party organized a boycott on Zionists in Morocco.
17
Sultan Muḥammad Ben-Yussuf, in a speech delivered on 23 May 1948, as-
serted that Zionism must be fought, especially after the establishment of
the state of Israel less than two weeks earlier. In his speech, the sultan ex-
pressed “frustration by the fact of the very existence of Israel,” whose ex-
istence, he hinted, was one of the identifying focuses of Moroccan Jews.
18
He went so far as to camouflage his threat toward the Jews by warning
them, “lest they forget” their Moroccan identity and the protection he
gave them. Although he added that not all Moroccan Jews are Zionists
The Moroccan Nationalist Movement and Its Attitude toward Jews and Zionism · 167
and not all of them identify with the rule in conquered Palestine, the radi-
cal elements of the Istiqlal interpreted his words for their own purposes.
It is assumed that the Moroccan Nationalists understood, at this point,
the “double standard” espoused by some of the elite Jews, whose identity
fluctuated between various combinations of national, French, and Mo-
roccan identity. They related to them as toward a manipulative factor in
Moroccan society.
19
As stated, the sultan’s speech and various concurrent
events are considered the catalysts of the riots and murders in Oujda and
Jerada about a month later.
The public forum of the Istiqlal was—and still is today—the daily al-
῾
Alam. In the period discussed here, many articles appeared in al-῾Alam
concerning the subject of Zionism. In June 1947, the newspaper published
an article under the headline “The Modern Crusaders,” which stated that
the Jews, as Zionists, play the part of the destructive Crusaders in today’s
modern world. They are “trampling, blood-thirsty soldiers” whose aim is
to “conquer the entire world.” They have different beliefs and opinions,
and all kinds of ideologies, but “no true belief and no real ideals”—it is
just the lust for money that drives them forward. Their only goal is to
gain control of the entire universe.
20
During the 1947–49 war, the Moroc-
can newspapers called upon Muslims of all socioeconomic strata to do-
nate funds on Arab Palestine’s behalf and to boycott Jews and Europeans.
In Fez, the wife of ῾Allal al-Fassi and the wives of other leading notables
rallied on behalf of the Palestinian Arabs and the war effort against Israel.
In Casablanca, the women of the local bourgeoisie donated their jewelry
for this cause. Muslims in several major urban communities were encour-
aged to boycott Jewish and European business firms if their representa-
tives were known to espouse pro-Zionist sentiments or to have collected
funds on Israel’s behalf.
21
The Nationalists’ reactions to the riots in Oujda and Jerada typify their
overall approach to the Jews: They claimed their people neither partici-
pated in the riots nor initiated them, but took their time before they criti-
cized them. They expressed remorse about the events, called harming the
Jews “contemptible steps,” but simultaneously accused them of bring-
ing these sorry events upon themselves by supporting Zionism and the
state of Israel. Aḥmad Balafrej claimed that the Zionist propagandists
should have foreseen these outcomes, just as the Nationalists should
have warned their people of the consequences of their actions.
22
The scene’s situation changed again shortly before and after Morocco
168 · Dalit Atrakchi
received its independence: France’s exile of Sultan Ben-Yussuf on 20 Au-
gust 1953 and the riots that broke out the following year created a further
polarization of the Jews and the Muslims. The majority of Jews felt no
real bond to the Nationalist Movement, and only a few of them, most of
whom were young, educated, and westernized and held leftist world-
views, were members of the Nationalist parties. They belonged to the
left wing of the Istiqlal headed by Mehdi Ben-Barka, who left the party in
1959 and established the Union Nationale des Forces Populaires (UNFP).
Both of these parties, as well as the Parti Démocratique d’Indépendance
(PDI), tried to attract Jews by defining the situation as a Zionist prob-
lem and not as a Jewish problem. However, only a number of Jews an-
swered their call. The Istiqlal party, headed by ῾Allal al-Fassi and Aḥmad
Balafrej, claimed they were devoted to equal rights for the Jews, and to
show how easy it was for the Jews to join the party, they exempted them
from swearing their allegiance to the Istiqlal party on the Quran.
23
In a report sent by Meir Grossman (an Israeli emissary to the Casa-
blanca Jewish community) sent to the Jewish Agency headquarters in
Jerusalem, he claimed that the Istiqlal was trying to create an alternative
to the leadership of the Jewish Communities Council by pretending this
was an attempt to “create a solidarity between Jews and Muslims, in
order to enable the Jews to take part in Morocco’s political life.” Jewish
community leaders considered this an attempt to increase the involve-
ment of those Jews connected to the Istiqlal in the inner politics of the
Jewish community by those who believed in complete integration of the
Jews in Moroccan society.
