Jewish Thought in Arab Societies, 1880-1960

'Speaking Truth to Power': Shehata Haroun's Endurance

Yoram Meital

Presented at the workshop

A work in progress

Please do not quote without the author permission

'Speaking Truth to Power': Shehata Haroun's Endurance

Yoram Meital

At the beginning of March 2014 Nadia Haroun suffered a fatal heart attack. Hundreds attended her funeral procession that began at the Shaar HaShamaim (Gate to Heaven) Synagogue and ended at the Jewish cemetery in Bassatine. The funeral of one of the last Jews in Egypt was widely covered by the local and international media. The religious service was held by a rabbi from Paris who had come for the occasion. The reports and photos published in the press and on the internet dealt extensively with the Haroun family‟s history. Nadia died of a heart attack in the middle of a workday at the modest law firm in downtown Cairo she and her sister Magda inherited from their father, on whom this paper focuses.

Shehata Haroun was above all a political activist whose positions were directly derived from his commitment to Marxism and internationalism, and his stern opposition to imperialism and Zionism. His exceptional and decisive views established his status as someone who is not afraid to speak „truth to power,‟ even at the cost of serious harm to himself and his family. Shehata was born in Cairo (1920) to a typical middle-class Jewish family. He attended a Catholic school for boys and later completed his law degree at Fu‟ad I University (which became Cairo University after the „Free Officers‟ coup). During his studies he joined communist organizations that were active on campus. His participation in the massive demonstrations in the summer of 1946 against the Isma'il Sidqi government led to his first arrest.1 After graduation Shehata worked as a lawyer and later established a law firm in the center of Cairo, which bears his name until today. When the Sadat regime permitted the

1 The record of his incarcerations shows that at times he was put behind bars when communist activists were arrested, and at other times he was arrested together with members of the Jewish community. In an interview Shehata was asked whether it was not strange that the Zionists accused him of treason, while he was sent to prison in Egypt. He answered: “I don‟t think it‟s so weird. Whoever fights against bigotry [al-ta'assub] in the context of the Israeli–Arab conflict can expect such difficulties. Nevertheless, I should mention that I was astonished about my arrest and even more so about my depiction in the press as a „leftist Jew‟ rather than an Egyptian opposed to Zionism and fighting for the rights of the Palestinian-Arab people.” Ruz al-Yusuf, 2 March 1975.

renewal of political party activities, Shehata was among the founders of the Tagammu Party [The National Progressive Unionist Party].

* * *

The Jewish Community

Significant socio-political, economic and cultural transformations and Western domination characterized Egypt in the last third of the 19th century. The Suez Canal became established as international passageway and allowed for unprecedented commercial and technological development. The British occupation and the protection it provided to minorities and foreigners (Greeks, Italians, Jews and Copts) drew tens of thousands of migrants to Egyptian cities, where they quickly gained dominance in finance, entrepreneurship, commerce and industry. Modern urban quarters with a cosmopolitan atmosphere grew like mushrooms after the rain. Social and cultural changes, especially among the middle classes and the elite, were reflected in the style of housing, the acquisition of language skills and education, in dress style and leisure activities.2

The developments in Egypt caused also significant changes among Jews in the land of the Nile. The local Jewish community actually comprised three sub- communities: the majority belonged to the Sephardic community; also an Ashkenazi community was prospering (a small community belonging to Rabbinic Judaism, though preserving different prayer and other traditions).3 The Karaite Jews differ from their Rabbanite brethren in their approach to religion, customs and tradition. With

2 The previous social and cultural order lost gradually in weight, while new traditions, norms and values penetrated – creating a reality of hybrid processes characterized by the combination of previous values and traditions, and new ones. This was not a process “erasing” previous customs and traditions, but rather the adoption of new values and norms in various ways by different sectors of society. 3 From historical records we learn that already in the 16th century there were Ashkenazi families in Cairo. Most of them continued to speak Yiddish; their prayer style and minhag were those of Eastern Europe. The “Ashkenazi Jewish Community of Cairo” was established in 1865 with government permission. It provided education and welfare services, supported the publication of a Yiddish newspaper, “Dee Tzeyt”, and founded a symphony orchestra and a small theatre group. A considerable part of the Ashkenazi community‟s activities were conducted from the Ashkenazi synagogue, which still stands intact in El-Gaish Street, not far from the busy „Ataba Square.

government permission they established their own separate community and religious institutions.

