WHO IS AN ARAB JEW? *
By:
ALBERT MEMMI
February, 1975
* The term "Arab Jews" is
obviously not a good one. I have adopted it for convenience. I simply
wish to underline that as natives of those countries called Arab and indigenous
to those lands well before the arrival of the Arabs, we shared with them,
to a great extent, languages, traditions and cultures. If one were to
base oneself on this legitimacy, and not on force and numbers, then we
have the same rights to our share in these lands - neither more nor less
- than the Arab Moslems. But one should remember, at the same time, that
the term "Arab" is not a happy one when applied to such diverse populations,
including even those who call and believe themselves to be Arabs.
The head of an Arab state (Muammar
Ghadaffi) recently made us a generous and novel offer. "Return," he told
us, "return to the land of your birth!" It seems that this impressed many
people who, carried away by their emotions, believed that the problem
was solved. So much so that they did not understand what was the price
to be paid in exchange: once reinstalled in our former countries, Israel
will no longer have any reason to exist. The other Jews, those "terrible
European usurpers", will also be sent back "home" - to clear up the remains
of the crematoria, to rebuild their ruined quarters, I suppose. And if
they do not choose to go with good grace, in spite of everything, then
a final war will be waged against them. On this point, the Head of State
was very frank. It also seems that one of his remarks deeply impressed
those present: "Are you not Arabs like us - Arab Jews?"
What lovely words! We draw
a secret nostalgia from them: yes, indeed, we were Arab Jews- in our habits,
our culture, our music, our menu. I have written enough about it. But
must one remain an Arab Jew if, in return, one has to tremble for one's
life and the future of one's children and always be denied a normal existence?
There are, it is true, the Arab Christians. What is not sufficiently known
is the shamefully exorbitant price that they must pay for the right merely
to survive. We would have liked to be Arab Jews. If we abandoned the idea,
it is because over the centuries the Moslem Arabs systematically prevented
its realization by their contempt and cruelty. It is now too late for
us to become Arab Jews. Not only were the homes of Jews in Germany and
Poland torn down, scattered to the four winds, demolished, but our homes
as well. Objectively speaking, there are no longer any Jewish communities
in any Arab country, and you will not find a single Arab Jew who will
agree to return to his native land.
I must be clearer: the much
vaunted idyllic life of the Jews in Arab lands is a myth! The truth, since
I am obliged to return to it, is that from the outset we were a minority
in a hostile environment; as such, we underwent all the fears, the agonies,
and the constant sense of frailty of the underdog. As far back as my childhood
memories go - in the tales of my father, my grandparents, my aunts and
uncles - coexistence with the Arabs was not just uncomfortable, it was
marked by threats periodically carried out. We must, nonetheless, remember
a most significant fact: the situation of the Jews during the colonial
period was more secure, because it was more legalized. This explains the
prudence, the hesitation between political options of the majority of
Jews in Arab lands. I have not always agreed with these choices, but one
cannot reproach the responsible leaders of the communities for this ambivalence
- they were only reflecting the inborn fear of their co-religionists.
As to the pre-colonial period,
the collective memory of Tunisian Jewry leaves no doubt. It is enough
to cite a few narratives and tales relating to that period: it was a gloomy
one. The Jewish communities lived in the shadow of history, under arbitrary
rule and the fear of all-powerful monarchs whose decisions could not be
rescinded or even questioned. It can be said that everybody was governed
by these absolute rulers: the sultans, beys and deys. But the Jews were
at the mercy not only of the monarch but also of the man in the street.
