Amid the largest genocide of this century in Gaza and the violent ethnic cleansing on the West Bank, two prominent Jewish historians believe that one democratic secular state in Palestine is not only achievable but inevitable, writes Stefan Moore.
IDF soldiers in Gaza in May 2025. (IDF Spokesperson’s Unit / Wikimedia Commons/ CC BY-SA 3.0)
By Stefan Moore
Special to Consortium News
Two prominent Jewish historians have recently written from different perspectives — one economic and political; one largely theological and moral — that the state of Israel is doomed and living on borrowed time.
Despite coming in the midst of the largest genocide of this century in Gaza and the violent ethnic cleansing on the West Bank, they believe that one democratic secular state in Palestine is not only achievable but inevitable.
In his latest book, Israel on the Brink: Eight Steps for a Better Future, llan Pappé writes that Israel is self-destructing economically, militarily and politically as it finds itself abandoned internationally.
According to Pappé, the farcical two-state solution is “a rotting corpse” and the only way forward is decolonisation, the return of Palestinian refugees to their land, accountability for those who have committed crimes and a new model of statehood for Palestine and the region.
A corollary to Pappé is the moral and religious critique of Zionism by Canadian Jewish historian and biblical scholar Yakov Rabkin who holds that the Zionist movement is a death trap for Jews, the region and the world.
In his recent book, Israel in Palestine: Jewish Rejection of Zionism and his earlier work, What is Modern Israel, Rabkin relates how the Jewish state represents a complete repudiation of the most fundamental values of Judaism.
In Israel, he says, values such as tolerance, morality and humility have been replaced with a new muscular Jewish identity that extols nationalism, aggression, violence and conquest. Traditional Jewish culture is looked upon with contempt.
Rabkin recounts how Zionist leader Vladimir Jabotinsky, the founder of the terrorist Jewish militia Irgun, described transforming the “Yid” from the shtetels of Eastern Europe into the New Hebrew:
“Our starting point is to take the typical Yid of today and to imagine a diametrical opposite…because the Yid is ugly, sickly, and lacks decorum, we shall endow the ideal image of the Hebrew with masculine beauty. The Yid is trodden upon and easily frightened and, therefore, the Hebrew ought to be proud and independent. … The Yid has accepted submission and, therefore, the Hebrew ought to learn how to command.”
If you hear echoes of Nazi master race philosophy, it’s no accident. Jabotinsky is channeling the views of early Zionist eugenicists such as Arthur Ruppin who sought “the purification of the [Jewish] race” and “maintained his ties with the German theoreticians of racial science even after the National Socialist regime took power.”
As for the Jewish religion, Rabkin dismantles the Zionist myth that the land of Israel was a God-given promise to the Jews – a claim “based on a literal interpretation of the bible that diverged drastically from the teachings of Rabbinical Judaism.”
Yakov M. Rabkin, 2017. (Alexandr Shcherba /Wikimedia Commons/ CC BY-SA 4.0)
To begin with, he explains, Palestine was never a homeland for Jews who, in fact, came from Mesopotamia and Egypt and migrated to Canaan (Palestine). There, according to the Talmud (the foundational source of Jewish theology) Abraham and his descendants were instructed by God to disperse to the four corners of the earth and never to return “en masse and in force” to the land of Israel until they had become spiritually purified.
In other words, until the coming of the messiah, Jews should stay where they are, which, in fact, is exactly where they have been.
Ashkenazi Jews have lived in Europe since Roman times and had been thoroughly assimilated into European culture. In the 19th century, many were socialists, communists and members of the Jewish Labour Bund which emphasized the right to thrive in their own culture, speak their own language (Yiddish) and fight for justice in the countries they inhabited, Rabkin says.
As a result, when Zionism emerged as a movement at the end of the 19th century, most Jews viewed it as a reactionary cult and a bourgeois adventure opposed to the interest of the Jewish working class, the author argues.
But some of the strongest opposition, Rabkin writes, came from religious Jews who believed Zionism is in direct conflict with the values of Judaism, which teaches that the Torah (the Jewish bible), and not a nation, is what binds Jews together. In the words of one Orthodox Jewish scholar, Zionism was “a spiritual corruption…that borders on blasphemy,” Rabkin says.
The opposition to Zionism, of course, was muted with the Holocaust — a genocide that Zionists immediately seized upon as an opportunity for nation building in Israel. Not only did Zionists actively thwart Jews from emigrating to other countries during and after the war, they used the Holocaust as a lever to bolster the Jewish population in Palestine, argues Rabkin.
In fact, Nazi anti-Semites and Zionists became joined at the hip. “The anti-Semites wished to be rid of the Jews, the Zionists sought to gather the Jews in the Holy Land,” writes Rabkin.
Leopold von Mildenstein in Palestine in 1933. (Wikimedia Commons/ Public Domain)
In 1933, Rabkin recounts, the high-ranking Nazi SS officer Baron Leopold Elder von Mildenstein travelled to Palestine with his good friend German Zionist Federation leader Kurt Tuchler. After his return, Mildenstein wrote laudatory articles about the Zionist enterprise and a special medal was coined to commemorate his visit. On one side was a Swastika, on the other, The Star of David.
Today, the Zionist ideology first espoused by Theodore Herzl in 1896 and transmitted through every Israeli leader from David Ben-Gurion, Menahem Begin, Ariel Sharon and onward has morphed into the most right-wing, militant and genocidal government in Israel to date.
The rabidly racist cabinet ministers Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben Gvir are now followers of a new messianic movement called National Judaism – what Rabkin describes as “the dominant ideology of vigilante settlers who have harassed, dispossessed and murdered Palestinians in the West Bank and encourage the starvation of Palestinians in Gaza.”
“Since its inception in the late 19th century, critics of Zionism warned that the Zionist state would become a death trap, endangering both the colonisers and the colonised alike,” writes Rabkin. “For those voices…the Zionist experiment was seen as a tragic mistake [and] the sooner it ended … the better for humanity as a whole.”
Concluding with his own reflection as an observant Jew he writes:
“Jewish teachings frequently attribute the root causes of communal suffering to internal moral failings. In this light, Israel’s current trajectory –- marked by impunity, hubris and cruelty, all of which contradict Jewish values –- appears destined for moral and political ruin.”
One Democratic, Multiethnic State
Ilan Pappe at the University of Exeter, April 2023. (Fjmustak/Wikimedia Commons/ CC BY-SA 4.0)
Pappé shares Rabkin’s view that Israel is in a suicidal spiral that will ultimately lead to its collapse. But, then, he takes a giant leap into the future to look at what he envisions emerging from the ruins – one democratic, multiethnic state in Palestine.
Israel on the Brink starts with the disastrous events from the time of the 1917 Balfour Declaration and the founding of the Israeli state in 1948 to the rise of the religious right settler movement in recent years.
Like a building engineer surveying a crumbling structure, Pappé points out the fatal cracks in the foundations of the Israeli state that will ultimately widen and lead to the collapse of the Zionist project – an event that he believes “could well change the course of world history in this century.”
Crack No. 1 — a very big one, according to Pappé — is the rise of messianic Zionism — the belief the Holy Land was given to the Jewish people by God to hasten redemption. Pioneered by Rabbi Avraham Yitzchak Kook (1865-1935) it was
“the most extreme form of Zionism: a fusion of messianic ideas with unashamed racism towards the Palestinians and contempt for secular and Reform Judaism.”
Kook’s disciples form a direct line from his son, Tzvi Yehuda HaKohen Kook to today’s far-right West Bank settlers and the dominant political coalition including ministers Itamar Ben Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich.
This movement, writes Pappé, represents one of the most serious cracks in Israel’s unstable political foundations –- a schism between religious right and political Zionists that, ironically, despite their differences, shares the same goal of maintaining Jewish supremacy in Palestine.
Other foundational cracks exposed by Pappé are: the “unprecedented support for the Palestinian cause around the world,” deepening economic troubles as the wealth gap widens, investment dries up and the most affluent professionals flee the country (estimated to be over half a million since 2023).
Rabbi Zvi Yehuda Kook with Israeli forces at the Western Wall shortly after Israeli forces captured it in 1967. (Wikimedia Commons/Public Domain)
Added to the list are the “glaring inadequacy” of the Israeli military that, while capable of bombing Gaza to rubble, is not trained for real combat and unable to defeat Hamas; and the crumbling civilian apparatus that is incapable of adequately housing the thousands of Israelis displaced by the wars in Gaza and Lebanon.
