NATIV Online        

  Vol. 7  /  March 2005                 A JOURNAL OF POLITICS AND THE ARTS      


Israel’s Tenured Radicals

P. David Hornik


“‘Fortress Israel,’ as we call it, is by necessity based on a culture of strength, violence and crudity. In the final analysis, it will be the bulldozer that razes the structure that once was Israel.”1


 “As the government of the Jewish state forces the Palestinians in ghettos, history must be turning in its grave”2


 “Israel wants to do more than keep the suicide bombers out... It wants to erase the Palestinian nation once and for all.”3


 “This unarmed uprising was turned into an armed revolt by harsh Israeli retaliation to demonstrations and street protests.”4


“There is an entire sector in the Jewish public which I unhesitatingly define as a copy of the German Nazis.”5


 “STOP ISRAEL! The Israeli army has been terrorizing cities and villages in the West Bank... there is one simple thing that anybody can do: Boycott Israel!... Israel is not the US. It is a small country with hardly any economy, and with a self-image completely detached from reality. It can be stopped.”6

Statements by European leftists in hate marches against Israel? By Berkeley activists for “solidarity” with Palestinian terror? By radical Islamic preachers in mosques in Paris, London, or Dearborn, Michigan? No; every one of those statements was made by an Israeli academic employed by an Israeli university. People entrusted with teaching history, political science, sociology, and the like to young Israelis. People whose writings, declarations, and activities against the state of Israel are underwritten by the Israeli taxpayer and by those who make donations to these institutions out of a desire to help the Jewish state

And, of course, are used by anti-Semites all over the globe as prime ammunition against Jews and Israel.

Most Israeli academics are not radicals, spanning a wide political spectrum within the bounds of loyalty to the state. Having worked in and for Israeli academia for close to two decades, I can attest to that from personal experience. Many among the left-wing academics are patriots who would never leave Israel, serve in the armed forces and encourage their children to do so as well, and strongly oppose refusal to serve in the territories even if they favor ultimately relinquishing all or most of them. I may disagree with their views on territory, Arab attitudes, and Jewish national and historical rights, but they object no less to mine. Such is the “price” of living in a democracy with a difficult security situation. Although I believe Israelis of the Zionist Left should react appropriately to the dire statements and activities of the radical Left rather than reflexively defending them, their own views clearly fall within the legitimate bounds of academic freedom and are not the subject of this article.

But anti-Israeli, anti-Zionist, and sometimes anti-Semitic radicalism on the radical Left of Israeli academe is a different matter, and is now the focus of a new website. Modeled after Campus Watch, Daniel Pipes’s site for monitoring Middle East studies on North American campuses, Israel Academic Monitor ( was created by a group of academics, journalists, donors, students, and others with the aim of monitoring genuine abuses of academic freedom in Israel’s universities. These abuses include not only writings and statements that deny Israel’s legitimacy, advocate its destruction, or compare it with the Nazi and other worst regimes in history, but also calls for widespread insurrection and mutiny by Israeli soldiers and support for international efforts at boycotting Israel and ostracizing the teachers and students of these universities themselves.

This far-Left flank is not negligible and by no means constitutes a tiny fringe. Its members constitute an active, salient presence both in Israeli universities themselves and in anti-Israeli activities throughout the world:

  • American supporters of Israel have fought hard to stop efforts on American campuses to boycott or divest from Israel. Yet a group of Israeli professors openly supports an academic boycott of Israel. “We, the undersigned are defenders of Palestinian academic freedom and supporters of the academic boycott against Israel,” states a recent petition. It goes on to say: “...the Israeli government has set up a system of roadblocks and checkpoints that makes it difficult or impossible for Palestinian teachers and students to reach their universities, colleges and schools. Its policy of harassment, arrests, random shootings and assaults is carried out almost weekly by Israeli troops on Palestinian campuses. All of this takes place against the backdrop of an ongoing 37 year occupation and relentless attack on Palestinian civil society...”7 This brazenly distorted statement, which entirely excludes a security situation of constant terrorist attacks on Israelis despite generous peace offers, as well as the fact that Palestinian campuses are focal points of jihadi incitement and terror, was signed by hundreds of scholars and activists all over the world. They included, however, a set of Israeli academics who continue to work and earn compensation at some of the very Israeli universities and colleges that are targeted, including: Riva Bachrach (Beit Berl College of Education), Diana Dolev (Wizo College for Design), Rachel Giora (Tel Aviv University), George Habib (Technion, Haifa), Eva Jablonka (Tel Aviv University), Vered Kraus (University of Haifa), Dan Rabinowitz (Tel Aviv University), Tanya Reinhart (Tel Aviv University), and Yuval Yonay (University of Haifa).

