
Why Israel's self-image changed from self-reliance to militarism
Proud, self-reliant and resilient, the 'new Jew' was a reaction to centuries of bullying, culminating in the virulent antisemitism of the modern era.
But, as I argue in my book, New Hebrews: Making National Culture in Zion, as Zionists set out to invent themselves anew, they also sowed the seeds of self-sabotage. Early pride and defiance, paired with disregard for the native Arabs of Palestine, bred both a survival instinct and a dangerous militarism.
A look back at some of the principles of the Zionist revolution in the 20th century uncovers the cultural backstory to Israel's current situation. It shows how the same vision that built a strong nation also hardwired the divisions and antagonisms now threatening its democracy, security and place in the world.
In this way, I argue that the logic behind Israel's alarming actions in Gaza, the rage with which it continues to come down on the Gazans following the October 7 attack almost two years ago, may be found in the country's history.
The cultural revolution Zionists staged was an intensive project. It was a revolution so fervent that it altered the course of Jewish history and set in motion one of the most enduring transformations in a century crowded with radical changes.
Many of the Zionist innovations were truly impressive. The ancient Hebrew of the Bible was used to create a completely modern literature and was later turned into a spoken language. The socialist leanings of early Zionists led them to experiment with new communal forms, such as the kibbutz. The old Jewish festival calendar was creatively updated in the spirit of modern nationalism.
Zionists also created new artistic sensibilities in visual art and in music. They tapped into rich and diverse Jewish cultural traditions that spanned geographic regions.
One innovation in particular, the physical transformation of the Jewish image, had profound consequences that continue to reverberate today as we see in the tragic war on Gaza. At the heart of the Zionist cultural revolution lay a determination to overturn centuries-old stereotypes of Jews as outcasts: weak, passive, cowardly.
Drawing on European nationalist ideals, Zionists wanted to disprove these slanders by forging new Jewish men (men in particular): strong, productive and self-reliant. Israeli kibbutzim celebrate 'Bikurim', also known as the Festival of First Fruits, 1951. Israel Preker via the PikiWiki via Wikimedia Commons
This remaking of the Jewish body was not merely symbolic. It was a deliberate strategy to reclaim visibility, dignity and respect. It was a quest that would have far-reaching consequences for Jews and non-Jews alike.
The obsession with manual labor was both a necessity and an ideological cornerstone of Zionist ideology. It was the engine behind the remarkable growth of the Yishuv – (literally: settlement) – the Jewish community that developed in Palestine in the first half of the 20th century.
Commonly referred to in quasi-military terms as the 'conquest of labor,' it romanticized agriculture and construction work as a moral and spiritual renewal. It was a rebuttal to the negative stereotype of Jews.
But I believe it had a more problematic side. As Arab resistance to Zionist settlement grew, the new Jewish farmers evolved a military side as well.
The inspiration for it came from two sources, from the fighting culture of local Bedouins, and from the Ukrainian Cossacks. This was an ironic twist given the violence Cossacks often directed at Jews. By 1948, both farmers and soldiers became two of Zionism's most distinct symbols, national ideals of productivity and physical force. Jewish defense forces (Haganah) training in March 1948, two months before the creation of the state of Israel. Kluger Zoltan/GPO, CC BY-SA
But something unexpected happened to that evolution somewhere along the way. In their effort to create a new kind of Jew, Zionists in Israel distanced themselves from life in the Jewish diaspora – sometimes by internalising antisemitic notions of that life.
One sad example was the chilly reception Holocaust survivors received in 1950s Israel. Some Jews born in what is now Israel, who were referred to as sabras (prickly pears), were arrogant enough to believe they would have fared better under the same circumstances than those caught up by the Holocaust, who they called sabonim (soap).
By the 1980s, attempts to leave behind the so-called 'lachrymose history' of Jews – which viewed Jewish history primarily as a narrative of suffering and persecution – began to be supplanted.
During and after the trial of Nazi war criminal Adolph Eichmann in 1961, Nazi persecution of Jews was linked first by Israeli Prime Minister Ben-Gurion and then journalists and academics with Arab resistance to the state of Israel.
Both were eventually presented as examples of congenital hatred and used as a powerful argument for the establishment of the state and its right to exist. It was a dramatic combination, hard to resist, that connected the creation of the Jewish state with the near destruction of the Jews in the Holocaust – even if Zionism emerged long before that catastrophe.
The baggage that was put aside in the rush to statehood, was now being opened. A reminder for Zionists that utopias are more easily written about than created – and that the pull of Jewish history is stronger than they thought.
The resulting new mix was alarming: a combination of the Jewish power Zionism obtained with the old sense of Jewish victimhood that early Zionists had fought hard to eradicate.
Consider this: in the aftermath of the October 7, 2023, attack, many people in Israel referred to it as a pogrom, a word that describes the sporadic massacres of Jews in Eastern Europe. Think about it.
Israel, a rich and powerful country, well-connected and – until recently at least, generally well-liked – compared itself to a small, vulnerable and isolated Jewish shtetl (small settlement in eastern Europe) in a bygone world where Jews were utterly powerless.
That one word, pogrom, explains it all. It wipes away 100 years of Zionist history and resurrects old Jewish grievances.
This may be one explanation for the country's overreaction in Gaza. This is not an excuse, but an explanation that calls for the next evolutionary step in the history of Zionism – one in which Israel understands that it has achieved the goal for which it was established. Israel must realize it has power – that it is a power – and that with power comes responsibility.
Yaron Peleg is Kennedy-Leigh professor of modern Hebrew studies, University of Cambridge
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


AllAfrica
3 days ago
- AllAfrica
Gaza grab will deepen Israel's global credibility crisis
For all its claims of being a democracy that adheres to international law and the rules of war, Israel's global reputation is in tatters. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's latest plan for a full military takeover of Gaza, along with the expanding starvation crisis in the strip and Israel's repressive measures in the West Bank, underline the country's predicament. Notwithstanding US support, the Jewish state faces a crisis of international credibility, from which it may not be able to recover for a long time. According to a recent Pew poll, the international view of Israel is now more negative than positive. The majority of those polled in early 2025 in countries such as the Netherlands (78%), Japan (79%), Spain (75%), Australia (74%), Turkey (93%) and Sweden (75%) said they have an unfavorable view of Israel. The International Criminal Court has issued arrest warrants for Netanyahu and Israel's former defense minister, Yoav Gallant, on charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity. Many international law experts, genocide scholars and human rights groups have also accused Israel of committing genocide in Gaza. Israel's traditional supporters have also harshly criticized the Netanyahu government's actions, from both inside and outside the country. These include former prime ministers Ehud Olmert and Ehud Barak, the Israeli literary giant David Grossman and Masorti Judaism Rabbi Jonathan Wittenberg and Rabbi Delphine Horvilleur. In addition, hundreds of retired Israeli security officials have appealed to US President Donald Trump to push Netanyahu to end the war. With images of starving children in Gaza dominating the news in recent weeks, many of Israel's friends in the Western alliance have similarly reached the point at which they can no longer tolerate its policy actions. In a major shift in global opinion, France announced it would recognize Palestinian statehood in September. The United Kingdom and Canada vowed to follow suit. Even Germany has now begun the process of recognition. And Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has indicated his country's recognition of Palestine was only a matter of time. Spain and Sweden have called for the suspension of the European Union's trade agreement with Israel, while the Netherlands has officially labeled Israel a 'security threat', citing attempts to influence Dutch public opinion. Israel and the US have rejected all these accusations and moves. The momentum against Israel in the international community, however, has left it with the US as its only major global supporter. Israel's sovereignty, security and prosperity now ride on the back of America's continued support. Without US assistance, in particular its billions of dollars worth of arms exports, Israel would have struggled to maintain its devastating Gaza campaign or repressive occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem since the 1967 Arab-Israeli war. Yet, despite Trump's deep commitment to Israel, many in the US electorate are seriously questioning the depth of Netanyahu's influence in Washington and the value of US aid to Israel. According to a Gallup poll in March, fewer than half of Americans are sympathetic toward Israel. 46% of Americans express support for Israel. This is the lowest rating in 25 years of Gallup's annual tracking of this measure on its World Affairs survey.