Finally, there’s the biggest crack of all – the rise of a new Palestinian Liberation Movement at the same time that the Zionist project “is careening towards a cliff edge.” This is a movement of energised young Palestinians who, “instead of pursuing a two-state solution, as the Palestinian Authority has done fruitlessly for several decades, … are seeking a genuine one-state solution.”
The challenge, according to Pappé, will be to meld youthful fervour with a clear political agenda. “Every successful revolution in history arrived when the creative energy of the masses met the programmatic vision of a confident organisation that could voice their demands,” he writes, “what Leon Trotsky described as ‘the inspired frenzy of history.’”
The guiding principle at the centre of this revolution is justice —transitional justice which involves legally addressing systemic human rights violations and holding the guilty accountable and restorative justice to provide restitution to their victims, Pappé says .
First and foremost, this means giving the 6 million Palestinian refugees who were driven off their land since 1948 the right of return to their towns and villages.
Next, is the dismantling of Jewish settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. Isolated outposts occupied by fanatical settlers will require total demolition but the sprawling urban settlements built since 1967 will present bigger challenges.
In any case,
“transitional justice will involve deconstructing the legal framework of the apartheid state and supplanting it with one that does not discriminate between Jews and non-Jews in property ownership, urban planning and land use.”
But perhaps Pappé’s most sweeping vision of all is reconnecting Palestine with the entire Eastern Mediterranean, the Mashreq, “which were organically linked to each other by cultural, social, economic, historical and ideological ties dating back centuries.”
This entire region, where Muslims, Christians and Jews lived together in relative harmony for thousands of years before the European colonial powers carved it up with artificial boundaries, could be reconnected with Palestine inspiring “a wider revolution in all the Mashreq.”
In regard to the millions of Jews who will remain living in post-Israel Palestine, Pappé believes they will be willing to contribute to the building of this new future: “The way other Jewish communities elsewhere in the world view themselves as part of their respective countries can be replicated in post-Israel Palestine.”
Envisioning a Future
Gaza solidarity demonstration in Berlin on Nov. 4, 2023, organized by Palestinian and Jewish groups. (Streets of Berlin – Free Palestine will not be cancelled/Wikimedia Commons/ CC BY-SA 2.0)
Israel on the Brink concludes by conjuring up a post-Israel Palestine in the form of a fictional diary where Pappé is both observer and participant in the building of a future society — beginning in 2027 and culminating in 2048, 100 years after the founding of the Israeli State.
Over this time, he witnesses Israel becoming increasing isolated internationally; the nations of the world imposing crippling sanctions and cutting off diplomatic relations; the mass exodus of Israeli citizens; towns and streets being given back their Arab names; new political coalitions being formed between Palestinian and Jewish parties; fears that the capitalist model will leave power in the hands of an affluent Jewish and Palestinian elite creating a new form of apartheid; the creation of a new educational system and the recognition of returning Palestinian refugees as full citizens.
Is this just wishful thinking to imagine the brutal, racist stain of Zionism will be washed away in the foreseeable future and a new democratic state emerge in its place?
The roadblocks are formidable –- from the continued military occupation of Gaza under Trump’s Orwellian Board of Peace to the massive 82 percent support among Jewish Israelis for the ethnic cleansing of Gaza, making Israel what American political scientist Norman Finklestein calls “a whole society that has been effectively Nazified.”
Neither Ilan Pappé nor Yakov Rabkin are under illusions about the obstacles; they only believe that the creation of the State of Israel was a tragic historical mistake and, in the interest of the Palestinian people and all humanity, it must come to an end.
One way, as Palestinian author Ghada Kharmi has written is that, “The U.N. that made Israel must now unmake it, not by expulsion and displacement as in 1948, but by converting its bleak legacy into a future of hope for both peoples in one state.”
This would certainly be a first step on the road to the one-state solution that Pappé and Rabkin envision – one that we can only hope to see the beginnings of in our lifetime.
Stefan Moore is an American-Australian documentary filmmaker whose films have received four Emmys and numerous other awards. In New York he was a series producer for WNET and a producer for the prime-time CBS News magazine program 48 HOURS. In the U.K. he worked as a series producer at the BBC, and in Australia he was an executive producer for the national film company Film Australia and ABC-TV.
The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of Consortium News.
Stefan Moore has written a simply fantastic essay that very responsibly exposes the frivolousness of the widely touted two-state solution for historic Palestine and situates it also within the broader virulent and vile “culture” of Zionism, thus lending a deeper perspective to the long festering problem in Levant / Middle East. Nevertheless, this wonderful write-up, that cites the eminent scholars Ilan Pappé and Yakov Rubkin, throws up much more questions, as also testified within the many germane appended commentaries, than the smart and logical one-state solution it wisely proffers.
Every sensible human knows that one-state solution is the most just one on the Palestine issue and the Israeli problem. A small adjustment to Moore’s prescription is in order here, however : the prospective Palestine should be, rightly, a Democratic, multi-ethnic and NOT secular but multi-religious if not also multi-theocratic, presumably republican ONE-STATE ! One should not dump the religious model in favour of a secular one simply because the Zionist schemed to variously-tarnish Judaism within their concocted illegitimate entity. Otherwise, all three Abrahamic religions would be guilty of capitulating to the vile Zionistic secular-project, by miscalculated default if not also by reckless design !
What should always have been the true “American” plan for peace.
One nation, where all people are equal and all people have certain unalienable rights that can not ever be taken away from them. Where among these rights, but not limited to just these rights, are the rights to Life, Liberty, the Pursuit of Happiness, and the Freedom of Religion. Where a government is instituted to protect and defend these rights and to work towards the Safety and Happiness of all of the people who rule themselves in a government of the people and by the people in this land.
That’s what a true American Peace Plan would look like. That this is never heard expressed in America tells someone only how far America has fallen since its revolutionary beginning and ideals.
There is only one legitimate state there-
Palestine!
Attention is to be payed to the fact, that many zionists just pretend to be jewish/ religious.
Like many criminals generally do within other religious entities for more or less the same reason.
They are hiding their evil deeds and intentions behind a holy curtain like this.
And the jewish are blamed for the crimes, the mass murdering zionists (of course not hesitating to kill jews in what is still called ‘israel’ as well, see ‘hannibal directive’ for example) actually commit, using the people attached to the jewish religion as scapegoats.
A very dangerous situation for the jewish community worldwide, and perhaps soon other bothering minorities as well.
So please, kindly differentiate between individuals truly belonging to the jewish religion, and those severely criminal zionists just pretending to be religious, while simply enriching themselves.
Couldn’t agree with you more here. This has increasingly become an universal disease in modern times. embracing not just Jews, Christians, Hindus and some others but, unbelievably, even Muslims increasingly at present times. Mosques and Islamic centers in previous decades used to be absolutely sure places for the truly spiritual, enlightened and deeply pious but this situation has rapidly eroded over the ages and now these very places have become breeding places for all manner of unsavory characters, often under the self-serving complicity of the powers-that-are and even the authorities. So, believing Jews, don’t worry, you are not the only victims !
While there’s ‘life’ there is hope, someone once said, more than 2030 years ago…
It’s all still up in the air, as Contradictions in Terms abound.
Are believers in the Christian faith “one people”? Are believers in the Islamic faith “one people”?
They are not, yet both definitive religious sects believe in the Abrahamic one God monotheistic tradition.
However, a bending of the rules in beliefs between the one and the other – depending on how one reasons, within Christianity: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and rules, defining what one must do, are quite apparently at odds to those who will see.
As to the notion of the believers in these two religious sects faithfully maintaining that they are “one people” of the same God; the very idea is both laughable and ludicrous.
A nation refers to ‘a group of people’ sharing a common culture, language, history, or ethnicity, often without defined political borders.
According to open media sourcing, “there are 195 widely recognized countries in the world today. This total consists of 193 member states of the United Nations (UN) and 2 non-member observer states: the Holy See (Vatican City) and the State of Palestine” – the Holy See (Vatican City) confined within a sovereign, self-governing political entity, with defined territory, population, and government, namely the Italian State.
The other being, Palestine, not even qualifying as a phantom state: “a de facto, self-governing entity that functions as an independent country for their inhabitants—possessing territory, governments, and militaries”— yet still, like the Holy See (Vatican City) having gained some formal non-member observer status internationally within the framework of the United Nations Organization guiding principles.