    There is, of course, no push for boycotting or divesting from countries like Iran, Sudan, or North Korea; of all the countries in the world, only democratic Israel has the “honor” – and the professors who try to gain that honor for it.

  • A 2002 statement declared: “We, members of Israeli academe, are horrified by the US buildup of aggression toward Iraq and by the Israeli political leadership’s enthusiastic support for it... We are deeply worried by indications that the ‘fog of war’ could be exploited by the Israeli government to commit further crimes against the Palestinian people, up to FULL-FLEDGED ETHNIC CLEANSING... Escalating racist demagoguery concerning the Palestinian citizens of Israel may indicate the scope of the crimes that are possibly being contemplated...”8 It was signed by 60 Israeli academics. Needless to say, Israel did not take the actions they fantasized!

  • Of particular concern is the strong radical presence at Ben-Gurion University of the Negev. Israel’s first prime minister was a fervent patriot and nationalist who would be appalled at some of the things now being taught and written at the institution that bears his name. Israeli or Jewish parents sending their children to such a university have reason to fear whether their sons or daughters will emerge with the sort of values they would want them to espouse.

    Thus, Neve Gordon of the Department of Politics and Government, whose columns have appeared in the Baltimore Sun, has characterized Israel not only as terrorist but also as fascist and Nazi, writing that: “Scrutiny of Israel’s actions in Lebanon indicates that it has often used methods of terror... Israel, one should note, has practiced terrorism in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip as well”;9 “Israel’s gravest danger today is not the PA or even Hamas and the Islamic Jihad, but the one it faces from within: fascism”;10 “As the government of the Jewish state forces the Palestinians in ghettos, history must be turning in its grave.”11 After the Passover massacre of 2002 in Netanya, Gordon was among a group of left-wing activists that illegally infiltrated army lines and entered Arafat’s Ramallah headquarters, where Gordon clasped hands with Yasser Arafat in a victory salute. Not surprisingly, Gordon’s articles have been posted on anti-Semitic and neo-Nazi websites.

    For Lev Grinberg, director of the university’s Humphrey Institute for Social Research, Israel is both terrorist and genocidal: “There is a difference between Israeli and Palestinian acts of aggression – the difference is that Israeli aggression is the direct responsibility of Ariel Sharon, Benjamin Ben Eliezer, Shimon Peres, and Shaul Mofaz, while individual terrorist acts are done by individuals in despair, usually against Arafat’s will”;12 “Suicide bombings killing innocent civilians must be condemned unequivocally; they are immoral acts, and their perpetrators should be sent to jail. But they cannot be compared to state terrorism carried out by the Israeli government”;13 “Who will arrest Sharon, the person directly responsible for the orders to kill Palestinians? When is he going to be defined as a terrorist too?”;14 “The murder of Sheik Ahmad Yassin by the government of Israel is part of a major move carried out by the government of Israel, which can be described as symbolic genocide.”15

    Oren Yiftachel of this university’s Department of Geography and Environmental Development uses smooth academic verbiage to characterize Israel as an immoral, “illusory”, “colonial” entity whose days, thankfully, are numbered: “The failed Oslo process, the violent intifada and most acutely Israel’s renewed aggression and brutality toward the Palestinians in the Occupied Territories, have cast a dark shadow over the joint future of the state’s Palestinian and Jewish citizens... The actual existence of an Israeli state (and hence citizenship) can be viewed as an illusion. Israel has ruptured, by its own actions, the geography of statehood, and maintained a caste-like system of ethnic-religious-class stratification... Israel has created a colonial setting, held through violent control... Occupation and settlement, which necessitate ever intensifying oppression of Palestinians with or without Israeli citizenship, have clear potential to make Israel gradually cave from within”16 – a prospect that Yiftachel does not find unappealing: “The establishment of a binational (as distinct from a ‘secular’) democratic state [i.e., in which Israel ceases to exist as Jewish state]...appears more attractive than ever.”17