Shehata‟s grandfather from his father‟s side moved from Aleppo to Egypt with the migration wave from Syria and Lebanon. At some stage the family adopted the name Haroun instead of Silverra. The Jewish community grew in the wake of the immigration waves. At the beginning of the 20th century, there were about twenty thousand Jews. In the census of 1947 there were 65,639 (out of whom 41,960 were living in Cairo, and 21,128 in Alexandria). The community‟s prosperity is well reflected in the diverse services that it provided to its members, including schools, synagogues, orphanages, nursing homes, cemeteries, clinics and a hospital in Cairo and in Alexandria. Several Jewish newspapers were published, in French, Arabic and Hebrew. The institutions and community services were established by donations from wealthy Jews. The mobilization allowed for the construction of several spectacularly beautiful synagogues and for the renovation of ancient ones.

The Jewish quarters that had existed for hundreds of years were increasingly vacated at the turn of the 20th century. Like other well-to-do Egyptian families, many Jewish families began to move to the city center. Some of them lived on central streets, Qasr al-Nil, Soliman Pasha and the other streets in the vicinity of al-Isma„iliya (al-Tahrir since the mid-1950s) and the Opera Squares; and also in the Garden City area. Others established only their businesses in the city‟s commercial center and resided in such prestigious neighborhoods like Heliopolis, Ma'adi and Zamalek. The modern style of the Jewish downtown houses and sites testify to the tremendous development boom that characterized the early 20th century. Also in terms of cultural symbols (visits to the opera, membership in prestigious clubs), dress and language (French, Italian, and English), it is evident that many Jewish families were members of the cosmopolitan social strata that flourished in the Egypt's urban centers in the first half of the 20th century. Many saw themselves as part of Western culture, which is evident in the children‟s education at foreign schools (such as the Lycée Français), European dress, language use, especially of French as spoken language, and cultural habits. Members of the middle class and the elite usually sent their children to local private and foreign schools (Le Lycée Français, Le Collège des Jésuites, the British Boys/Girls School). Shehata attended the Catholic school for boys in the center of the

capital. Families with more modest means made do with the education provided by the schools of the Jewish community.

Many of the downtown Jews kept some connection to the Jewish religious tradition, such as Kabbalat Shabbat and the attendance of prayers on holidays in synagogues at the city center, especially Shaar HaShamaim. Many families took residence in the new urban quarters that were architecturally similar to modern quarters in Western Europe. Luxury department stores and shops offering a wide range of products indicate the emergence of a consumer society based on an ever- growing affluent public. Shehata‟s father was employed as a salesman at the department store chain Les Grands Magasins Cicurel et Oreco, which became a prestigious brand in Cairo during the first half of the 20th century.4

In the midst of the “golden age” the overall feeling was that of a peaceful and comfortable life. In general, Egyptian Jews cultivated ties with the local community, upheld religious ceremonies (circumcision, Bar Mitzva, and marriage) and observed the holidays in accordance with their community‟s tradition. Synagogues were full on Shabbat and the holidays. The evidence regarding the Haroun family suggests that this holds also true for them. After graduating from law school, Shehata married Marcelle Halfon, and soon they had three daughters (Mona, Magda and Nadia). The testimony of his daughter Magda shows that her father‟s commitment to communism did not diminish the family‟s Jewish identity.

Yet, the „economic boom‟ was also characterized by significant demographic growth and a particularly worrisome increase in inequality in Egyptian society. Although the local middle class was expanding, the majority belonging to the lower social strata remained behind. Millions of peasants and residents of the densely populated urban quarters hardly benefited from their country‟s rapid economic development, from the infrastructure established in the urban centers, from the health services and the education system, which served the affluent social strata. The political arena was dominated by the Wafd party that led the national struggle. The Wafd championed the slogan “Religion [is] for God, and the Homeland [is] for All” and offered an inclusive framework that included Muslims, but also quite a few

4 Nancy Reynolds, A city consumed: Urban commerce, the Cairo fire, and the politics of decolonization in Egypt (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2012), 47-69.

Copts, Jews and Greeks. The British occupation seemed to end with the Egyptian declaration of independence (1922), the establishment of a parliamentary monarchy and the enactment of a constitution granting universal rights to citizens. The positions of the leading parties, especially the Waft, on economic and social issues were much less impressive. The alienation from the upper classes increased popular support for movements and parties seeking to overthrow the unequal socio-economic order. The Muslim Brothers movement and the „Young Egypt‟ party, who won wide public support, advocated hostile attitudes towards groups and social sectors that were not identified with the national struggle. The tension and alienation between “Egyptians” and “foreigners” intensified. During World War II there was also an expansion in the activities of several communist organizations, in which the high proportion of Jewish members stood out, in particular in the ranks of the leading positions.5 As mentioned, Shehata joined these activities while he was a law student.

