The strength of the diaspora’s attachment to Israel—and, correspondingly, the intensity of Israel’s connection with the diaspora—has its sources in the innermost dynamics of Jewish life throughout the world, and in the processes of Israel’s development and struggle. What are the basic features of this mutual magnetic attraction, which exercises so powerful an influence at both the center and the periphery and which generates on both sides such profound satisfaction and such weighty responsibilities?

The first feature of the relationship which I would like to examine can be summed up by a simple question: To whom does Israel belong?

From the standpoint of both constitutional law and formal sovereignty, Israel does not differ from any normal state in the world. It demands political loyalty only from its own subjects. Its sovereignty is vested in its own constitutional organs. Only its citizens, through their elected representatives, can make its laws, and they alone are called upon to obey them. Yet despite these fundamental similarities, Israel is different from all other states in one essential respect. In a deep, historic sense—which is most tangibly expressed in long-term policy as well as in day-to-day life—Israel is the common possession of the entire Jewish people, that is, of all the Jews of the world. Every Jew can claim a share in it. Millions of Jews feel emotionally identified with it. This extraordinary state of affairs stems from compelling reasons. Israel is a product of Jewish history, and its creation reflects the historic experience of the entire people—of the miracle of its survival, of its memories and longings, of its endless hardships and its enduring faith, of its awakened determination and demonstrated capacity for action.

It is true that only a fraction of the people—at the outset an insignificantly small portion—accomplished the stupendous task of laying the foundations for, and eventually erecting, the structure of statehood. Yet these few acted as emissaries of the many: They drew their inspiration from the heritage of all Jews, and their tenacity and drive were those of the vanguard that realizes that the outcome of its battle will be decisive for the campaign being waged by the whole host that stands behind it. Moreover, at practically every phase of the process the pioneers were assisted from the rear. At the decisive hour in the political struggle for statehood, practically all Jewish groups and organizations, as well as individual Jews in leading positions, from most countries of the world and from different schools of thought, rallied to bring about this historic breakthrough. In the War of Independence, during which Israel’s own youth naturally bore the heaviest burden, volunteers from nearly all the world’s free Jewish communities played a role. The massive support mobilized by the Jews of the diaspora for Israel’s titanic effort to handle mass immigration is itself a significant chapter of Jewish history.

Since those heroic days, Israel’s continuing ordeals and accomplishments, its brilliant military victories and the serious political challenges it still has to endure—above all its isolated territorial position and the implacable hostility of its neighbors—have aroused alternately the joy and the anguish of the Jewish world. This emotional attachment to Israel, this tension-ridden concern for its fortunes, is a novel and salient feature of contemporary Jewish life—indeed, its central focus, its living inner content, the major theme of its public manifestations. A visit to Israel is a high point in the lives of countless Jews. A public celebration of the establishment of Israel, or a gathering at which Israel’s position is conveyed by one of its authorized emissaries, is a central event in the life of a Jewish community, and is remembered long after it takes place. The living legend of a new Israel plays a key role in the education of countless multitudes of Jewish children. The presence of Israel’s diplomatic embassies in the capitals of so many countries is a source of thrill to the individual Jew and a new source of dignity to his community. In effect, the existence and activities of these concrete embodiments of an independent Israel have become an integral part of Jewish life everywhere.

Since the Jews were exiled from their land, there has been no central focus like that represented by the State of Israel operating within the Jewish people; no such vehicle for collective self-reliance had existed. Religion was a powerful unifying agent, but it was essentially a static force. It prescribed an elaborate way of living, gave infinite moral solace, afforded profound spiritual experiences, and created opportunities for sharpening the intellect. It kept up the morale of the people and made them emotionally resistant to adversity, yet it issued no call for action. It helped the people endure misery and inhuman conditions; it did not dare to attempt a drastic change. But then there emerged a new cause, an eminently constructive one, a powerful challenge to Jewish idealism and practical devotion, a revelation of what Jews can do if they dare to take destiny by the forelock and shape the conditions of their life with their own strength and spirit. What a soul-shaking transformation, what sublime exultation, what a victory over fate!

So it is not merely that the Jews admire Israel for its bravery and creative achievements. What they feel is not merely a sense of moral duty. Israel is simply theirs—their own cherished, priceless possession. As Jews, they can no longer imagine their own existence without it. Association with Israel is for them an uplifting, ennobling experience. If Israel were to come to grief, the light would go out of their lives. Therefore, it must not come to grief. Therefore, they must do everything they can—materially, politically, and in whatever other way is practical, effective, and legitimate—to preserve and strengthen it. The knowledge that they had fulfilled this supreme duty would then be their highest reward.

Some may argue that this frame of mind, though widespread, is not everywhere shared by the great mass of the Jews of the diaspora, or is not much in evidence in some of its smaller communities. The justification for such skepticism is open to serious doubt. But if this is the case, then to perpetuate the sense of connection among those who share it, to widen its scope, to implant it ever deeper in the hearts of the younger generation, is the task facing all thinking Jews in the lands of the dispersion. This is their duty not only for Israel’s sake but for the sake of what it represents in the general scheme of Jewish life.

A corresponding challenge confronts Israel as well. It must remain faithful to the vision that brought it into being. If the coming generations of Israelis lose the sense of where their country’s mission fits in the framework of Jewish history, if they develop an introverted and self-contained mentality—one that would necessarily estrange them from their diaspora brethren and might eventually result in a complete psychological separation—then they would be guilty not only of betraying a sacred trust, but also of unwittingly sowing the seeds of Israel’s own undoing. Cultivating a consciousness of the diaspora must be an active concern of Israel’s political and educational leadership. Only by continuing to serve the cause of the Jewish people as a whole can Israel ensure its own future.

This situation may give rise to complications and misunderstandings. Israel’s primary concern must, of course, be its own survival. Since Israel is in a position of such vital importance for the entire Jewish world, its survival must indeed be the overriding preoccupation of all Jews devoted to Israel. Considerations of Israel’s security must therefore rank first not only with its own government and people, but with Jews everywhere in their relation to Israel. There may be other vital Israeli interests that can similarly demand that the same high priority be accorded them by diaspora Jews. But aside from such issues of enduring significance, concerning which Israel is entitled to expect the diaspora to accept its authority unquestioningly, there is a wide range of issues regarding which the diaspora as a whole, or certain sections of it in particular cases, is entitled to expect special consideration on Israel’s part for its own interests, viewpoints, and sensitivities. Israel can never divest itself of the responsibility entailed by the fact that many of its actions affect Jews everywhere. There can naturally be no hard and fast rule delimiting the areas where such consideration is or is not due, or defining its extent. Moreover, on many controversial issues within Jewry in general, there are differences of opinion both in Israel and in the diaspora. The decision as to how to act in each particular case must be left to the judgment of those in a position to decide. In any case, there can be no question of imposing any limitations on Israel’s sovereign right to determine its policy or course of action, but at the same time, it is imperative that Israel constantly remain sensitive to diaspora sentiments, and that it demonstrate such sensitivity outwardly.