论哈尔滨犹太社区的衰落及哈尔滨犹太人的流向

随着中东铁路的修筑、通车,首批为逃避反犹排犹浪潮和寻求自由发展的俄国犹太人来到哈尔滨。哈尔滨犹太社区存在了半个多世纪,中东铁路所有权、使用权和管理权的演变对哈尔滨犹太人产生了较大影响。自20世纪20年代中期以后,犹太社区的社会和经济生活遭到了一系列外部冲击,犹太人陆续离开哈尔滨,哈尔滨犹太社区由盛转衰。1962年哈尔滨犹太宗教公会的关闭,标志着哈尔滨犹太社区的历史结束。离开哈尔滨的犹太人或直接移居美国、澳大利亚、加拿大等欧美国家,或移居巴勒斯坦,或返回苏联,或先南迁上海、天津、青岛等地,而后再移居欧美国家。     

初访犹太自治州

2003年2月11-15日,黑龙江省社会科学院曲伟院长应邀率团访问了俄罗斯犹太自治州。总的印象是:犹太自治州和比罗比詹市领导非常重视与中国开展经贸合作。阿穆尔捷特海关效率低,比罗比詹市商品丰富,价格偏高,犹太宗教公会活动卓有成效,犹太自治州科学中心与中国合作的热情高,犹太人非常重视教育……考察访问非常顺利,实现了增进友谊、加强合作的目的。     

哈尔滨俄籍犹太人宗教公会的形成与发展

犹太民族是一个古老的民族,在中东地区过着颠沛流离的生活。公元前11世纪,他们建立了自己的王国———希伯莱王国。但是,这是一个多灾多难的民族,厄运几乎永远伴随着他们。犹太王国曾多次被其它国家所征服,大批的犹太人遭到残酷的杀戮,另外有一大批犹太人沦为奴隶。公元1—2世纪,犹太人的历史进入了大流散时代,犹太人开始移居国外,散居于世界各地。大约在公元12世纪,移居印度的一部分犹太人来到中国,在开封定居,从事商业活动。19世纪末犹太人开始进入哈尔滨。犹太人进入哈尔滨是与中东铁路的建设密不可分的。自沙皇俄国政府决定建设中东…     

不懈追求安息之——漫议哈尔滨犹太公墓迁址皇山的过程地

译序：哈尔滨犹太人多来自俄国，人数最多时达2．5万人，约占哈尔滨俄侨总数的10％。哈尔滨犹太公墓曾是东亚地区规模最大的犹太墓地和迄今中国境内唯一一座功能要件遗存完整的犹太墓地，以色列前总理埃胡德·奥尔默特的祖父、以中友好协会主席特迪·考夫曼先生的六位亲人和原远东地区兼哈尔滨犹太教会总拉比基谢廖夫等一批重要人物均葬于此。犹太墓地不仅为犹太人在哈尔滨存在期间的活动轨迹提供了实物证据和线索，也是哈尔滨乃至中国人善待而非排挤犹太人的重要历史见证。作为哈尔滨历史文化的一大特色遗产，它每年吸引着国内外众多人士前来祭扫或观光，已成为哈尔滨与外界多种交流活动的重要窗口和平台。本文作者丹·本一卡南先生现为黑龙江大学西语学院的外籍教授和知名学者，也是业经哈市相关部门注册的在哈常住之唯一一位以色列籍犹太人。近年来，他在教学之余，对哈尔滨犹太历史文化颇有研究。文中引用的一些档案资料和观点，有一定研究参考价值，不过文中的某些议论和看法显系有所偏激，属“典型的以色列风格”，但亦不失为本文看点之一。本文系罗斯柴尔德基金会（伦敦）资助项目的子课题阶段性成果之一，原文用英文写成（2010年，哈尔滨），现受作者委托将其翻译成中文并发表。     

