The Stranger in Your Midst: The African Refugees

“Do not taunt nor oppress the stranger in your midst, because you were slaves in the Land of Egypt…” (Exodus 22: 20)

The modern State of Israel was created explicitly for refugees. It was a made-to-order asylum for the thousands of Jews adrift in Europe post WWII, and since then has functioned as a safe haven for Jews from Russia, Yemen, Iraq, Iran, Ethiopia, the Soviet Union, and most recently France. Under the “Right of Return” law of 1950 any Jewish person who wishes to can live in Israel and claim citizenship. Israel is the homeland for the homeless.

Recently, six thousand African refugees have fled to Israel through the border with Egypt. Of those, 600 are Darfurians who have been granted temporary resident status. The difference between them and past refugees: they are Muslim.

A debate is now currently raging. Can Israel, the only Jewish state in the world, with its own Jewish refugees to fend for and demographics that are tipping heavily Arab-wards, afford to harbor African Muslim refugees? On the other hand, can the modern State of Israel, a country founded to give the homeless a home, a country that is looked upon as a moral guide for other nations, maintain its identity and purpose if it turns away the tired, poor, huddled masses that no other country will accept?

Israel has no choice. Because of all that it is, because of its history and its mission and its position as a spiritual center for humanity, it must accept the refugees. It owes it to itself to take care of these people. Without continuing its legacy of justice, it ceases to exist as a purposeful nation and might as well let Ahmadinejad carry out his threats of extinction. One of the reasons that Israel has such a strong right to exist (a claim that no other country is required to fight for) in the midst of antagonistic neighbors is that it is a bastion of equality and advocate for civil rights. Without a strong self-pride in its compassionate humanitarianism, Israel will lose its identity.

One can come up with plenty of reasons for why Israel ought not to allow the refugees to remain there. Would the U.S. let six thousand Mexicans shelter in its borders? Obviously not—it deports them as fast as it finds them. Why doesn’t one of the fifty-six Islamic countries in existence take in their co-religionists? Israel has enough refugees of its own, what with the Ethiopians still struggling to gain a place in society, and the Gush Katif refugees who still don’t have proper housing. The last time I was in Israel, four months ago, I drove along the highway and saw the huge plastic crates in which the Jewish refugees who were kicked out of the Gaza strip house their belongings. The last thing Israel needs is a tent city for African refugees right outside Tel Aviv. What if the children of these refugees grow up to forget their gratitude and loyalty to Israel, and instead identify with the Muslim extremists in the neighborhood?

What will happen to the refugees in the long term? Perhaps they will become part of the country, bringing their own culture in to join the hodgepodge there today. Religious diversity is a good thing. The African Muslims should not have any more difficulty fitting in than the sfardim, the Christian Arabs, the Ethiopian Jews, the Druze and the Bedouins and the Russian immigrants. Which gives one pause. Yet I firmly believe that in time all will settle and mix and we will simply have a country of Sabras.

At the end of the day, Israel cannot afford to count up the what-ifs of opening its gates. The refugees from the Sudan are not being helped by anyone else. The Jewish State was created out of the horrors of genocide. The rest of the world is in debt to it, not the reverse, but it still owes something to itself. “You were slaves in Egypt” is a mantra throughout Tanach, used to remind Jews of their obligation towards humanity. The modern Jewish State, created out of the ashes of Europe, has the same responsibility.