ENVOY ANNA AZARI: “I look forward to the time when Israel embarks on a productive cultural debate in search of a new national identity”

Ukraine and Israel are very different countries, but they have a lot in common. For example the Ukrainian Jews who leave for Israel. They carry with them threads of family and friendship connections, and elements of Ukrainian culture and language.

Though the people of Israel have close relations to most of the countries of the world, it is one of the most restless and fast changing countries on the planet. It is not accidental that Israeli diplomats are obligated to return home every 5-6 years so they can understand what country they represent.

In the following interview with Anna Azari, Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of Israel to Ukraine, speaks about the most acute questions facing Israel: war and peace, current and future national identities, the repatriation of Jews from across the world and attendant cultural and political processes.

UKRAINE AND ISRAEL — ON THE ROAD TO HIGH- TECHNICAL CONFIDENCE

The Day: Mrs. Ambassador, how would you describe the current Ukrainian-Israeli relations — beginning with economic ties?

A.A.: It all depends on which side you see them from. The relations between us are good. Comparing to the beginning when they were non-existent, the annual trade turnover is now $200 million. This is not bad, and it grew in 1999, though no one expected such a growth especially after the Russian crisis. But if it is approached more professionally, this turnover is not stable. Firstly, from the Israeli point of view the relation is two to one in favor of Ukrainian exports, but we also would like to export more to Ukraine. Secondly, these are not the sectors that we consider to be of priority. Now we buy grain and steel. We would like to export hi-tech supplies, including for agriculture, medicine, telecommunications, and so on. We are starting to cooperate in these sectors, but it’s too early to rest on our laurels.

The Day: You’ve just mentioned hi-tech equipment. Have you recently noticed any interest from the Ukrainian side in this sector?

A.A.: Regrettably, we have few companies that know how to do business with Ukraine. Israeli businessmen cautiously approach not only Ukraine but all post-Soviet countries. They did not always know how to start businesses here.

The Day: It is true that foreign entrepreneurs often encounter the complicated conditions to engage in business in Ukraine. Are you aware of similar problems by Israeli companies? We continuously speak talk about the importance of foreign investments, but it’s as important to know precisely how investors are received in Ukraine and how the bureaucracy responds.

A.A.: It’s been a long time since concrete complaints have ended up in court. Problems most often are encountered at the contractual stage or when attempts are made to make a contract. The un-clarity of legislation and the different business mentalities of partners break the continuation of these negotiations. Considering that those were the first contacts, they leave unpleasant memories for future ones.

The Day: There is a large Jewish ethnic community in Ukraine, including very influential politicians and businessmen who know well the specifics of the Ukrainian market. Does this make any positive or negative impact on bilateral economic relations?

A.A.: A simple answer is not possible. You probably have in mind “loud” names. Many of them, even those involved in some manner in the Ukrainian-Jewish community show absolutely no interest in developing contacts with Israel. Of course, there are people working here and there, but “big” businessmen of Jewish heritage seldom work with Israel.

By the way, it took the American- Jewish Diaspora about ten years to transform to a new level of relations. They helped Israel a great deal, gave money for various projects, but it was very difficult to convince them to invest in the economy rather than charity. Finally this transformation has taken place. In Ukraine it’s still a different story. In this sense we would rather place emphasis on people who immigrated to Israel and could be a live bridge to Ukraine.

COLLECTION MOSAIC

The Day: Emigration from Eastern Europe has of late prompted many to speak of a new iron curtain. Moreover, certain political forces in the West, skillfully manipulating the problem of “foreigners,” are making political capital. In many respects, Israel is a country of immigrants. So what is immigration for Israel: A matter of expedience, an inalienable right or a problem? (At this point the Embassy’s adviser Zeev Ben Ariye joined the conversation: “I would like to point out that Israel does not have immigrants. Israel is a country of repatriation and collection.”)

A.A.: Israel is quite distinct from all other countries. Fifty-two years ago this state with a population of about 600,000 was created not for those who lived there but for those who would come to it. Such was the national idea, the underlying principle of the Zionist movement and concept of Israel. About ten days ago (the interview was taken on May, 23 — Ed. ) we celebrated the arrival of the millionth immigrant from the former Soviet Union. I mean we celebrated, rather than marked a problem. Since 1989 we have been experiencing unusual economic growth. Therefore, a million immigrants in our country are expedient.

What is the problem? There are no ideological problems. Problem exists in some people. There are narrow- minded, especially not well-off people, who fear this influx as they assume immigrants will take away their jobs. This tendency exists, though I do not consider that it is the dominant problem in Israel. Immigration is both a right and expediency, and only in the end a problem.

