Democratic Palestine : 32 (ص 27)
غرض
- عنوان
- Democratic Palestine : 32 (ص 27)
- المحتوى
-
were used against demonstrators. On June 20, 1984, Haaretz
reported the establishment of Qama electronics plant in Dur-
ban South Africa, by Kibbutz Lohamey HaGettaot, also
Mapam-affiliated.
The military continues to this day to exert sizeable influence
vis-a-vis land usage and population distribution. The board of
the Israeli Land Administration, which administers over 90%
of all land in the state, and takes decisions on leasing portions
of it, includes in its membership many retired senior army of-
ficers.
WAR ECONOMY
The close connection between the economic and military
spheres in ‘Israel’ dates back to pre-state days when the Zionist
project in Palestine functioned as a colonial venture in the
framework of the British Mandate. The single most influential
institution in organizing the immigrant settler community was
the Histadrut, founded as the General Federation of Hebrew
Labourers in the Land of Israel, in 1920. It was the Histadrut
which established the Haganah which became the Israeli army
in 1948. At the same time, the Histadrut embarked on the pro-
cess of dispossessing Palestinians under the slogan of «Jewish
Labor Only».
Having refused attempts by progressive Jews and Palesti-
nians to form a joint union for struggle against British col-
onialism and the racist Zionist trend, the Histadrut supplied
replacement workers during the Palestinians’ six month
general strike in 1936. Less well known is that Jewish women
settlers also had to fight for the right to work. In «Ideology
Without Revolution: Jewish Women in Israel,» Dina Hecht
and Nira Yuval-Davis write: «The long period of enforced
unemployment to which Jewish women had been subjected
reached its peak, at the height of the economic crisis of
1940-41, with the Histadrut directive that no Jewish family
should have more than one breadwinner...» (Forbidden
Agendas). This is only one example of the social control exer-
cised to mold the immigrants to the needs of the colonial pro-
ject. With the founding of the state, this took on major struc-
tural dimensions on two levels, ideological and practical.
Histadrut is overtly committed to class collaboration in the
interests of Zionism as is clear from its May Ist declaration of
1986: «The Histadrut, the country’s largest social organiza-
tion, must find solutions to the problem of Israel’s economic
distress... All members of the House of Israel are responsible
to each other» (Jerusalem Post, April 29, 1986). Its negotia-
tions with the state and employers are the main instrument for
enforcing wage freezes, or acceptance of price rises, etc. when
this is needed to strengthen the Israeli war economy. That the
Histadrut is able to play this role is also organically connected
with Zionism’s aggressive role in the Middle East and interna-
tionally at imperialism’s behest. It is mainly the massive aid
from the USA which blunts the contradiction between capital
and labor in ‘Israel’, giving Israeli workers a higher standard
of living than is warranted by the economy’s productivity, and
thus enabling the success of class collaboration. It is an in-
Democratic Palestine, March 1989
teresting comment on the Histadrut’s nature that Pinchas
Lavon, forced to resign in 1955 as Israeli Defense Minister
after the scandal that erupted when the Israeli agents who
bombed British, US and Egyptian targets in Egypt were
caught, was then appointed Secretary-General of the
Histadrut.
The Histadrut’s class collaboration does not end at the
negotiating table. It owns the biggest industrial complex in
‘Israel’, which by 1970 employed one quarter of Israeli wage
earners and accounted for a quarter of the state’s gross na-
tional product. Its largest concern, Koor, accounts for over
half of Israeli exports (Jerusalem Post, February 6, 1986), and
is the state’s major partner in arms production and export.
The militarization of the Histadrut is indicative of the
overall Israeli structure. As Shimon Peres wrote in his book,
David’s Sling, 1970, «Getting arms has thus been one of the
central tasks of Israel’s leadership... (and) the principal aim of
Israel’s foreign policy.» The Israeli leadership did not suffice
with importing arms, but from the start began building their
own arms industry, based on imperialist support. While
private companies usually concentrate on consumer goods for
the local market, state and Histadrut firms predominate in the
heavy and military industries which are increasingly oriented
towards export, in addition to meeting the needs of the Israeli
military itself. The result is an unparalleled militarization:
«... Israel stands at the top of the list of developed countries
on three scales of expenses for national security: defense ex-
penditures as a percentage of the GNP (Israel with 31 percent
as opposed to the USA with 5.4 percent), defense expenditures
per capita (Israel $831 and the USA slightly more than half this
figure), and the number of individuals employed by the army
and national defense jobs (almost 50 persons per 1,000 in-
habitants in Israel, compared to about 10 in the USA... (based
on 1976/77 figures).» Even with US aid, defense in 50% of the
state budget. A quarter of the labor force directly or indirectly
works for the military establishment, while half of all in-
dustrial workers are involved in defense-related projects. «The
only other economic body or sector comparable in size and in-
fluence (to the military establishment) is the Histadrut’s con-
glomerate of economic enterprises» (Israeli Society and Its
Defense Establishment, edited by Moshe Lissak, 1984).
Militarization has spiralled in line with the Zionist state’s
ascent from a regional strongman to imperialism’s strategic
asset, charged with an international role on the side of
counterrevolution, exporting arms to dictatorships, etc. - a
development most notable from the mid-sixties. «... the pro-
portion of defense sector employees to all Israeli wage-earners
increased two and a half times between 1967 and 1980... Ex-
pansion was especially prominent in arms manufacture and
exports... a tenfold increase in total arms production... while
military exports underwent an even greater expansion...
revealing that the growth of the defense economy exceeded that
of the overall expansion of the economy... According to
foreign estimates, Israel’s defense exports have exceeded an
annual value of $1 billion and constitute about 25% of all>
25 - هو جزء من
- Democratic Palestine : 32
- تاريخ
- مارس ١٩٨٩
- المنشئ
- الجبهة الشعبية لتحرير فلسطين
Contribute
Not viewed