* * *

Zionism

The attitude of the Jewish community‟s members and leaders toward Zionism underwent several stages. Until the early 1940s the majority of the Jewish community in Egypt was not Zionist. This tendency changed with the dramatic developments of World War II, and a growing number of the Jewish community in Egypt identified now with the idea of establishing a Jewish state in Palestine. However, there were also strong voices of those who opposed Zionism, and of many others who feared that its activity would harm the status of their community. The local Jewish press reflected

5 Communist activity in Egypt began in the early 1920s. Ideological controversies and organizational difficulties let to the fragmentation of the movement into various rival groups; their activities were hardly noticeable. With the beginning of World War II came a revival of communist activities which intensified during the following two decades. The Democratic Movement for National Liberation headed by Henri Curiel was the leading communist organization in the country. Selma Botman, The Rise of Egyptian Communism: 1939-1970 (New York: Syracuse University Press, 1988); Rami Ginat, A History of Egyptian Communism: Jews and Their Compatriots in Quest of Revolution (Boulder Co.: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2011); Rifʻat al-Saʻīd, Tārīkh al-ḥarakah al-shuyūʻīyah al-Miṣrīyah: al- waḥdah, al-inqisām, al-ḥall, 1957-1965 (Cairo: Sharikat al-Amal, 1986); idem, Tārīkh al-ḥarakah al- shuyūʻīyah al-Miṣrīyah, 1900-1940 (Cairo: Sharikat al-Amal, 1987).

the views of both, the supporters and the opponents of Zionism.6 It should be mentioned that activities of Zionist organizations were permitted in Egypt at the time. Zionist leaders and emissaries frequently visited Egypt. The record of Zionist youth movements („HaShomer HaTza'ir‟ and „Bnei Akiva‟) that gained sympathy among the younger generation, were particularly impressive in this respect. These activities occurred while there was growing hostility among the general Egyptian public toward Zionist activity in light of the escalating conflict between Zionists and the Palestinians in 1936-1939.

The adoption of the Partition Plan by the UN General Assembly turned the tables.7 Severe hostilities between the opposing sides were the opening chord of the first Arab–Israeli war. The Arab defeat in battle and hundreds of thousands of Palestinians becoming refugees constituted a traumatic historical event for Arab societies, including also the Jewish communities in Arab countries. Demonstrations against Zionism swept the streets of the cities. Jewish institutions and businesses became the target of angry crowds. Beinin described the repeated attacks on Jews and their property during the 1948 War. Bombs planted by members of the Muslim Brothers went off in the „Jewish Quarter‟ and at Cicurel &Oreco, Adès and Gattegno department stores in downtown Cairo, killing at least 31 Jews, injuring over one hundred and causing fear in the heart of many more.8 The difference between Jews and Zionists became increasingly blurred in the Egyptian public discourse. Nationalist orators described Egyptian Jews as a fifth column. Hundreds of Jews were thrown into internment camps. It was under these circumstances that the first wave of Jewish emigrants left Egypt.

6 A clear pro-Zionist stance is visible in the newspaper Israël (1920-1939). See Hagar Hillel, Israël in Cairo: A Zionist Newspaper in Nationalist Egypt, 1920-1939 (Tel Aviv: Am Oved Publishers, 2004) [in Hebrew]. 7 Curiel's DMNL movement supported the UN Partition Plan. Their position was in part a function of the Soviet vote in favor of the Plan; but the Plan met also with opposition within the communist camp in Egypt. For a detailed discussion on attitudes of Egyptian leftist parties and the UNGA decision on the partition in Palestine, see: Yossi Amitai, Mitzrayim ve-yisrael – mabat me-semul, 1948-1978 (Haifa: Haifa University Press, 1999), pp. 97-131. 8 Joel Beinin, The Dispersion of Egyptian Jewry: Culture, Politics, and the Formation of a Modern Diaspora (Berkeley: University of California, 1998), pp. 68-69.

