Book Review: On Palestine by Noam Chomsky and Ilan Pappe

“The destruction and demolition in Palestine are not just a tragedy or even a catastrophe but it is a crime” – Ilan Pappe, an 'Israeli' historian

This is a summary of the book On Palestine by Ilan Pappe & Noam Chomsky. On Palestine is a compilation of conversations between two human rights activists, Ilan Pappe and Noam Chomsky. The interviews were mediated by Frank Barat, a journalist and human rights activist based in London. Despite his Israeli nationality, Ilan Pappe, as a historian, firmly opposes Israeli settlements. Similarly, Noam Chomsky, an American philosopher and political activist, has been outspoken in his criticism of America's foreign policy, particularly its longstanding support for Israel.

Section 1: Israeli Apartheid

Section 2: The Effectiveness of international movement - BDS

Section 3: Resolution - One-state, two-state solution

Section 4: Discussion - Palestinian self-determination

Section 1: Israeli Apartheid

The apartheid model, particularly used by Israeli historian Ilan Pappe, describes the crimes committed by Israel in Palestine. Apartheid refers to the harshest form of segregation in history, which was implemented in South Africa during the era of white minority rule. According to Pappe, the situation in Palestine today is actually worse than African Apartheid. Unlike Apartheid South Africa, which did not blockade communities or systematically kill protesters, Israel is currently engaging in these actions along the Gaza fence (creating the largest open-air prison on Earth), while also denying Palestinians in the West Bank their human rights. Palestinians in the West Bank face daily humiliation at checkpoints, arbitrary arrests, land confiscation by settlers and the Israeli Land Authority, and restrictions on travel to nearby villages and towns due to apartheid walls and barriers surrounding their homes. Noam Chomsky further adds that this issue extends to delegitimization and isolation. Israel's goal is simply to maintain 'quiet for quiet,' which means a return to the status quo. In the West Bank, this norm involves Israel's continued illegal construction of settlements and infrastructure, while in Gaza, the norm is a miserable existence under a cruel and destructive siege.

Looking back in history, the formation of the 'Israel state' today was the result of the Zionist movement, which was established with the purpose of colonization and the establishment of a 'Jewish state'. The Hebrew verbs 'le-hitnabel' or 'le-hityashev', meaning 'to settle' and 'to colonize', were proudly used from 1882 until the end of the First World War. This mission was further advanced with the Balfour Declaration of 1917 under British authority, where Zionists claimed to have 'successfully' achieved their goal of bringing all Jews to settle in Palestine. Noam Chomsky has argued that the concept of a 'Jewish State' is nonsensical and unacceptable. Citizenship should be recognized based on the state rather than on ideology or religion. For example, if you are a French citizen, you are French. A state based on ideological concepts often leads to ongoing violence and ethnic cleansing, as we witness in Palestine today. It is important to examine the root causes of the problems and consider the price paid and by whom when establishing and recognizing a Jewish state. If the establishment of the state comes at the expense of other people, that is a significant concern. As Pappe stated,

“If a group is a victim of a crime and is looking for a safe haven, it cannot obtain this by expelling someone else, another group, from this space that you want as your safe haven. This is the difference between what you want as a group and what means you use to achieve it. The problem is not the right of the Jews to have a state of their own or not. That’s an internal Jewish problem”.

He also added that from 1902 to 1903 there were several proposals to form the Jewish State in Uganda, as it was reasonable since there were many Jewish in Uganda. If so, Palestinians have no doubt at all about the Jews forming a state there. Not one Palestinian in the world would be interested in this scenario. That’s the main issue.

“The destruction and demolition in Palestine are not just a tragedy or even a catastrophe but it is a crime” – Ilan Pappe

The practice of ethnic cleansing in Palestine since 1948 is not merely a policy, but a way of life in Israel, and its consistent implementation renders the state culpable. The events of 1948 (Nakba Day), which resulted in the mass expulsion of 750,000 people (half of the region's population), the destruction of over five hundred villages, and the demolition of a dozen towns, cannot be simply regarded as a tragedy or catastrophe; they constitute a crime. These actions highlight the inherent connection between Zionist ideology and past movement policies, as well as current Israeli policies: both aim to establish a Jewish state by appropriating as much of historic Palestine as possible and minimizing the Palestinian presence. Pappe goes so far as to describe ethnic cleansing as ingrained in the DNA of Israeli Jewish society. Israel seeks not only survival but prosperity, and the fewer Arabs within the state, the better. This ideology of ethnic cleansing also underlies the dehumanization of Palestinians. The recent events in Gaza (November 2019) serve as a stark example of this cruelty and suffering, with Israeli airstrikes causing the deaths of at least 34 individuals, including children and women, and injuring over 100 within a span of two days. when an Israeli soldier sees a Palestinian baby he does not see an infant – he sees the enemy.

Section 2: The effectiveness of international activism – the Boycott Divestment & Sanction (BDS) movement

Some argue that Palestinians should 'move on' from the past and forget about everything that has happened in history. However, Chomsky argues that forgetting the past means forsaking the future, as the past is intertwined with aspirations. It is impossible to simply forget when Israel continues to brutally kill Palestinians and seize control of the country. Pappe emphasizes that the destruction in Palestine persists, while those urging to forget claim to have the right solution through the 'peace process,' even though the situation has remained unchanged for years. Israel has already established extensive Jewish settlements throughout the West Bank, aiming to expand its territory, but the past serves as an obstacle. While some view the past as a hindrance to Israel's expansion of its crimes, for the occupied and oppressed Palestinians, the past encompasses everything. This is why the international activist movement plays a crucial role in advocating solidarity with the Palestinians.

