Moving to the Homeland: South African Jews in Israel

Home , South African Jews

This article was downloaded by: [University of Haifa Library] On: 26 July 2013, At: 08:26 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Immigrant & Refugee Studies Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wimm20 Moving to the Homeland: South African Jews in Israel Rebeca Raijman a a Department of Sociology and Anthropology , University of Haifa , Haifa , Israel Published online: 26 Jul 2013.

To cite this article: Rebeca Raijman (2013) Moving to the Homeland: South African Jews in Israel, Journal of Immigrant & Refugee Studies, 11:3, 259-277 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15562948.2013.801728

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms- and-conditions Journal of Immigrant & Refugee Studies, 11:259–277, 2013 Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC ISSN: 1556-2948 print / 1556-2956 online DOI: 10.1080/15562948.2013.801728

Moving to the Homeland: South African Jews in Israel

REBECA RAIJMAN Department of Sociology and Anthropology, University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel

This article focuses on Jewish South African immigrants migrating to Israel. It examines motives for migration, the ways by which migrants organized their move to the new country, and the types of resources (individual and institutional) on which they relied to make and implement their decision. Our study suggests that both push and pull factors explain South African Jewish migration to Israel. The unstable socioeconomic and political situation prevalent in South Africa was the main push factor explaining the desire to leave the country, whereas a strong Jewish and Zionist identity acted as a strong pull factor driving South African Jews to Israel. In addition, the existence of social networks and institutional frameworks linking the two countries helped perpetuate the migration over time. Two salient conceptual points emerge. First, theories that stress the economic aspects of migration alone are not helpful in explaining South African Jewish migration to Israel. We must also consider how ethnic identities related to the host society (e.g., their Jewish and Zionist identity) affect potential migrants’ decision making. Second, in order to understand the process of the migration of Jews to Israel, it is important to refer to the communal and social structures in the countries of origin and of destination. Downloaded by [University of Haifa Library] at 08:26 26 July 2013

This research was funded by the J. Kaplan Centre for Jewish Studies and Research at Cape Town University in South Africa. I am deeply indebted to Prof. Milton Shain and Shirley Bruk at the Kaplan Centre for Jewish Studies, Cape Town University who provided guidance and support during these years of data collection and analysis. I am very grateful to all in- terviewed partners who shared their time and life histories with us. I thank Research Success Technologies, which under the direction of Dr. Ezra Kopelowitz oversaw the ﬁeldwork required for the interviews. I wish to thank Miri Schwartzvald, Orit Avital, and Ariane Ophir for their help with data preparation and analysis. Address correspondence to Rebeca Raijman, Department of Sociology and Anthropology, University of Haifa, Haifa 31905, Israel. E-mail: [email protected]

259 260 R. Raijman

KEYWORDS Migration motives, South Africans, Israel, institutional resources, migration decision

INTRODUCTION

To leave one’s country of origin and relocate to a new society is one of the most radical decisions people may ever take (Gold, 1997). Nevertheless, still today emigrants’ motives are a poorly developed area in the migration literature. Most migration studies tend to focus mainly on integration into the host society, hence overlook the migration itself, migrants’ motives, and the implementation of the move to their new host society. This neglect is somewhat surprising given that motives are key factors for understanding the process whereby people change locations (Winchie & Carment, 1989), but also the ways migrants integrate into host societies (Berry, 1997; Gold 1997, 2002). This article aims to fill the gap by focusing on the case study of South African Jews who moved to Israel. Specifically we examine the process of decision making, motives for migration, the ways by which migrants organized their move to the new country, and the types of resources (individual and institutional) on which they relied to make their decision and implement it. While most studies have focused on the economic dimensions of immigration, fewer have centered on the sociocultural aspects driving migration flows. Most migration theories downplay ethnic, national, religious, and other collective ideologies as forces shaping migration decisions. However, our findings suggest that it is also necessary to consider how collective identities related to the host society affect the potential migrants’ decision making as well as the social structures in their countries of origin that nurture the relationship between prospective migrants and the receiving societies (Gold, 1997). As we shall see, these considerations are especially relevant for understanding Jewish migration to Israel in general and South African migration to the country in particular.

Downloaded by [University of Haifa Library] at 08:26 26 July 2013 Israel as a Destination Country Israel is a society of immigrants and their offspring, where at the end of the 20th century two out of three members of the Jewish majority were foreign- born (40%) or of the second generation (30%) (Raijman & Kemp, 2010). Unlike most migratory movements, migration to Israel has been characterized as a returning ethnic migration (Levy & Weiss 2001). The centrality of the idea of migration as a return from the Diaspora is expressed in the Law of Return of 1950, which grants Israeli citizenship to Jews and their children immediately on arrival. Jewish migrants in Israel are labeled olim (Hebrew for “ascenders”).1 Moving to the Homeland 261

Between the founding of the State of Israel (1948) and 2008, approximately 19,000 South African Jews entered the country under the terms of the Law of Return. Migration of South Africans to Israel has been uneven, surging during periods of political unrest and violence in the late-1970s, mid- 1980s, and mid-1990s, when SA Jews, anxious for their immediate safety, took advantage of Israel’s Law of Return. In the 2000s migration ﬂows dropped to relatively low levels, although some increase has occurred in 2008. What motivated South African Jews to leave their country, their families and their homes, a high standard of living and a rich Jewish communal life? What were the main reasons for choosing Israel as a destination? How have migrants gone about their migration, and on what types of individual and institutional resources do they rely to make their decisions? These are some of the questions we would like to answer in this paper, focusing on the process of decision-making and migration of South African Jews who have arrived and settled in Israel.

THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

A thorough reading of migration theories reveals that migration is usu- ally conceptualized as economically motivated (see Stark, 1991; Massey et al., 1998). From the neoclassical economic perspective, it is assumed that the rational decision of individuals or families to migrate is guided by a comparison between the potential income level in the host country and their actual income in their countries of origin. Based on this logic, by applying a cost-benefit analysis, rational individuals would decide to migrate if the benefits of the move outweighed the costs over some time horizon (Todaro & Maruszko, 1987; Borjas, 1990). While most studies conducted by economists have focused on the economic dimensions of migration, sociologists have generally centered on the sociocultural aspects driving migration flows such as social networks and institutional frameworks that develop as a consequence of migration (Boyd, Downloaded by [University of Haifa Library] at 08:26 26 July 2013 1989; Massey et al, 1998). The sociocultural approach to migration asserts that the immigration process itself, namely, preparing for departure to a new country, is full of uncertainty. Prospective immigrants must rely on several sources for information, guidance, and financial and emotional support. Knowing or being related to immigrants already in the destination country opens up sources of information and connections, mitigating the uncertainty. Among people considering migration, ties to an earlier immigrant living in the host country are likely to determine the probability of selecting that place of destination (Massey et al., 1987, 1998; Amit & Riss, 2007; Shoham & Kaufman Strauss, 2007). 262 R. Raijman

Once a certain immigration flow starts, a system of institutions and organizations, formal and informal, is created in the immigrant community and in the host society to handle matters arising from the immigration process. At the community level, ethnic associations such as social clubs, sports clubs and religious organizations emerge to play an important role in the socioeconomic integration into the host society (Massey et al., 1987). At the societal level, government and nongovernment organizations affect the size and composition of migrant flows. In some cases, such as Israel, these organizations are strongly involved in encouraging and sponsoring migration from selected countries that have Jewish communities (Raijman, 2009). When these institutional and social network frameworks undergo institution- alization, they become a kind of social capital, which helps the immigrant in all spheres of life by providing a social structure capable of supporting international migration on a mass basis. Following other scholars, we suggest viewing the migration process in general, and the decision to migrate in particular, as a “multi-level process (demographic, political, economic, cultural and familial) that involves various links between two or more settings, rather than a discrete event constituted by a permanent move from one nation to another” (Gold, 1997, p. 410). We have to consider not only the economic, political and cultural structures in which immigrants develop their communities and lives in their destination countries, but also the specific contexts of origin (sending countries) whence the migrants have come (Amit & Riss, 2007). We argue that the characteristics of the contexts of origin (participation in ethnic networks, institutions and local values) and the ways in which they nurture a strong national attachment to the host society are relevant for understanding the process of migration itself (the emergence and reproduction of migration flows) as well as the patterns of migrants’ integration into their host societies.

METHODOLOGY

We adopted a mixed-methods approach on the assumption that neither the Downloaded by [University of Haifa Library] at 08:26 26 July 2013 quantitative nor qualitative methodological traditions can provide a complete picture of social reality, but the two combined in a single design can impart a deeper understanding of the feature under study. The quantitative part of the study consisted on a survey conducted in 2008 with a representative sample of SA immigrants (607 respondents) who were older than 17 years on arrival (ﬁrst generation). The survey collected information on migrants’ socioeconomic characteristics before departure (e.g., age, marital status, family income before departure, and occupation) and the extent of their involvement in Jewish life (measured by Jewish school attendance, youth movement membership, religious practices and synagogue attendance). Information was also gathered Moving to the Homeland 263

on the decision-making process, such as reasons for leaving South Africa (push factors) and reasons for choosing Israel (pull factors). Data were collected on social networks before arrival and the individual and institutional sources of help on which migrants relied when arranging their move. The qualitative study comprised 17 in-depth interviews, which were most useful in exploring the migrants’ feelings, and their accounts and inter- pretations of their motives, decisions, and migration pathways. Combining quantitative information from the survey with qualitative information from the in-depth interviews permitted us to describe the migration process to Israel systematically and to illuminate its different layers and dimensions.

DATA ANALYSIS The Newcomers’ Socioeconomic Proﬁle Table 1 shows a general proﬁle of the South Africans before making aliyah (migrating to Israel) according to selected sociodemographic characteristics. It is seen from table 1 that in South Africa most of the migrants in our sample lived in Johannesburg and Cape Town, the two cities where most of the South African Jewish population reside (Horowitz & Kaplan, 2001). On arrival, most newcomers were young: 27 years old on average and 84% younger than 34. The age distribution is naturally linked with the migrants’ family status at the time of arrival. A high percentage were single (58%), and among the married (39%) only a third had children before aliyah. Half of the respondents in our survey arrived in Israel alone, over a third with family members, and 14% as part of groups mostly organized by youth movements such as Habonim or Bnei Akiva.2 South African newcomers displayed a relatively high socioeconomic background, over half of them ranking their family’s income in South Africa above average before departure. Almost two thirds of the migrants were active in the labor force before departure, a high percentage (64%) in professional, technical, and managerial jobs. By any standards, SA olim constitute a notably highly skilled population; the question now arises as to the Downloaded by [University of Haifa Library] at 08:26 26 July 2013 constellation of factors that explain their decision to migrate to Israel.3

