The event held in Jerusalem on December 13, 2018, initiated by Nativ – the Liaison Bureau under the Prime Minister's Office, was organized to officially honor the contribution of those who fought for the repatriation of Jews from the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe to Israel. The gathering generated substantial public interest for two principal reasons. First, the very nature of its format represented a milestone, occurring for perhaps the first time in many years. Second, it once again brought to the forefront the question of the extent to which a nation established to resolve the "Jewish question" through a Zionist model—specifically, by receiving and integrating Diaspora Jews—should reserve a place in its collective memory for the contributions of individual participants in this process.

The Struggle for Recognition

The group referred to as the "fighters for the repatriation (Aliyah) of Soviet Jews" comprised two distinct categories of activists. On one hand, it included participants in the Jewish underground movement in the Soviet Union and Eastern European countries, which was anchored by two key groups. The first was the "Prisoners of Zion"—individuals subjected to state repression, including serving extensive prison and labor camp sentences for their involvement in Zionist activities. The second group consisted of the "refuseniks"—Jews who, upon being denied exit visas to Israel by the authorities, engaged in informal political, human rights, and Jewish cultural activities. On the other hand, the movement included Jews and non-Jews, Israelis and foreigners alike, who worked tirelessly on the other side of the Iron Curtain to secure the right of free emigration to Israel for Eastern European Jews.

With minor exceptions, Aliyah from Eastern Europe has virtually never ceased since the establishment of the State of Israel. Although post-Stalinist Soviet leaders officially recognized the possibility of Jewish emigration to Israel, they did so with extreme reluctance, attempting by all available means to limit the flow to a small group of older individuals. Consequently, for the majority of Jews in the USSR and Eastern Europe, mass emigration remained unattainable until the early 1970s. Exceptions were made in select Soviet bloc countries where Israel conducted direct negotiations with local leadership. For instance, through direct contacts with the leadership of the Socialist Republic of Romania, Israel secured relatively unhindered emigration for local Jews. During the second half of the 1950s, a segment of the Jewish population in Poland also obtained the right to leave for Israel—an opportunity utilized by several thousand Soviet Jews who managed to exit the USSR to the Polish People's Republic under a bilateral agreement on the repatriation of Polish citizens. However, the large-scale departure of Soviet Jews only began in the late 1960s, coinciding with the rise of Jewish national consciousness within the Soviet Union.

The primary catalyst for this awakening was undoubtedly the Six-Day War of 1967, which became a source of immense pride for Soviet Jewry. Nevertheless, Jewish national sentiment had been developing since the 1940s, when young Jews who came of age during World War II and the Stalinist repressions began to re-evaluate their Soviet experience through a Jewish lens. For instance, they began pointing out the official silencing of the Holocaust and the systematic mass destruction of the Jewish population as a defining event of World War II.

The establishment of the independent State of Israel was another major factor in the national awakening of Soviet Jews. There is an unverified urban legend that Ekaterina (Golda) Gorbman, the wife of Marshal Kliment Voroshilov, told her daughter-in-law: "Now we Jews have our own homeland too." While that remains undocumented, there is substantial, well-documented evidence of a sharp increase in pro-Israel sentiment in the collective consciousness of USSR Jews. This shift played a critical role in the "Zionisation" of significant segments of the Jewish national movement two decades later.

Understandably, myths are often born where facts end. For example, it was long asserted that the State of Israel itself remained distant from the open struggle for Aliyah from the USSR, wishing not to provoke the Soviet authorities and risk shutting down the thin stream of Jewish emigration that persisted despite postwar difficulties. Recently, the prominent Israeli historian Dr. Uri Milstein published an article in the Maariv newspaper, identifying the 1968–1969 Israeli student protests for the release of Soviet Jews as the cornerstone of the struggle. According to Milstein, the Israeli chapter of the "Let My People Go" movement began precisely with these student demonstrations, organized in part by Yona Yahav, who recently completed his tenure as Mayor of Haifa. Over time, this movement became a prominent fixture on the agenda of Golda Meir's government.

Student organizations, trade unions, and other civil society institutions compelled the Israeli government to engage in a coordinated series of actions. Combined with the solidarity movement for Soviet Jews in Western countries, Western diplomacy, and the Zionist movement within the USSR, these efforts ultimately breached the Iron Curtain. Milstein was not alone in this view. In 2010, another prominent Israeli expert, Dr. Tom Segev, made similar assertions in a Haaretz article. Relying on information from Yona Yahav, Segev detailed the role of Israeli student organizations in the struggle for Soviet Jewry.