24
In an interview of al-Fassi by Arnold Mandel, for the Jewish-French
newspaper L’Arche, dated Paris, October 22, 1958, al-Fassi explained his
approach:
My position concerning Zionism isn’t only against [Zionism]. In
New Morocco, all political parties that receive instructions from
outside must be banned. Do you know that the Zawiya [Muslim
mystical orders] are prohibited in Morocco, despite the crucial role
they played in our history? Are we considered anti-Muslim because
we do not approve of the existence of Muslim orders? In this respect
we are . . . as anti-Jewish as we are anti-Muslim.
25
Although al-Fassi stated that he was not against the study of the He-
brew language and Judeo-Arabic as part of the heritage of the Moroccan
The Moroccan Nationalist Movement and Its Attitude toward Jews and Zionism · 169
nation, he also stated, at the end of 1958, that Jews must be returned to
their traditional dhimmi status in Morocco, not, of course, in a humiliat-
ing or degrading and inferior sense, but as part of the maintenance of a
sound, intact social order and as “foreigners.”
26
Other leaders in the party
considered the Jews “an electoral asset” and as “potential partners of the
national interest in the time of post-colonization.”
27
In his different addresses, al-Fassi added to and clarified the strong
bond between the Moroccan nation and other Arab nations: Morocco,
he asserted, is linked to the other Arab nations by love based on decades
of affiliations. “The Arab spirit,” as he calls it, provides Morocco with
strength and confers upon it the right to be included in the brotherhood
of Arab nations. It is interesting that despite being an enthusiastic reli-
gious exhorter, a modernist, and a religious reformist, al-Fassi accepted
the division of the Middle East and the Maghreb into “nation-states.” He
does not challenge the fact that the individual countries were established
under Western influence and Western pressure, nor does he desire the
formation of a complex but unified Muslim country on the model of the
Muslim Empire of the Golden Age, as did other Islamic reformers before
him.
28
In conclusion, the image that crystallizes is one in which the leaders
of Morocco’s Nationalist parties, particularly the Istiqlal, did not clearly
differentiate between Judaism and Zionism or between religious obser-
vances and national and political identification. This lack of clarity was
also characteristic of the sultan/king, the Istiqlal’s followers, and the fa-
natic nationals of other parties who, whether for inner-party needs or po-
litical interests, frequently blurred the boundaries between the two. It is
reasonable to assume that the polarization and distancing that occurred
between the various Moroccan native bodies and the Jewish community
was caused by the strong reverberations of political developments—
those occurring both within Morocco itself and elsewhere.
In the 1950s and 1960s, the leaders of the conservative wing of the
Istiqlal, headed by ῾Allal al-Fassi, voiced resolute support for both Nass-
er’s policy and that of the Arab League concerning inter-Arab issues.
Morocco became active in the struggle against Israel; they received the
League’s “Jerusalem File” and convened inter-Arab meetings concern-
ing the issues. However, the involvement with internal problems did
not leave the Moroccan Nationalists enough maneuvering space in the
arena of inter-Arab and international issues. They made do by openly
170 · Dalit Atrakchi
and explicitly expressing their support of all struggles against Israel,
sweeping support for an immediate and final solution to the Palestinian
problem (especially that of the refugees), and symbolically aiding the
countries at war with Israel by sending some supplies and a few small
units of soldiers to help.
In the course of time it became clear that much of what was said was
only chaff blowing in the wind. The declarations were not practically val-
idated to any significant degree, and not only did independent Morocco
not participate in the struggle against Israel and the “Zionist entity,” but,
since the 1960s, it also maintained one form or another of contacts with
Israel. At first these were clandestine intelligence connections, but later
they became partly open, and since the late 1970s there have been almost
totally open connections. It is now known that King Ḥasan II had an
“open communication channel” with various Jewish organizations, espe-
cially in France, Canada, and the United States. In 1976, a Jewish-Muslim
organization was established in France by Moroccan intellectuals; its
aim was to stabilize the relationship and coexistence between Moroc-
can Muslims and Jews. This organization received the king’s (unofficial)
patronage and approval (the mere fact that it was activated with consent
shows that it had approval). Finally, it is known that Morocco served as
the bridgehead for secret diplomatic activities in the 1970s, in order to
expand communication channels between the Israeli and Egyptian lead-
ers. This mediation subsequently led to the visit of the president of Egypt,
Anwar al-Sadat, to Israel in November 1977. Morocco thus takes part in
inter-Arab activities, but does not completely disqualify and reject Israel,
and, moreover, its leadership provides for the possibility of communica-
tion between the Arab countries and the “Zionist entity.”
Notes
1. Robert Assaraf, Yehudey Marrōqō: Tequfat Hamelekh Mohammad V (Jews of
Morocco: The Era of Mohammad V) (Tel Aviv: Yediot Aharonot, 1997), 19–80;
Michel Abitbol, Yehudey Ṣfon Afriqa Hayom (The Jews of North Africa Today)
(Jerusalem: Institute for Contemporary Jewry, 1981), 9–10; Yaron Tsur, Qehila
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |