Now that the war in Gaza appears to have come to an end and Hamas has returned the remaining 20 living hostages to their families, we can fully expect Israel’s enemies and other critics across the globe to turn their attention to the declared intention of some of the extremist members of the Israeli government to formally make the West Bank part of a greater Israel that stretches from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean.
Except, of course, that President Donald Trump seems to have preemptively put the kibosh on any such scenario. “I will not allow Israel to annex the West Bank,” Trump told reporters two weeks ago. “It’s not going to happen.”
Trump realizes and has said out loud the simple truth that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his acolytes stubbornly ignore: Israel cannot endure in the long run by permanently subjugating the Palestinian population of the territories it has held since the June 1967 Six-Day War. More importantly, as Trump told Netanyahu in a telephone conversation this past week, “Israel can’t fight the world.” Or as he told Netanyahu during his speech to the Knesset on Monday, “Be a little bit nicer, Bibi, because you’re not at war anymore. … You don’t want to have to go through this again.”
An Israeli – or Jewish – hegemony over what was once the biblical land of Judea and in due course morphed into pre-1948 British Mandatory Palestine is not and has never been the goal of mainstream Zionism as conceived and understood by the likes of Theodor Herzl, Chaim Weizmann, David Ben-Gurion and Louis D. Brandeis. But with the concept and essence of Zionism widely misunderstood or deliberately mischaracterized, it is more critical than ever to place the broad and multifaceted nature of this ethnocultural ideology in its accurate historical context.
We know whereof we speak. We are both unabashed Zionists who unequivocally identify with the State of Israel even though we radically disagree with the extremist ideology and many of the policies of its present government. One of us is a former national president of the Labor Zionist Alliance and past member of the Zionist General Council which oversees the work and activities of the World Zionist Organization. The other has been a visiting professor at both the Hebrew University in Jerusalem and Tel Aviv University, and maintains ongoing relations with both. We are long-time supporters of the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. One of us met with Yasser Arafat and senior leaders of the Palestine Liberation Organization together with four other American Jews in Stockholm in December 1988, resulting in the PLO’s first public acceptance of Israel as a state in the Middle East. The other is presently writing a book on the early socialist founders of modern Israel.
Trump’s above-quoted comments regarding the West Bank came against the backdrop of an earlier pronouncement by Netanyahu in which he resurrected the old meme of Israel as latter-day Sparta. Acknowledging Israel’s ever-increasing political and economic isolation in consequence of what then still seemed as his government’s seemingly interminable war in Gaza, Netanyahu declared that his country “will increasingly need to adapt to an economy with autarkic characteristics” and become a “super-Sparta.”
Had Netanyahu’s reference been to Plutarch’s account of the ancient Greek polity — a society highly unified, disciplined, and militarily formidable when existentially threatened – then perhaps, fair enough. The problem with his analogy, however, is what it leaves out: First, that Sparta’s hegemonic dominance was decisively and permanently ended by its catastrophic defeat at the hands of a far superior Theban army at the Battle of Leuctra in 371 BCE. And, more importantly, second, that Israel was meant by its socialist founders to emulate Athens more than Sparta, and that most of its population longs to return to this “Athenian normal” even as its current leaders try to force it into a Sparta-only straight-jacket.
There are, in short, two conflicting contemporary visions of Israel that can, when taken in “absolutist” fashion, distort understandings of both the Athenian and the Spartan aspects of today’s Israel. Peace, progress and prosperity await both refinement and synthesis of both visions.
The first vision, part of which was at the core of the Labor-Zionist-guided establishment of Israel under U.N. auspices in 1948, is of a democratic polity rooted in not only the quintessentially Jewish values of justice and social solidarity but also, equally important, a Jeffersonian-republican model of social democracy pursuant to which religiously and ethnically diverse groups coexist and co-govern as a matter of course.
This vision requires updating in one subtle respect to stay true to the Israel-as-Athens picture: namely, by supplementing the largely pastoral-agricultural imaginary of Israel’s primarily kibbutznik Labor-Zionist founders (not to mention of Jefferson himself) with a now-fuller and more productively-diversified picture of the Israel now widely called, among tech visionaries and others, the “Startup Nation.” This we must do if we are to understand both the motivations and, indeed, the promise of the Abraham Accords with their vision of a vibrantly revived Mediterranean-Levantine civilization the likes of which hasn’t been seen since the days of the ancient Phoenicians.
The second, borderline-apocalyptic vision of Israel now dominant in today’s Netanyahu-led Israel government is that of a fundamentalist Jewish hegemony over the entire biblical territory that encompasses not only Israel but the West Bank as well – “From the River to the Sea for Jews and Jews Only,” as it were. This is the pseudo-messianic model that Netanyahu and the shots-calling extremist far right members of his government are working feverishly and openly to bring about at the expense of Israel’s Jewish and non-Jewish citizens alike — not to mention its neighbors, its standing in the international community, and even the interests of Jews across the globe.
This vision requires far more radical revision to do justice to a plausible — and indeed desirable — Spartan comparison than does the original Labor-Zionist vision to do justice to a plausible Athenian comparison. Indeed, an accurate Spartan vision would have to be as Jeffersonian as the Athenian model: It would be that of a republic of citizen-soldiers able to mobilize on short notice, “Minute Man” style, when threatened, but otherwise going about the business of producing, inventing, arguing (these are Israelis, after all), and governing under the rule of law just as the ancient Israelite leaders were anointed only on condition that they rule under then-Hebrew law.
Happily, there are hundreds of thousands of Israelis who not only reject the Netanyahu government and its (distorted) “Super-Sparta” policies, but also have consistently taken to the streets against it since long before Hamas’ terrorist savagery on Oct. 7, 2023. These Israelis have sought to block Netanyahu’s attempt to eviscerate their country’s independent judicial system. They are the ones who called consistently for the ceasefire in Gaza that has now been reached and that will hopefully result in a pathway to a viable Israeli-Palestinian coexistence. And they are among those whom, alas, the likes of Hollywood actors Javier Bardem, Emma Stone,and Hannah Einbinder seek to boycott.
Israel’s aforesaid enemies, for whom a putative “anti-Zionism” they do not begin to comprehend or deliberately distort is an article of blind and blinded faith, seem either cognitively unable or perversely unwilling to distinguish between anything-but-Athenian neo-fascists like Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and Internal Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir who want to destroy Israel’s democracy on the one hand, and the likes of Israeli President Isaac Herzog and opposition leader (and former prime minister) Yair Lapid, among others — who work to preserve that democracy — on the other hand. And in his heart of hearts, we fear, Netanyahu desperately wants the world to see only the former and never the latter.
Nahum Goldmann, then president of both the World Zionist Organization and the World Jewish Congress, pointedly observed, in the wake of Israel’s June 1967 “Six-Day War,” that Israel cannot prevail exclusively as “the Sparta of the Middle East.” He was right. Israel must be both Athens and Sparta — and it must be the actual, not the children’s book, version of both. Netanyahu does not seem to “get” this. Nor, sadly, do some of those who support New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani, who in endorsing a “global intifada” are, wittingly or otherwise, effectively calling for the elimination of Israel altogether and thereby perpetuating Netanyahu’s comic-book Sparta government with all the apocalyptic horrors that this entails.
The road ahead will not be easy even after the Gaza war is in the rearview mirror and it will not be short, but if there is to be any hope for the future, the leaders of both sides of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict must embark on it by recognizing each other’s humanity and seeking to emulate Athens more and Sparta less.
JTA has documented Jewish history in real-time for over a century. Keep our journalism strong by joining us in supporting independent, award-winning reporting.
