Reading Response: Emigration in the Soviet Union

In the piece entitled “Fear No Evil” By Natan Sharansky, the narrator discusses his struggle with the restrictions and persecutions imposed on him by the Soviet Union for his struggle to help the Jewish nationalist movement and Jews who wanted to emigrate to Israel but they were refused a visa and persecuted for wanting to leave. He was “charged with espionage and treason against the Soviet Union”, and he was sentenced to 9 years of prison and labor camp. The regime of the Soviet Union was very authoritarian punishing those who sought to emigrate from the Soviet Union to Israel. The narrator sought to improve the situation of those who sought to emigrate to Israel and who were forbidden to do so in Soviet Union and then they were singled out, even though it was a violation of their human rights.

The piece starts with a date March, 15, 1977 when the narrator explains how he was abducted by the KGB and he was interrogated in a very harsh way so he would confess to crimes he didn’t commit. He advocated for the right of Jews to leave for Israel and of the dissidents who sought that their human rights would be respected. He delineates episodes of anti-Semitism that occurred since he grew up as Stalin had revived anti-Semitism and his mother was afraid of pogroms. He had to adopt a vigilant attitude in the face of an authoritarian regime that would be suspicious of Jews.  Though he didn’t grow up to have a religious education. He was accepted into the Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology, and he remarks that the acceptance requirements were more challenging for Jews. He says that it was anti-Semitism that made him aware of his own Jewishness, and identity as a Jew. He translates an article about Andrei Sakharon who had formed a Committee for Human Rights and wrote a letter to the Soviet leadership and so the narrator was summoned to respond to the KGB official at the Institute to be interrogated. He mentions the Holocaust and the Six Day War as events that made Jews feel united with each other. In spite of the anti-Israeli propaganda in the Soviet Union, the author notes that there was respect for Israel and the Jews.

The Jews of Russia were beginning to realize that in order for them to achieve their personal freedom, they had to reclaim their historical roots. He comes to the conclusion that the Soviet mentality is that the Soviet system is responsible for controlling the destiny of other peoples and this is their way in which they derive their own authoritarian power while they want people to ascribe to the Soviet mentality in order to maintain “the consciousness of the slave who looks for guidance to the good czar, the leader, the teacher”. The Soviet regime was anti-Israel and anti-Zionism and viewed Israel as a “fascist” state. He relates how he applied for an exit visa to Israel and he was denied, and how many like him where also not allowed to leave Israel and afterwards they were persecuted for applying for their exit visas, they were called ‘refuseniks”. They considered those who applied for exit visas to be “traitors”. Moreover, he started to demonstrate against the unfair policies of the Soviet Union and he made contacts with people who would be able to inform the foreign press about the dire situations that the Jews were subjected to. During this time, the KGB would keep a close watch on him. The narrator and his group kept in touch with other refuseniks and they knew what was happening to them to ensure their safety. They were jailed for their desire to emigrate from the Soviet Union to Israel. The author was put on trial. The proceedings of the trial showed that the evidence against him was fabricated and unreliable. The witness testimony was not accurate and the judge was interfering with the witnesses’ testimony in order to get them to accuse the narrator. There were obvious discrepancies and contradictions of the testimonies in terms of date and place of locations, yet in spite of these ambiguities, the goal of the prosecution was to condemn the narrator rather than grant him a fair trial. The prosecutor makes the case that “Israel….was not a country but an armed camp. The economy lay in ruins, and religious terror was unbearable. The Sabbat was a silent period of morning that stretched for twenty-four hours. Israel required cannon fodder in order to oppress other peoples and conquer new territories, which explained why international Zionism was in league with the Soviet Jewry movement” (p.  217).  He was charged with “aiding capitalist states in conducting hostile activity against the USSR” (p.219). The narrator defends himself by saying that “Our open activity in informing world public opinion has been presented as clandestine and conspirational, and organized and coordinated from abroad”. (p. 219). The narrator talks in his defense about the struggle between the two system that is taking place, the Soviet system and capitalism, and about the “struggle of peoples for their national liberation, for the right to live in accordance with their own national culture and religious traditions, and for the right to live in their own state” (p.218-219). He presents in a clear and objective way the inconsistencies in the accusations that were brought against him, and how this treatment Jews receive is “anti-Semitism in its purest form.”  He was given 13 years in prison. The foreign press covered the event and his brother who was present in the courtroom informed him that he has the support of the foreign press. At the end of the story, the narrator sits in his cell with his cellmate and he weeps over the injustice, symbolic of the fact that the Soviet system tries to quench those who speak against injustice.