Egypt‟s first military coup took place against the backdrop of political and economic crisis, and severe public outrage over the leadership. The “Free Officers” overthrew the monarchical regime (23 July 1952), and their policies introduced changes in many areas. The process of decolonization that began with the Anglo- Egyptian Evacuation Agreement (October 1954) and the nationalization of the Suez Canal (July 1956) gained momentum and subsequently many private assets were nationalized, in particular those owned by foreigners and minorities. The attitude of the state and society soon turned against foreign nationals, and especially against the Jewish minority. The nationalization policy and later the adoption of 'Arab socialism' dealt a fatal blow to the activities of the private sector. Soon tens of thousands of Jews, Italians and Greeks were leaving Egypt. Jews were allowed to leave under the condition that they give up their Egyptian citizenship, while knowing that they will not be allowed to return. The majority immigrated to Western European countries and North America, and some went to Israel.

* * *

“I’m an Egyptian” and “I’m staying put”

In his book, A Jew in Cairo [yahudi fi al-Qahira], in his prolonged political activities, and in his many interviews, Shehata Haroun offered a unique perspective on the national and cultural identity of Egyptian Jews, their attitude to Zionism, the State of Israel, and the possibility of achieving peace in the Middle East. His writings and the political activities in which he participated provide a critical perspective regarding the historical, political, economic and social changes in Egypt since the late 1940s. These changes were influenced by the dramatic processes that occurred in the Middle East in general and in Egypt in particular, notably: the establishment of the State of Israel and the escalation of the Arab–Israeli conflict; the establishment of the revolutionary regime in Egypt, led by Gamal „Abd al-Nasser, and the struggle it waged against imperialist and reactionary forces.

A Jew in Cairo is meant to shed light on Shehata‟s worldview. He dedicated the book to his parents (“who gave me life”), to Henri Curiel (“who guided me on how to interpret it”), and to his “patient [and] courageous” wife Marcelle. The numerous linguistic errors and typing mistakes indicate that the book was hastily produced. Shehata suffered from Alzheimer‟s disease during the last year of his life,

which might be the reason why his daughters sought to publish the manuscript quickly. Shehata himself chose the texts included in the volume, wrote the dedication, and decided on the title, “A Jew in Cairo.” The book has 119 pages in Arabic; and was never translated to any other language. The reflections offer by Shehata in his modest essays open a window into the world of those Jews who saw themselves as integral part of the history and the social and cultural fabric of the nations where they had lived for generations. Shehata used to stress first and foremost his identity as an Egyptian, and only in second place as a Jew and a political activist. In an interview with the popular weekly Ruz al-Yusuf, he stated: “I am a Jew – yes; a leftist – yes, but the most important characteristic [al-sifa] is me being an Egyptian, and to the best of my knowledge, the possibility of me being an Egyptian is not conditioned on me changing my religion or my political conviction.”9

Shehata's opposition to stripping him of his religion was accompanied his demand that Egyptian society and especially the political and security establishment accept their Jewish compatriots as an integral part of the local historical, cultural and national fabric. He did not limit his struggle to the dimension of his being a „Jew‟ or issues involving his religious origins, but saw it as a struggle of the entire Egyptian society over its identity and its political and national path. This finds expression in his assertion: “Personally, I followed my conviction. I participated, and still participate with the nation to whom I belong, the Egyptian nation, in the struggle for liberation.”10 Several times he was asked why he does not leave Egypt like so many Jews did. He used to reply: “because I refuse to oust myself. […] Like any other citizen a Jew has to be involved in the problems of the homeland to which he belongs. This is his responsibility, and not Zionism.”11 On another occasion he stated: “I will not leave Egypt even if my head will be cut off, since this is my country, and it is my right and my duty [to stay]; I am a lawyer who does not compromise his rights nor shun his duty. And when I was arrested, I encountered in prison dozens of citizens of all faiths and beliefs, and I was not treated differently from them.”12 His refusal to leave Egypt even in the difficult situation of his daughter‟s illness was an expression

9 Ruz al-Yusuf, 2 March 1975. See also: A Jew in Cairo, p. 39 10 A Jew in Cairo, p. 73. 11 A Jew in Cairo, p. 41. 12 A Jew in Cairo, pp. 46-47.

of Shehata‟s exceptional personality. His eldest daughter, Mona, fell ill with leukemia, and her doctors recommended an expensive treatment abroad. The authorities granted the travel permit under the condition that the family members would not return to Egypt. Shehata refused to accept that condition, and the daughter died shortly afterwards. Shehata's stubborn struggle to stay in Egypt corresponds to the struggle of Palestinian refugees to return to their country and to the devotion of those who remained under Israeli control to hold on to their historic homeland. A powerful expression of this theme can be found in the words “I stayed in Haifa” engraved in the tombstone of Emile Habibi, the distinguished Palestinian writer and a leading figure in the Communist Party in Israel.13

