The recent Israeli Supreme Court decision allowing the Kaadan family to live in Katzir, a community developed by the Jewish Agency, will have far reaching implications in Israel. This landmark ruling sets the stage for further challenges to Israel’s segregationist housing practices. How the decision will affect the policies and behavior of the Government, and the various quasi-public agencies that develop land for Jewish housing remains to be seen. It is clear that there will not be a United States style ‘affirmative action’ plan in the foreseeable future and the activist non-profit sector will no doubt continue to be the vanguard for progressive social change. Israel is already deep into a national conversation regarding the Zionist foundations of the Jewish State, and the historical narratives that underpin it. One facet of this conversation is the issue of housing segregation and the limited opportunities for Israeli Arabs. The Supreme Court’s decision sets the stage for a democratic transformation of the country’s housing situation. However it is important to look to the historical roots of the problem before attempting to formulate solutions.
Cities, villages and neighborhoods in Israel are defined largely by the ethnic or religious character of the communities living within their confines. Thus Tel Aviv is a ‘Jewish’ City, whereas Nazareth is an ‘Arab’ town. Jerusalem is divided by ‘Jewish West Jerusalem’, ‘Arab East Jerusalem’, ‘The Jewish Suburbs’, and ‘The Old City’. The Old City is further divided into Muslim, Christian, and Jewish neighborhoods. Virtually all of the smaller towns and villages in Israel are either exclusively Jewish or Arab. These separate or segregated living arrangements have their roots in the established traditions of each community, a century of animosity, and more recently are largely mandated by Israeli law. It is the history, and social repercussions of the mandated aspects of the segregation I would like to explore, especially since the democratic character of Israel is being undermined by these longstanding segregation policies, first by the Yishuv, then by successive Israeli governments since the founding of the state. The West Bank and Gaza Strip have separate problems and are in danger of becoming cantonized into something similar to the former South African system. The future ‘Palestinian State’ seems to be emerging as a collection of over 20 separate areas each of which is surrounded by Israeli settlements, by-pass roads and a matrix of civilian and military controls on the movements of the Palestinians between these islands of population. Hardly a state by anyone’s definition. However The root of the housing issue is within the pre-1967 borders of what is considered ‘Israel proper’, and for the purposes of this essay I will focus on the housing issue within these borders.
Since the beginnings of Zionism in the nineteenth century there was no serious consideration given to the concept of integration with the indigenous Arab residents of Palestine. It was recognized by the early Zionists that land would have to be wrested away from the Arabs if a Jewish State was to have any hope of emerging. In 1882 Ben-Yehuda wrote to Rashi Pin in Vilna that “ … we shall easily take away the country [from the Arabs] if only we do it through stratagems … “ By the time the Jewish Agency Constitution was signed in 1929, land purchases had been codified into a segregationist policy. This was reflected by the lease contracts of Keren Kayemeth (Jewish National Fund) and Keren Hayesod (Palestine Foundation Fund a.k.a. United Israel Appeal)), which state: “land is to be acquired as Jewish Property…..the title to the lands acquired…..shall be held as the inalienable property of the Jewish People”. In 1961, through a covenant between Keren Keyemeth and The State of Israel, the authority to administer all publicly owned land in Israel was transferred to The Israel Lands Administration. Jewish land ownership in Mandatory Palestine rose from 2% in 1918 to approximately 15% in 1948. Most of this land had been purchased over the years from absentee owners in Syria, Lebanon and Turkey. Any tenants on the land at the time of purchase were evicted, usually without compensation. Thereafter the property could not be leased or sold to ‘Aliens’. An ‘Alien’ under Israeli Law is anyone not eligible to reside there under the Law Of Return’, in other words non-Jews. Deed covenants are often used by private landowners for the same purpose.
Since the establishment of the state in 1948 a number of laws were enacted to take advantage of the vacant land left by the fleeing Palestinians who were not permitted to return to Israel after the armistice. The estimated numbers vary from half a million to well over 700,000 displaced persons. Whether they fled of their own free will or were coerced or expelled by the Israelis I will leave aside for now. Suffice to say that they were not permitted to return and by 1951 over 1,400,000 Jews were housed on ‘absentee’ Arab property. This was accomplished with a semblance of legality through Israeli Legislation including the Emergency Regulations Concerning the Cultivation of Waste Land (1949), The Absentee Property Law (1950), and the land Acquisition Law (1953). During the 1950’s The Land Acquisition Law was to transfer to State ownership at least 3,200 square Kilometers (2,000 square miles). Keep in mind that all of these land transfers could not legally be sold or leased to non-Jews and have been used since then exclusively for Jewish residential communities, industry, and agriculture. In the meanwhile the remaining Palestinian population (now citizens of Israel) was under military rule from 1948-5, confined to limited locales, and needed permits for travel within Israel. During this era, Palestinian citizens of Israel who were caught outside their home area without a permit were often deemed infiltrators and deported from the country.