The Day: Repatriation foresees the return of Jews. Suppose people of other nationalities want to settle in your country, they obviously would be immigrants. Are there any signs of people wishing to immigrate from Ukraine?

A.A.: Jewish repatriation to Israel is based on the Law of Return. In other words, the right to return to Israel is vested only in people with Jewish ancestry. For other people, immigration is a rather complicated and slow process. It resembles the practice of US immigration laws.

As for repatriation from Ukraine, most people leaving from here do not consider themselves Jews, yet they are subject to the law of return because they have Jewish ancestry.

The Day: The majority of the million repatriates from the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) countries “carried” their Soviet mindset to Israel. Doesn’t it get in your way and theirs?

A.A.: Apathy and distrust of the government does exist among those who come from this region. This is not acceptable in Israel. But I do not consider this a problem. Yes, this immigration has an impact on our political life, introducing complex elements, but it also benefits us in many ways.

The Day: We know from unofficial sources that certain noted Ukrainian politicians have of late applied for dual citizenship. Any comment?

A.A.: We never divulge any information about noted or perfectly ordinary individuals. Dual citizenship is not a problem in Israel. If someone comes under the law of return and applies for citizenship, the embassy is not necessarily informed. Persons subject to the repatriation law can apply for citizenship only in Israel. No one can apply for it at our or any other Israeli embassies anywhere else in the world. Israeli citizenship is granted in Israel and exceptions from the rule were made only during the Soviet period.

The Day: In an interview with this newspaper at the end of last year, Israeli Interior Minister Nathan Shcharansky said that some estimates suggest up to 30,000 illegal workers from Ukraine in Israel, and that there exist several ways to solve the problem. What is the situation like today?

A.A.: I don’t have any other sources of information other than those used by Mr. Sharansky. This is a very serious problem in Israel. Estimates differ, as some say that there are 170,000 illegal workers; others claim the number it is over 200,000.

This is a very big problem. Firstly, we have a rather high unemployment rate. Secondly, it’s a serious humanitarian problem. People living in a country illegally sometimes find themselves almost enslaved by their employers, who could do whatever they want with them. Such illegal workers are not subject to state health insurance or social guarantees. How can we live in a socially oriented country alongside others living in inhuman conditions? There are also illegal residents that have spent several years in Israel and now have families. How can their children be enrolled in a school, how can they live without health care?

Sharansky had a lot of ideas on how to solve this problem. For the time being his ideas remain unaccepted, because the ministry representing the unemployed and other agencies disagree with them.

In the last several months no one bothered the illegal workers. Now they are again arrested and deported. Sharansky’s idea was good but complex; he proposed to legalize the shadow workers for a year and then see them out of Israel. Precisely how this could have been accomplished is still not clear.

The Day: People come to Israel from all over the world. Cultural clashes are inevitable. In a recent interview you said that your country had discarded the melting pot ideology. Then what do you propose to substitute in its place? How can Israel provide conditions in which cultures will enrich and stimulate each other rather than clash?

A.A.: I don’t think that we have created an ideal situation. But I think how the last immigration wave was received gives the best answer to the melting pot theory. The Gesher (Bridge) drama company is a very eloquent example, I would even describe it as too convenient. It is a perfectly Israeli theater, although they began by staging plays only in Russian. It is a bilingual company and its popularity in Israel is unbelievable.

There is mutual enrichment, but this does not mean that there are no frictions. The point is that no one is trying to make everyone conform to the same standard in Israel. We have turned into a postmodernist state where everyone is free to act as he deems expedient. We have always been a mosaic society, yet nowadays things are changing even faster. The impact of the last wave of Russian- speaking immigration is very strong in every sphere of life. Time will show what comes out of it.

The Day: Is there a language problem in Israel? It exists in Ukraine rather strongly. Recently there are attempts to politicize it. How is the language problems being solved in Israel?

A.A.: I don’t think the language question exists in Israel. We have two official languages, Hebrew and Arabic. No one has so far suggested that Russian becomes an official language. In fact, there is no need, for every package of milk has a Russian inscription, for business reasons, of course. What is problematic here is that the immigration influx has created whole Russian-speaking city blocks. In some schools there are more Russian than Hebrew-speaking students, but this does not prevent children from studying well. I don’t see no linguistic problems in the foreseeable future. Besides, a repatriate can live in Israel without even being aware that they are not any longer in the former Soviet Union. This is especially true of pensioners. They stay at home, watch television — they can always tune in to Moscow’s ORT; communicate in Russian and who do they bother. If you want to go into politics you will have to master Hebrew.

The Day: Is there any prospect of raising the status of the Russian language, considering that there are so many Russian-speaking voters in Israel?