In Shehata‟s view, the class struggle was and still is the driving force of historical processes, and he suggested examining the struggle for peace and equality in this context. The Western powers‟ involvement in the Middle East was shaped by the context of the struggle for control over the region‟s resources. In this regard he used to say that “the problem of the Middle East has a strong smell of oil.”14 The policy of these old and new powers toward the Middle East and the conflict had, and still has, two salient features: maintaining the economic and security interests of the capitalist West. In other words, Western control over the oil resources in the Middle East and a policy of divide et impera. In light of this historical reality, the peoples of the region have to conduct a “joint struggle against the common enemy: American colonialism and its local servants; Zionism and Arab reactionary [forces].”15 Success in the struggle for liberation from imperialism will lead to civil equality and just peace between the region‟s nations.

Shehata's attitude toward the Zionist movement and the Arab–Israeli conflict derived from his overall worldview as a Marxist: “Zionism in all its currents came into existence in Europe and was exported to the Middle East through imperialism; and it is based on a petit-bourgeois stratum that exploits religion and descent for waging its struggle. The struggle against Zionism is an integral part of the class

13 Some theoretical aspects of the theme of 'staying-put' was convincingly addressed in: Samdar Lavie, “Staying Put: Crossing the Israel–Palestine Border with Gloria Anzaldứa,” Anthropology and Humanism, Vol. 36, No. 1 (2011), pp. 101–121. 14 A Jew in Cairo, p. 69. 15 A Jew in Cairo, p. 69.

struggle which is the force “driving history.”16 In an interview with the Kuwaiti newspaper al-Watan (6 February 1985), Shehata was asked whether the Arab–Israeli conflict was religious or national in nature. In his answer, he argued that the developments in the Middle East are influenced by “the world-wide struggle between Socialism and global imperialism.” The conflicts between nations in the region and within the societies themselves are essentially „class struggle‟ [sira' tabaqi]. On the regional level there is a struggle between imperialism and the liberation movements, and on the local level a struggle between the classes within each society. According to Shehata, the claim that the conflict is religious or ethnic in origin is a cover employed by imperialism to conceal the truth about the roots of the conflict. The media are dominated by the forces of imperialism and multinational corporations; they create the false consciousness even among the exploited and common people that the conflict is only religious or ethnic in nature.17 Shehata found conclusive evidence in the Suez War that Israel is part of the imperialist camp. The „Tripartite Aggression,‟ as the Suez War was dubbed in Egypt, was designed to restore the colonial order by a British and French takeover of the Suez Canal, to overthrow the revolutionary government headed by „Abd al-Nasser, and to allow for an Israeli takeover of the Sinai.18

In his view, Zionism was and still is a movement based a “racist, expansionist, and aggressive theory [naẓariya],” which is an integral part of colonialism, and which was able to establish a colonial project in Palestine.19 Israel presents itself to the world, and especially to the Jews, as a Jewish entity, whereas in fact it is a colonial project that has nothing to do with Judaism.20 When he was ask whether it is not strange that he as a Jew opposes Zionism, Shehata replied that “it is not stranger than a Muslim opposing the Muslim Brothers.” With regard to the negative attitudes toward Jews prevalent in Egypt he used to say that they are not an expression of anti- Semitism but “rather a response to Israeli aggression. In Europe there was hostility toward the Jews because they were Jews, whereas in Egypt the image of the Jew

16 A Jew in Cairo, pp. 71, 89. 17 A Jew in Cairo, p. 70. 18 A Jew in Cairo, p. 99. 19 A Jew in Cairo, p. 65. 20 A Jew in Cairo, pp. 42-43.

changed when Zionism appeared.”21 In his arrests based on him being Jewish and in the degrading treatment which members of his family at times encountered, Shehata saw a bearable price which allowed him to stick to his decision to stay in Egypt and to fight his fundamental struggles from within.

