Queen Elizabeth and the Eternal Kingdom

“I declare before you all that my whole life whether it be long or short shall be devoted to your service.” Those were the words of commitment of then princess Elizabeth before becoming the Queen, and the first British Monarch to celebrate a Platinum Jubilee, marking this month seventy years of service to the people of the United Kingdom. People can learn from her example how to stand by one’s words and hold a role in steady devotion even when surrounded by storms.?

Elizabeth II seems to be the last of the queens. Time is doing its thing, and all the descendants of the crown exhibit an emptiness that does not fit into a throne. True kings or queens are not allowed to function according to their private will, according to desires and gut feelings, but to act according to what is desired for their role.?

For seven decades this petite but strong of stature lady has ruled Britain, containing the contrasts between the longing for empire and modern multiculturalism. She has showed stamina when intimate and embarrassing details of her family have spread across the world's media.?

At 96 years old, although showing physical fragility, she provides stability to the turbulent world of modern societies. I do not know another leader like her —a woman who recognizes and assumes the power of her role with unparallel commitment, acts with a determined spirit and impressive willpower, knows exactly how to function to give the world the degree of steadiness it needs.?

She receives guests, attends ceremonies, even goes hunting in Scotland —not for her own pleasure, but as part of a royal protocol. Well done to her.?

Elizabeth II seems to be the last of the queens. Time is doing its thing, and all the descendants of the crown exhibit an emptiness that does not fit into a throne. True kings or queens are not allowed to function according to their private will, according to desires and gut feelings, but to act according to what is desired for their role.?

A king is a single leader who stands at the head and under him the others. This pattern is rooted in the plan of creation. Similar to the kingdom of the upper nature, the kingdom of heaven, the dynasties of kings on earth are a permanent, stable and unchanging factor that runs like a thread through the periods and generations. A kingdom is like a material branch that emerges from a spiritual root. Just as a hierarchy prevails in nature, a royal monarchy can be a suitable form of government in human society.?

For several centuries in human history there has been such a close and visible connection between the people and the king of the world. It was the dynasty of the House of David that operated in Jerusalem until the destruction of the Temple, a passing episode that ended about two thousand years ago. The people of Israel are essentially not built to exist under a royal house. By nature, we despise anyone who jumps and wants to be bigger than the others. The rest of the nations are willing to surrender under who among them knows how to lead them. For Israel, this is not appropriate and will not happen. From the beginning we were meant to exist in equality, to bow only to the supreme power of nature, and not to a king of flesh and blood.?

We will succeed as a nation only if we unite with one heart and as a consequence reveal the hidden force of nature. This force will then truly rule over us and will cleanse us of our egoistic nature. We should do this not only for the sake of our good future, but to demonstrate to the world the kind of heartfelt connection it must reach in order for all of us alike to cling to Him, the eternal King of the world.?

------------------------------------------

Debunking the Myth that America Loves Israel

Americans have probably long known this, but for Israelis, the realization that America may not be our best friend and faithful guardian is somewhat of a shocker. Now, for those still in doubt, a new book by Distinguished University Professor of History at the University of Maryland Jeffrey Herf, exposes the “extent and intensity of opposition to the Zionist project in the entire top leadership of both the State Department and the Pentagon.”

I am always in favor of exposing the truth as a first step toward correction. Indeed, America’s attitude toward Israel has always been very pragmatic. It has always sought to do what is best for America and nothing else.

Herf’s extensive research draws on new research in government, public, and private archives. The research reveals, for example, that on September 13, 1947, two and a half months before the League of Nations’ vote on the establishment of a Jewish and Arab state in Palestine, William Eddy, special assistant to secretary of state by George Marshall, wrote to his superior of his objection to the establishment of a “theocratic, racial Zionist state.” According to Herf, “Eddy found the Zionist project morally objectionable.”

Eddy was far from being a lone voice. The objection to the Zionist project “was shared by Secretary of State Marshall; the under secretary of state, Robert Lovett; the head of the Department’s Near East Division, Loy Henderson; the secretary of defense, James Forrestal; members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff; and Admiral Roscoe Hillenkoetter, the first director of the Central Intelligence Agency; as well as Kennan and his Policy Planning Staff in the State Department.”

On February 1, 1944, Senators Robert Wagner and Robert Taft introduced a resolution seeking to abrogate the 1939 White Paper issued by the British Mandate authorities in Palestine, due to its anti-Zionist bias. According to Herf, “Critics of the Wagner-Taft Resolution denounced the Zionist project as an effort to establish a theocratic state,” and argued that Wagner and Taft were proposing “to establish a theocratic state based upon religious or racial discrimination.”

I am always in favor of exposing the truth as a first step toward correction. Indeed, America’s attitude toward Israel has always been very pragmatic. It has always sought to do what is best for America and nothing else.

America has no regard for Jewish or Israeli interests or for anyone’s interests but its own. Nor do they care about pressure from Jewish lobbies or the State of Israel; they simply have no regard for it. Whatever is good for America, this is what they will do, and the sooner everyone in Israel realizes it, the better it is for Israel. If at some point, America decides that supporting or protecting Israel does not serve its interests, it will kick Israel out the window just like that.

We should wake up from our naivety that leaders and countries that smile at us do so because they like us. I understand that centuries of persecution and suffering have made us receptive to such gestures, but they are illusions, and like all illusions, they always shatter painfully.

If Israel wants to be accepted by the nations, it must nurture its inner solidarity, and abandon its futile attempts to appease the world. The only thing that the world needs to see in Israel is Israelis striving to unite above all their divisions. This should be the sole interest of the State of Israel. However, unlike America’s interests, Israel’s interests are congruent with the interests of America, and with the interests of the entire world.

Our duty is to be a model of unity, solidarity, and mutual responsibility. Nothing else will legitimize our presence in the land of our fathers, who taught us that “Love your neighbor as yourself,” is the comprehensive law of our nation. Until we strive to set an example of such unity, no one will accept us. But if we learn to embrace one another, the world will embrace us in return.

And speaking of books, you will find more on the link between Jewish unity and hatred of Israel in my book The Jewish Choice: Unity or Anti-Semitism, Historical facts on anti-Semitism as a reflection of Jewish social discord.