My grandfather still wore the obligatory and discriminatory Jewish garb,
and in his time every Jew might expect to be hit on the head by any Moslem
whom he happened to pass. This pleasant ritual even had a name - the chtaka;
and with it went a sacramental formula which I have forgotten. A French
orientalist once replied to me at a meeting: "In Islamic lands the Christians
were no better off!" This is true - so what? This is a double-edged argument:
it signifies, in effect, that no member of a minority lived in peace and
dignity in countries with an Arab majority! Yet there was a marked difference
all the same: the Christians were, as a rule, foreigners and as such protected
by their mother-countries. If a Barbary pirate or an emir wanted to enslave
a missionary, he had to take into account the government of the missionary's
land of origin - perhaps even the Vatican or the Order of the Knights
of Malta. But no one came to the rescue of the Jews, because the Jews
were natives and therefore victims of the will of "their" rulers. Never,
I repeat, never - with the possible exception of two or three very specific
intervals such as the Andalusian, and not even then - did the Jews in
Arab lands live in other than a humiliated state, vulnerable and periodically
mistreated and murdered, so that they should clearly remember their place.
During the colonial period,
the life of Jews took on a certain measure of security, even among the
poorest classes, whereas traditionally only the rich Jews, those from
the European part of town, were able to live reasonably well. In these
quarters the population was mixed, and the French and Italian Jews were,
in general, less in contact with the Arab population. Even they remained
second-class citizens, a prey from time to time to outbursts of popular
anger, which the colonial power - French, English or Italian - did not
always repress in time, either out of indifference or for tactical reasons.
I have lived through the alarms
of the ghetto: the rapidly barred doors and windows, my father running
home after hastily shutting his shop, because of rumours of an impending
pogrom. My parents stocked food in expectation of a siege, which did not
always materialize, but this gives the measure of our anguish, our permanent
insecurity. We felt abandoned then by the whole world, including, alas,
the French protectorate officials. Whether these officials knowingly exploited
these happenings for internal political reasons, as a diversion of an
eventual rising against the colonial regime, I have no proof. But certainly
this was the feeling of us Jews of the poor quarters. My own father was
convinced that when the Tunisian riflemen left for the front during the
war, the Jewish population had been delivered into their hands. At the
least, we thought that the French and Tunisian authorities had shut their
eyes to the depredations of the soldiery or the malcontents who streamed
into the ghetto. Like the carabinieri in the song, the police never came,
or if they did it was only hours after it was all over.
Shortly before the end of the
colonial period, we endured an ordeal in common with Europe: the German
occupation.
I have described in Pillar
of Salt how the French authorities coldly left us to the Germans.
But I must add that we were also submerged in a hostile Arab population,
which is why so few of us could cross the lines and join the Allies. Some
got through in spite of everything, but in most cases they were denounced
and caught.
Nevertheless, we were inclined
to forget that dreadful period after Tunisia attained independence. It
must be acknowledged that not many Jews took an active part in the struggle
for independence, but neither did the mass of Tunisian non-Jews. On the
other hand our intellectuals, including the communists, who were very
numerous, took an active role in the fight for independence; some of them
fought in the ranks of the "Destour". I was myself a member of
the small group which founded the newspaper Jeune Afrique in 1956,
shortly before independence, for which I had to pay dearly later on.
At all events, after independence
the Jewish bourgeoisie, which was an appreciable part of the Jewish population,
believed that they could collaborate with the new regime, that it was
possible to coexist with the Tunisian population. We were Tunisian citizens
and decided in all sincerity to "play the game". But what did the Tunisians
do? Just like the Moroccans and Algerians, they liquidated their Jewish
communities cunningly and intelligently. They did not indulge in open
brutalities as in other Arab lands - that would anyhow have been difficult
after the services which had been rendered, the help given by a large
number of our intellectuals, because of world public opinion, which was
following events in our region closely; and also because of American aid
which they needed urgently. Nonetheless they strangled the Jewish population
economically. This was easy with the merchants: it was enough not to renew
their licences, to decline to grant them import permits and, at the same
time, to give preference to their Moslem competitors. In the civil service
it was hardly more complicated: Jews were not taken on, or veteran Jewish
officials were confronted with insurmountable language difficulties, which
were rarely imposed upon Moslems. Periodically, a Jewish engineer or a
senior official would be put in jail on mysterious, Kafkaesque charges
which panicked everyone else.