In the piece “Congress of Jewish Organizations and Communities in the USSR” by Lukasz Hirszowicz, the focus is on presenting information about Jewish organizations in the Soviet Union.  There were organizations that represented the Soviet Jewry from all aspects of Soviet Jewish life, except for the anti-Zionist organizations who did not attend. The Congress of Jewish Organizations and Communities in the USSR met on December 18-21, 1989 in Moscow. The significance of this is that it portrays the reaction and involvement of the Soviet government to Jewish life in the Soviet Union.

It appears noteworthy that for this gathering the Soviet government granted visas to the foreign visitors who wished to attend this meeting, with the exception of Natan Sharansky, the author of the piece “Fear no evil” who is symbolic of the struggle of the Soviet Jews to obtain the freedom and right to emigrate to Israel. Among the organizations represented there were members of the World Zionist Organization, World Jewish Congress, and officials from the Jewish Autonomous region of Birobidzhan. It was emphasized that this meeting is a continuation of the emigration movement and it has an independent character. They wanted to strengthen a Jewish national movement that would resist anti-Semitism, to help Jews fight for their rights, and to enable emigration in order to unite the Jewish people. They created the Vaad as an umbrella organization that would unite the cultural bodies on a confederative basis. They also discussed the proper remembrance of the Holocaust in the Soviet Union. They wanted to organize in order to be able to combat anti-Semitism and the anti-Zionist propaganda. It called for abolishing the practice of the Soviet Unions to deprive the emigrants who were refused entry into Israel of Soviet Citizenship, and that their human rights be respected as according to the Helsinki and Vienna Agreements, and to ease transition of their belongings to those who were to emigrate. In exchange the position of the anti-Zionist organizations was that Zionists and anti-Semites were hand in hand, and that the Jews were settling on Arab territories, and Zionism was equal to racism.  They were aware that in order to maintain Jewish independent activities they would face much opposition from the Soviet government.

The piece entitled “Perestroika and Jewish Cultural Associations in Ukraine” by Vladimir Khanin discusses how the perestroika impacted ethnic revival among the ethnic groups, such as the Jews of Ukraine. The perestroika was an attempt of the Soviet Communists to restructure the Soviet system and which in turn granted some independence, and this stimulated nationalism in the Soviet republics.

The Jews in the Soviet Union sought to gain independence and legalize Jewish organizations. The first official Jewish organizations appeared in the Baltic republics and in Lvov in 1988, where there was strong nationalism. The Vaad (Committee of Jewish Organizations and Communities in the USSR) was established in December 1989. There were trends that supported Zionism and emigration to the land of Israel and trends that supported cultural autonomy and directed at reviving the cultural and public life in the Soviet Union. There was significant emigration at this time. Though these activities were banned before in the early 1970’s and 1980’s, at this point the government offered a path for these activities to be legal under Gorbachev liberalization movement. The communist authorities were also hoping that with this, they would gain control over the “Jewish cultural, historical, and Zionist organizations” (p. 7).

In Ukraine, the Jews as a minority were very significant as they were “one of the key communities” and after Ukrainians and Russians, the Jews were “third in number” (p. 8). The authorities were concerned with the “upsurge of Jewish activity” and they wanted to set in place loyal leaders through which they would be able to monitor these activities. For this reason, the state was trying to use their means to control the indepence of the Jewish organizations. For this, they established Jewish Culture Associations (JCA’s). They founded JCA’s in Lvov and elsewhere, the hope being that like this they would be able to control the activities of the Jews and it would improve the image of the regime at an international scale. Those in charge of JCA’s were supposed to appear traditional, with Yiddish as their mother tongue, with schooling in Russian, Ukrainian, or possible received in Yiddish schools, and they would be loyal to the Soviet system. There were some conflict in terms of leadership that wanted to support at anti-Zionism agenda and supporters of Zionism. There were JCA leaders who regarded emigration as an “unpatriotic step” (p. 21).