It is clear that Milstein, Segev, and their proponents were incorrect in their conclusions, having limited their research to interviews with direct participants who were only familiar with the student protests and lacked a broader perspective. This is precisely the point raised by their opponents. Among them is Dr. Yosef Govrin, a former high-ranking Israeli diplomat who served in the Soviet Union and as an ambassador to Eastern European countries. Govrin is the author of a seminal study on Soviet-Israeli relations between the two ruptures in diplomatic ties (1953–1967). Having been directly involved in the struggle for Soviet Jewry in the 1960s, Govrin described the narrative presented in Segev’s article, and repeated by Milstein, as "inaccurate." In a letter to the editor of Haaretz, Govrin asserted that the State of Israel played the leading role, actively, though quietly, championing the cause of Soviet Jewry since the early 1950s.

For instance, under the direct instruction of David Ben-Gurion, the government agency "Nativ"—then known as the Liaison Bureau for Jews in Eastern Europe—was established. The Prime Minister acted on the recommendation of prominent Israeli figures Reuven Shiloah, Shaul Avigur, and Yeshayahu (Shaike) Dan. In 1952, the decision was made to establish this state entity, tasked with gathering intelligence on Eastern European and Soviet Jewry, disseminating information about Israel among them, and assisting in their repatriation to Israel.

Furthermore, Nativ performed another critical function during the Iron Curtain era: coordinating the efforts of foreign public organizations involved in the struggle for the rights of Soviet Jews. While these included some non-Jewish organizations, the bulk of the movement in the West was driven by Jewish communities, organizations, and movements. This represented a global mobilization of the Jewish people to secure the right of Soviet Jews to national self-determination, including the right to emigrate and return to their historic homeland. Hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of Jews worldwide contributed to this shared cause, spearheaded by the State of Israel, with Nativ serving as a primary instrument.

Memory Policy in a New Reality

The fall of the Iron Curtain in the late 1980s, the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, the lifting of travel restrictions, and the subsequent mass migration of Jews from the post-Soviet space in the 1990s altered the objectives of Israeli and international Aliyah organizations. For Nativ, this shift meant prioritizing the verification of eligibility under the Law of Return for Jews and their families in Eastern Europe, Eurasia, and Russian-speaking communities globally. It also expanded its role into research on the status of Jewish communities in the former Soviet Union and managing a network of Israeli Cultural Centers in these regions, which introduce local populations to Israeli society, achievements, culture, and history. Recently, a new focus has emerged for Nativ: preserving the historical and ideological legacy of those who fought for Aliyah.

Upon assuming office in August of last year, Nativ’s new director, Neta Briskin-Peleg, prioritized the development and promotion of projects in this domain. The event on December 13, 2018, served as the launch of this initiative. Its purpose was not only to honor the activists of the underground Jewish movement in the Soviet Union and the Communist bloc, but also to initiate educational efforts to ensure that the current generation of young Israelis learns about this heroic chapter—a history that, until the late 1980s, was familiar to every Israeli schoolchild and citizen.

The necessary steps are clear. First, there must be active engagement with the Israeli education system, public organizations, and youth movements. It is essential to introduce young Israelis to the events of that era and to the activists who witnessed them. The struggle for Aliyah from the USSR and Eastern Europe is a milestone and a point of pride for the State of Israel and the Jewish people as a whole.

Currently, numerous organizations in Israel focus on the history of Mizrahi Jews, supported by community associations, academic research centers, and university courses. This history is well-represented in the national school curriculum. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for the history of Soviet Jewry. Within Israeli academia, which led research in this area for decades, the study of Soviet Jewish history is no longer offered as an independent discipline. Archival records on the struggle remain partially inaccessible, and Soviet-era archives, with the exception of those in Ukraine, remain largely closed to researchers.

At the same time, Israel possesses a vast repository of historical documentation concerning Eastern European and Soviet Jewry, preserved in state, university, and private archives. While much of this is open to researchers and the public, the archives of Nativ—which led the state's efforts on behalf of Soviet and Eastern European Jews for fifty years—hold a unique place. For historical reasons, these archives remained closed for a long time. However, preserving the legacy of the struggle for Aliyah and integrating it into Israeli public discourse is impossible without granting access to these primary sources.

To this end, Nativ, in collaboration with other state and public institutions, is initiating a process to ensure that Israeli society—and its youth in particular—not only preserves the memory of the struggle for Aliyah from the USSR and Eastern Europe, but also holds it as a source of national pride.