logo
Anti-Zionism is antisemitism — university leaders settle the question

Anti-Zionism is antisemitism — university leaders settle the question

For too long, the debate over antisemitism on college campuses has bogged down over whether anti-Zionism is antisemitism. Endless ink has been spilled over the distinction (or not) between the two.
Last week, in their testimony to the House Committee on Education & Workforce, UC Berkeley Chancellor Rich Lyons, City University of New York Chancellor Félix V. Matos Rodríguez and Georgetown interim President Robert M. Groves cut through all this academic hairsplitting. 'Is denying the Jewish people their rights to self-determination … antisemitism? Yes or no?' asked Rep. Burgess Owens (R-Utah). All three university leaders replied simply and unequivocally: 'Yes.'
The right to Jewish self-determination is a textbook definition of Zionism. The clarity with which the university officials pegged anti-Zionism as antisemitic is much-needed and long overdue.
For years, progressives have raised consciousness about the need to recognize and repudiate bigoted dog whistles, microaggressions and misgendering. Yet many of those same progressives have been shockingly silent when it comes to decrying the macroaggressions of antisemitism that have become increasingly commonplace at anti-Israel protests. They've insisted that the now-familiar chants — 'From the river to the sea, Palestine shall be free!' 'We don't want no two states! We want all of '48!'— are not antisemitic, just anti-Zionist, with some who are Jewish concurring and providing cover.
Yet just as there can be 'racism without racists' — that is, racist results without racist intents — so too can there be antisemitism without antisemites. Not all anti-Zionists are antisemites, but anti-Zionism, in its most basic form — denying to the Jewish people the right to self-determination, a right recognized as inherent to countless others, including Palestinians — is itself a form of antisemitism.
Moreover, because anti-Zionism singles out the Jewish state alone for elimination — among the dozens of ethnonational or ethnoreligious states in the world, including myriad Islamic ones — that, too, makes it a form of antisemitism.
Declaring anti-Zionism to be antisemitic, as the university leaders did, was an important development for the dignity of Jewish students, one that echoed and amplified a federal district court's preliminary injunction last year that said UCLA could not allow anti-Israel activists to exclude 'Jewish students … because they refused to denounce their faith,' of which Zionism was a central component, from parts of the campus, as happened during protests against the Israel-Hamas war.
Zionism, at its core, is a belief in Israel's right to sovereignty as a Jewish state on part of the ancestral homeland of the Jewish people. That's a millennia-old article of faith for Judaism, as reflected, for example, in daily Jewish prayers, the Passover Seder and the ritual of breaking a glass at weddings. Those claiming the mantle of Zionism for far more aggressive or exclusionary aims don't change that core fact, nor do those treating Zionism as a uniquely malevolent expression of national liberation or nation-building.
Recognizing anti-Zionism as a manifestation of antisemitism is an important step forward for combating the discrimination and ostracism that many Jewish students have experienced for expressing their support for Israel's right to exist in the face of those who call for its elimination. Such recognition, in turn, can help concentrate campus conflicts about Israel and Palestinians on what matters most: fruitful debate over Israel's actions (including its prosecution of the war in Gaza) rather than fruitless shouting matches over Israel's existence and neo-McCarthyite litmus tests ('Are you now or have you ever been a Zionist?').
As this happens, we would be well-served to cease and desist using the terms 'Zionism' and 'anti-Zionism,' except as historical artifacts. After all, 'Zionism' refers to the aspiration to create a nation that is now nearly 80 years old. And anti-Zionism thus perpetuates a fantasy that Israel's long-settled place among the family of nations is still open for debate. It isn't, any more than, say, the existence of Russia under Putin or the United States under Trump, however much we might deplore their policies, is open for debate.
We owe the Berkeley, CUNY and Georgetown leaders a great debt of gratitude for helping to elevate the intractable campus conflicts about Israel and the Palestinians to a higher plane.
Mark Brilliant is an associate professor of history and American studies at UC Berkeley.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

French authorities investigate if Jewish passengers were removed from flight due to religion
French authorities investigate if Jewish passengers were removed from flight due to religion

New York Post

time18 minutes ago

  • New York Post

French authorities investigate if Jewish passengers were removed from flight due to religion

French authorities are trying to establish whether a group of young French citizens was removed from a plane bound for Paris from Spain this week because they are Jewish. The airline, Vueling, has denied the claims. Several dozen French passengers on Wednesday were kicked off a flight leaving the Spanish city of Valencia for Paris, for what Spanish police and the airline described as unruly behavior. French authorities are trying to establish whether a group of young French citizens was removed from a plane bound for Paris from Spain this week because they are Jewish. AFP via Getty Images France's ministry for Europe and foreign affairs said in a statement on Saturday that the minister, Jean-Noël Barrot, contacted the CEO of Vueling, Carolina Martinoli, to express his deep concern 'about the removal of a group of young French Jews from one of the company's flights.' Barrot also requested more information to 'determine whether these individuals had been discriminated against on the basis of their religion.' A similar request has been made to the Spanish ambassador to France. 'Ms. Martinoli assured Mr. Barrot that a thorough internal investigation was underway and that its findings would be shared with the French and Spanish authorities,' the ministry said. Vueling previously denied reports that the incident, which involved the removal of 44 minors and eight adults from flight V8166, was related to the passengers' religion. Several dozen French passengers on Wednesday were kicked off a flight leaving the Spanish city of Valencia for Paris, for what Spanish police and the airline described as unruly behavior. AP Some Israeli news outlets reported that the students were Jewish and that their removal was religiously motivated, a claim that was repeated by an Israeli minister online. Spain's Civil Guard said the minors and adults were French nationals. A Civil Guard spokesperson said the agents involved were not aware of the group's religious affiliation. A Vueling spokesperson said the passengers were removed after the minors repeatedly tampered with the plane's emergency equipment and interrupted the crew's safety demonstration. A Civil Guard spokesperson said the captain of the plane ordered the removal of the minors from the plane at Valencia's Manises Airport after they repeatedly ignored the crew's instructions. On Thursday, the Federation for Jewish Communities of Spain expressed concern about the incident. The group said that Vueling needed to provide documentary evidence of what happened on the plane.