    Other Ben-Gurion U. academics portray Israel – which has made massive land concessions and offered further ones in a quest for peace, while creating the Palestinian Authority and helping it becoming the most generously assisted entity on earth – as a brutal oppressor and call for its dissolution as a Jewish state. Thus, Amnon Raz-Krakotzkin (teacher of Jewish history) writes: “I try to show the way the Zionist historical consciousness is based on suppression and the erasure of history: the history of the land, and particularly the Naqba, the transfer of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians in 1948 [a claim acknowledged to be false even by “new historian” Benny Morris]18 ...there really are Arabs who accuse me of supporting binationalism in order to preserve the Jewish people.”19 Jeff Halper (Department of Anthropology) asserts: “[Israel is using] state terrorism on a scale we have not seen before.20 ...A just and lasting peace will not emerge from within Israel; only international pressure can save the Palestinians from being crushed by the iron wall.21... [Israel uses] the most up-to-date American weapon systems, snipers, closures until starvation, clearing thousands of acres of agricultural land, destruction of hundreds of houses.”22 In fact the real Israel, as opposed to the monstrous fantasy-image of the Jewish state conjured by such authors, has often sacrificed its own soldiers in efforts to avoid harming Palestinian civilians.

    And Sam Bahour (Palestinian-American businessman) and Michael Dahan (Political Science, Ben-Gurion U.) also invoke the genocide theme: “Nevertheless, deliberate and systematic destruction, as the definition of genocide illustrates, does not necessarily mean physical killing of people, albeit Israel is having no problem, and is facing no international outcry, in doing just that.”23

  • For decades the Hebrew University of Jerusalem has employed a prominent professor of German history, Moshe Zimmerman, who has a hard time avoiding the word Nazi when speaking about Israelis. In 2000, when Zimmerman called then-Knesset Member Rehavam Ze`evi (later murdered by Palestinian terrorists) a “Nazi copy”, Ze`evi sued him for slander and won. Other objects of Zimmerman’s verbal abuse have obtained no redress – as when he referred to the children of the Israeli community of Kiryat Arba, outside Hebron, as “Hitler Youth”, or compared the Torah with Mein Kampf as a blueprint for annihilating other peoples.

Zimmerman is alleged to have said last March in his capacity as teacher: “There is a group of students which cannot come today due to the excuse that its members are guarding at checkpoints, and the like. Such an excuse is not acceptable to me. Were they to be missing because they were serving in jail due to a refusal to serve in the territories, that would be satisfactory to me.” Soon after, a petition was circulated among Israeli faculty members “wish[ing] to express our appreciation and support for those of our students and lecturers who refuse to serve as soldiers in the occupied territories”; it has so far been signed by 287 faculty members. Such “service in the occupied territories,” of course, is the only thing that stops Palestinian suicide bombings and over the past year has drastically reduced their number.

When Education Minister Limor Livnat asked then-Attorney General Elyakim Rubinstein for his opinion on whether she should “act against lecturers from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, since their activities encourage infraction of the law, and perhaps also sedition,” Rubinstein wrote in reply that Zimmerman's statement and the petition “are an irresponsible outrage. However, demands involving criminal prosecution in a sphere outside of the IDF, in the public realm, have to be forwarded with extreme caution.” He added that the State Prosecutor's Office had “discussed the possibility of initiating criminal steps with respect to calls for refusal to serve; but in the end it was decided not to proceed with [these steps], not at this time.” Rubinstein told Livnat, however, that complaints about such statements by lecturers would continue to be reviewed case-by-case.24