And this does not take into
account the impact of the relative proximity of the Arab-Israel conflict.
At each crisis, with every incident of the slightest importance, the mob
would go wild, setting fire to Jewish shops. This even happened during
the Yom Kippur War. Tunisia's President, Habib Bourguiba, has in all probability
never been hostile to the Jews, but there was always that notorious "delay",
which meant that the police arrived on the scene only after the shops
had been pillaged and burnt. Is it any wonder that the exodus to France
and Israel continued and even increased?
I myself left Tunisia for professional
reasons, admittedly, because I wanted to get back into a literary circle,
but also because I could not have lived much longer in that atmosphere
of masked, and often open, discrimination.
It is not a question of regretting
the position of historical justice we adopted in favour of the Arab peoples.
I regret nothing, neither having written The Colonizer and the Colonized
nor my applause for the independence of the peoples of the Maghreb. I
continued to defend the Arabs even in Europe, in countless activities,
communications, signatures, manifestos. But it must be stated unequivocally,
once and for all: we defended the Arabs because they were oppressed. But
now there are independent Arab states, with foreign policies, social classes,
with rich and poor. And if they are no longer oppressed, if they are in
their turn becoming oppressors, or possess unjust political regimes, I
do not see why they should not be called upon to render accounts. Besides,
unlike most people, I was never willing to believe (as the liberals naively,
and the communists artfully, repeat) that after independence there would
be no more problems, that our countries would become secular states where
Europeans, Jews and Moslems would happily coexist.
I even knew that there would
not be much of a place for us in the country after independence. Young
nations are very exclusive; and anyhow, Arab constitutions are incompatible
with a secular ideology. And this, by the way, has been recently underlined
most appositely by Colonel Qadhafi. He only said aloud what others think
to themselves. I was equally aware of the problem of the "small" Europeans,
the poor Whites; but I thought that all this was the inevitable end of
a state of affairs condemned by history. I thought, in spite of everything,
that the effort was worth making. After all, we had never occupied a major
place; it would have been enough had they allowed us to live in peace.
This was a drama, but a historical drama - not a tragedy; modest solutions
did exist for us. But even that was not possible. We were all obliged
to go, each in his turn.
Thus I arrived in France, and
found myself up against the legend which was current in left-wing Parisian
salons: the Jews had always lived in perfect harmony with the Arabs. I
was almost congratulated for having been born in such a land where racial
discrimination and xenophobia were unknown. It made me laugh. I heard
so much nonsense about North Africa, and from people of the best intentions
that, honestly, I did not react to it at all. The chattering only began
to worry me when it became a political argument that is, after 1967. The
Arabs then made up their minds to use this travesty of the truth, which
fell on willing ears once the reaction against Israel had set in after
her victory. It is now time to denounce this absurdity.
If I had to explain the success
of the myth, I would list five converging factors. The first is the product
of Arab propaganda: "The Arabs never did the Jews any harm, so why do
the Jews come to despoil them of their lands, when the responsibility
for Jewish misfortune is altogether European? The whole responsibility
for the Middle East conflict rests on the Jews of Europe. The Arab Jews
never wanted to create a separate country and they are full of trust and
friendship towards the Moslem Arabs." This is a double lie: the Arab Jews
are much more distrustful of the Moslems than are the European Jews, and
they dreamed of the Land of Israel long before the Russian and Polish
Jews did.
The second argument stems from
the cogitations of a part of the European Left: the Arabs were oppressed,
therefore they could not be anti-Semites. This is ridiculously manichaeistic
- as though one could not be oppressed and also be a racist! As if workers
have not been xenophobic! Actually the argument is not convincing: the
real purpose is to be able with a clear conscience to fight Zionism and
thus serve the Soviet Union.
