Wall Street Journal Mr. Oren was Israel's ambassador to the U.S. from 2009 to 2013. He
holds the chair in international diplomacy at IDC Herzliya in Israel and
is a fellow at the Atlantic Council. His books include "Six Days of
War: June 1967 and the Making of the Modern Middle East" and "Power,
Faith, and Fantasy: America in the Middle East, 1776 to the Present."
They come from every corner of the
country—investment bankers, farmers, computer geeks, jazz drummers,
botany professors, car mechanics—leaving their jobs and their families.
They put on uniforms that are invariably too tight or too baggy, sign
out their gear and guns. Then, scrambling onto military vehicles, 70,000
reservists—women and men—join the young conscripts of what is
proportionally the world's largest citizen army. They all know that some
of them will return maimed or not at all. And yet, without hesitation
or (for the most part) complaint, proudly responding to the call-up,
Israelis stand ready to defend their nation. They risk their lives for
an idea.
The idea is Zionism. It is the
belief that the Jewish people should have their own sovereign state in
the Land of Israel. Though founded less than 150 years ago, the Zionist
movement sprung from a 4,000-year-long bond between the Jewish people
and its historic homeland, an attachment sustained throughout 20
centuries of exile. This is why Zionism achieved its goals and remains
relevant and rigorous today. It is why citizens of Israel—the state that
Zionism created—willingly take up arms. They believe their idea is
worth fighting for.
Yet Zionism,
arguably more than any other contemporary ideology, is demonized. "All
Zionists are legitimate targets everywhere in the world!" declared a
banner recently paraded by anti-Israel protesters in Denmark. "Dogs are
allowed in this establishment but Zionists are not under any
circumstances," warned a sign in the window of a Belgian cafe. A Jewish
demonstrator in Iceland was accosted and told, "You Zionist pig, I'm
going to behead you."
In certain
academic and media circles, Zionism is synonymous with colonialism and
imperialism. Critics on the radical right and left have likened it to
racism or, worse, Nazism. And that is in the West. In the Middle East,
Zionism is the ultimate abomination—the product of a Holocaust that many
in the region deny ever happened while maintaining nevertheless that
the Zionists deserved it.
What is it
about Zionism that elicits such loathing? After all, the longing of a
dispersed people for a state of their own cannot possibly be so
repugnant, especially after that people endured centuries of massacres
and expulsions, culminating in history's largest mass murder. Perhaps
revulsion toward Zionism stems from its unusual blend of national
identity, religion and loyalty to a land. Japan offers the closest
parallel, but despite its rapacious past, Japanese nationalism doesn't
evoke the abhorrence aroused by Zionism.[...]
The
answer is simple: Zionism worked. The chances were infinitesimal that a
scattered national group could be assembled from some 70 countries into a
sliver-sized territory shorn of resources and rich in adversaries and
somehow survive, much less prosper. The odds that those immigrants would
forge a national identity capable of producing a vibrant literature,
pace-setting arts and six of the world's leading universities
approximated zero.[...]
But not all of Zionism's critics are
bigoted, and not a few of them are Jewish. For a growing number of
progressive Jews, Zionism is too militantly nationalist, while for many
ultra-Orthodox Jews, the movement is insufficiently pious—even
heretical. How can an idea so universally reviled retain its legitimacy,
much less lay claim to success?