不懈追求安息之地——漫议哈尔滨犹太公墓迁址皇山的过程

哈尔滨犹太人多来自俄国,人数最多时达2.5万人,约占哈尔滨俄侨总数的10%。哈尔滨犹太公墓曾是东亚地区规模最大的犹太墓地和迄今中国境内唯一一座功能要件遗存完整的犹太墓地,以色列前总理埃胡德.奥尔默特的祖父、以中友好协会主席特迪.考夫曼先生的六位亲人和原远东地区兼哈尔滨犹太教会总拉比基谢廖夫等一批重要人物均葬于此。犹太墓地不仅为犹太人在哈尔滨存在期间的活动轨迹提供了实物证据和线索,也是哈尔滨乃至中国人善待而非排挤犹太人的重要历史见证。作为哈尔滨历史文化的一大特色遗产,它每年吸引着国内外众多人士前来祭扫或观光,已成为哈尔滨与外界多种交流活动的重要窗口和平台。本文作者丹.本-卡南先生现为黑龙江大学西语学院的外籍教授和知名学者,也是业经哈市相关部门注册的在哈常住之唯一一位以色列籍犹太人。近年来,他在教学之余,对哈尔滨犹太历史文化颇有研究。文中引用的一些档案资料和观点,有一定研究参考价值,不过文中的某些议论和看法显系有所偏激,属"典型的以色列风格",但亦不失为本文看点之一。     

哈尔滨历史上的早期犹太社团

19世纪末至1918年,犹太社团在哈尔滨开始形成并初步发展,设立了严密的组织机构,开展丰富的宗教活动,在哈尔滨的社会、文化、政治、经济等诸多领域都留下了历史的足迹。     

苏俄国内战争时期犹太人对外迁徙述略

苏俄国内战争期间大批苏俄犹太人移居异国他乡，这不仅是由于反犹浪潮的肆虐，而且还有犹太复国主义运动兴起等诸多因素的影响。苏俄犹太人的迁移加快了犹太人流散世界各地的进程，加快了哈尔滨等新兴犹太聚居区的兴起，同时也成为第三次“阿利亚”运动的重要组成部分。     

从哈尔滨犹太社区看犹太教

犹太教可以被看作是上帝、《托拉》和犹太人三个基本部分相互交织在一起的组合体。神圣的上帝已经沉淀为犹太民族的“圣殿情结”永驻心中，不管他们流浪到何处，生活在哪一种文化氛围之中，他们都会随着生存境遇的不同而对其教义的核心《托拉》现实化，在文化的碰撞中寻求自己生存发展的空间。犹太教的这一本质在哈尔滨犹太社区中可见端倪。     

中国的犹太研究

中国的犹太研究经历了1949～1978年的沉寂期。改革开放后,犹太研究逐渐进入复苏、发展与高潮期。专事犹太研究的学术团体和机构渐多,关涉犹太议题的书籍和论文大量问世,高校中犹太历史、文化方面的教学日益活跃,参加国际学术活动和开展国际学术交流更为积极,这极大地推进了我国犹太研究的开展和深入。犹太研究的开展使国人对中东问题有了进一步了解,能在更深层次理解和把握中东冲突的实质,同时也促进了对犹太人在华散居历史的研究。     

美国犹太人对美中东政策的影响

美国犹太人支持以色列的深层次原因 ,源自对这个世界上唯一的犹太国家的认同感。因他们在美国社会及经济领域占有重要地位 ,由之组成的政治势力对美国中东政策具有重要影响 ,但也受到美国总体对外战略及犹太人社会自身发展状况等因素的制约。     

The United Nations Plan to Establish an Armed Jewish Force to Implement the Partition Plan (United Nations Resolution 181)

On 29 November 1947, the United Nations General Assembly voted to partition Palestine into two independent states, Jewish and Arab, with Jerusalem as a corpus separatum under international control. The General Assembly then established the United Nations Palestine Commission to implement partition. Amongst other things, the Commission was to establish “armed militias” under UN supervision to help realise the plan. The analysis examines various aspects of the sequence of events related to this idea, from its conception in the General Assembly to its death in February 1948. It demonstrates that under the militia clause, the United Nations intended to rely on the Jews’ main military organisation – the Haganah – to establish the Jewish state and shows how and why this plan went awry despite the converging interests of the Jews and the United Nations.     

