Understanding “Zionism” is integral to being able to understand the underpinnings of Israeli society and the formation of the world’s only Jewish State. Not to mention, it is essential to understand if you are going to engage in discourse about antisemitism — especially in our moment in history. Since early Biblical times, Jews have had a longing to return to their ancestral homeland. This yearning, in part to escape persecution and in part to connect with their land, is reflected in a term that is often abused: Zionism.
“If you will it, it is no dream.”
— Theodor Herzl
Zion is a term with deep religious and cultural meaning, and is another term for Jerusalem. More broadly, it means the nation which encompasses Jerusalem. As we will discuss later, the concepts of nations or states have shifted with the many centuries, but the Jewish people have strong claims to the land which comprises modern day Israel and this is in keeping with historic understanding of the term.
Before the modern re-establishment of the State of Israel, Zionism was a political movement. This movement, like any, had many debates. Internally, amongst the Jewish people, they primarily ranged around the balance of secular and religious. Overall though, the common goal was safety, security, and stability for the Jewish people. According to Professor Donna Robinson Divine, an impeccably credentialed academic who is an expert in Middle Eastern politics:
Zionism imagined Jews could interact with other societies without risking their distinctiveness only if their culture and society had a permanent address.
Internally, this political movement had three primary counter positions. Orthodox opposition mostly centered around the fear that a Jewish state would erode religious traditions. The Bundist movement rejected nationhood and advocated for cultural autonomy and socialism within existing nations. Similarly, assimilationists believed integration within existing societies was preferable to establishing a separate nation.
What, then, does this mean to us in a period in history after the establishment of the state of Israel? What is Zionism, now? Simply put, Zionism is the belief that Jewish People have a right to self-determination in their historic homeland.
Throughout history, the meaning of Zionism has been amended somewhat slightly, but the commonality at all times has been the simple, yet profound belief that the Jewish People have a right to self-govern and the desire to return to Zion.
Golda Meir put it this way, “To be Zionist is to believe in the Jewish People’s right to live in their own country, free from fear and free from oppression.” For Benjamin Netanyahu, the definition is much the same — though, perhaps, more forward looking. He said:
Zionism is the belief that the Jewish People have a right to self-determination in their historic homeland. But Zionism is also a belief in the future — a belief that Israel must continue to grow and thrive for the sake of all Jews.
That the Jewish People wanted a state of their own has been evident throughout the ages, but in modern history it has been a security-related imperative. In the time leading up to the horrors of the Shoah, and during that period itself, Jews had no place to turn en masse for refuge. Though it would be incorrect to say that Israel exists because of the Shoah.
The Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel ended the political movement of Zionism. The movement, to be clear, wasn’t solely political. It was a matter of survival for an indigenous people that was mostly exiled from its historic homeland and persecuted in every society in which they dared to exist.
With the formation of the State of Israel, they could exist in relative safety. The political part of the movement has finished. The remnant of it is merely about safety and survival. Regardless of anyone’s preference, Israel exists. The Jewish people have a place in which to self-govern in their historic homeland. The Declaration called for Jews everywhere to come together (whether in person through immigration or in spirit through support in other ways):
We appeal to the Jewish People throughout the Diaspora to rally round the Jews of Eretz-Israel in the tasks of immigration and upbuilding and to stand by them in the great struggle for the realization of the age-old dream — the redemption of Israel.
Though this doesn’t stop people from trying to mask their antisemitism to the — somehow — more palatable anti-Zionism. The Israeli writer Amos Oz says:
If people call Israel the devil incarnated, I think they are obsessed—they are mad. But this is still legitimate. But if they carry on saying that therefore there should be no Israel, that’s where it becomes anti-Semitism, because no one ever said after Hitler that Germany should cease to exist, or after Stalin that there should be no Russia. Saying that Israel should cease to exist, or should not have come into being, this is crossing the line.
I’m not entirely sure I agree with him in full — I think calling Israel the devil incarnate is a bit past the line of acceptability (see: demonization and dehumanization). That said, Oz is correct. You can object to any policy you want. Logic and rational thought are, counterintuitively, somewhat subjective.
The persistent questioning of Israel’s legitimacy is a manifestation of unequal treatment rooted in antisemitism. Recognizing Israel’s right to exist is not a political stance but an affirmation of the universal principle of self-determination.
Case Study: Israel & Pakistan
Modern history gave birth to numerous nations emerging from colonialism and war. Let’s look specifically at Israel and Pakistan — as they are both quite similar. Both were founded within a year of each other. Both nations were carved out through partition. The creation of both involved significant population movements. Both were born amidst intense conflict. Yet, despite these striking similarities, Israel uniquely faces persistent questions regarding its legitimacy. This disparity invites a critical examination of the factors that contribute to this singular scrutiny.
Israel and Pakistan were established based on the principle of self-determination — in these cases, for Jews and Muslims, respectively. The partition of British India led to the creation of Pakistan as a separate homeland for Muslims. It resulted in one of the largest mass migrations in history and communal violence that claimed countless lives. Similarly, Israel was reborn out of the British mandate of Palestine — carving out a place for the Jewish people in their historic homeland, while giving the majority of the land of the mandate to the Arab world.