* * *

Shehata often related to the question of the responsibility for the depletion of the Jewish communities in the Middle East and North Africa [Mizrahim]. His main, and original, argument was that the responsibility for this tragedy lies with the forces of political and economic colonialism, the Zionist propaganda, and the policies adopted by Arab governments toward their Jewish citizens. Whereas in the Arab political discourse similar arguments prevailed regarding the responsibility of the colonial powers for the theft of Palestine, Shehata‟s criticism emphasized the significant part played by the Arab leadership. In other words, his hostility toward Zionism did not diminish his original and harsh criticism that stressed the responsibility of the Arab leadership for the displacement of hundreds of thousands of Jews from their homelands, and for the discrimination against tens of thousands of Jews who remained in Arab countries.

These claims found elaborate expression in a letter that Shehata Haroun sent to President Gamal ‛Abd al-Nasser (28 February 1967). A few days earlier, the charismatic champion of Arabism had given a speech on the occasion of „Unity Day‟ [‘eid al-wahda], marking Egypt‟s union with Syria, in which he called for the unification of the Arab revolutionary forces. This call made Shehata send his extraordinary letter to the President of the Republic. This unique document presents Shehata‟s position on the question of the responsibility for the unbearable situation of thousands of Jews who chose to remain in Egypt after the massive emigration waves following the wars of 1948 and 1956. He presented his position in the general context of “the ongoing battle between colonialism, the reactionary [forces] and Israeli racism on the one side, and the revolutionary forces on the other.” In this context, he asserts that “there is no doubt that the progressive ones among the Jews have a positive role and place in the ranks of the revolutionary force. […] I believe that in these circumstances they have to be part of the revolutionary forces so that they may help

21 A Jew in Cairo, pp. 39-40.

mobilizing the Jewish community in the battle for liberation, democracy and socialism.” Yet, since 1948, Arab governments have taken harsh steps against their Jewish citizens. To leave no room for doubt, Shehata asserted that the attitude toward Jewish citizens has not improved with the establishment of the revolutionary regimes, including the one led by ‛Abd al-Nasser. In Shehata‟s view, such treatment of Jews was “a certain kind of racism that stood in sharp contrast to the principles of socialism” that these progressive governments adopted. There was no justification for such treatment in the first place “and now with the [adoption of] socialism the justification did not merely become more difficult but was rendered impossible.”

In his letter Shehata presents striking examples of the state‟s discrimination against its Jewish citizens: preventing their mandatory military service recruitment and their employment in government institutions; making their travel abroad dependent on renouncing their Egyptian citizenship, marking their identities as 'Jews' in official documents and placing them on „blacklists.‟ This was a stereotyping approach that denied the existence of „revolutionary‟ Jews and their unexploited potential to mobilize support for the forces of the revolution. Moreover, a significant number of Mizrahim emigrated to Israel and “provided 60-65 percent of its workforce.” Shehata asked Egypt‟s popular president “to nullify immediately the measures and overt and covert guidelines relating to Jews” and to use his influence to bring about similar change also in other Arab countries. At the end of the letter, he wrote: “This is the position in which I believe,” and signed “Citizen Shehata Haroun.” Three months later the Six-Day War broke out and following Egypt‟s defeat another blow was struck against the local Jewish community. During the waiting period before the war the Egyptian Lawyers Association made an appeal to its members to contribute to the war mobilization. Shehata, who was a member of the Association, offered to volunteer for any task given to him, but he was turned down. A few days later he was thrown into detention along with hundreds of other Jews.

* * *

Against the background of the signing of the Camp David Accords (1978) Shehata responded to Issam Sartawi‟s request and prepared a special report for the PLO, titled

“The State of the Jews in Egypt.”22 The document describes plainly the harsh treatment that the government authorities and the security apparatus meted out to Jews in Egypt from 1948 to 1978. At the outset, Shehata stated that “the Egyptian people is free from any guilt for all that its Jewish members suffered,” while holding the government authorities responsible for their severe condition. The community was shrinking and now it numbers “400-500, at most.”23 The difficulties already started with World War II and found expression in the authorities‟ refusal to provide Jews born in Egypt with documentation confirming their citizenship, without which they had often difficulties finding work. The nationalist atmosphere sometimes caused harm to Jews; for example the annual demonstrations against the Balfour Declaration, during which Jewish businesses were damaged and sometimes even synagogues in the Jewish quarter attacked. In addition, the media widely disseminated the image that “every Jew is a Zionist.” In the wake of the 1948 War many members of the Jewish community were arrested and their bank accounts were placed under supervision, “without distinction between Zionists and non-Zionists.”24 By military order (4/1948) employers were allowed to fire Jews. The government permitted many Jews to leave the country provided they agreed not to return, to give up their Egyptian passports and to sign a document confirming that they renounced their Egyptian citizenship. A second wave of Jewish emigration from Egypt occurred in the wake of the intensification of measures taken against them during the Suez crisis and the 1956 War. Many families lost their private property, and many Jews were placed on “blacklists” under Directive No. 183 of 1964. A department dealing with matters of “the Jews” was established in the Ministry of the Interior. When war broke out on 5 June, some 350 Jews were incarcerated in the infamous Abu Za„abal prison, where they were held in harsh conditions, humiliated, beaten and even tortured. The pressure