A.A.: Personally I would never back such a proposal (the Ambassador was surprised by this question, and replied laughing). No, I don’t think there is any prospect.

FACE TO FACE WITH UKRAINE

The Day: When you came to Ukraine to head the embassy, was there anything in particular that helped you understand the Ukrainian character and national traits?

A.A.: I am trying to learn Ukrainian. Here the main problem is that, just like an old Russian-speaking man in Israel, sadly I can be fully informed without practically needing Ukrainian. 90 percent of the periodicals placed daily on my desk are in Russian.

By the way, Israeli history is one of struggle for the language. A hundred years ago Hebrew was not as active as it is now. For example, when we opened the Technion [in 1912] in Haifa (currently Israel’s most prestigious institute of technology), German professors would shrug and say that Hebrew was not a language for instruction. Time proved it was and very successfully.

The Day: Is there anything you dislike about Ukrainians?

A.A.: Yes, there is a trait — which is characteristic of many Israelis, too. I know that the situation in this country is difficult, but why describe it even worse than it actually is. I refer to people, not the media. I don’t like people’s utterly pessimistic attitude to the Ukraine’s realities.

Also, I think you lack an understanding what can be accomplished like the possibility of selling “air.” Why is not Kyiv part of the Central European tourist package? Perhaps you are not fully accustomed to the idea that a lot of business across the world is providing services rather than selling goods?

The Day: What about our culture?

A.A.: I can’t say much about your literature, because I am a poor reader in Ukrainian. I am very fond of the Ivan Franko theater company, although every time it’s a torture; I can’t understand half of what is being said on stage. I am interested in Kyiv’s architecture and have visited all of your Orthodox monasteries. Well, I am still in the process of understanding Ukraine.

The Day: We know that serious literature is being published in Israel and actively translated in the West. We know nothing about it. How would you explain that our states show no interest and haven’t taken a single step in the direction of Israeli-Ukrainian cultural mutual understanding?

A.A.: Certain small steps have been made. In 1995, the last issue of the magazine Vsesvit carried an Israeli literary collection. Our cherished dream is that at least a book a year is translated into Ukrainian. But this is hard to accomplish. Firstly because of financial problems. Secondly, there is bound to be an argument about what is to be translated. Even if we translated a serious book or collection, where would it be sold here? Would it be sold at the Petrivka [the outdoor second- hand and pirate book, audio, video and CD market near the Kyiv’s Petrivka Metro station. — Ed.]?

IN THE EPICENTER OF THE PEACE PROCESS

The Day: Recent events in the Middle East creates the impression that the peace process is deadlocked. Many analysts predict bleak domestic political prospects for Ehud Barak’s Cabinet. Would you please comment on the subject?

A.A.: May 17 marked a year since Barak took office. The population had high expectations in him. Although only a year has passed, some people have become disillusioned. The trouble is that a number of vital issues are at stake and the domestic political situation continues to sharpen. Ehud Barak has proposed deadlines but they are not fullfilled, mostly because of the Arab partners. Psychologically, this works against the Prime Minister. One must remember that it’s a matter of national security. Whenever the subject of Golan Heights is broached the situation becomes especially tense. The same applies to the question of the districts adjacent to Jerusalem. The Prime Minister, and he is not the first one in this tradition, tries to balance the views of all political parties, who form the majority at the Knesset. This week he canceled his trip to the United States because another critical situation had developed, when things started happening during peace talks, bringing us back to the times of what is called in Arabic intifada, when a Molotov cocktail was hurled at a little girl in Jericho, when Israelis got killed during conflicts with our “good partners”... Of course, all this influences the attitude to the government. The same would happen in any other country.

The Talmud reads that when the Second Temple was destroyed, only fools and children could have foreseen it. I am no longer a child and I wouldn’t want to be a fool. No one in Israel can foretell what will happen next.

The Day: Talks with the Arabs have been on and off for many years. Doesn’t this make Israeli society feel tired and less sensitive to the problem? Or does it remain the focus of debate?

A.A.: We cannot loose our sensitivity. We have a very crowded state and the car in which that little girl got killed was enough to make everyone’s nerves frayed. We are tired of warfare, but we cannot become disinterested, because everyone enlists for the army. My brother did, my son will, and my husband is still there. This is too real for anyone of us to be distracted. When everything is quiet and there is headway in peace talks, people may relax for a couple of weeks and follow developments in territory A or territory B less attentively, but this doesn’t last long, regrettably.

The Day: What proposals as to compromises with the Arab world dominate among the political elite and public in Israel?

