor investment that has generated little or no
profits and has brought major losses: a massive number of
young religious people have crossed over the bridge to the
other side.
As HaRav Elchonon Wassermann Hy'd said in his well-
known admonitions, the bridge carries only one-way traffic.
The reason for the collapse of this "historical bridge" is
that the non-religious nationalists grew weary of their
partners and at a certain point said, "Stop! We no longer
share a common goal." The issue of Eretz Yisroel may have
been relevant in the past, but it is no longer of great
significance within the secular camp.
We have Nothing in Common with Them!
The following letter to the editor, appearing in
Ha'aretz some weeks ago, serves as a typical example:
"A clear line has to be drawn between us and them. The
straight-thinking Left must sharpen the debate within the
Nation. Whoever speaks of national unity while our soldiers
are at the front joins Effi Eitam and his cohorts. They are
not our allies and we have nothing in common with them. The
straight-thinking Left must remove itself from this criminal
war being waged for the sake of peace in the settlements and
engage in a head-on battle, telling Effi Eitam and his
friends: You do not belong with us. Dispute within the nation
is a sign of sanity and the only path to peace."
This letter is noteworthy for the object of its wrath. In
this case the villains are not members of Neturei Karta in
Jerusalem, Satmar chassidim in New York or chareidim
united under the banner of United Torah Judaism. After all,
Ha'aretz writers and readers severed ties with them
generations ago. Instead this rebuff is aimed directly at the
National-Religious, with whom they have had a longstanding
alliance, and the arrows are being shot primarily at "Effi
Eitam and his cohorts."
Here's a bit of valuable information for those who do not
follow the news in the political arena: Recently Effi Eitam,
a brigadier general (res.) who shed his army uniform one year
ago after thirty years of military service, was elected
chairman of the Mafdal Party. He retired from military
service even though, based on his talents and extensive
experience on almost every front, he might have continued and
even vied for the post of Chief-of-Staff. However, in the
end, his beard and yarmulke were his undoing.
His biography is also interesting: Born on Kibbutz Ein Gev
and raised with a secular upbringing, during his military
career, particularly as a result of the Yom Kippur War, he
did an about-face and began to keep Torah and mitzvos.
Realization of the Zionist Dream
Eitam's illustrious career is of no avail to him against his
new opponents, not even the "national" part of his identity,
for it is based on the passe school of thought that
adheres to the concept of Eretz Yisroel as a middle ground
that ties Jews together, even those who are not united on the
basis of mitzvah observance. Why are his partners of
yesterday rising up against a man with such an exemplary
record of nationalism, military excellence and perseverance
toward Zionist goals? How are they so different from him? Has
the place of religion in national life -- Shabbos,
kashrus, education -- become a point of contention
between them? The truth is that in this area they never had
anything in common.
The Mizrachi movement, the forerunner of the National-
Religious movement, used to constantly tell chareidim, "We
have nothing in common with you. But with secular Jews from
Labor, Mapai and even Mapam, although they are so far from
every matter of religion, we have a tight, solid and real
partnership."
Yet today this partnership is dissolving due to differing
viewpoints on the only goal they ever shared in common: the
building and settling of the Land.
The degree of hostility the various factions of the Left show
towards the National-Religious sector's largest enterprise--
the towns and settlements over the Green Line--is often
underestimated. The settlers remain the only kernel carrying
on "the realization of the Zionist dream," though until about
thirty years ago settlement was the ideal of every movement
within the Zionist camp.
All of the Zionist youth groups directed their young members
towards building settlements, which was considered the
highest aspiration. They organized core groups charged with
carrying out this mission, primarily through the kibbutz
movement. Many members of these groups filled the ranks of
the Nachal Brigades, which were sent to reinforce existing
kibbutzim following their military training, or went to
frontier areas to set up military holdings that eventually
became civilian settlements, generally kibbutzim.
The religious and the non-religious went side-by-side, united
by the Zionist dream, each within its own specific sphere of
activity. At a certain age all of the members of the youth
group were sent to the kibbutzim belonging to their movement:
Mapai's Ichud Hakibbutzim, Achdut Ha'avoda's Hakibbutz
Hameuchad, Hashomer Hatza'ir's Hakibbutz Ha'artzi, and the
National-Religious movement's Hakibbutz Hadati. Others went
to rural and agricultural settlements associated with the
Moshav Movement, which was also a part of the Labor
Movement.
Shortsightedness
Today almost nothing remains of this high idealism that
valued settlement above all. The kibbutz movement is rapidly
withering away as, one-by-one, kibbutzim transform into
regular communities. The faithful few who remain true to the
original calling populate the chains of settlements set up in
Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Strip; although not kibbutzim and
generally not based on agriculture, the settlement concept
has certainly remained alive in them. They absorb the brunt
of the Left's indignation, a deep-seated animosity
articulated through harsh abuse toward those who remained the
last of the banner-holders of the Zionist dream.
This development highlights the National-Religious movement's
shortsightedness in failing to comprehend that Eretz Yisroel,
Hashem's nachaloh to Am Yisroel, is wholly
unsustainable through a partnership with those who uproot His
holy Torah from the Land, and the longstanding belief in such
an illusion has now been proven to be an illusion.
Members of the National-Religious movement considered
themselves smarter than gedolei Yisroel who said such
attempts are doomed to failure, warning that Eretz Yisroel
does not support transgressors. He who denies the entire
Torah cannot maintain his standing even in the single
enterprise of yishuv ha'aretz, regardless of any
notions that they are engaged in "revolutionary" or
"pioneering" tasks. They will eventually brandish the sword
even to chop down what they left behind a short time
before.
The same applies in the case of Ephraim Eitam, a high-
ranking officer whose wealth of experience in battle should
have provided him open passage into the elite ranks of
Israeli society, but to the Left he too has become a sign of
tumah that must be kept at a distance.
The Promise of a New Society
Yisrael Harel, former chairman of the Judea, Samaria and Gaza
Council, is deeply distraught over this development. Despite
his frustrations with the Left, he still feels no affinity
whatsoever for the chareidi sector, which clings fervently to
its uncompromising faith in pure Torah and cannot be
misled by either religious or secular Zionist conjurers in
any of their various forms. Harel is particularly distraught
when he hears foreign journalists pose the question, "Will
the State of Israel celebrate its 75th Independence Day?"
In an article fraught with pain and sorrow he writes, "The
conviction that Israel's days are numbered comes primarily
from Jews. Of course the Arabs are pleased to confirm the
prophecies of doom. By the time they [foreign journalists]
arrive at a conversation on the issue of settlement they have
spoken with dissenters, Four Mothers [from Lebanon],
academics, writers and journalists who have already given
them an earful of dibas ha'Aretz. Some of the people
they speak with do not believe their grandchildren will live
in Israel. One journalist, the spine, perhaps even the heart,
of the nation's conscience, proclaims, by thinking about what
the future holds for his own grandchildren, that there is no
future for a Jewish state."
Yet in the same article Harel displays a glimmer of hope that
could come out of these developments. "When the leading
grumblers leave, those who spread evil winds, those whose
hearts are bitter here and whose lives here contradict their
beliefs and their aspirations, then we will be left with a
less polarized, but still diverse society; an optimistic
society, with a fundamental sense of justice and less of a
guilt complex; a society, unlike today's, where the basic
values held in common will exceed those that divide . . .
"
Perhaps the time will finally come when everyone will come to
understand that unity can only be achieved among those who
truly believe in Hashem and His Torah, that carrying out the
Torah is the foremost principle they share in common and that
the Land was intended as an inheritance for them alone.