So the stage was set quite early in the Israel’s history for the physical separation of Jews and Arabs in Israel, which continues to the present day. While the early Zionists may have had a national imperative to create and promote segregation, the conditions in Palestine at the beginning of the twentieth century (or in 1948) have little resemblance to modern Israel. One only needs to look at other countries’ experience with segregating their population based on ethnicity, religion or race. It is a legacy of colonial attitudes that defined non-white or non-western populations as ‘inferior’ in intellect. At the time of the early Zionist settlements slavery was still rampant in much of Africa, the Middle East, and the Americas. The legal segregation in the European colonies was an accepted fact of life well into the twentieth century, and led to Apartheid in South Africa, and the Jim Crow laws in the United States. Both of these regimes have been swept into the trashcan of history. Unfortunately Zionism is perpetuating some of the worst kind of discrimination through almost complete separation of the two main ethnic groups in Israel, not only in housing but within the national economic and cultural milieu. The parallels with the history of the southern United States are quite striking. Not only do the Arab citizens participate in the segregation by acquiescing to separate housing, school systems, and public services, but the Israeli and American Jewish definition of civil rights in Israel has come to mean separate but equal. This philosophy was rejected by the United States Supreme Court in Brown vs. The Board of Education in 1953. Apologists for the Israeli system often cite the higher standard of living that Arab Israeli’s enjoy compared to other Arab countries, or right to vote and be represented in the Kinesset. However all these rights and more were accorded to American Blacks prior to the civil rights movement but it still did not conform to a legal or moral definition equal rights with white citizens. Similarly the Israeli democracy will not be fully realized until all citizens enjoy not only the same rights under the law but are permitted the free exercise of these rights. This includes being able to live anywhere in the country.
Perhaps the time is soon coming when consideration must be given to a repeal of the authority of Keren Kayemeth and Keren Hayesod, and the supporting legislation and government regulations, regarding discrimination in the allocation of State funds for housing, and housing related financing. Especially since the Supreme Court has declared housing segregation illegal in most circumstances. In the final settlement with the Palestinian refugees there will undoubtedly be some compensation for lands lost through the wars of 1948 and 1967. It is unlikely though, that any confiscated land will be returned to its former owners. Thus it becomes even more of a moral imperative to redress the remaining discrimination towards Palestinian/Israelis. The final Status talks with the Palestinian Authority may include a limited right of return to Israel for family re-unification, and the right of return to the new Palestinian State. As the Israeli public becomes accustomed to these new ideas, the time will become ripe for repeal of additional laws that have created unequal citizens, especially in housing, education, the arts, and employment.
In addition to allowing all citizens the basic right to live where they choose, the entire complex system of land allocation, city planning, and zoning will need to be adjusted through a process that allows for the natural growth of all communities, rather than giving priority to Jewish concerns. Perhaps a future enlightened government of Israel might also create new neighborhoods explicitly as integrated communities, in much the same way that state and local governments in the United States have created favorable conditions for the development of mixed communities in the USA. However it’s doubtful that government sponsored affirmative action in housing will be seen anytime soon in Israel.
In the meantime private citizens, businesses, and non-government organizations could have some impact on this issue though lobbying and creating new ‘facts on the ground’. Private development companies could initiate projects designed to be promoted to prospective Jewish and Arab residents, and individuals wanting to live in a diverse community could seek out opportunities. Perhaps the time has come when, in the words of Israeli Supreme Court Justice Aharon Barak “We do not accept the conception that the values of the State of Israel as a Jewish state justify discrimination between citizens on the basis of religion or nationality.”
2000 Fred Schlomka
Fred Schlomka is President of Cultural Gateways International which operates in Kenya and the Palestinian Territories. The company recently created a housing development division to establish integrated Jewish/Arab neighborhoods in Israel. Mr. Schlomka plans to move back to Israel later this year with his wife and two children
Email: fred@musicmax.com
