How certain is the future of Jewish sovereignty over Israel? When asked, most Jews will respond without any real understanding of its implications. They may mean Israel should never fall into the hands of a non-Jewish group or nation that doesn't identify themselves as Jews. But, how can such an outcome be assured given the democracy Israel’s modern state claims in its now fungible Basic Law of 1948. Surely a democracy means that all people living within a nation’s borders must enjoy an equal right to vote? If so, how long will Israel hedge its, river to the sea, border claims against ‘two states’ which have prevented resident aliens from diluting its democracy and Jewish sovereignty?
This thorny question is often the root cause of extreme disagreement among Jews. Some religious fundamentalists claim Israel does not require a state, that Israel is a spiritual ideal defined in the psyche of its people. On the other hand those that rely on Israel’s State law and its response to International Law focus on the physical definition of national borders as determined by the prevailing consensus. The diversity presents the dilemma of a nation seeking a sovereign guarantee for their Jewish, ‘democratic’ ideal.
Under the two-state-solution, once the shared dream of its President Shimon Peres, Israel would have been divided into a Jewish and a non-Jewish state under the Palestinian Authority. However, after significant resistance on both sides, the internationally sponsored idea has failed. In the midst of the political fury, legal opposition and terror Israel equivocates as it grapples with the threat a single state may pose to its Jewish ideal.
Regardless of Israel’s present, positive Jewish demographic trend, risk to Jewish sovereignty, in a single democratic state, from the Jordan river to the Mediterranean Sea, that incorporates all resident aliens, is too much for the Jewish Israeli electorate to bare. Alternatively, giving up security control to an enemy occupying land controlled, but not presently annexed by Israel is controversial, daunting and impractical. The untenable advance of terrorism and global rhetoric is often more alarming to Israel's Jewish electorate than the prospect of losing its Jewish majority in a future single state. The status quo is ineffective, a drain on national and individual prosperity.
Who can guarantee Jewish sovereignty? The Supreme Court are disinterested and international pressure is growing. The question is increasingly serious, rising up in the minds of Israel's Jewish constituents. Existing mechanisms within the states legal construct are limited, but there is one that fully satisfies the essential guarantee. Compare the United Kingdom with its King and Church of England, Denmark with its Evangelical Lutheran constitution, Italy with its Vatican, Iran with its Ayatollah, Saudi Arabia with its King and Mecca. Although some of the western states identify as religious, their constitutions separate church and state. Similarly, Israel has an inherent solution to its Jewish sovereignty problem, a model that makes sense, is already partially active and works.
Whether secular or religious, t
he vast majority of Israel’s Jewish electorate periodically participate in religious services of a local synagogue. Through these community synagogues, elected, municipally appointed City Rabbis are nominated by a legally established Electoral Committee that represents communal religious interests. One of those interests is Jewish sovereignty guaranteed by national rabbinical representation in a future Senate or Upper House of Israel’s Knesset (parliament). That may be a confronting prospect to many, but the national benefits for all, Jewish or non-Jewish citizens and alien-residents, are presently misunderstood and underappreciated.
Many popular elected City Rabbi’s[1] are self-motivated to empower community voices through their electoral framework and elevate it to Israel's national political stage. Others require replacement by younger, more active and knowledgeable representatives. Rabbinical representation in a bicameral government of a single Jewish state is complex, but societal demands are rising as a result of dedicated grass roots participation. Town hall meetings, community activities, representations organized by appointed City Rabbis and leaders are and will be hallmarks that signify the success of this future movement. Education and awareness that a Sovereign Rabbinical body, elected to the Upper House of Israel's parliament, can truly be representative and liberating will underly the ground swell of this Jewish indigenous ideal.
Shifting government priority from its present emphasis on defense, energy and technology to also develop labor intensive domestic industry around Israel's rich cultural principles will be essential to satisfy Israel’s growing constituent underclass. Political parties that prioritize development of sustainable industries capable of employing a significant portion of the unemployed and non-participating[2] workforce will benefit. Israel’s indigenous cultural prerogative, including toward the optimal growth of cultural tourism, is a principle that will serve the prosperity of Jewish and non-Jewish populations of a single, sovereign, Jewish state. The development of skills[3] directed to economic benefits associated with Jewish sovereignty will ultimately deliver better financial distribution to the broader population.
Objectors may struggle to digest such a prospect: A democratic-theocracy that stacks its constitutional Jewish sovereign deck in favor of its Jewish population by its Jewish religious leaders in an upper house of its government. Jewish sovereignty looms large, but the embrace of non-conventional models, inspired by the ancient past, would for the first time in 2000 years also establish an authoritative, representative religious body licensed to decide its ancient religious laws.
