Intellectual Tradition and the Legitimacy of Israel’s Roots
Israel’s legitimacy is passionately debated. This essay outlines and explores the arguments that are cited by critics as justification.
Criticism of Israel takes two different forms. The first is disapproval of governmental policy, on issues ranging from educational disparity and the rabbinate to continued presence in the Occupied Territories. Its goal is to highlight political injustice and lobby the government into meaningful action. Criticism is often linked to suggestion and intended to accelerate changes in public policy. This remains a critical element of political discussion and helps ensure the vibrancy of Israeli democracy.
The second variety of criticism disputes Israel’s legitimacy. It challenges the recognition — granted by citizens and external governments — that lends universal acknowledgement and legality of status. Whereas the aforementioned criticism attempts to alter policy, this variety of pushback has an entirely different aim. Rather than mold a more perfect country, it hopes that Israel will unilaterally dissolve and establish, in its stead, a new political entity.
It is within this framework that our report finds its niche. Though much has been written on delegitimization efforts against Israel, comparatively little has been published on their intellectual underpinnings. This is a critical aspect of our understanding that remains under-explored.
Though much has been written on delegitimization efforts against Israel, comparatively little has been published on their intellectual underpinnings. This is a critical aspect of our understanding that remains under-explored.
While accounts of Israeli offenses abound throughout the media, they are often fragmented and sensationally reported. It is not uncommon for them to lack foundation, relevant context, or objective presentation. And even when criticism is dispassionately conveyed, it never assumes the form of comprehensive summary or is intended for communities that support Israel’s existence.
These are the voids that this report attempts to fill. The following paper outlines every argument against Israel’s legitimacy and attempts to highlight them just as they are espoused. There is one, however, overarching goal: How can supporters of Israel’s existence, regardless of political or ideological bent, learn from and better understand these arguments? It is rare in public discourse, especially relevant to Israel, to open-mindedly engage alternative perspectives. But this is exactly what must be done and our essay attempts to do.
Israel’s relationship with the West Bank and Gaza Strip, often referred to as the Occupied Territories, is perhaps the best known and most widely cited of contemporary criticism. It is unique from pushback against Israel’s legitimacy, however, in two important ways. Firstly, it speaks to Israel’s presence in an outside territory and not to its existence within recognized borders (as defined by international law). And secondly, the debate emerged after Israel’s birth and reflects public policy rather than underlying legitimacy. Discussion will thus be saved for a separate undertaking. This paper, instead, will focus exclusively on the arguments intended to invalidate Israel’s existence.
Many sources were consulted in exploring these arguments. While a select number of articles proved immensely helpful, research revolved largely around published books and essays. Israeli, Palestinian, and Western sources have all been equally considered. Each of these materials lends important perspective, both firsthand and secondary, on Mandatory history and contemporary Israeli affairs. While it is important to recognize their inherent bias, it is exactly this standpoint that the essay attempts to capture.
Part I investigates the historical arguments levied against Israel’s legitimacy. It focuses on intellectual critiques against the modern nation-state, and perceived faults with ethnically defined countries. It goes on to discuss the First Arab-Israeli War and the subsequent dispossession of Palestinian land. Early injustices, from forced expulsion to massacre, are all considered equally.
Part II transitions to the injustices of contemporary Israel. It explores in great depth claims of a two-tiered social system, and questions the egalitarianism of Israeli society. Institutional discrimination, especially in the realms of land distribution, budgetary allocation, and societal opportunity, are all examined at length.
Part III examines the global pervasiveness of delegitimization. It explores the public’s evolving views about Israel, and the mixed success of the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) movement. Though definitive conclusions are difficult to draw, it attempts — as well as possible — to investigate sources that lend relevant insight.
Israel’s legitimacy is passionately debated. This essay explores the arguments, both historical and contemporary, that are cited by critics as justification. It lays out the reasoning as dispassionately as possible and outlines, comprehensively, the evidence produced. The following pages examine all relevant issues and attempt to understand them with genuine open-mindedness.
The above is an excerpted Introduction from an essay written for the Israel Democracy Institute’s Center on Religion, Nation, and State. To read the rest of this essay, please visit this link.