In 1995, Zimmerman, hardly a mere fringe figure, was appointed by the Education Ministry to a committee tasked with revamping the history textbooks for Israeli middle schoolers. The committee recommended teaching a “universal history” in which the Jewish people would play a modest role, at best equal to the civilizations of Greece, Rome, or America. Zimmerman explained: “Learning about the [Jewish] people and the State [of Israel] appears in the program, but certainly not as a subject of primary importance.”25 (It is worth noting here that young Israelis are drafted at age 18 to serve in the IDF and, in many cases, risk their lives defending the Israeli-Jewish people.) Eventually, textbooks that were based on the recommendations of this committee and another one were accused of distorting history, defaming the Israeli population, and many errors and omissions. The Knesset Education Committee appointed a team of experts to examine the most controversial of the books, and the committee recommended a long list of corrections.

  • It was also back in 1995 that a group of Hebrew University professors published a huge advertisement in Ha`aretz, and sent a letter to the president of the country and the rector of the Hebrew University, demanding that Zimmerman be fired for likening Israelis to Nazis. Today, quite contrary to their wishes, Moshe Zimmerman is head of the Hebrew University’s Koebner Center for German History.

  • Last July, a group of Israeli academics and activists composed and circulated a document called the Olga Appeal, which declares:

...The State of Israel was supposed to be a democracy; it has set up a colonial structure, combining unmistakable elements of apartheid with the arbitrariness of brutal military occupation... An incessant succession of “retaliations”, military operations and wars has become the life-support drug of Israel’s Jews. And now, almost four years after the beginning of the second Palestinian Intifada, Israel is up to its neck in the mire of occupation and oppression... Ten years after the Oslo Accords, we are living in a benighted colonial reality – in the heart of darkness ...meanwhile Israel is amplifying the devastation of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, as if determined to pulverize the Palestinian people to dust... We are united in a critique of Zionism, based as it is on refusal to acknowledge the indigenous people of this country and on denial of their rights, on dispossession of their lands... Adding insult to injury, Israel persists in its refusal to bear any responsibility for its deeds, from the expulsion of the majority of Palestinians from their homeland more than half a century ago [again the same canard noted above], to the present erection of ghetto walls around the remaining Palestinians in the towns and villages of the West Bank. We are united in the belief that peace and reconciliation are contingent on Israel’s recognition of its responsibility for the injustices done to the indigenous people, the Palestinians, and on willingness to redress them. Recognition of the right of return follows from our principles... For many years now, Israeli leaders have been exerting themselves to depict the Palestinians as sub-human; and their exertions have been seconded and assisted by members of the cultural elite, media barons, vain functionaries and light-scribblers, right and left. We reject this racist arrogance with disgust... We are convinced that if we approach peace and reconciliation with the Palestinians with an open mind and a willing spirit, we shall find in them what we bring with us: an open mind and a willing spirit. For we are brothers and sisters, not eternal enemies as the well-poisoners profess...26

Particularly after having lived in Israel for 20 years, knowing its people’s existential yearning for peace, the suffering that they undergo from fear, injury, and bereavement caused by terrorism and war, and the country’s strong adherence to democratic values and total rejection of racism and dehumanization despite constant attack, the words of this document amaze and astonish. Like Israel’s most cynical enemies in the Arab, Muslim, European worlds, at no point does it mention Israel’s sacrifices for peace nor the offer to the Palestinians, by then-Prime Minister Ehud Barak at Camp David in 2000, of a state in virtually all the post-1967 territories including East Jerusalem and the Temple Mount.

Along with prominent American Jewish academics Joel Beinin (Stanford University) and Daniel Boyarin (University of California at Berkeley), among the better known of the dozens of Israeli academic signatories are Daphna Golan (Hebrew University), Neve Gordon (Ben-Gurion University), Baruch Kimmerling (Hebrew University), Adi Ophir (Tel Aviv University), Dan Rabinowitz (Tel Aviv University), and Oren Yiftachel (Ben-Gurion University).

  • Last October 28 a mosque was inaugurated on the Tel Aviv University campus to serve the religious needs of about one thousand Muslim students. