Zionism has been described by some scholars as a form of settler colonialism in relation to the region of Palestine and the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. The term has gained significant traction among leftist groups and individuals engaged in campus activism.[1][2][3]
Patrick Wolfe, a theorist of settler colonial studies defines settler colonialism as an ongoing "structure, not an event" aimed at replacing a native population rather than exploiting it.[4][5][6] Many of the founders of Zionism themselves described it as colonialism, such as Vladimir Jabotinsky.[7][8] Proponents of the paradigm of Zionism as settler colonialism include Edward Said, Rashid Khalidi, Noam Chomsky, Ilan Pappe, Fayez Sayegh, Maxime Rodinson, George Jabbour, Ibrahim Abu-Lughod, Baha Abu-Laban, Jamil Hilal, and Rosemary Sayigh.[9][10]
The current conceptual framework emerged in the 1990s among Palestinian scholars in Israel who "reframed the history of the Nakba as enduring" in response to their marginalization by the two-state Israeli–Palestinian peace process.[11][a] Rachel Busbridge contends that its subsequent popularity is inseparable from frustration at the stagnation of that process and resulting Western left-wing sympathy for Palestinian nationalism. She writes that while a settler colonial analysis "offers a far more accurate portrayal of the conflict than...has conventionally been painted".[12] Hussein Ibishargues that such zero-sum calls are "a gift that no occupying power and no colonizing settler movement deserves."[13]
Critics of the paradigm argue that Zionism does not fit the traditional framework of colonialism. S. Ilan Troen views Zionism as the return of an indigenous population to its historic homeland, distinct from imperial expansion.[14] Yuval Shany calls the colonial label a "significant category error," as it involves "two indigenous peoples."[2] Jeffrey C. Alexander notes that the association of Israel with colonialism improperly aligns Jews with European colonizers.[2] Roger Cohen highlights Jews' lack of a "metropole" and Israel's diverse society.[2] Benny Morris argues that Zionism sought sovereignty over historically Jewish land without serving an imperial power or exploiting resources.[15] Tom Segevargues that colonialism is not central to the Zionist experience, emphasizing instead a historical vision for Jewish identity in the ancient homeland, and noting that most Jews arrived in the region as refugees.[1] Most Jews oppose the paradigm, saying it denies their historical connection to the land and aspirations for self-determination.[14][1]
Colonisation can have only one aim, and Palestine Arabs cannot accept this aim. It lies in the very nature of things, and in this particular regard nature cannot be changed...Zionist colonisation must either stop, or else proceed regardless of the native population.
Calling Israel a settler colonial regime is an argument increasingly gaining purchase in activist and, to a lesser extent, academic circles.
Cite error: There are <ref group=lower-alpha>
tags or {{efn}}
templates on this page, but the references will not show without a {{reflist|group=lower-alpha}}
template or {{notelist}}
template (see the help page).
© MMXXIII Rich X Search. We shall prevail. All rights reserved. Rich X Search