One of the little examples of semantics that tends to come up when talking about antisemitism is the potential difference between being antisemitic and anti-Zionist. It’s probably helpful first of all to talk about terms.
Jews: A recognised ethnic people group with minorities around the world. There are 7.8 million Jews in the modern state of Israel accounting for 73% of the total population of the country. There are 16 million Jews worldwide.
Israel: Refers first to the ancient kingdom from which the Jews as a people group originate and on which the plotline of the Bible centres. Secondly, it refers to the modern nation state established in 1948 at the end of the British Mandate in Palestine.
Judaism: A monotheist, religious belief system. Not all Jews practice Judaism as a religion and there are diverse strands within the faith.
Zionism: The root word describes the hill or mountain on which Jerusalem was built. Zionism therefore describes the movement which developed in the 19th Century seeking a Jewish homeland in Palestine and therefore the return of Jews from around the world to their homeland.
This matters first, because Zionism is in effect a historic movement, it’s objectives achieved. Therefore, in so far as Zionists exist today, they do so because there are still people around, with significant influence who do not believe that Israel has a right to exist as a nation state. These include, some Arabic and Islamist states in the Middle East as well as various politicians in other countries around the world.
To muddle things further, the term is also used pejoratively and has been heavily associated with conspiracy theories, particularly those which assume that Jews exercise disproportionate and malign influence around the world. Contemporary versions of these conspiracy theories associate this malign influence both with a “Jewish lobby” and with the modern state of Israel.
It matters second because, when defining antisemitism. According to the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA):
“Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”
https://www.holocaustremembrance.com/resources/working-definitions-charters/working-definition-antisemitism
The IHRA definition which has been adopted around the world includes within its definition a number of examples of antisemitism which include:
“Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavour.”
Note, that this does not mean that criticism of Israel is ruled out, nor does this deny that some may well have taken up the Zionist cause due to racist motivations. What it does mean though is that denying the right of Israel to exist as a country with borders, government and the means to defend itself amounts to a form of antisemitism. This is because it is denying the right of those 7 million Jews in Israel to live in peace and security. Note that it singles out Israel, in effect because its majority population is Jewish. The emergence of modern Israel is of course complex and includes immigration and land disputes but this would be true of a number of modern countries and indeed true of many more when you go further back in history.
So, antizionism may sound like a get out clause, a justification and defence against the allegation of antisemitism but antizionism is highly problematic. It of course begs the question “what then is the solution to the Palestine/Israel problem? Most people today see a two state solution as the best route to lasting peace. This would mean formerly recognising Palestine, including Gaza and the West Bank together as a distinct, sovereign nation. Whilst there have been moves towards this via the creation of the Palestinian Authority, this is not the same as a fully sovereign, recognised state.
However, antizionism is not primarily arguing for a two-state solution. There are two forms of antizionism. First, particularly in the Middle East, there are those who see the solution being the creation of an Islamic entity, potentially part of a wider Islamic Caliphate. This would of course require either the expulsion or genocide of Jews from the land or their conversion to Islam. There is a more western, secular form of antizionism which argues that, there should be a single, secular state solution. It is worth noting that Israel is already in effect a secular state but with a majority of Jews and a level of particular recognition of Judaism. So, assuming a democratic solution, this of course begs the question “What exactly would be different about this one state solution.” It seems to assume that Palestinians would want to be part of such a state. It also doesn’t seem to allow for the reality on the ground that this state, without further mass emigration and immigration would still be majority Jewish although by a significantly reduced margin.
Now, the reason why this matters right now, is that frequently when I see people speaking about the current conflict, particularly when you focus on the kind of rhetoric at recent demonstrations, a significant undertone to the argument has been that the modern state of Israel should not exist. This is of course captured very explicitly by the “From the river to the sea” slogan. It is incumbent upon those who join in with or excuse such rhetoric to properly consider the implications.
I believe therefore that it is possible to say that you are not a Zionist, to argue that you would not have supported the existence of Israel as a nation state if you were around in the 19th century. It is certainly legitimate to strongly condemn both contemporary and historic injustices by the Israeli state. However, if you are treating Israel differently from other nations today, denying its right to exist if you are using “Zionist” as a slur, then it is very difficult to distinguish that from the rhetoric of antisemitism.
Faithroots 