Overall, the activities of the JCA’s were significant as they initiated Jewish activities and help establish Jewish ethnic cultural organizations, Jewish newspapers, monuments and ceremonies for remembering the Holocaust, gave lectures on Jewish topics and had Yiddish and Hebrew language courses. They attracted the Jewish intellectuals in Ukraine who were interested in reviving Jewish culture. The reaction of the authorities was to support the JCA’s in order to increase control of Jewish public life through them and to get rid of the other groups. However these Jewish organizations sought to strengthen the Jewish consciousness.

Reading Response: In Private: The Daily Lives of Jewish Women and Families

The piece “In Private: The Daily Lives of Jewish Women and Families, 1933-1938” by Marion Kaplan delineates the reaction of Jewish women in the face of the changing environment of Nazi Germany, which was characterized by restrictions that effected family life and altered the role of women and men. Kaplan points out the ways in which the roles of women changed, the transition that occurred in reversals of gender roles, and how men reacted to this situation.

Kaplan points out that certain values received more emphasis. The milieu of the Jewish family became a refugee in the face of persecutions as the family members sought emotional comfort. The author points out that women interceded for their husbands in the public sphere with state officials. Women also showed greater insight than men in sensing the danger that they were facing in Nazi Germany. The way the Nazi policies affected family life can be analyzed on two planes, at the group level and at the individual level. She points out that in 1941 there was a Harvard study that assessed the attitudes that men and women assumed in the face of the mercurial environment in Germany. Jewish organizations attempted to deal with the restrictions placed on the “Jews as a group”. According to the Harvard study, there was increased emphasis on the importance of the family and friendships, reliance on the self, as well as “the lowering of ambitions, increased planning and action; and a change in life philosophy” (p. 51). The Harvard study found that the perspective of men also shifted to place more emphasis on family life. Friendships among Jews also provided some comfort. However, socially, the Jews had to limit their interactions to the milieu of “their own homes or organizations, staying away from public theaters, and museums, but still, occasionally, frequenting movie houses.” (p. 51). Among the topics discussed there was the “worsening situation for Jews, the emigration of friends and children, and details about visas, foreign lands, and foreign climates “of an existence where they would no longer be frightened to death when the doorbell rang in the mourning, because they would be certain: it is only the milkman!”

Factors that contributed to the shift in gender roles came with the change in status of men. There was increased unemployment so the men would gather with other male friends to comfort each other. They had to be careful because they were being watched by the Gestapo or other informants from among the neighbors. Social life was very difficult during the period between 1933-1938. Wealthier Jews could afford to leave for vacations outside of Germany. The laws that emphasized restrictions directed towards Jews resulted in an increased awareness of one’s identity as a Jew. Religion was also a factor that received more attention than before as it provided comfort. There was increased synagogue attendance. Jews also turned to Zionism and there was increased membership as Jews sought a new homeland.

Another way in which Jews sought to cope with this was emigration. The attitude of men and women towards emigration differed. The expectations of the society towards women were that they should endure and seek ways to cope with this situation. Women were “to prepare less expensive meals, to repair their homes and clothing themselves, and to make do with less help around the house.” (p. 54). Women’s organizations encouraged women to keep their “moral strength to survive” and suggested that when cooking, they should cook vegetarian menus as kosher meat was expensive and hard to obtain, and they should have their daughters help their mothers in the kitchen. In terms of men, they were “expected to pitch in— but only minimally. Despite women’s new responsibilities, the “domestication” of men felt illegitimate to women and men alike” (p. 55). The press advised women to hire young men to help with household choirs since the Nuremberg laws forbade Jews to hire Aryan women below 45 years of age. The Nazi laws were taking a deep psychological burden on Jews. In terms of emigration, women wanted to emigrate while their husbands tended to resist and did not want to leave Germany.