“A ‘state’ is a sovereign, self-governing political entity with a defined territory, population, and government. While ‘nations’ focus on identity, states focus on control and law”.
Therefore, within UN legal parameters, the State of Palestine may have non-member observer state status, yet in living reality, like the Holy See (Vatican City), Palestinians have no sovereignty, yet they alone are illegally occupied by a foreign country.
Their (Palestinian) state, not recognized as an independent country is the prime example of the brazen hypocrisy of extant international law these days!
Unlike the Holy See (Vatican City), however, the Palestinian people are not of a theocracy, for this “one people” predominantly, are open to both Islamic and Christian faith believers. And in the not-too-distant past Judaism too was, side by side, openly practiced in biblical Canaan/ Palestine.
Unlike the people of Palestinian, and in contradistinction to the purported one-God thesis of monotheism today; the practitioners of the Judaic religious faith claim that the “one-God” thesis does not apply equally to Christian and Islamic faith believers.
This notion makes the idea of Jews seeing themselves as being not but “one of the monotheistic Gods people” but the “chosen ones”. This is an obnoxious, ridiculous absurdity!
So long as humanity cannot recognize itself as ‘one humanity’ no one specific religion can legitimately claim to be “one people”.
As of early 2026, Jewish populations are dispersed throughout 100 countries; in over 50% of the countries on the planet.
Analysis indicates that Christians form a majority of the global population, in approximately 120 countries while approximately 50–60 countries have a Muslim-majority population, and over 79 countries are home to at least a million or more Muslim inhabitants.
A nation is a group of people sharing a common culture, language, or history, while a nation-state is a sovereign political entity where the borders of that nation align with the borders of a governing state.
Nations can exist without a state (e.g., Kurds, Palestinians et.al), whereas a nation-state merges cultural identity with political control.
A country (or state) is a sovereign, geographically defined political entity with a government, while a nation-state is a specific type of country where cultural, ethnic, or historical identity (the “nation”) aligns with the state’s borders.
While country refers to the land/territory, nation state emphasizes the unity of its people.
Is the diverse population of the U.S. (2026) “one unified people”? The U.S. is formally a secular nation rather than a theocracy.
Does one country’s theocracy make citizens of other countries, who happenstance are believers in the same religion as that theocracy – Judaism, make the adherents globally, of that religion “one people”?
To the question posed: Which are the theocracies in the world today?
The most prominent examples cited include Vatican City (Catholic), Iran (Shia Islamic), Saudi Arabia (Sunni Islamic), and Afghanistan (Islamic). These nations operate under legal systems heavily influenced or entirely based on religious doctrine.
Yet, NOT one Peep mentioned about the Zionist theocratic Israeli state today; which country is the major cause of the chaos and mayhem reigning in the world today (2026)!
If anti-Zionism is antisemitism, then I am a monkey’s uncle, and not of the Homo-sapiens species etymologically out of Africa.
“A nation refers to ‘a group of people’ sharing a common culture, language, history, or ethnicity”
In the real world, in the European traditions, a “nation” was always the group that could be commanded by a King to do what the King wants. The King will always provide some BS story about how we are all the “one people” and thus must all die for the bleepin King.
A part of my heritage is that I come from people who lived in the border regions of France and thus at various times have been called French, or German or some minor sub-nationality that such as Bavarian or Westphalian or something. Thus, in my past, my people would have always known that we needed to check an up to date map to know what nation we a part of. Although I’m sure the tax collectors would provide a reminder would we ever to be uncertain.
Perhaps that’s a definition of “nation” … the people from whom the King can take taxes. That seems closer to reality than this stuff about a common culture. I’ve got a feeling that Joseph Heller can add something to this discussion:
“The enemy is anybody who’s going to get you killed, no matter which side he is on.” – ‘Catch-22’, by Joseph Heller.
Kudos, you have given a rather well-learned elucidation of basic political concepts such as nation, state, country and nation-state, political non-state entity and even theocracies. A short clarification is due, in this latter regard, however : the Afghan (Islamic) theocracy is not Islamically orthodox, as seems to be implied in your otherwise excellent comment, but rather the Afghan Islamic theocracy has a distinctly tribalistic-bent to it, that it would not easily allow itself to be seen as part of orthodox Sunni Islam.