AllAfrica
5 days ago
- AllAfrica
Why Israel's self-image changed from self-reliance to militarism
When the Zionist movement began to gather pace a century ago, many Jewish supporters wanted not just to create a political state for themselves, but to initiate a cultural revolution that would forge a new kind of Jewishness. Proud, self-reliant and resilient, the 'new Jew' was a reaction to centuries of bullying, culminating in the virulent antisemitism of the modern era. But, as I argue in my book, New Hebrews: Making National Culture in Zion, as Zionists set out to invent themselves anew, they also sowed the seeds of self-sabotage. Early pride and defiance, paired with disregard for the native Arabs of Palestine, bred both a survival instinct and a dangerous militarism. A look back at some of the principles of the Zionist revolution in the 20th century uncovers the cultural backstory to Israel's current situation. It shows how the same vision that built a strong nation also hardwired the divisions and antagonisms now threatening its democracy, security and place in the world. In this way, I argue that the logic behind Israel's alarming actions in Gaza, the rage with which it continues to come down on the Gazans following the October 7 attack almost two years ago, may be found in the country's history. The cultural revolution Zionists staged was an intensive project. It was a revolution so fervent that it altered the course of Jewish history and set in motion one of the most enduring transformations in a century crowded with radical changes. Many of the Zionist innovations were truly impressive. The ancient Hebrew of the Bible was used to create a completely modern literature and was later turned into a spoken language. The socialist leanings of early Zionists led them to experiment with new communal forms, such as the kibbutz. The old Jewish festival calendar was creatively updated in the spirit of modern nationalism. Zionists also created new artistic sensibilities in visual art and in music. They tapped into rich and diverse Jewish cultural traditions that spanned geographic regions. One innovation in particular, the physical transformation of the Jewish image, had profound consequences that continue to reverberate today as we see in the tragic war on Gaza. At the heart of the Zionist cultural revolution lay a determination to overturn centuries-old stereotypes of Jews as outcasts: weak, passive, cowardly. Drawing on European nationalist ideals, Zionists wanted to disprove these slanders by forging new Jewish men (men in particular): strong, productive and self-reliant. Israeli kibbutzim celebrate 'Bikurim', also known as the Festival of First Fruits, 1951. Israel Preker via the PikiWiki via Wikimedia Commons This remaking of the Jewish body was not merely symbolic. It was a deliberate strategy to reclaim visibility, dignity and respect. It was a quest that would have far-reaching consequences for Jews and non-Jews alike. The obsession with manual labor was both a necessity and an ideological cornerstone of Zionist ideology. It was the engine behind the remarkable growth of the Yishuv – (literally: settlement) – the Jewish community that developed in Palestine in the first half of the 20th century. Commonly referred to in quasi-military terms as the 'conquest of labor,' it romanticized agriculture and construction work as a moral and spiritual renewal. It was a rebuttal to the negative stereotype of Jews. But I believe it had a more problematic side. As Arab resistance to Zionist settlement grew, the new Jewish farmers evolved a military side as well. The inspiration for it came from two sources, from the fighting culture of local Bedouins, and from the Ukrainian Cossacks. This was an ironic twist given the violence Cossacks often directed at Jews. By 1948, both farmers and soldiers became two of Zionism's most distinct symbols, national ideals of productivity and physical force. Jewish defense forces (Haganah) training in March 1948, two months before the creation of the state of Israel. Kluger Zoltan/GPO, CC BY-SA But something unexpected happened to that evolution somewhere along the way. In their effort to create a new kind of Jew, Zionists in Israel distanced themselves from life in the Jewish diaspora – sometimes by internalising antisemitic notions of that life. One sad example was the chilly reception Holocaust survivors received in 1950s Israel. Some Jews born in what is now Israel, who were referred to as sabras (prickly pears), were arrogant enough to believe they would have fared better under the same circumstances than those caught up by the Holocaust, who they called sabonim (soap). By the 1980s, attempts to leave behind the so-called 'lachrymose history' of Jews – which viewed Jewish history primarily as a narrative of suffering and persecution – began to be supplanted. During and after the trial of Nazi war criminal Adolph Eichmann in 1961, Nazi persecution of Jews was linked first by Israeli Prime Minister Ben-Gurion and then journalists and academics with Arab resistance to the state of Israel. Both were eventually presented as examples of congenital hatred and used as a powerful argument for the establishment of the state and its right to exist. It was a dramatic combination, hard to resist, that connected the creation of the Jewish state with the near destruction of the Jews in the Holocaust – even if Zionism emerged long before that catastrophe. The baggage that was put aside in the rush to statehood, was now being opened. A reminder for Zionists that utopias are more easily written about than created – and that the pull of Jewish history is stronger than they thought. The resulting new mix was alarming: a combination of the Jewish power Zionism obtained with the old sense of Jewish victimhood that early Zionists had fought hard to eradicate. Consider this: in the aftermath of the October 7, 2023, attack, many people in Israel referred to it as a pogrom, a word that describes the sporadic massacres of Jews in Eastern Europe. Think about it. Israel, a rich and powerful country, well-connected and – until recently at least, generally well-liked – compared itself to a small, vulnerable and isolated Jewish shtetl (small settlement in eastern Europe) in a bygone world where Jews were utterly powerless. That one word, pogrom, explains it all. It wipes away 100 years of Zionist history and resurrects old Jewish grievances. This may be one explanation for the country's overreaction in Gaza. This is not an excuse, but an explanation that calls for the next evolutionary step in the history of Zionism – one in which Israel understands that it has achieved the goal for which it was established. Israel must realize it has power – that it is a power – and that with power comes responsibility. Yaron Peleg is Kennedy-Leigh professor of modern Hebrew studies, University of Cambridge This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.