Despite the parallel narratives, Pakistan’s right to exist is seldom questioned on the international stage. In contrast, Israel has faced continuous challenges to its legitimacy since its inception. Wars were waged — and as of the moment I am writing these words are continuing to be waged — by neighboring states explicitly aiming to erase it from the map. International organizations and movements have frequently singled out Israel for condemnation, often applying standards not imposed on any other nation.
It should be clear that anti-Zionism — the opposition to the Jewish right to self-determination in their historical homeland — serves as a thin veneer for antisemitic sentiments. It is inherently antisemitic. Denying Jews the same rights afforded to other peoples is discriminatory. Moreover, the historical and legal foundations of Israel’s establishment are solid. The Balfour Declaration, the League of Nations Mandate, and the United Nations Partition Plan all recognized the legitimacy of a Jewish state in Palestine. These international endorsements underscore that Israel’s creation was rooted in legal and moral grounds, paralleling the legitimacy granted to other nations formed during decolonization.
The double standards applied to Israel become more evident when considering other nations formed under contentious circumstances. Bangladesh seceded from Pakistan after a brutal conflict, yet its right to exist is universally accepted. Many African and Middle Eastern nations have borders drawn arbitrarily by colonial powers, leading to ethnic and sectarian strife. Yet, the international community does not question their legitimacy as sovereign states.
The persistent challenge Israel faces in discourse and on the international stage — that of whether it is a legitimate sovereign nation or not — is why the Zionist moniker is still extant. This persistent challenge of legitimacy doesn’t simply question policies or borders, it questions the very right of Jews to exist as a nation. Today, Zionism is a defensive movement to counter external, existential threats. It encapsulates the will of a people — in this case the Jews — to survive and flourish against whatever the odds.
Historical Facets of Zionism
Zionism’s strength comes from interwoven strands of religious, cultural, and political identities. Though we touched on the political earlier, it is important to really understand the remaining two main facets of the Zionist movement.
While early Zionism was mostly secular, the integration of faith was essential. For most Jews, the integration of religious traditions acknowledged that they are key components of — and largely inseparable from — Jewish identity. The religious element of Zionism centers on the fact that Eretz Israel isn’t just land, it’s the birthplace of the Jewish faith. Biblical and historical accounts reflect profound connections between the Jewish people and that land — with stories, commandments, and more that have shaped Jewish identity for millennia. Religious Zionism, one facet of the movement, bridges faith and nationalism. It views the modern State of Israel as part of the divine plan.
To come to fruition, Zionism needed to foster a commonality through culture — especially if it wanted to be a so-called big tent for Jews. Resurrecting the Hebrew language from something reserved for liturgical use into the vibrant lingua franca of the nation was a crucial component of this. It united Jews from diverse backgrounds and fostered a shared identity, and rekindled Jewish arts and literature. Sephardi, Ashkenazi, Mizrahi, and more all had further commonality — forging new national identity and cohesion.
External Criticisms
Criticisms of Zionism frequently misrepresent what it is — whether that’s intentional or accidental is largely irrelevant. One of the most visible opposition movements to Zionism today is Arab and Palestinian opposition. While legitimate discourse is expected around territorial disputes and rights, outright denial of Israel’s right to exist derails any potential peace process. Israel often faces (see: inversion) claims of human rights abuses and allegations against its democracy. Israel, despite its imperfections, is a democratic nation striving to uphold the highest standards of human rights while it faces unprecedented and complex security challenges. There are those who claim Israel is a colonial project. This is absurd on its face; Israel is one of the most successful instances of decolonization on the globe today. Unlike colonial powers, Zionists returned to their ancestral homeland. The movement was about self-determination and not subjugation.
Zionism in Practice
For Jews around the world today, Zionism represents a source of identity and security — especially amidst rising levels of antisemitism throughout the West. True Zionism reflects a desire for peace and security that upholds the dignity and rights of all. While movements try to counter Zionism today — such as BDS (Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions) that claims to advocate for Palestinian rights and yet relies on antisemitic tropes and unfairly singles out Israel — the reality of the situation is that Israel exists and is flourishing.
Israel lives up to its Zionist ideals in a number of ways — beyond mere existence. For example, through the Law of Return any Jewish person can immigrate to Israel. It’s not just a symbol of welcome and inclusion. This is an essential lifeline for Jews facing persecution.
Israel has also made huge strides in economic development. It has made what was a barren desert into an agricultural powerhouse. It has become a global leader in technology, medicine, industrial innovation, and defense. Perhaps of those, defense was the most essential. The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) have been crucial to Israel’s continued existence. No other nation has been subjected to the attacks Israel has faced (see: Chapter 10). This has led to private industry innovations—developing defense technologies that are deployed around the world, sold and licensed to allies of Israel.
In the end, it is hard to see Zionism as anything other than a force for good. It has allowed the Jewish people to reclaim their historic homeland. It has allowed the Jewish people to practice self-determination. It has allowed the Jewish people to preserve their identity. In a world rife with antisemitism, Zionism stands as a bulwark against oppression and persecution. Zionism isn’t a relic of ages past, it is the essential support of the Jewish people to exist and of Israel to flourish and prosper. Zionism should foster understanding and lead to a future of peace and security for all peoples. And it can, too, so long as people are willing to eschew antisemitism and see Anti-Zionism for what it is: a cloak over the age-old hatred.