    When discussing international support for Palestine, Pappe highlights four paradoxes that the solidarity movement faces. The first paradox is why Western governments continue to support Israel despite the overwhelming condemnation of its human rights violations by international public opinion. The second paradox is why Israeli society fails to acknowledge global opinion and maintains a positive self-perception. The third paradox is why the Palestine solidarity movement has largely failed to make Zionist ideology a central focus of its critique of Israel, despite the fact that Zionism is at the root of Israel's criminality. The fourth paradox is why Israeli propaganda has been successful in portraying the conflict as 'complicated' and without a solution, when in reality, as Pappe argues, it is a clear case of settler colonialism. To address these paradoxes, Pappe suggests that the solidarity movement needs to introduce a new vocabulary specific to the Palestine issue that gradually replaces the old one. This new vocabulary includes terms such as decolonization, regime change, and a one-state solution, which contrasts with Chomsky's suggestion of a two-state solution (to be discussed further in the following section).

    The international community interested in supporting Palestine must stand behind efforts to isolate Israel as long as it continues its policies of apartheid, dispossession, and occupation. The most effective movement that poses a real threat to Israel and its supporters today is the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement. The significant growth and impact of the BDS movement should not be underestimated in putting Palestine back on the map. BDS is a Palestinian-led movement advocating for freedom, justice, and equality. It promotes various forms of boycott against Israel until it fulfills its obligations under international law, as described by the campaign. The movement upholds the fundamental principle that Palestinians are entitled to the same rights as the rest of humanity. The BDS movement asserts: Let’s stop trying to justify our actions, let’s act.

      When reflecting on the South African anti-apartheid movement, Chomsky emphasizes the crucial aspect of targeting the main supporters of South Africa, namely the USA and Great Britain. He suggests that directing activism against these two countries is vital for the anti-apartheid Israel movement as well. However, the weakness of the BDS movement lies in its focus solely on Israel. The policies of the United States are of utmost importance, as Israel realizes that it can be isolated as a pariah state by the international community, but it makes little difference as long as the USA continues to support them. In this regard, civil society in the USA should play a role in pressuring US foreign policy. Chomsky asserts that, as with any other case, US foreign policy will only change when pressure is exerted from the grassroots level, underscoring the significance of civil society.

Section 3: Resolution; “Peace Process”, Two-State & One-State Solution

The crucial part of this book focuses on the resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which has been a subject of global debate and disagreement between the two scholars. The two-state solution, also known as "a land for two people," aims to divide the Palestinian land into two separate states: Palestine and Israel, with the Green Line of 1949 as the dividing line. However, the agreement has been undermined by Israel's continuous denial of basic rights for Palestinians within Israel, including the right to vote. The shrinking of Palestinian territory over time, the recognition of Jerusalem as Israel's capital, and other actions make it impossible to consider this a viable solution.

Both scholars agree that peace negotiations have been merely a tactic allowing Israel to further colonize the West Bank. Furthermore, the right of Palestinian refugees to return to their homeland, as stated in UN Resolution 194, has been denied for decades. Chomsky and Pappe argue that Israel's crimes cannot be compared to other cases, such as the treatment of Indigenous Australians in Australia. Israel's apology, if it ever happens, would pale in comparison to Kevin Rudd's apology on Sorry Day, as it should be accompanied by the restoration of rights to education, return, and more.

Chomsky believes the two-state solution is the only realistic option due to international consensus. By pressuring the US government to stop supporting Israeli violations of international law, Israel may be compelled to recognize international sanctions and engage in negotiations based on the two-state solution.

On the other hand, Pappe suggests a different perspective, considering the two-state solution a failure after more than 65 years. He proposes a one-state solution, reconceptualizing Israel and Palestine as a single country where all people can live equally. Pappe emphasizes that this solution does not seek to eliminate states but challenges the ideology and ethical validity of the current state. He suggests that Israelis and Palestinians should work together to create a constitution that upholds the rights of all.

Section 4: Discussion & Conclusion; Palestinian Self-Determination  

Based on the previous discussion, in my opinion, neither the two-state nor the one-state solution can adequately address the history and the denied rights of the Palestinians over the past 65 years. The two-state solution undermines the fundamental right of Palestinian self-determination, which was denied to them in 1948. Unfortunately, this book does not delve into the topic of Palestinian self-determination.

As an alternative, the one-state solution is proposed to put an end to Israel's brutality. However, considering Israel's history of non-compliance with peace agreements for over 70 years and its continued settlement activities and discrimination, this alternative also seems unlikely to resolve the occupation. Israel is not just a "state," but an ideology rooted in racism, making it extremely difficult for them to coexist with Palestinians in a single state on equal terms.

The principles of self-determination demand that Israel recognize the Palestinians' right to self-determination and adhere to international law by ending occupation and colonization, recognizing the rights of Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel, and respecting the rights of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes. By acknowledging these requirements, it may be more logical to envision a single, democratic state where Israeli Jews and Palestinians are equal citizens. However, it is clear that limited sovereignty achieved by a West Bank-Gaza state would only address the first point and fail to meet the minimum requirements of Palestinian self-determination. Therefore, both the two-state and one-state solutions are illusory, serving as a pretext for Israel to continue the occupation.