The third argument is the doing
of contemporary historians, among whom, curiously enough, are certain
Western Jews. Having undergone the dreadful Nazi slaughter, they could
not imagine a similar thing happening elsewhere. However, if we except
the massacres of the twentieth century (the pogroms in Russia after Kishinev
and later by Stalin, as well as the Nazi crematoria), the total number
of Jewish victims from Christian pogroms over the centuries probably does
not exceed the total of the victims of the smaller and larger periodic
pogroms perpetrated in Arab lands under Islam over the past millennium.
Jewish history has so far been written by Western Jews; there has been
no great Oriental Jewish historian. This is why only the "Western" aspects
of Jewish suffering are widely known. One is reminded of the absurd distinction
drawn by Jules Isaac, usually better inspired, between "true" and "false"
anti-Semitism, "true" anti-Semitism being the result of Christianity.
The truth is that it is not only Christianity that creates anti-Semitism,
but the fact that the Jew is a member of a minority - in Christendom or
in Islam. In making of anti-Semitism a Christian creation, Isaac, I regret
to say, has minimized the tragedy of the Jews from Arab lands and helped
to confuse people.
The fourth factor is that many
Israelis, perturbed by the issue of coexistence with their Arab neighbours,
wish to believe that this existed in the past; otherwise the whole undertaking
would have to be discarded in despair! But in order to survive, it would
be far wiser to take a clear view of the actual environment.
The fifth and last factor is
our own complicity, the more or less unwitting complacency of us Jews
from Arab countries - the uprooted who tend to embellish the past, who
in our longing for our native Orient minimize, or completely efface, the
memory of persecutions. In our recollections, in our imagination, it was
a wholly marvelous life, even though our own newspapers from that period
attest the contrary.
How I wish that all this had
been true - that we had enjoyed a singular existence in comparison with
the usual Jewish condition! Unfortunately, it is all a huge lie: Jews
lived most lamentably in Arab lands. The State of Israel is not the outcome
only of the sufferings of European Jewry. It is certainly possible, contrary
to the thinking - if there is any thinking at all - of a part of the European
Left, to free oneself from oppression and in turn to become an oppressor
towards, for example, one's own minorities. Indeed, this happens very
often with many new nations.
And now?
Now it is no longer a question
of our returning to any Arab land, as we are so disingenuously invited
to do. Such an idea would seem grotesque to all the Jews who fled their
homes - from the gallows of Iraq, the rapes, the sodomy of the Egyptian
prisons, from the political and cultural alienation and economic suffocation
of the more moderate countries. The attitude of the Arabs towards us seems
to me to be hardly different from what it has always been. The Arabs in
the past merely tolerated the existence of Jewish minorities, no more.
They have not yet recovered from the shock of seeing their former underlings
raise up their heads, attempting even to gain their national independence!
They know of only one rejoinder: off with their heads! The Arabs want
to destroy Israel. They pinned great hopes on the summit meeting in Algiers.
Now what did this meeting demand? Two points recur as a leitmotiv: the
return of all the territories occupied by Israel, and the restoration
of the legitimate national rights of the Palestinians. The first contention
can still create an illusion, but not the second. What does it mean? Settling
the Palestinians as rulers in Haifa or Jaffa? In other words, the end
of Israel. And if not that, if it is only a matter of partition, why do
they not say so? On the contrary, the Palestinians have never ceased to
claim the whole of the region, and their succeeding "summits" change nothing.
The summit meeting in Algiers is linked to that of Khartoum (1967), there
is no basic difference. Even today the official position of the Arabs,
implicit or avowed, brutal or tactical, is nothing but a perpetuation
of that anti-Semitism which we have experienced. Today, as yesterday,
our life is at stake. But there will come a day when the Moslem Arabs
will have to admit that we, the "Arab Jews" as well - if that is how they
wish to call us - have the right to existence and to dignity.
Source: Israel Academic Committee
on the Middle East, February, 1975
|