Understanding Motives for Migration to Israel

PUSH FACTORS DRIVING EMIGRATION FROM SOUTH AFRICA To understand the process of South African migration to Israel, in the survey and in the in-depth interviews we asked the olim their reasons for it. In Table 2 (upper panel) we present the percentage of respondents reporting the extent to which speciﬁc reasons prevailing at the given time inﬂuenced 264 R. Raijman

TABLE 1 Selected Socioeconomic Characteristics of Immigrants Before Arrival (Percentages, Means, Standard Deviations)

First generation

Residence before migration Johannesburg 60.6 Cape Town 25.5 Durban 3.6 Port Elizabeth 3.1 East London 0.7 Pretoria 2.8 Other 3.6 Years since migration 18.9 (11.7) Age at migration 27.6 (8.3) 18–24 42.3 25–34 41.4 35–44 11.7 45–54 2.8 55–64 1.8 Marital status before migrating Married or living with a partner 39.3 Divorced, separated, or widowed 2.5 Single (never married and not living with a 58.3 partner) % had children before aliyah 28.8 Number of children 2.8 (1.1) Came to Israel Alone 44.0 With family 38.1 With friends 4.0 With an organized group 13.9 Family’s income in South Africa (%) Far and slightly below average 8.0 About average 37.2 Slightly and much above average 54.8 % belonging to the labor force in South 66.4 Africa Occupational status in South Africa (for those in the labor force) % professional, technical, and managerial 63.5 N 607 Downloaded by [University of Haifa Library] at 08:26 26 July 2013

their decision to leave South Africa (to a great/very great extent).4 The data permit us to examine each motive separately, showing trends over time as well as its relation to the complex of other motives, by focusing on its rank order of importance. The data show that relatively low percentages of the olim reported push motives as reasons for migrating. That said, close scrutiny of the data in the table reveals that political reasons, namely feelings of dissatisfaction with political upheavals in South Africa, personal safety concerns, opposition to Moving to the Homeland 265

TABLE 2 Push and Pull Factors According to Time of Arrival in Israel (% to a Great/Very Great Extent)

All 1961−1979 1980−1989 1990−1999 2000−2008

Reasons for leaving South Africa Dissatisfaction with 35.548.843.821.531.6 political upheavals Personal safety concerns 27.814.219.736.643.4 Opposition to apartheid 27.646.035.610.212.9 government Concern for the future 25.912.530.626.034.8 under a black government Wishes of other family 19.618.918.419.822.7 members Afﬁrmative action in 12.11.04.312.029.1 South Africa Economic situation in 9.20.02.910.524.4 South Africa Dwindling of the South 8.20.83.711.617.0 Africa Jewish community Anti-Semitism in South 4.75.51.57.02.9 Africa Reasons for coming to Israel Zionism 74.574.880.371.871.5 Children grow up in a 66.364.366.266.572.0 Jewish environment Living among Jews 66.060.370.166.768.6 Religious beliefs 38.622.029.947.156.2 Joining relatives and 26.320.225.028.934.1 friends who made aliyah Wishing to ﬁnd a 25.613.913.627.845.3 partner/spouse in Israel Israel’s educational 10.39.55.29.918.1 system Israel’s health system 8.81.65.111.617.5 N 607 159 137 174 138 Downloaded by [University of Haifa Library] at 08:26 26 July 2013 the apartheid, and concern for the future under a Black government, ranked among the most important reasons inducing them to emigrate from South Africa (35.5%, 27.8%, 27.6%, and 25.9%, respectively). The percentage of respondents reporting political upheavals as an important push factor was higher for those arriving up to the end of the 1980s, much lower for those arriving during the 1990s (the Mandela period), but rising again for the 2000 cohorts. Carla, for example, told us that her decision to emigrate was taken during the Soweto uprising in 1976 when still was a youngster: 266 R. Raijman

Interviewer: When did you start thinking about leaving South Africa? Carla: During the revolts of 1976 ...it disturbed me a lot ...I was 15 years old and I said to myself that I do not want to live here, it was scary and I was scared of all. ...Around me a lot of people started to get organized and pack and leave South Africa ...my best friend ...came to Israel with her family. And it affected me ...really. So from a very young age I knew this was not the place where I would bring up my children. I did not agree with the government and could not stay there. But to stay there and ﬁght, I did not see how I could do that.

Clearly associated with political upheavals, concerns over personal safety scored relatively high among the forces fueling SA Jewish migration to Israel (more for women, 32%, than for men, 22%) with this fear becoming more marked for new arrivals. For example, only 14% of migrants arriving during the 1960s and 1970s stressed this reason as a factor affecting their decision to a very great extent; the ﬁgure rose to 43.4% in the 2000s cohort. Personal safety was a concern for Daniela, who arrived in Israel in 1988. When asked about the factors that affected her decision to leave South Africa she compared the differences between the two countries in that regard:

The situation was not good there [in South Africa], not like today but still not good. ...When I came to Israel and started to live here, and I saw girls walking alone in the street, and my son going freely in the street, Isaid...there’s no such thing there ...I grew up [in South Africa] with a sense of insecurity from an early age. There is no such thing as “I’m going out,” no such thing as “I’m going for a walk with friends.” ...You don’t do such things there ...it was always dangerous.