In terms of role reversals, “Jewish women took on new roles as breadwinners, family protectors, and defenders of businesses or practices (…) The Nazis essentially destroyed the patriarchal structure of the Jewish family, leaving a void to be filled by women” (p. 59). Women became the representatives of their husbands in public matters, and often saved them as “it was always assumed that the Nazis would not disrupt gender norms: they would arrest or torture Jewish men but would not harm women” (p. 60). As such, as a result of this, women ended up having more “assertive roles in public” (p. 60).

Jews were also migrating due to the hostility they encountered in villages and smaller towns and so they headed for larger cities were they would have some privacy.  Women had to cope with the “new urban environment: crowded apartments, unskilled jobs, and public constraints, not to mention deteriorating political circumstances”. They also joined social welfare activities in the Jewish community and Jewish women’s organizations who sought to help the newcomers adjust to the new life.

Women were more insightful in interpreting danger signals, and they attempted to convince their husbands to emigrate. Kaplan makes the argument that women were not as attached to their life in Germany as men were because they were not as integrated into the public sphere. Marion believes that women were not as attached to their status in Germany since “their status had always been determined by that of their father or husband anyway” (p. 64). Women picked on warning signals coming from their neighbors and children, servants and they took on these signals seriously. In exchange, men had a different interpretation of events; they were trying to analyze things. It is interesting that “a widespread assumption that women lacked political acumen—stemming from their primary role in the domestic sphere—gave women’s warnings less credibility” (p. 64). Men believed that singling out the Jews was Hitler’s ruse to gain power in Nazi Germany, but once he would have this power, he would stop. There was much confusion in interpreting what the Nazi policies really meant. Marion notes that there was prejudice in interpreting women’s reaction to the Nazi dangers and they were viewed as “hysterical”, they were considered “too emotional in general” and their attempts to convince their husbands to emigrate were being discredited. The ultimate decision to emigrate belonged to their husbands. However, there was a shift in this with the November Pogroms, where “some wives broke all family conventions by taking over the decision making when it became clear that their husbands’ reluctance to flee would result in even worse horrors.” (p. 69). The Nazis wanted the Jews to emigrate between 1935 and 1939 and they regarded this as the “territorial final solution” (p. 70). However, Jews faced very harsh limits in emigrating, such as there were restrictions on immigration and the Nazi government wanted to enrich themselves by placing cumbersome emigration taxes forcing people to sell everything they had to be able to pay these taxes. Moreover, the Jews who were emigrating were obligated to buy foreign currency at rates that were exploiting them. Furthermore, there was much corruption as the Nazi officials as well as those working in foreign consulates demanded bribes. Besides financial exploitation, Jewish women were also sexually exploited by Nazi officials who demanded sexual favors in order to grant them emigration visas. Overall, one quarter of German Jew fled before 1938. 

The Plight of Soviet Jewry after World War II: Reading Selections

         The piece entitled “Soviet Jews as Economic Criminals” from the Journal of the International Commission of Jurists relates that the Jews of Lvov have been there since the thirteenth century. Lvov had been under Polish rule, and it was not under Soviet influence until the end of World War II. There were 30,000 Jews in Lvov and though they did not pose a political threat to the Soviet Union, the Soviet Union viewed them as an ideological threat so they were either deported to Russia, killed by the Germans, or evacuated to Poland as the Tehran Conference decided to hand in the city to the Soviet Union.  The Jewish inhabitants of the city of Lvov were attacked in the press in seven articles that criticized the remnant of the Jewish community in Lvov. These articles carried anti-Semitic and biased perspectives. The synagogue was depicted as the site where “anti-Soviet activity” took place and as the “center for illicit currency dealings” where “Jewish speculators from Lvov and foreign towns met and carried on their trade and concluded their transactions” (p. 116).  The leadership of the synagogue was regarded as “speculators”. The ritual slaughterer Kntorovich is attacked for making “religion and its rites the source of his personal income”. He was put on trial and received the death sentence. Moreover, the Jews are accused of carrying out a “black market”. The articles also criticize the fact that Israeli diplomats visited the synagogue and distributed “Israeli propaganda material”. The Rabbi is also sentenced to death along with other members of the synagogue council. In analyzing the proceedings of these trials, it is evident that injustice was done against them. There was no fair trial and the accusations were fabricated.  The Soviet regime condemns those who have relations with people from abroad and regards them as suspicious. The attacks are also directed against the Jews of Moscow who are deemed “a large group of parasites who do not wish to encumber themselves with work useful to society” (p. 119).  The articles report other cases in which Jews are said to “go to any length in order to help their kind” (p. 120). There are other reports were Jews are depicted as being dishonest, thieves, exploiters, wanted to get rich quickly, corrupt, willing to use bribes, immoral, “whose only God is gold”. This anti-Semitic propaganda hides the true facts and relates things only one sided casting the blame on the Jews.  The goal of this is to portray how beneficial communism is and that capitalism is “both evil and less successful” (p. 126).

