OpinionU.S.-Israel Relations

The crisis with Russia presents Israel with a terrible dilemma

The Jewish state has two obligations: to its citizens and to the Jews of the entire world.

Russian President Vladimir Putin. Credit: Shutterstock.
Russian President Vladimir Putin. Credit: Shutterstock.
Shuki Friedman. Credit: The Israel Democracy Institute.
Shuki Friedman
Shuki Friedman, Ph.D., is vice president of the Jewish People Policy Institute and a lecturer in law at the Peres Academic Center.

Based on information coming out of Russia, President Vladimir Putin is clearly working to hobble Jewish and Israeli organizations in the country, particularly the Jewish Agency. This developing crisis presents Israel with a terrible dilemma: Should we fight for Jewish interests behind the rewoven Iron Curtain, or prioritize Israel’s interest in ensuring its freedom of action on our northern border, which depends on good relations with Russia?

This dilemma is the first major test of the section of the 2018 Nation-State Law that obligates the State of Israel to act on behalf of Diaspora Jews. It is hoped that the current crisis will soon subside, but the dilemma it presents will likely continue to haunt Israel’s relations with Russia and may also appear in other contexts. It is important to develop the tools necessary to address it.

Israel, like any sovereign state, must act to ensure the well-being and security of its citizens. But unlike other countries, Israel sees itself as the nation-state of a people that is scattered all over the world—the Jewish people. Israel is home to any Jew who wishes to immigrate there, but it is also the protector of Diaspora Jews in need of its help.

This historical and traditional obligation, which is rooted in Israel’s Declaration of Independence and a long-standing political tradition, has recently been anchored constitutionally. The Nation-State Law, enacted by the Knesset four years ago to great fanfare, stipulates that the state “will strive to ensure the safety of the members of the Jewish people and of its citizens in trouble or in captivity due to the fact of their Jewishness or their citizenship.”

This clause imposes an obligation upon the State of Israel to act to ensure the well-being of Diaspora Jews in general and especially when they are in distress. The law further states that Israel is obliged to act in the Diaspora to strengthen Jewish identity there, something that, among other things, is pursued in Russia by the organizations now under threat.

In the Middle East reality, however, Israel’s dual commitment to the safety and well-being of its citizens and the peace and security of Diaspora Jews often places Israel in a difficult if not impossible quandary. History shows that Israeli actions sometimes come at a terrible price paid in Jewish blood, such as the murderous terror attack (85 dead and 350 wounded) on the AMIA building in Argentina, which was Hezbollah and Iran’s revenge for the elimination of Abbas al-Musawi in Lebanon.

To what extent, then, should Israel exercise restraint in Gaza, knowing that the more forcefully it acts, the more likely it is that Jews abroad will suffer violence and even terrorism? And in the current crisis with the Putin regime, to what extent should Israel insist on the continued activity of Jewish and Israeli organizations in Russia, if such a confrontation could jeopardize its freedom of action in the northern arena?

Israel’s strategic dilemmas are also legal and, above all, ethical dilemmas. The fact that Israel is the national home of the Jewish people is one of the main justifications for its establishment and continued existence. It has now become a constitutional obligation. Turning a blind eye to that commitment and focusing on narrow Israeli interests would violate this fundamental existential value.

Whatever decision is taken in such dilemmas could compromise the security of Israelis here and of Jews around the world. In order to make such decisions in an informed manner, Israel must hold a principled strategic discussion aimed at designing tools for dealing with cases where these critical interests conflict, so that decision-makers can fulfill their duty while weighing all of Israel’s values and interests.

Dr. Shuki Friedman is vice president of the Jewish People Policy Institute and a lecturer in law at the Peres Academic Center.

The opinions and facts presented in this article are those of the author, and neither JNS nor its partners assume any responsibility for them.
You have read 3 articles this month.
Register to receive full access to JNS.

Just before you scroll on...

Israel is at war. JNS is combating the stream of misinformation on Israel with real, honest and factual reporting. In order to deliver this in-depth, unbiased coverage of Israel and the Jewish world, we rely on readers like you. The support you provide allows our journalists to deliver the truth, free from bias and hidden agendas. Can we count on your support? Every contribution, big or small, helps JNS.org remain a trusted source of news you can rely on.

Become a part of our mission by donating today
Topics
Comments
Thank you. You are a loyal JNS Reader.
You have read more than 10 articles this month.
Please register for full access to continue reading and post comments.
Never miss a thing
Get the best stories faster with JNS breaking news updates