A.A.: There is a very small minority that views everything has been done so far as being wrong and that we should not let the Arabs have another bit of land. But opinions among us are gradually shifting. The first breakthrough in the peace process was made with Egypt when it got back all the Israeli-conquered territories. True, this triggered irreconcilable territorial claims by Syria. There are people saying we must not sign a peace agreement with that country, simply because they don’t trust it. In many ways opinions depend on whether a given society is sure of its own safety. People may come out in support of a process — and polls show that it is really so — and so on. And there is an explosion in Tel Aviv and the process is put in reverse. In recent clashes with Palestinians the hottest day was when Barak conducted a vote in Knesset for transferring a village near Jerusalem to Palestinians. It was an absolutely inexplicable move politically. The Premier was making concessions and many in Jerusalem thought it crazy. At the same time, the Palestinians staged a mini-revolution. So who was there to negotiate with?

The situation with Syria is even worse, because no one knows whether it really wants peace. Suppose we let them have a territory. What do we get in exchange and who will be in power after Assad? Barak was optimistic about the talks with Syria. He tried it and then Bill Clinton did, nothing happened. So the Syrian talks have dried- up. It’s been a long time since Israeli society showed such unanimity: no use negotiating anything with Syria. Perhaps the withdrawal of Israeli troops from Lebanon will give an impetus to the renewal of talks with Syria. Yet the situation on the Lebanese border remains tense.

The Day: Israel is among countries refusing to accede to the Non-proliferation of Nuclear Weapons Treaty. How do you explain your stand in the matter?

A.A.: We approach nuclear disarmament from the regional rather than global standpoint. Even at its peak the peace process never involved the countries we consider our biggest threat. I mean Iran and Iraq. We support the Treaty ideas, but so far we see no prospects for its implementation in our part of the globe. For example, when Israeli warplanes destroyed Iraqi nuclear reactors in the early 1980s not a single country came out in our support. But when the Gulf War broke out in 1991 everybody remembered the reactors and said isn’t it just great that the Iraqi no longer have them. We do not believe that any inspections and control on the part of the Treaty member states are possible in this region where Israel is the only open democratic state. We are very seriously concerned about what is happening in Iran with Russia’s help. I mean nuclear technology transfers. The Middle East might eventually become a nuclear- free zone and we are all out for it. But this must be a regional and not a global decision. We cannot sign the Treaty because we are a state that others want to wipe off the face of the earth.

The Day: Evidently there is little room for compromise in such situations. What would have to happen to find a solution to the problem: maybe some historical sign, maybe some geopolitical breakthrough?

A.A.: Actually, a major breakthrough has been made. The Arabs always had a demographic theory whereby the Jews, like Crusaders, came and will eventually leave and the Arabs will reign triumphant demographically. Well, this theory didn’t work as a second immigration wave swelled back in 1989. Another factor was the Soviet Union’s military and technological support. By the way, it stopped even before the USSR collapsed. After that psychological processes began that would bring part of the Arabs to the round table of talks. Apparently, most of the Palestinians realize that they will have to live next door to us. Syria and President Assad started maneuvering outwardly indicative of their desire to come to terms. Most likely, however, they did not because Syria wanted to live in peace with Israel but because the United States was now the world’s only superpower and they had to adjust their stand to the fact. I do hope that we will eventually make peace.

The Day: Russia’s dignitary Yastrzhembsky announced May 22 that Russia could launch a pre-emptive strikes on Taliban bases in Afghanistan. Israel and the US were mentioned as positive examples as making such pre-emptive blows in foreign territories. What do you think?

A.A.: I wouldn’t want to pass judgment on this. I don’t think that Israel can be on bad terms with the new Russian president, even though there is a rather strenuous Israeli-Russian dialogue on Iran. And the fact that Russians refer to Israel as a positive example in pre-emptive attacks sound a bit improper, because the small State of Israel is in an altogether different strategic situation.

AFTER PEACE

The Day: All things considered, Israel is not an entirely secular country, and nor is it a theocracy. How does the state coexist with religion?

A.A.: It’s an extremely complicated issue that is being constantly put off until the problem of war and peace is finally solved. It is a rather serious political and cultural argument. Israel is a country built for the repatriation of people that had had no state of their own for centuries. Jewry means religious tradition in the first place. However, many in Israel want the state to be completely separated from religion, meaning that the issue will become a focal point after peace is reached.

The Day: Do you personally believe that the future Israeli national indentity will have to do with religion or what?

A.A.: Polarized opinions exist on this question in Israel. The original concept was the creation of a real socially just state. We have our state, Jews are returning, yet the ideas of collection and repatriation no longer suffice. I look forward to the time when Israel embarks on a productive cultural debate in search of a new national identity.