Many migrants stressed the difﬁcult security situation in South Africa, their constant fear of being attacked and robbed. In Israel, by contrast, they feel secure and value the ability to walk freely in the streets. In their view, this contributes to a better quality of life. The reasons for leaving South Africa were also cast in terms of social dilemmas: apartheid and the changes that its abolition would pose to Whites Downloaded by [University of Haifa Library] at 08:26 26 July 2013 and Jews. This was especially true for individuals arriving in Israel up to the 1990s: 46% and 36% among the 1970s and 1980s cohorts, respectively. The concern for the moral and ethical consequences of living in a society characterized by apartheid emerged spontaneously from the in-depth interviews. A case in point is Stacey, who arrived in Israel in 1985.

First of all, when I grew up under apartheid, I didn’t know that not everyone lived like this ...It was natural ...to get on a bus that said “Whites only,” I took the train every day ...Blacks were crowded together and we [Whites] had room ...and not to ask why ...[then] I traveled to Moving to the Homeland 267

Europe ...I suddenly I saw it all. ...When I returned I couldn’t take it anymore. ...That’s why I wanted to leave South Africa because I knew I could not change it [apartheid] or even to begin to change it ...we knew we could not continue to live in this situation.

Along with their critical stance on apartheid, concern for the future under a Black government greatly affected respondents’ decision to emigrate. This is especially true for olim arriving from the late 1980s, close to the year of the abolition of apartheid: on average, 30% of the respondents reported such a concern.

I was concerned about the future, and you know that then Blacks were oppressed and people were anxious that at some time the situation could ﬂip over. What would the future of the Jews be then [under a Black government]?

Next to political reasons, migration is also a consequence of the wishes and decisions of other family members. In our survey almost 20% of the migrants reported this reason as very important. It was more prevalent among women (25%), who came to Israel accompanying their husbands or other family members, than among men (15%). Many of these women in fact came against their will, hoping to convince their spouses to emigrate from Israel to other (English-speaking) countries. Overall, economic reasons did not play an important role in the SA Jews’ migration decision process, but as Table 2 shows, for recent cohorts (2000−2008) the economic situation in South Africa, and fears of the consequences of afﬁrmative action policy in the labor market,5 are notably relevant (29% and 24%, respectively). One important aspect of these policies is preferential treatment for the black population in employment, intended to improve their economic position. The government’s employment legis- lation reserves 80% of new jobs for Black people and favors Black-owned companies. This new policy is perceived as affecting Whites’ occupational mobility in the South African labor market and has become an important

Downloaded by [University of Haifa Library] at 08:26 26 July 2013 factor fueling emigration of SA Jews to other countries in general, and to Israel in particular, for the last decade. Ryan arrived in Israel in 2003, and gave employment issues as a reason for leaving South Africa:

I knew that it would be hard for me to get a job [in South Africa] just because I’m White. I knew it from [someone] whose job was to examine the racial composition of employees in companies ...Ihearit too from my friends who remained in South Africa. ...[It is difﬁcult] to ﬁnd work and advance ...It is one of the reasons but not the main one. 268 R. Raijman

Some immigrants, like Stacey, who has resided in Israel since 1977, even deﬁne the new afﬁrmative action policy as discrimination against whites and label it a “new type of apartheid”:

And now ...it’s really the opposite, there’s a reverse apartheid, there’s racism against Whites. Whites can’t get jobs—ﬁrst of all Blacks and then maybe, if there’s a place left, then Whites get a job. Everything is [now] backwards.

Data in Table 2 reveal that the dwindling of the Jewish community serves as a push factor, especially for those arriving since the 1990s. This was precisely the time when Jewish emigration from South Africa was high and the size of the Jewish population fell from 120,000 in 1980 to 80,000 in 2000 (Horowitz & Kaplan, 2001). Although on average this motive ranks low among other factors (8.2%) it is apparently relatively more important for later arrivals (17% in the 2000−2008 period). Finally, the data show that anti-Semitism played a minor role in fueling moving to Israel. So far we have discussed respondents’ reasons for leaving South Africa. We now move on the pull factors attracting South African Jews to Israel.

Pull Factors: What draws South African Jews to Israel? Table 2 (bottom panel) shows the percentage of respondents reporting how much speciﬁc factors at the given time made Israel attractive for them as a country of destination (to a great/very great extent). Overall, we identify three main pull factors, which can be ranked by level of importance: (a) ideological (i.e., national and religious Zionist and Jewish identities), (b) social (i.e., joining friends and family), and (c) instrumental (e.g., employment opportunities and the quality of social services).