AllAfrica
6 days ago
- AllAfrica
Gaza's full occupation would pave way for Israeli resettlement
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is reportedly considering an expansion of fighting and a 'full occupation of the Gaza Strip.' There is strong opposition to the idea from within Israel's senior military ranks, amid growing international condemnation of Israel for the increasingly dire humanitarian disaster in Gaza. Yet Netanyahu is expected to present the plan to his cabinet to capture the last areas of the strip not held by the Israeli military, including areas where the remaining hostages are believed to be held. A majority of Israelis want the war to end and see any remaining live hostages returned safely. But a section of the population is preparing for the very real possibility that their dreams of resettling Gaza will be realized. Netanyahu's decision is not necessarily driven by the same motives as the would-be settlers, but the consequences on the ground may end up aligning. This reflects similar dynamics in the history of Israeli settlement building. Based on security rationale, successive Israeli governments have set about controlling the Palestinian population. In the wake of military conquest, settlers have moved in to establish outposts. Gradually, these outposts have become settlements as families have flooded in, whether driven by secular Zionist ideology, encouraged by cheaper properties, stirred through religious beliefs, or inspired by dreams of a better quality of life. The Gaza Strip was first occupied by Israel at the beginning of what became known as the 'Six-Day War'. Responding to intelligence reports that its neighbours were mobilising against it, Israel launched a series of pre-emptive strikes against Syria, Jordan and Egypt. On June 5 1967, Israel Defense Forces (IDF) major general, Yeshayahu Gavish, commanded his troops to occupy the Gaza Strip, which was then under the control of Egypt. He did so in defiance of orders from Israel's then defence minister, Moshe Dayan, who had warned against being 'stuck with a quarter of a million Palestinians' in an area 'bristled with problems … a nest of wasps.' But once it had moved IDF troops into the Strip, the Israeli government followed a policy of breaking up Palestinian-populated areas by establishing military outposts, which then became civilian settlements. In 1970, Israel's then Labour government established two 'Nahal settlements.' Named after the Nahal brigade, founded by Israel's first prime minister, David Ben Gurion, these settlements were agricultural communities established by military force. By 2005, there were 21 civilian settlements in the strip, with a total estimated population of 8,600, living alongside a Palestinian population of around 1.3 million. Map of Israeli settlements in the Gaza Strip before disengagement: May 2005. US Central Intelligence Agency via Wikipedia The settlers' ideology at that stage did not include the sort of racist anti-Arab sentiments that have become prolific in the ultranationalist corners of the settler movement. But the disparities between the overpopulated Palestinian refugee camps and the flourishing Israeli settlements in the Gaza Strip – protected by IDF troops – led to growing Palestinian resentment. Things began to change with the second intifada (uprising), which erupted in 2000 and led to a reassessment of Israel's settlement policy. Security considerations and a desire to reduce confrontations between the IDF and Palestinian civilians necessitated a new policy of separation. The Israeli government also wanted to maintain a majority-Jewish population in areas under its control. So the idea of separating off the majority Arab areas under the control of a Palestinian authority was appealing to the government of the then-prime minister, Ariel Sharon. Sharon had previously been known as the father of the settlement project. But in 2004, he ordered the evacuation of all Israeli settlements from the Gaza Strip and four settlements in the north of the West Bank, a project which was accomplished in 2005. The previously consistent alignment between the settler movement and the state came to an abrupt end. While the majority of Israelis supported the plan, the religious right was violently opposed. The Jerusalem Post reported: 'For Religious Zionists, who link Torah, people, and land, the state's bulldozers felt like a theological betrayal.' The 'disengagement plan' had significant consequences on the settler movement, which then fragmented. A militant racist wing emerged, which has since grown in power and influence. After the 2022 Israeli national elections, two of the wing's leaders, Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich, were included in Netanyahu's cabinet. The pair have been able to use their leverage over the prime minister to influence the trajectory of the war in Gaza. Since Israel began its onslaught in Gaza, settler groups have been calling for the resettlement of Gaza. These radicals go beyond the families that were evacuated in 2005. They include the Nachala settler organization, whose raison d'etre is establishing Jewish settlements to control the West Bank and Gaza. The liberal newspaper Haaretz recently reported a Nachala-organized march by thousands of Israelis on July 30 to the borders of Gaza, calling for the settlement of areas of the northern Gaza Strip currently occupied by the IDF. Operational plans to establish settlements have been drawn up and 1,000 families have signed up to reestablish a Jewish community in Gaza. It's not yet clear whether Netanyahu will order the full occupation of Gaza – or whether he plans to allow the establishment of civilian settlements there. But historical precedent makes this a very real possibility. Leonie Fleischmann is senior lecturer in international politics, City St George's, University of London This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.