22 For a complete version of Shehat's report, see: A Jew in Cairo, p. 51. Sartawi served as special political envoy of PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat. 23 A Jew in Cairo, p. 51. In an interview with the Kuwaiti newspaper al-Qabas (22 October 1980) Shehata emphasized: “The Egyptian people itself was deprived of rights, and therefore could not protect the rights of minorities, including the Jewish minority.” I decided to stay in Egypt in order to participate in the struggle of the Egyptian people for its rights including also the rights of the minorities. Ibid., p. 66. 24 A Jew in Cairo, p. 52.

on the families grew and actually forced many of them to emigrate. Many restrictions were imposed on the few who chose to stay.

The report on “The State of the Jews in Egypt” included the author‟s harsh criticism of the Camp David Accords. The conditions on which the parties agreed were presented as an obstacle to achieving just and sustainable peace, and as a capitulation to the dictate designed to serve the interests of the U.S. and not those of the peoples of the region. “The USA is not interested in a just peace, but in [achieving] partial calm that will allow it to exploit the resources of the Arab world, primarily oil.” Whereas the Egyptian regime presented the agreements with Israel as a gateway to overall peace and stability in the Middle East, Shehata shared the prevalent view of the Egyptian opposition that the peace treaty does not promote democracy in Egypt and that the harsh conditions included in the agreement tie the hands of the government in face of Israeli aggression against Arab nations, in particular the Palestinians. The agreement also created a tremendous dependency on American aid that may even entail the danger of “Egypt [becoming] a kind of American colony just like Israel.”25 Yet, “a just peace can be achieved only if the Arab and the Israeli publics fight together against American colonialism in order to achieve political and social democracy in all countries including Palestine.”26 It is noteworthy that despite his opposition to a normalization in the relations with Israel, Shehata was in favor of “reaching out to democratic, progressive Israelis, peace advocates who proclaim clearly and unconditionally that they recognize the right of the Palestinians to self-determination, including the establishment of an independent Palestinian state and an immediate withdrawal from all occupied territories.”27

* * *

25 Al-Watan, 6 February 1985. 26 A Jew in Cairo, pp. 63-64. 27 A Jew in Cairo, p. 94. Shehata found a ray of hope in the Israeli left “that fought for a just peace under difficult internal conditions. The Arab left should assist them.” Ibid., p. 65. Like other Egyptian intellectuals also Shehata used to follow the political discourse in Israel. In the wake of the law prohibiting Israelis from having contact with PLO members, Shehata strongly criticized the Israeli government‟s attempt to suppress the progressive forces in Israeli society. al-Ahram, 5 December 1985.

The dozens of Jews living in Egypt today are a remnant of the community that was thriving there for over two thousand years. This tiny community has been headed by Magda Haroun in the last year. Her assumption of office received wide media coverage in Egypt and abroad. In interviews with her it is discernible that her father‟s, Shehata Haroun‟s positions echo clearly in her statements, in particular the determination of the local Jewish community to be an integral part of Egyptian society and culture.

In addition, out of concern for the needs of the last remaining Jews, mostly elderly, Magda is required to act in order to preserve the sites and property of the community. These include a dozen synagogues, several public buildings (mostly schools) and cemeteries.28 In light of the very small number of Jews in Egypt, there is an ever more heated debate in recent years about the responsibility for the future of the unique synagogues, the community archives, and the collections of countless books and Judaica. This controversy brings us back to the critical issue that Shehata Haroun addressed frequently: Should the Jews/their community property remain in Egypt or is it better to leave/take it abroad? The position of the Haroun family was and still is firm: As the Jews should have remained in their country, so should also their community assets. Egyptian society knew to include and preserve the heritage of the peoples and cultures that lived in the Nile Valley before hundreds and thousands of years; and thus it has the duty to preserve the heritage of the Jewish community that existed there throughout history. The local Jews were an integral part of Egypt‟s culture and history, and that is how their sites and heritage should be treated. In contrast to those who demand to remove the property, Shehata Haroun and his daughters suggest to see the Jewish sites as a part of the local heritage and history. They call on the Egyptian state to bring these monuments under its auspices. This call has unfortunately received so far only a partial response. State funding for the Jewish community has sharply declined in the recent decade. A ray of hope may nevertheless be found in the restoration of synagogues in Cairo (Ben Ezra, Maimonides and Shaar HaShamaim) and in Alexandria (Eliyahu HaNavi). The opening of these historic sites to visitors is a positive model for the preservation of the Jewish past, at a time when there is almost no Jewish life in the land of the Nile.

