Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T18:27:55.787Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Between Celebration of Independence and Commemoration of Al-Nakbah: The Controversy over the Roots of the Israeli State

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2016

Baruch Kimmerling
Baruch Kimmerling*
Affiliation:
Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

When The Jubilee year of the founding of the State of Israel arrived, the market was flooded with books, periodicals, special issues, TV documentaries and albums marking the 50th anniversary. As expected, some of these products stimulated sharp controversies, as a part of recent debates over Israeli historiography, collective memory, and identity. Perhaps the most controversy was focused on the Channel One (public TV) series titled “Tkuma” (“Revival”). Contrary to expectations, the series presented the Israeli past a little bit more courageously and less canonically than the usual conservative Zionist version. It was by no means a “revisionist” history, but for the first time the general public was exposed to a more balanced and less mythical version of Israel’s history. The uprooting and expulsion of the Palestinians during the 1948 war and their transformation into a refugee camp society were briefly mentioned with some empathy. Clips from the well-known Syrian reconstruction of the massacre in Kafr Qassem were aired. In the segment on Palestinian armed struggle use was made of films from the PLO archives (captured by the Israeli secret services during the 1982 invasion of Lebanon). The discrimination and peripheralization of the immigrants from Arab countries and their violent reactions (the Wadi Salib riots and the Black Panthers’ demonstrations) were not blurred. In general, alongside the state’s great economic, cultural, and military achievements, some of the shadows were remembered as well, such as Ben-Gurion’s one-man leadership and Golda Meir’s refusal to make any territorial concessions in exchange for security arrangements (peace?). Even the inevitability of the 1967 and 1973 wars was questioned. The series was heavily attacked and accused of being anti-Zionist, especially by the right-wing establishment. The Minister of Communication, Limor Livnat, who is in charge of public broadcasting, tried to “supervise” the series and especially the segment on the PLO; however, she withdrew when she was accused of censorship.

Type
Research Article
Information
Review of Middle East Studies , Volume 32 , Issue 1 , Summer 1998 , pp. 15 - 18
Copyright
Copyright © Middle East Studies Association of North America 1998

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Endnotes:

1. The series general editor and director is Gideon Drori, and scientific advisors were Professors Yigal Eilam, Sammy Smooha, Moshe Lissak, Ella Belfer and Yoav Gellber. All of them are identified with varied attitudes, from the right to the left of the non-radical Zionist camp. Each segment had its own research staff, writers, and directors. I think it is especially worthy to credit Ronit Weiss-Berkowicz for the segment on Palestinian guerrilla warfare, Daniel Waxmann on the intifada, Ido Sela on the impact of the 1973 war, and Nina Chaplin on the rebellion of the Oriental Jews. The series will be available in video-cassette and in book form, written by Aviad Kleinberg.

2. Originally the segment title was the Palestinian anthem “Biladi, Biladi” (“My Country, My Country”). After the resignation of Yehoram Gaon, a popular singer who had introduced each episode with some “private reflections,” the segment was retitled “On the Road to Terror.”