IDEOLOGICAL FACTORS

Downloaded by [University of Haifa Library] at 08:26 26 July 2013 From Table 2 it becomes clear that South African Jewish migration to Israel is above all ideological. The motives accounted for choosing Israel as a destination relate to Zionism6 (75%), the desire to live among Jews (66%), and the desire to have their children grow up in a Jewish environment (64%). These reasons have remained pretty much stable in the various cohorts arriving. Strong feelings of attachment to Judaism and to Israel as the homeland of the Jewish people are not surprising, given the longstanding tradition of the Zionist movement in South Africa. In addition, most olim were raised in a segregated Jewish environment, deeply embedded in Jewish life and traditions in which the shul (synagogue), Jewish schools, youth movements, and Moving to the Homeland 269

other organizations formed the dense ethnic fabric of South African Jewish community life (Dubb, 1977; Elazar, 1983). As we shall see, this identity assumes a central role in shaping migration decisions of prospective olim. Table 2 also reveals the salience of religious beliefs for later arrivals. The percentages of migrants reporting religious motives as pull factors has signiﬁcantly increased from 22% in the 1960s and 1970s to 56% in the 2000s. These ﬁndings suggest that later arrivals grew up in a community, while Zionist had a more accentuated religious orientation (see Horowitz & Kaplan, 2001).

SOCIAL FACTORS:THE POWER OF SOCIAL NETWORKS Nonideological factors also play an important part in attracting people to Israel. Social networks established in the country prior to the respondents’ migration were quite extensive. Most respondents in the total sample (88%) had family members or/and friends residing in Israel prior to their own migration, and one third had at least one family member residing in Israel sometime before arrival. Data in Table 2 attest to the importance of social networks as a magnet as, a quarter of all SA olim stated that the desire to join relatives and friends already in Israel counted as an important motive for choosing this country; percentages rose from 20% in 1970s to 34% in the 2000s. Orah is a case in point. She ﬁrst moved to another English-speaking country to pursue a career, but after a couple of years she decided that her family was more important:

When did you start thinking about? I didn’t think about it ...I’m not an ideological person. ...It was a matter of fate. I came because my [family] was here ...I came here to try and see how I would manage ...I wanted a family life surrounded by my sisters.

New motives for choosing Israel as a country of destination gain importance for the new cohorts of arrivals. One is the wish to ﬁnd a (Jewish) spouse in Israel. The data in Table 2 show that the percentage reporting this motive

Downloaded by [University of Haifa Library] at 08:26 26 July 2013 rose from 13% on average until the end of the 1980s to 45.3% for the cohorts arriving during the last decade. Arguably, the increasing importance of this reason over time is connected to the dwindling of the Jewish community in South Africa, which squeezes the marriage market for young Jewish people.

INSTRUMENTAL FACTORS Although of relatively lesser importance, instrumental factors are also given as motives for migrating to Israel, especially among new arrivals. For example, approximately 20% of immigrants arriving in the 2000s reported that the advantages of the national health system (universal coverage) and the educational system, which is mostly public and free, were important factors. 270 R. Raijman

Education is highly evaluated especially for religious and traditional-religious immigrants because of the obvious fact that in South Africa they had to send their children to private and expensive Jewish schools for a Jewish education. For example, Megan, who arrived in Israel in 2007, clearly set out the beneﬁts of living in Israel:

My kids were in private schools in South Africa, they had to go to private schools to get an education, and here schooling doesn’t cost as much, not nearly what it cost there. Medical care here is much cheaper—those were the two items that used to kill us every month.

Interestingly, despite the South African immigrants being a very highly skilled population, economic motives did not constitute a pull factor: only 9% of the total reported career opportunities as a reason for choosing Israel as their destination. Quite the contrary; for many of them migration, at least during the ﬁrst years, meant downward economic and occupational mobility. In sum, the data in the survey help to highlight the degree to which different factors triggered the migration of South African Jews to Israel. The key role of noneconomic motives in the decision-making, namely a strong Zionist and Jewish identity that characterized most of the respondents in the sample, is striking. But these pull factors in themselves had seemingly been inadequate to detach prospective migrants from their social origins. The deterioration in the political, social, and economic situation in South Africa served as the catalyst for the pull factors to concretize in a speciﬁc time.

Context of Origin: Aliyah as a Natural Consequence of Jewish and Zionist Education One of the most recurrent themes to emerge from the analysis of migrants’ narratives in the in-depth interviews is that making aliyah (immigrating to Israel) is a natural outcome of their upbringing in South Africa in a closely consolidated and uniﬁed Jewish community, where Judaism and Zionism Downloaded by [University of Haifa Library] at 08:26 26 July 2013 were the main values by which children were raised. Attendance at Jew- ish schools and belonging to Jewish youth movements were fairly common among South African immigrants to Israel (58% and 83% of all arrivals, respectively). Synagogue attendance in South Africa was quite common. Fully 60% of all ﬁrst generation migrants attended religious services and activities at least once a week and this religious involvement is more evident among olim arriving after 1990. So the data suggest a theme to which we return time and again in this article: the typical South African Jew rooted in a community context that was highly receptive of the idea of making aliyah. Moving to the Homeland 271

For example, Jack provides a vivid insight into everyday life of Jews in South Africa, illustrating the extent to which the ethnic community was very important in constructing a strong Jewish identity and a fervent attachment to Israel:

[At Jewish school] we had the [Passover] seder before we celebrated it at home ...all activities [were] related to the Jewish life cycle and the Hebrew calendar ...Yom Haatzma’ut [Israel’s Independence Day] ...I used to go with my father and my grandfather to the stadium and all the Jews came too ...I remember the Israeli ambassador arriving in a black limousine and everybody was cheering him when he arrived ...because he was the representative of Israel ...and everybody at the entrance got two candles, one blue and one white and we light the candles and stood up for the Hatikva [Israel’s national anthem]. (Jack, arrived in 1986)