How France's recognition of the state of Palestine could shift Middle East dynamics
How France's recognition of the state of Palestine could shift Middle East dynamics

Chicago Tribune

timean hour ago

  • Chicago Tribune

How France's recognition of the state of Palestine could shift Middle East dynamics

PARIS — France's bold decision to recognize the state of Palestine could help to shift conversations about the future of the Middle East, even if it's unlikely to have an immediate impact for people in Gaza or on Israel's war with Hamas. In a world where nations are again using military force to impose their will on others — notably Russia in Ukraine, and the U.S. and Israel with their recent strikes on Iran and its nuclear facilities — French President Emmanuel Macron is attempting to strike a blow for diplomacy and the idea that war rarely brings peace. With less than two years left of his second and last term as president, Macron also has his legacy to think about. Not acting decisively as a humanitarian disaster unfolds in Gaza could be a stain when history books are written. Macron has levers to influence world affairs as leader of a nuclear-armed, economically and diplomatically powerful country that also sits at the big table at the United Nations, as one of the five permanent members of its security council. Being the first member of the G7 group of industrialized nations to take this leap carries domestic risks. Presiding over a country with both Europe's largest Jewish population and largest Muslim population, Macron is on a public opinion tightrope. His words will please some voters but infuriate others — a fact reflected by deeply divided political reactions in France to his decision announced on X on Thursday evening. But after staunchly backing Israel's right to defend itself against Hamas and its Oct. 7, 2023, attack that triggered the war, Macron is signaling that France's support can only go so far. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu denounced the shift by one of his country's closer allies in Europe. 'Such a move rewards terror and risks creating another Iranian proxy, just as Gaza became,' he said in a statement. 'A Palestinian state in these conditions would be a launch pad to annihilate Israel — not to live in peace beside it.'' The idea that Palestinians and Israelis could live side by side in peace in their own states has perhaps never looked more unrealistic — with Gaza in ruins and the occupied West Bank facing increasing settlement by Israelis. Macron's words alone won't change that. Still, the French leader's message is that the hope of a 'two-state solution' achieved through diplomacy must not be allowed to die — however unattainable it may seem. 'This solution is the only path that can address the legitimate aspirations of both the Israelis and the Palestinians. It must now be brought about as quickly as possible,' Macron said in a letter to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas which confirmed his decision to recognize Palestine as a state. 'The prospect of a negotiated solution to the conflict in the Middle East seems increasingly distant. I cannot resign myself to that,' he said. The first impacts are likeliest not in Gaza but in world capitals where leaders may face pressure or feel emboldened to follow France's lead. Attention is focusing on other G7 nations, because of their economic and diplomatic sway. 'Macron's declaration could create a precedent because it would be the first Western country in the G7 to do so, which could have the effect of leading others,' said David Rigoulet-Roze, a researcher at the French Institute of Strategic Analysis. Although more than 140 countries recognize Palestine as a state, France will be the biggest, most populous and most powerful among those in Europe that have taken this step. 'It creates some small momentum,' said Yossi Mekelberg, a senior consulting fellow at the Chatham House think tank in London who also added, however, that 'this is not enough.' 'France should be congratulated, and Macron should be congratulated for doing that and showing the courage,' he said. Until now, China and Russia were the only permanent members of the U.N. Security Council that recognized Palestinian statehood. France will join them when Macron makes good on his promise in September at the U.N. General Assembly. The new trio will leave the U.S. and the U.K. in a security council minority as its only permanent members that don't recognize Palestine as a state. The so-called P5 nations are divided on many other issues — including Ukraine, trade and climate change — so France's shift isn't, in itself, likely to spur radical and rapid change for Palestinians. Still, if only mathematically, the U.S. — Israel's most important ally — and the U.K could find themselves more isolated among the big powers in any discussions on solutions for the Middle East. U.S. President Donald Trump dismissed Macron's decision on Friday, saying 'What he says doesn't matter. It's not going to change anything.' France may have better traction with the U.K. Putting Brexit behind them, the U.K. and France are now drawing closer, most notably in support for Ukraine. If British Prime Minister Keir Starmer follows Macron's example, Trump could become the odd man out on Palestinian statehood among the security council's big five powers. Starmer has signaled growing disquiet over the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, saying in a statement Thursday that suffering and starvation there 'is unspeakable and indefensible.' But he doesn't seem ready to take a leap like Macron, suggesting that fighting must stop first. 'Statehood is the inalienable right of the Palestinian people,' Starmer said. 'A ceasefire will put us on a path to the recognition of a Palestinian state and a two-state solution.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store