Israel and the Republican Minimum Programme |
Is it anti-Semitic to deny Israelis (and Palestinians) their right to a minimum (i.e. democratic republican) programme? The answer is uncertain. But this is the road that the CPGB ‘Theses on Israel-Gaza war and communist strategy’ (Weekly Worker 25 January 2024 Issue 1475) has taken by ruling out “two-states” which “effectively falls at the same hurdle as the single-state solution”. Denying the people of Israel and Palestine their right to a minimum programme is surely discrimination. The CPGB would never tolerate here what they deny to Jewish workers in Israel and Palestine.
The CPGB thesis argues against two states because “We cannot expect Israel, as presently constituted, to concede the territory necessary to create a viable Palestinian state. Without a serious transformation of the regional, and indeed global, balance of forces, any such solution will simply not happen. Benjamin Netanyahu has the virtue of making that abundantly clear”.
Yes, the Israeli ruling class has ruled it out and will not budge. The British ruling class will not agree to a democratic republic here either.
The minimum (republican) programme is not ruled out because of the opposition of powerful ruling classes and the regional and global balance of forces. To argue that this programme is not relevant for Israel-Palestine alone is to descend towards the murky waters of Jewish exceptionalism. Is Israel so democratic that it has no need for a democratic republic?
If the two-state solution represents the minimum programme, then communism has taken a wrong turn. It is not simply that Netanyahu won’t allow it. More importantly we should reject it regardless of the Israeli ruling class.
The two state solution is Zionist policy built on the 1948 Partition of Palestine. It is no solution. It is an imperialist game for manipulating public opinion whilst the Palestinian people suffer ethnic cleansing and the real threat of genocide. The thesis is far too tolerant of the two-states policy, the means by which the Labour Party, TUC and the major trade unions line up behind the policy of Zionism.
The only alternative minimum programme is “One State” and the thesis rules this out too. One State as a republican demand means one democratic secular federal republic of Israel-Palestine. The CPGB thesis thus opposes one state and two states and thus the minimum programme as such. This essentially puts an equals sign between a Zionist policy and a democratic policy. Then of course there is no distinction between the Israeli nation and the Jewish ‘nation’, which is identified as the Hebrew nation. The Israeli nation is 80:20 Jewish and Palestinian Arab. Zionism defines Israel as a Jewish nation and Israeli democrats (i.e. Jews and Arabs) must stand opposed to this and for a democratic secular De-Zionised Israeli republic.
Section 14 says “The Palestinian national resistance movement cannot win by its own efforts alone.” This is true. But neither could the South African democratic movement win on its own without international solidarity. However international solidarity is not a substitute for the South African masses or the Israeli-Palestinian masses taking up the fight for a democratic republic. Unfortunately the thesis suggests the Jewish workers stand by their beds and salute the Arab socialist revolution. When it arrives, they will gain “the right to join an Arab socialist republic with the right to self-determination”.
I remain of the opinion that the move to a single-state solution will have to involve a lengthy transitional period, during which a UN peace force must work within a two-state framework, while difficult processes such as agreeing on the basis for a unitary economy which moves to economic equality, refugee returns, re-distribution of land, a constitutional convention and a Bill of Rights are thrashed out through a bottom-up process in each community. The resultant state must be guaranteed by the UN Security Council.