I have not yet had the privilege of reading Illan Pappe’s latest book “Israel on the Brink” nor the writing/thinking of others who envision a ‘one state solution’ that would result in dissolution of Israel and a return of all the land to Palestine.
Thus, realizing that there is much I do not know nor understand at this point, I have long thought that Israel must no longer exist. I have come to this conclusion based on the fact that Israel is, in effect, a country created by the UN at the behest of a particular group. A country created on land already occupied for centuries by those of many faiths. Land, taken from those whose families had lived there for generations. Land that at the time of Israel’s creation contained ancient buildings, villages, homes, orchards, schools, libraries, all that have evolved over centuries was simply taken, a small portion retained by Palestine and Palestinians.
There is not only this immoral and illegal beginning. There is the inhumane treatment that began at the founding of Israel, continued and increased in ferocity leading to the ongoing genocide and horrendous destruction we witness daily over more than two years. It is this latter capability for cruelty and destruction carried out by Israel that, in my mind, must be eradicated in order for a single state to be created. The entire structure of governance. The military and weapons, including the nuclear arms, must be removed completely. and there is the very mindset that has evolved and become an integral part of Israeli society with very few exceptions. In reflecting, I ask myself: how can any among us assume the right to ask the Palestinians to live side-by-side with Israeli’s? Those who advocate ‘democracy’ conveniently ignore its major flaw: decisions arrived at by a majority. Thus leaving the ‘minority’ concerns excluded. Also, leading to the active cultivation of a ‘majority’ whose votes can be, in the main, assured. Given the history of Israel, is it unrealistic to think that, should the idea of a ‘one state solution/Palestine” be realized in which ‘democracy and majority rule’ prevail, what will be among the first efforts of any remaining Israeli’s?
I must admit that all this leads me to believe that, while a one state solution seems to me to be the only ‘just solution’ … this has, in my mind some serious and challenging caveats. Among them: removal of all weapons, arms, armament including nuclear weapons. Removal of all who have participated in the genocide, no matter how remotely. Removal of all settlers.
Ultimately, although I think and write as I have above, I believe it is only the Palestinians who have the right to determine what must be done. It will be our obligation, the obligation of every single country, of the UN, of every human being to fully support the wishes of the Palestinians so long as they do not violate international or humanitarian laws.
Given the record of the UN, the Security Counsel, and the history of US manipulation these obstacles to any just and enduring peace must be removed – finally, and once and for all. I recommend abolishing the Security Counsel and the veto as a start.
The UN was created after World War II with the task of “Never Again” to both the Genocide and World War. Since the UN has obviously been a failure in its mission, it should no longer exist. It is clearly not fit for its purpose. Put it with the League of Nations in the trash bin.
Nationalism causes wars. A world of competing nations can never be at peace. Thus, a body named The United Nations that was supposed to secure the Peace was always doomed by its nationalism. Its doom was always there in its name. But, there is a solution:
“Imagine there’s no countries
It isn’t hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
Livin’ life in peace
Yoo hoo
You may say I’m a dreamer
But I’m not the only one
I hope someday you’ll join us
And the world will be as one”
-‘Imagine’ by John and Yoko Lennon.
Nur Masalha, in “Palestine: A Four Thousand Year History”, also addresses Lord Shaftesbury and the people around him in the British government in the 1830s.
Such a perfect name for the English Upper Class …. Shaftesbury. Brilliant. The Earl of a nation where the Upper Class always makes sure the Lower Class gets the Shaft.
Yeah, all good, except that Netanyahu, Gvir, Smotrich and Trump…among many others like them, don’t give a damn about any of the arguments made by the thinkers that the author highlights.
I think the point of the book is that developments will not be contingent on the attitudes of Netanyahu and company.
Excellent piece.
Further to “the Zionist ideology first espoused by Theodore Herzl.”
Ilan Pappé, Ten Myths About Israel, has the philosophy of Zionism predating Herzl’s work.
Modern Zionism has its origins firmly stuck in the British imperial project of the nineteenth century. And current UK PMs are unwilling/unable to dissociate from that policy.
Pappé – pp. 12-14:
“Lord Shaftesbury (1801-1885) [who was not Jewish] … campaigned actively for a Jewish homeland in Palestine. His arguments for a greater British presence in Palestine were both religious and strategic.
