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/termsand-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
Downloaded by [University of Haifa Library] at 08:26 26 July 2013
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.
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 interviewed 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
Downloaded by [University of Haifa Library] at 08:26 26 July 2013
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.
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 foreignborn (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
Downloaded by [University of Haifa Library] at 08:26 26 July 2013
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, mid1980s, 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 usually 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,
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).
Downloaded by [University of Haifa Library] at 08:26 26 July 2013
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 institutionalization, 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
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
Downloaded by [University of Haifa Library] at 08:26 26 July 2013
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 interpretations 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
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)
Downloaded by [University of Haifa Library] at 08:26 26 July 2013
First generation
Residence before migration
Johannesburg
Cape Town
Durban
Port Elizabeth
East London
Pretoria
Other
Years since migration
Age at migration
18–24
25–34
35–44
45–54
55–64
Marital status before migrating
Married or living with a partner
Divorced, separated, or widowed
Single (never married and not living with a
partner)
% had children before aliyah
Number of children
Came to Israel
Alone
With family
With friends
With an organized group
Family’s income in South Africa (%)
Far and slightly below average
About average
Slightly and much above average
% belonging to the labor force in South
Africa
Occupational status in South Africa (for
those in the labor force)
% professional, technical, and managerial
N
60.6
25.5
3.6
3.1
0.7
2.8
3.6
18.9 (11.7)
27.6 (8.3)
42.3
41.4
11.7
2.8
1.8
39.3
2.5
58.3
28.8
2.8 (1.1)
44.0
38.1
4.0
13.9
8.0
37.2
54.8
66.4
63.5
607
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
265
Moving to the Homeland
TABLE 2 Push and Pull Factors According to Time of Arrival in Israel (% to a Great/Very
Great Extent)
Downloaded by [University of Haifa Library] at 08:26 26 July 2013
All
Dissatisfaction with
political upheavals
Personal safety concerns
Opposition to apartheid
government
Concern for the future
under a black
government
Wishes of other family
members
Affirmative action in
South Africa
Economic situation in
South Africa
Dwindling of the South
Africa Jewish
community
Anti-Semitism in South
Africa
Zionism
Children grow up in a
Jewish environment
Living among Jews
Religious beliefs
Joining relatives and
friends who made
aliyah
Wishing to find a
partner/spouse in
Israel
Israel’s educational
system
Israel’s health system
N
1961−1979
1980−1989
1990−1999
2000−2008
Reasons for leaving South Africa
35.5
48.8
43.8
21.5
31.6
27.8
27.6
14.2
46.0
19.7
35.6
36.6
10.2
43.4
12.9
25.9
12.5
30.6
26.0
34.8
19.6
18.9
18.4
19.8
22.7
12.1
1.0
4.3
12.0
29.1
9.2
0.0
2.9
10.5
24.4
8.2
0.8
3.7
11.6
17.0
4.7
5.5
1.5
7.0
2.9
Reasons for coming to Israel
74.5
74.8
80.3
66.3
64.3
66.2
71.8
66.5
71.5
72.0
66.0
38.6
26.3
60.3
22.0
20.2
70.1
29.9
25.0
66.7
47.1
28.9
68.6
56.2
34.1
25.6
13.9
13.6
27.8
45.3
10.3
9.5
5.2
9.9
18.1
8.8
607
1.6
159
5.1
137
11.6
174
17.5
138
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?
Downloaded by [University of Haifa Library] at 08:26 26 July 2013
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,
I said . . . 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
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.
Downloaded by [University of Haifa Library] at 08:26 26 July 2013
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 legislation 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
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 . . . I hear it
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”:
Downloaded by [University of Haifa Library] at 08:26 26 July 2013
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
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).
Downloaded by [University of Haifa Library] at 08:26 26 July 2013
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
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:
Downloaded by [University of Haifa Library] at 08:26 26 July 2013
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
were the main values by which children were raised. Attendance at Jewish 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
Downloaded by [University of Haifa Library] at 08:26 26 July 2013
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
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
Downloaded by [University of Haifa Library] at 08:26 26 July 2013
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 Jewish 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.
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
273
Moving to the Homeland
TABLE 3 Social Networks and Sources of Help for Information
Downloaded by [University of Haifa Library] at 08:26 26 July 2013
Source of help
Friends (% relying on this
source)
% Reporting that help +
help a lot
Family (% relying on this
source)
% Reporting that help +
help a lot
Jewish agency (% relying
on this source)
% Reporting that help +
help a lot
Telfed (% relying on this
source)
% Reporting that help +
help a lot
Youth movements (%
relying on this source)
% Reporting that help +
help a lot
Internet (% relying on this
source)
% Reporting that help +
help a lot
N
All
1961−1979
1980−1989
1990−1999
2000−2008
26.4
23.6
22.6
25.3
34.3
56.3
66.7
58.1
63.7
40.4
32.6
26.0
35.0
35.6
35.8
57.1
63.7
58.4
56.4
51.0
61.1
44.9
59.1
61.5
81.8
61.3
58.9
68.4
57.5
63.0
61.0
63.8
60.0
65.5
58.4
60.3
55.1
62.6
61.1
61.5
33.4
41.7
39.4
29.9
17.5
70.0
81.2
76.0
61.6
45.9
9.4
0
0
4.0
36.5
35.8
0
0
28.6
36.7
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 frameworks 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
Downloaded by [University of Haifa Library] at 08:26 26 July 2013
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,
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.
Downloaded by [University of Haifa Library] at 08:26 26 July 2013
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
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
Downloaded by [University of Haifa Library] at 08:26 26 July 2013
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 Federation, 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?
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 decisionmaking process: The case of North American immigration to Israel. Immigrants
& Minorities, 25(3), 290–313.
Downloaded by [University of Haifa Library] at 08:26 26 July 2013
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 developments 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 Research, 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. Argentina, 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.
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.), Immigration 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.