Constructing interethnic conflict and cooperation: why some people harmed Jews and others helped them during the Holocaust in Romania

The authors draw on a natural experiment to demonstrate that states can reconstruct conflictual interethnic relationships into cooperative relationships in relatively short periods of time. The article examines differences in how the gentile population in each of two neighboring territories in Romania treated its Jewish population during the Holocaust. These territories had been part of tsarist Russia and subject to state-sponsored anti-Semitism until 1917. During the interwar period one territory became part of Romania, which continued anti-Semitic policies, and the other became part of the Soviet Union, which pursued an inclusive nationality policy, fighting against inherited anti-Semitism and working to integrate its Jews. Both territories were then reunited under Romanian administration during World War II, when Romania began to destroy its Jewish population. The authors demonstrate that, despite a uniform Romanian state presence during the Holocaust that encouraged gentiles to victimize Jews, the civilian population in the area that had been part of the Soviet Union was less likely to harm and more likely to aid Jews as compared with the region that had been part of Romania. Their evidence suggests that the state construction of interethnic relationships can become internalized by civilians and outlive the life of the state itself.     

Ethics,terrorism and counter‐terrorism

Traditionally, the Talmudic Orthodoxy always postulated the reestablishing of a Jewish state only by an act of God's grace at messianic times. The establishment of Israel by secular Jews thus caused real consternation among Orthodox sects. Ultra Orthodox sects did not even recognize Israel as a Jewish entity. However, the occupation of the West Bank, the site of the ancient Jewish kingdoms, in 1967 was seen by many Orthodox Jews as a sign of redemption and also an opportunity to take an active, even a leading, role in a “true Zionist” enterprise of fulfilling God's promise to Abraham that the whole land will belong to his offspring. The settling of the West Bank was congruent with the government's political aims. This led the government to provide deep financial and massive military support to settlers, both the religious population that follows a radical nationalistic policy enveloped with messianic motifs, and other settlers, attracted by the substantial perks. The violent conduct of the militant religious sector among the settlers provides a radical threat to Israel's character, and even its existence. Above and beyond that provided by the military and economic burden of the West Bank settlements themselves.     

The Future Foretold: Lyndon Baines Johnson’s Congressional Support for Israel

Lyndon B. Johnson became a senator the year of Israel’s creation: 1948. Moral, political, and strategic considerations guided Johnson’s outspoken support for Israel from an early point in his political career. This analysis reveals that Johnson’s advocacy of Israel whilst a senator foreshadowed his policy as president of championing the Israeli-American military-strategic alliance. Beginning with his time in Congress, Johnson had many Jewish American friends supporting the establishment of a Jewish state and, due to the importance of Jewish-American backing of the Democratic Party, Johnson supported Israel for significant political reasons. From a moral and strategic perspective starting in the 1950s, Johnson believed that Israel served as a humanitarian refuge for Jews in the aftermath of the Holocaust and, as a liberal democracy, was well suited to oppose the expansion of Soviet influence and communism in the Cold War Middle East. For these reasons, Johnson supported the initiation of American aid to Israel in the early 1950s, which would presage decisions to arm Israel with the first American tanks and fighter jets as president. As a senator, Johnson staunchly opposed President Dwight Eisenhower’s threat to impose sanctions against Israel if it did not withdraw from Egyptian territories occupied in the 1956 Suez crisis. Johnson’s stance on Suez – that Israel deserved greater security guarantees prior to withdrawal – would starkly parallel his policy following the 1967 Arab-Israeli War.     