Shaftesbury realised that it would not be enough to support the return of the Jews, and they would have to be actively assisted by Britain in their initial colonization. Such an alliance should start, he asserted, by providing material help to the Jews to travel to Ottoman Palestine.
“… in 1839, Shaftesbury wrote a thirty-page article for The London Quarterly Review, entitled “State and Restauration (sic) of the Jews,” in which he predicted a new era for God’s chosen people. He insisted that
the Jews must be encouraged to return in yet greater numbers and become once more the husbandman of Judea and Galilee … though admittedly a stiff-necked, dark hearted people, and sunk in moral degradation, obduracy, and ignorance of the Gospel, [they are] not only worthy of salvation but also vital to Christianity’s hope of salvation.
“Zionism was a movement asserting that the problems of the Jews of Europe would be solved by colonizing Palestine and creating a Jewish state there. These ideas germinated in the 1860s in several places in Europe, inspired by the enlightenment, the 1848 “Spring of Nations,” and later on by socialism. Zionism was transformed from an intellectual and cultural exercise into a political project through the vision of Theodor Herzl, in response to a particularly vile wave of anti-Jewish persecution in Russia in the late 1870s early 1880s, and to the rise of Semitic nationalism in the west of Europe.”
I appreciate the way Ilan Pappé comments on the past as well as on the future of Palestine. Pappé’s thoughts constantly give me new hope that possibly still in my lifetime justice, peace and full recognition will be given to the Palestinian people. Even so the present day politics of the US and Europe with regard to Palestine do not foster hope, we shouldn’t lose neither optimism nor faith for a better, more just future and do all we can to bring it about. Let’s be aware of the power of the masses and take to the streets to confront our politicians who have abandoned the rule of law, in that they don’t raise their voices against the permanent breach of international laws. Their silence means complicity which we, the people should never accept.
Jürg – thanks.
I posted Pappe’s comments primarily to draw attention to the historical context, and the often forgotten aspect that the State of Israel is very much a European confection.
A European outpost amid a ‘hostile’ Middle East – and this is where Edward Said’s analyses of how Europeans constructed an orient comes into play in a practical sense – in order to secure Britain’s imperial interests.
The rise of the notion for a Jewish nation seems to gain momentum as the Ottoman empire slowly fragmented.
The determination of western powers to maintain the state of Israel in its current form, and that includes the ‘2 states solution’ – where Palestine will be but a bantustan – is clearly based on the geo-politics as established nearly 200 years ago except that the USA and its sycophants now rule the roost and provide the instruments of genocide.
Your comments outline some of the practicalities ‘we’ need and must engage in, and I couldn’t agree more.
best wishes
I can’t speak for the European Empire, but in America, Israel’s position is as weak as it has been ever since the disgraced and impeached President Nixon and his war criminal security advisor Kissinger forged the close ties between Israel and the USA in the early 70’s.
On the Team Blue side of things, much of the voting base was in revolt against the Mega-Donors that run the party over the issue of Israel and Palestine. This has been growing for decades, and the open Genocide and the open Biden/Mega-
Donor position of “Praise the Lord and Pass the Ammunition” accelerated the separation between the party base and the Mega-Donors.
On the Team Red side of things, there are significant rumblings from the MAGA base that they voted for America First and have instead received Israel First. The death of Charlie Kirk after he began to question Israel First caused considerable comment among MAGA. This is more recent on the Team Red side of things, but the Team Red side also always had an isolationist tradition among its base that didn’t appreciate their farm boys and tax dollars being lost in foreign wars.
Israel has been wearing out its welcome in both political parties. Too bad America does not have a functioning democracy. The lack of democracy means that the funding of Israel and the waging of wars for Israel still continues. But, the foundations are shakier than they’ve been in a long, long time. It might reach a point where the American oligarchs might sacrifice Israel in order to avoid a moment of real democracy at home. Oligarchs have been known to abandon investments that turn red and become a threat to their overall position.
Simply excellent comment. You have exposed the long known almost axiomatic and bitter truth that undermines Middle East peace. The British were widely known to have worked hands in glove with the Zionists to create this proxy geopolitical wedge in the Levant; now with your update and revelation of the name of the exact British Lord involved in this intrigue, we know that the British also worked cock in condom with the the Zionists, as his name clearly hints !