Zionism
Zionism (/ˈzaɪ.ənɪzəm/ ZY-ə-niz-əm; Hebrew: צִיּוֹנוּת, romanized: Ṣīyyonūt, IPA: [tsijoˈnut]; derived from Zion) is an ethnic or ethno-cultural nationalist[1][fn 1] movement that emerged in Europe in the late 19th century and aimed for the re-establishment of a homeland for the Jewish people through the colonization[4] of Palestine,[5][6][7][8] a region corresponding to the Land of Israel in Jewish tradition,[9][10][11][12] an area deeply embedded in Jewish history, religion and the identity. Following the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, Zionism became an ideology that supports the development and protection of Israel as a Jewish state, in particular, a state with a Jewish demographic majority.[13][14][1][15][16] It has also been described as Israel's national or state ideology.[17]
For other uses, see Zionism (disambiguation).
Zionism initially emerged in Central and Eastern Europe as a national revival movement in the late 19th century, in reaction to newer waves of antisemitism and as a consequence of the Haskalah, or Jewish Enlightenment.[1][18][19][20] During this period, Palestine was part of the Ottoman Empire.[21][22][23] The arrival of Zionist settlers to Palestine during this period is widely seen as the start of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. Throughout the first decade of the Zionist movement, some Zionist figures, including Theodor Herzl, supported alternative options to Palestine in several places such as "Uganda" (actually parts of British East Africa today in Kenya), Argentina, Cyprus, Mesopotamia, Mozambique, and the Sinai Peninsula,[24] but this was rejected by most of the movement. This process was seen by the emerging Zionist movement as an "ingathering of exiles" (kibbutz galuyot), an effort to put a stop to the exoduses and persecutions that have marked Jewish history by bringing the Jewish people back to their historic homeland.[25]
From 1897 to 1948, the primary goal of the Zionist movement was to establish the basis for a Jewish homeland in Palestine, and thereafter to consolidate it. The movement itself recognized that Zionism's claim to Palestine went against the commonly accepted interpretation of the principle of self-determination.[26] In 1884, proto-Zionist groups established the Lovers of Zion, and in 1897 the first Zionist congress was organized. In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, a large number of Jews immigrated first to Ottoman and later to Mandatory Palestine. At the same time, some international recognition and support was gained, notably in the 1917 Balfour Declaration by the United Kingdom. Since the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, Zionism has continued primarily to advocate on behalf of Israel and to address threats to its continued existence and security.
The term "Zionism" has been applied to various approaches to addressing issues faced by European Jews in the late 19th century.[27] Modern political Zionism, different from religious Zionism, is a movement made up of diverse political groups whose strategies and tactics have changed over time. The common ideology among mainstream Zionist factions is support for territorial concentration and a Jewish demographic majority in Palestine. The Zionist mainstream has historically included liberal, labor, revisionist, and cultural Zionism, while groups like Brit Shalom and Ihud have been dissident factions within the movement.[13] Differences within the mainstream Zionist groups lie primarily in their presentation and ethos, having adopted similar political strategies and approaches to dealing with the local Palestinian population, especially regarding the use of violence and compulsory transfer.[28][29][30][31][32] Advocates of Zionism have viewed it as a national liberation movement for the repatriation of an indigenous people (which were subject to persecution and share a national identity through national consciousness), to the homeland of their ancestors as noted in ancient history.[33][34][35] Similarly, anti-Zionism has many aspects, which include criticism of Zionism as a colonialist,[36] racist,[37] or exceptionalist ideology or as a settler colonialist movement.[38][39][40][41][42] Proponents of Zionism do not necessarily reject the characterization of Zionism as settler-colonial or exceptionalist.[43][44][45]
Terminology
The term "Zionism" is derived from the word Zion (Hebrew: ציון, romanized: Tzi-yon), a hill in Jerusalem, widely symbolizing the Land of Israel.[46] Throughout eastern Europe in the late 19th century, numerous grassroots groups promoted the national resettlement of the Jews in their homeland,[47] as well as the revitalization and cultivation of the Hebrew language. These groups were collectively called the "Lovers of Zion" and were seen as countering a growing Jewish movement toward assimilation. The first use of the term is attributed to the Austrian Nathan Birnbaum, founder of the Kadimah nationalist Jewish students' movement; he used the term in 1890 in his journal Selbst-Emancipation (Self-Emancipation),[48][49] itself named almost identically to Leon Pinsker's 1882 book Auto-Emancipation.
Role in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict
The arrival of Zionist settlers to Palestine in the late 19th century is widely seen as the start of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict.[58]: 70 [192][193] In response to Ben-Gurion's 1938 quote that "politically we are the aggressors and they [the Palestinians] defend themselves", Israeli historian Benny Morris says, "Ben-Gurion, of course, was right. Zionism was a colonizing and expansionist ideology and movement", and that "Zionist ideology and practice were necessarily and elementally expansionist." Morris describes the Zionist goal of establishing a Jewish state in Palestine as necessarily displacing and dispossessing the Arab population.[194]
The practical issue of establishing a Jewish state in a majority non-Jewish and Arab region was a fundamental issue for the Zionist movement.[194] Zionists used the term "transfer" as a euphemism for the removal, or ethnic cleansing, of the Arab Palestinian population.[fn 3][195] According to Benny Morris, "the idea of transferring the Arabs out... was seen as the chief means of assuring the stability of the 'Jewishness' of the proposed Jewish State".[194]
In fact, the concept of forcibly removing the non-Jewish population from Palestine was a notion that garnered support across the entire spectrum of Zionist groups, including its farthest left factions[fn 4], from early on in the movement's development.[196][197][198][194][199][200] The concept of transfer was not only seen as desirable but also as an ideal solution by the Zionist leadership.[200][29][201] The notion of forcible transfer was so appealing to this leadership that it was considered the most attractive provision in the Peel Commission. Indeed, this sentiment was deeply ingrained to the extent that Ben Gurion's acceptance of partition was contingent upon the removal of the Palestinian population. He would go as far as to say that transfer was such an ideal solution that it "must happen some day". It was the right wing of the Zionist movement that put forward the main arguments against transfer, their objections being primarily on practical rather than moral grounds.[196][202]
According to Morris, the idea of ethnically cleansing the land of Palestine was to play a large role in Zionist ideology from the inception of the movement. He explains that "transfer" was "inevitable and inbuilt into Zionism" and that a land which was primarily Arab could not be transformed into a Jewish state without displacing the Arab population.[fn 5] Further, the stability of the Jewish state could not be ensured given the Arab population's fear of displacement. He explains that this would be the primary source of conflict between the Zionist movement and the Arab population.[195]