Immigrants’ narratives portrayed the vibrancy of Jewish life in South Africa, and the ways Jewish and Zionist values and culture were nurtured in Jewish schools, synagogues, and youth movements. Furthermore, we learn of the connections between communities in Israel and South Africa, and the involvement of Israeli institutions and organizations in the maintenance of the Jewish and Zionist character of the local South African community. Ofﬁcial policy of the Israeli government and Zionist institutions encouraged youth movements in Israel to send emissaries to summer camps in South Africa to motivate and nurture attachment of the youngest generations to Judaism and Israel through the organization of seminars and conferences, and the diffusion of Israeli songs and folk dancing. Attachment to Israel was also nurtured through frequent visits to Israel. Many of the interviewees had gone there as tourists, either as children with their parents or alone through youth movements and other programs organized in Israel to encourage and develop emotional connection to the state of Israel. This is the case of Ryan, who immigrated to Israel in 2003:

I came three times before I made aliyah. I participated in the quiz organized in South Africa by Bar-Ilan University on Jewish identity. The Downloaded by [University of Haifa Library] at 08:26 26 July 2013 ﬁrst time I got third place and a second time I won second place. The winners go Israel with winners from other countries, and here in Israel there’s the world quiz on Jewish identity. I also came here once alone and I stayed with family ...I especially wanted to see how life was here.

These visits to Israel had a signiﬁcant impact in prospective immigrants’ decisions to make aliyah, especially the youth. Given these strong and affective ties with Israel nurtured back home and through visits in the country, it is not surprising that for many people making aliyah was a natural path resulting from their experiences from childhood to maturity. As Shelly told us: “When 272 R. Raijman

I was in 10th grade I came to Israel on a three-month program, and it seems that then I caught the bug to live in Israel.” Judaism and Zionism being among the most important reasons for migrating to Israel, not surprisingly many immigrants see Israel as a place where they feel part of the majority group. Many of them experienced Judaism as a minority group in South Africa, and they wanted to enjoy the beneﬁts of being part of the cultural and political majority. They sought the advantages emanating from living in a society whose cultural themes and holidays refer to Jewish life and traditions. They came in search of a better Jewish life. They are strongly motivated to rear and educate their children in such a framework. For Shelly, living as a Jew in South Africa was complicated especially during the Jewish festivities when South Africans continued with their everyday routines at work and school and she needed to juggle two worlds (e.g., not going to work or to school on Rosh Hashana and Yom Kippur when everyone around her did so). By contrast, in Israel “you just live it ...It is part of everyday life and you don’t have to negotiate with your near environment how to be a Jew.”

My husband was working ...and on Yom Kippur or other religious Jew- ish holidays he had to work. ...The way it was there [in South Africa], we needed to handle sorting things out that Gentiles worked and we didn’t. ...And to this day I enjoy this bit, that on holidays I don’t have to worry. And you Israelis just don’t get it. I see my children who don’t understand, and you Israelis don’t get it.

To sum up, reasons for coming to Israel are mainly cast in ideological and religious terms: Zionism and Jewishness. The latter especially becomes a central marker in the immigrants’ social identity. They seek a place where they feel they belong and are part of the majority group, and where it is easier to conduct a traditionally Jewish way of life. Next we focus on the process of immigration to Israel, namely the role of networks and institutions in the process of decision making and moving to the new country. Downloaded by [University of Haifa Library] at 08:26 26 July 2013

Social Networks, Institutions and the Process of Migration To learn about the role of networks and institutions in the immigration process respondents were asked whether they relied on specific sources for information, and whether the specific source was helpful.7 The olims’ answers to both questions, in percentages, are set out in Table 3. The results demonstrate that most immigrants actively sought information about benefits for newcomers, and used two types of support services: formal agencies and informal networks functioning as complementary sources of information in Moving to the Homeland 273

TABLE 3 Social Networks and Sources of Help for Information

Source of help All 1961−1979 1980−1989 1990−1999 2000−2008

Friends (% relying on this 26.423.622.625.334.3 source) % Reporting that help + 56.366.758.163.740.4 help a lot Family (% relying on this 32.626.035.035.635.8 source) % Reporting that help + 57.163.758.456.451.0 help a lot Jewish agency (% relying 61.144.959.161.581.8 on this source) % Reporting that help + 61.358.968.457.563.0 help a lot Telfed (% relying on this 61.063.860.065.558.4 source) % Reporting that help + 60.355.162.661.161.5 help a lot Youth movements (% 33.441.739.429.917.5 relying on this source) % Reporting that help + 70.081.276.061.645.9 help a lot Internet (% relying on this 9.40 0 4.036.5 source) % Reporting that help + 35.80 0 28.636.7 help a lot N 607 159 137 174 138

the transitional process. Formal institutions have not only the knowledge, but also, and most importantly, the financial resources to support prospective migrants. Informal networks are more effective for managing the emotional tasks involved in everyday socialization (Litwak, 1985). These informal ties are still required for decision-making purposes, for example, to receive or confirm reliable information, friendly advice and emotional support (Amit & Riss, 2007) Prospective migrants were more likely to rely on institutional frame- Downloaded by [University of Haifa Library] at 08:26 26 July 2013 works such as the Jewish Agency8 and Telfed, the South African Zionist organization in Israel (almost two thirds of the immigrants), and to a lesser extent on youth movements such as Habonim and Bnei Akiva (one third). These formal venues were effective and helpful, as reported by over 60% of the olim. The percentages of olim relying on personal networks for information was much lower (26% reported relying on family members and 33% on friendship ties) but these networks were nevertheless valuable, as reported by over 50% of the olim. The differences in the use of formal and informal networks should be understood in light of the proactive role of the Jewish Agency and Telfed in stimulating migration to Israel. The financial support provided by the 274 R. Raijman