主体民族主义与国族构建的悖论——以色列民族政策思想之评析

以色列是一个以犹太、阿拉伯两大族类为主体的多民族国家。国家的犹太属性、内部殖民主义和分而治之是以色列处理与国内阿拉伯人民族关系的基本思想。以色列的民族政策造成阿拉伯人在社会生活的各个方面遭受挤压、歧视,成为经济落后、政治孤立的少数族类,与主流社会十分疏远。这一现实与以色列理应将全体国民纳入其民族国家构建范畴,以塑造统一的政治文化共同体和国族认同的民族构建产生了直接的悖论,并且从根本上制约着国家的稳定、健康与和谐发展。     

Cause,effect, and consistency: A response to Kenneth Waltz

In The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy, we argued that the “special relationship” between the United States and Israel is due largely to the influence of a domestic interest group—comprised of Jews as well as non-Jews—and that this unusual situation is harmful to both the United States and Israel. Jerome Slater's thoughtful review endorses many of our central arguments, but it also highlights several points of disagreement. He argues that we overlooked important alternative sources, defined the lobby too broadly, and exaggerated its influence on Congress and especially the Executive Branch. Although Slater is even more critical of U.S. Middle East policy than we are, he argues that the special relationship is due to strong cultural and religious affinities and broad public support in American society, and not to the influence of the lobby. In fact, the alternative sources cited by Slater do not undermine our basic claims; a broad conception of the lobby makes more sense than his narrower definition; and there is little disagreement between us about the lobby's influence on Capitol Hill or in the White House. Most importantly, public opinion in the United States does not explain why the United States gives Israel such extensive and nearly unconditional backing. Although most Americans have a favorable image of Israel, surveys show that they also favor a more even-handed Middle East policy and a more normal relationship with Israel. Thus, the special relationship is due primarily to the lobby's influence, and not to the American people's enduring identification with the Jewish state.     

The Interactions and Experiences of Armenians and Jews in the Ottoman Empire and Republic of Turkey from the Young Turk Revolution of 1908 to the Present

This article will examine the interactions of Armenians and Jews as well as shared and dissimilar experiences in the Ottoman Empire and the Republic of Turkey from the early 20th century to the present to compare how affinities and differences in political outlook have affected their relationship. It has been stated at times in academia, by politicians, and members of the press that the Armenian and Jewish Diasporas have had similar historical experiences mostly through hardships. Despite that being the case, this article will show that throughout their experiences as non-Muslim minorities in the Ottoman Empire and the Republic of Turkey Armenians and Jews have never developed any coordinated collaboration; instead, they have pursued perceived respective ethnic interests, largely influenced by historical memory and geopolitics. At the same time, the Young Turks and later the Turkish state engaged in policies, especially toward non-Muslim minorities, that have been described as contradictory, ambivalent, or both in nature, influenced by changing perceptions of citizenship and identity as well as geopolitics.     

历史视角下日本学界对东亚共同体的审视

日本学界通过不同的历史视角审视日本与东亚共同体的关系,并设定日本在东亚区域合作中的角色。积极看待古代东亚历史的日本学者,主张吸取近代日本殖民主义和帝国主义教训,日本应积极投身东亚共同体建设。强调东亚历史多样性和差异性的日本学者,主张日本应该借用西方的价值观念和东亚区域外的政治力量,进行东亚区域合作。而延续近代日本"脱亚入欧"历史视角的日本学者,坚决反对日本投身东亚共同体建设。     

民国时期哈尔滨俄侨学术活动的文化遗产

民国时期,哈尔滨的俄侨学者进行了活跃的学术活动,留下了宝贵的文化遗产,撰写出学术著作（含手稿）至少200部,创办刊载了6 000多篇学术文章（含报告）的学术期刊十余种。哈尔滨俄侨学术遗产流散到世界各地。国外主要分布在俄罗斯、美国、日本等国,其中俄罗斯最多。俄罗斯联邦国家档案馆学术图书馆、俄罗斯国家图书馆、俄罗斯科学院远东研究所图书馆和哈巴罗夫斯克边疆区档案馆,是俄罗斯哈尔滨俄侨学术遗产四大收藏地。国内主要分布在哈尔滨、长春、北京、上海等地。黑龙江省博物馆（前身为东省文物研究会博物馆）、吉林大学亚细亚文库、中国国家图书馆是中国三大收藏基地。国内外都十分重视哈尔滨俄侨学术遗产的保护,但只有在西方国家哈尔滨俄侨学术遗产得到有效利用。