28 For a detailed account, see: Yoram Meital, Attarim yehudim be-mitzraim [Jewish Sites in Egypt] (Jerusalem: Ben Zvi Institute for the study of Jewish communities in the East, 1995) [In Hebrew].

The principled position of Shehata Haroun and his daughters in relation to their staying put and the need for the Jewish community property to be kept and preserved in Egypt, constitutes an overall challenge to national narratives, which have been nurtured in the academic and public discourse for decades. In fact, the main importance of A Jew in Cairo lies in its challenge to the national narratives, the Zionist and the Arab, with regard to the Mizrahi Jews. Shehata‟s positions pose a challenge to major themes in the dominant narrative in Israeli-Zionist historiography, in particular to the themes of “the negation of Diaspora” [shelilat ha'galut] and of the focus on the immigration [‘aliya] to Israel as rescue and redemption. This narrative is characterized by the conception of history as a linear process – the diaspora is perceived as an intermediate stage on the past–future axis. „Exile‟ is a transient state (the transience of diaspora life). In the chronology of „exiles,‟ the diaspora communities have no significant history, and communities such as those in Egypt are descripted as existing in ghettos cut off from the Arab society in historical, cultural and of course national terms.

* * *

Today when only a handful of Jews remains Egypt, some might say that such attitudes as Shehata‟s (I'm an Egyptian, and therefore I stay in my homeland) suffered total defeat. On the other hand, one could argue the opposite, seeing the Haroun family‟s staying-put as an achievement in principle. The latter view can draw support from the fact that there is an increasing number of voices in Egyptian society in recent years seeking to „bring back‟ Jews into the local history, and even regretting their departure. Whereas in Israel the debate on the issue focused on the cultural and historical identity of Mizrahi Jews and on their status in Israeli society, the Arab discourse focused on the circumstances and the responsibility for their departure from Arab countries. Even if it does not amount to comprehensive historical revisionism, this trend undoubtedly poses a challenge to the simplistic and hostile arguments still common in the dominant narratives in Arab and Muslim societies. Since the early 1990s studies has been published presenting factual accounts of the participation and contribution of Jews to Arab economy, culture and politics.29 That current finds also

29 In this context it is worthwhile mentioning the studies of Siham Nasser on the Jewish press in Egypt, and of Awatef „Abd al-Rahman who focused on the Zionist press in Egypt. The study by Suleiman al-

expression in the translation to Arabic of books presenting the findings of research on Jewish communities in Arab countries. A year after the publication of Shehata‟s book, Jacques Hassoun‟s book, Histoire des Juifs du Nil, was translated from French to Arabic and published by the leading publishing house, Dar al-Shuruq. The translation was made by Joseph Darwish, an Egyptian Karaite Jew. Darwish held views similar to Haroun‟s; and like him he participated in political struggles within various leftist frameworks. In 2007 Dar al-Shuruq published also the translation to Arabic of the historian Joel Beinin‟s important study, The Dispersion of Egyptian Jewry. A few years earlier (1996), the translation to Arabic of my Hebrew book, titled Jewish Sites in Egypt, was published in Cairo by Dar al-Fiqr al-Hadith. Both books were reviewed in the local press. In this context one should also mention the discussion that took place around the screening of the documentary film Jews of Egypt, and the intervention of the security apparatus to prevent its screening. In an unprecedented manner the film presents the uprooting of Jews from Egypt as a historic mistake. The film‟s director, Amir Ramsis, stressed in interviews that the film seeks to challenge the stereotypes prevailing in Egyptian society with regard to local Jews.

* * *

Hakim presented Jews as an integral part of society and described positively their participation in the Egyptian national movement. Mohamed Abu al-Ghar, Yahud Misr: min al-izdihar ila al-shatat (2004).