state of Israel to prospective migrants makes government institutions such as the Jewish Agency a key actor in the process. In South Africa the Jewish Agency has two main offices, in Cape Town and Johannesburg. Prospective immigrants go there to meet the shlichim (emissaries) to discuss an aliyah program, assistance with travel costs, attending ulpan [Hebrew classes for immigrants], and support especially during the first months after arrival. The shlichim have played a very special role representing the state and the Israeli offices dealing with aliyah:

We met several times ...with the shlichim. It was a very important thing. I still have contact with them. ...They were very, very especial there [in South Africa] and I think that a large number of people [made aliyah] because of these shlichim. (Peter, arrived in 1997) We got the information from the shaliach at the Jewish Agency. What she said was sacred because we did not have any way to check or know. ...We didn’t have relatives or know people who there who could tell us. ...It was before the internet era—we sent letters at that time. (Shelly, arrived in 1986)

Telfed also plays an important role in the process of migration. One of its main characteristics is its rather intensive involvement in the process of aliyah and integration of South Africans in Israel. Telfed representatives are in permanent contact with the Jewish community in South Africa; they organize and participate in special fairs aimed to motivate Jews to make aliyah:

The Zionist federation in South Africa ...they too were very helpful. We had quite a few meetings with them, they were very good ...and people came from Israel to visit [South Africa] ...It was quite interesting what we heard, it was great. (Megan, arrived in 2007)

Pilot trips organized by Telfed were mentioned by many immigrants who took the opportunity to visit Israel, check the openings, and gather information. These pilot trips serve deciding on potential places to live,

Downloaded by [University of Haifa Library] at 08:26 26 July 2013 job search, and other types of required information (e.g., driving licenses, schools, health insurance, etc.):

We went to the South African Federation and talked with the representative of Telfed. We joined the pilot tour, a tour organized by Telfed, to learn about options in Israel. ...We also were in touch with [SA] friends in Israel who already made. (Samantha, arrived in 1987)

Finally, making aliyah in a global era is an experience entirely different from that of migrants who arrived in Israel before the Internet era. As Table 3 shows, the Internet has become a new source of information for immigrants in the last decade. Community organizations and Israeli government Moving to the Homeland 275

institutions have built websites for prospective immigrants where most of the necessary information can be gathered. Through the internet people have access to a wide variety of websites, from which the prospective migrant can learn about his or her possibilities in Israel, get in contact with the different sources of information, and even watch on YouTube a video, which lets one not just “imagine the future” in Israel but see it on the web. Next we summarize and discuss the main ﬁndings and point to the need for a multilayered approach to the study of the process of migration.

CONCLUSIONS

This article focuses on the migration process of South African olim to Israel, with the goal of identifying its main driving forces, the ways olim organized their move, and the types of resources (individual and institutional) on which they relied to make their decision and implement it. Our study suggests that both push and pull factors explain South African Jewish migration to Israel. The unstable socioeconomic and political situation prevalent in South Africa was the main push factor explaining the desire to leave the country, whereas a strong Jewish and Zionist identity acted as a strong pull factor driving South African olim to Israel. In addition, the existence of social networks and institutional frameworks linking the two countries helped perpetuate the migration over time. Two salient conceptual points emerge. First, theories that stress the economic aspects of migration alone are not helpful in explaining South African Jewish migration to Israel. Our ﬁndings suggest that in addition to economic concerns, we must also consider how ethnic identities related to the host society (e.g., their Jewish and Zionist identity) affect potential migrants’ decision making. Second, in order to understand the process of the migration of Jews to Israel, it is important to refer to the communal and social structures in the countries of origin and of destination. As our study shows, most SA olim explained their migration (aliyah) in Downloaded by [University of Haifa Library] at 08:26 26 July 2013 terms of their ethnic, national and religious identities. Even prior to migration, South African Jews felt extremely familiar with Israeli (Jewish) society in cultural terms. A variety of community-oriented activities and institutions such as synagogues, youth movements and schools have nurtured a resilient Jewish identity coupled with a strong attachment to Israel. In such communities, making aliyah was a kind of “rite of passage”—at least during the 1970s and 1980s, becoming a key factor affecting individual migration. This impetus highlights the social embeddedness of the migration process.9 The Jewish community developed a Zionist ethos that helped create a double identity: South African Jew or Jewish South African. Making aliyah was part of a general narrative discussed at home and in various community 276 R. Raijman

settings. People knew that returning to the “homeland”—Israel—was a goal to which many Jews aspired. Thus, a strong Jewish religious and ethnic background coupled with a desire to live in a “majority Jewish society” drew South African Jews to Israel. In addition to individual motivations, family, and community structures in the country of origin, Israeli government ministries and emissaries and community organizations in the country of destination were particularly salient in the decision to migrate and then in the actual move to Israel. In both South Africa and Israel, prospective immigrants have access to formal service-delivery organizations, be it the Jewish Agency, the Zionist Fed- eration, Telfed, or other bodies encouraging aliyah from English-speaking countries. They are closely interconnected and target the same population, seeking to increase the share of so-called “Anglo-Saxon” Jews making aliyah. Overall, our case study suggests the need to consider both the contexts of origin and of reception as the social structures in which individuals’ decisions to migrate develop and concretize.