              “The Jewish National Movement in the Soviet Union: A Profile” by Yossi Goldstein portrays the Jewish national movement that emerged in the Soviet Union after World War II and the reasons for its emergence. An activist desired to leave the Soviet Union to emigrate to Israel and was willing to petition the government in regards for this.  The activists tended to have a better education and a better economic situation than the non-activists. Thought they did not identify with traditional religious values, they were motivated by the recent events that had emerged attacking the existence of the Jewish people, such as the Holocaust, the Six Day war, and the experiences in the Soviet Union, which included anti-Semitic incidents. They protested to be allowed to emigrate to Israel, which was forbidden to them by the regime of the Soviet Union.

              “Jewish Freedom Letters from Russia” are a collection of letters in which Jewish intellectuals were appealing to higher authorities requesting help so they would be able to emigrate to Israel when the Soviet authorities forbid them to do so, and they had no one else to turn to. The Jews of Lithuania appeal to the Central Committee of the Lithuanian Communist Party pointing out their fears given the rise of anti-Semitism and reminded to the Party that the 25,000 Jews living in Soviet Lithuania are aware of the mass murders that have been carried out against their tens of thousands of their brethren. The point that the anti-Israeli propaganda that is carried out leads to the rise of anti-Semitism in their midst and they point how Jews face significant restrictions in their daily lives, such as not having access to higher education and jobs, not being able to teach their children Hebrew, being publicly humiliated and oppressed, even Jewish cemeteries being desecrated in Lithuania, something that did not happen not even under the Nazis. Another letter depicts a similar situation in the Soviet Union, where anti-Israel propaganda prevails. Moreover, the Jews of Georgia address a letter to the Prime Minister of Israel Golda Meir and to the Commission on Human Rights of the United Nations were they delineate their plight and request help to leave to Israel. Boris Kochubiyevsky’s letter points out his plight as a Jew living in the Soviet Union who is harshly punished with 3 years of forced labor for his support of Israel. He lost his job as an engineer and his wife was dismissed from the Pedagogical Institute of the Young Communist League. In his letter, he points out that his relatives were shot by the fascists, and he is forbidden to teach his children Hebrew, to read Jewish newspapers or to attend a Jewish theater. Under the Soviet regime, he was accused like a criminal of “slandering Soviet reality”.

          The excerpts from “Fascism under the Blue Star” from Theodore Freedman’s  “Anti-Semitism in the Soviet Union are directed at attacking the ideology of Zionism that the Jewish people, regardless of where they were born and where they live, form one undivided nation. It claims that the ancient Hebrews have disappeared a long time ago, and therefore the “slogan of Zionism” in regards to “the ingathering of the nation from the Diaspora” is unfounded. The argument is that a Jewish nation is being created by the Zionists now in the “national home” they claim, but this did not exist before. They say that the countries in which Jews live have welcomed them like brothers and the Jews have prospered in these locations intellectually and economically, and therefore the Jews belong to these social milieus. It claims that Zionism wants to instill anger in the midst of the other people where the Jews live so as to compel the Jews to leave their countries and come to Israel where a new nation would be built.

Alexander Rybak - "Europe's Skies" (Official Music Video)