NOTES

1. In our article we use the word olim rather than migrants because this is the way South African respondents in our sample deﬁned themselves. 2. Habonim Dror and Bnei Akiva are Jewish Zionist youth movements with branches in Jewish communities worldwide. For details on South African youth movements, see http://www.sazionfed. co.za/pages/youth_movements.htm. 3. We are aware that in order to study the determinants of migration, the relevant units of analysis should be individuals within their households in the country of origin. Unfortunately, we only have data collected in the host society for those who already have migrated to Israel. 4. Because no signiﬁcant differences were found between men and women regarding most of the motives for migration, we only discuss gender differences in the items where such differences were evident. 5. These preferential policies have been enacted by the African National Congress (ANC) in South Africa since its election in 1994 (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/jan/22/southafrica.features). 6. Zionism refers to the ingathering of the Jewish people in the land of Israel, the adoption of an Israeli identity, and the ideological commitment to both the Israeli Jewish collective and the land of Israel (Lomsky-Feder & Rapoport, 2011). 7. In the survey, respondents were asked: Before you left for Israel, how did you obtain information about the process of migration?

Downloaded by [University of Haifa Library] at 08:26 26 July 2013 8. By its own deﬁnition, the special mission of the Jewish Agency is: “Bringing a substantial number of Jews to live in Israel and ensuring their successful integration” (http://www.jewishagency. org/JewishAgency/English//+Info). 9. Note that although most Jews in South Africa have been exposed to these institutions and environment, not all of them decide to emigrate; those who do, do not chose the same destinations.

REFERENCES

Amit, K., & Riss, I. (2007). The role of social networks in the immigration decision- making process: The case of North American immigration to Israel. Immigrants & Minorities, 25(3), 290–313. Moving to the Homeland 277

Berry, J. (1997). Immigration, acculturation, and adaptation. Applied Psychology, 46(1), 5–34. Borjas, G. (1990). Friends or strangers: The impact of immigration on the US economy. New York, NY: Basic Books. Boyd, M. (1989). Family and personal networks in international migration: Recent de- velopments and new agendas. International Migration Review, 23(3), 638–670. Dubb, A. A. (1977). Jewish South Africans: A sociological view of the Johannesburg community. Grahamstown, South Africa: Institute of Social and Economic Re- search, Rhodes University. Dubb, A. A. (1994). The Jewish population of South Africa: The 1991 sociodemographic survey. Cape Town, South Africa: Kaplan Centre Jewish Studies & Research, University of Cape Town. Elazar, D. J. (with P. Medding). (1983). Jewish communities in frontier societies. Ar- gentina, Australia and South Africa. New York, NY: London, England: Holmes & Meier. Gold, S. (1997). Transnationalism and vocabularies of motive in international migration: The case of Israelis in the United States. Sociological Perspectives, 40(3), 409–427. Gold, S. (2002). The Israeli Diaspora. London, England; New York, NY: Routledge. Horowitz, S., & Kaplan, D. E. (2001). The Jewish exodus from the new South Africa: Realities and implications. International Migration, 39(3), 3–32. Kaplan Center for Jewish Studies. (2006) The Jews of South Africa 2005—report on a research study. Cape Town, South Africa: University of Cape Town. Levy, D., & Weiss, Y. (2002). Challenging ethnic citizenship: German and Israeli perspectives on immigration. New York, NY; Oxford, England: Berghahn Books. Litwak, E. (1985). Complementary roles for formal and informal support groups: A study of nursing homes and mortality rates. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 21(4), 407–425. Massey D., Alarcon, R., Durand, J., & Gonzales, H. (1987). Return to Aztlan: The social process of international migration from Western Mexico. Berkeley, CA; Los Angeles, CA: University of California. Massey, D., Arango, J., Hugo, G., Kouaouci, A., Pellegrino, A., & Taylor, J. (1998). Worlds in motion. Understanding international migration at the end of the millennium. Oxford, England: Clarendon Press. Raijman, R. (2009). Immigration in Israel: A map of trends and empirical research: 1990–2007 (in Hebrew). Israeli Sociology, 10(2), 339–379. Downloaded by [University of Haifa Library] at 08:26 26 July 2013 Raijman, R., & Kemp, A. (2010). The new immigration to Israel: Becoming a de-facto immigration state in the 1990s. In U. Segal, N. Mayadas, & D. Elliot (Eds.), Im- migration worldwide (pp. 227–243). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. Shoham, S., & Kaufman Strauss, S. (2007). Information needs of North American immigrants to Israel. Journal of Information, Communication & Ethics in Society, 5(2/3), 185–205. Stark, O. (1991). The migration of labor. Oxford, England: Blackwell. Todaro, M. P., & Maruszko, L. (1987). Illegal migration and US immigration reform: A conceptual framework. Population and Development Review, 13, 101–114. Winchie, D. B., & Carment, D. C. (1989). Migration and motivation: The migrant’s perspective. International Migration Review, 23(1), 96–104.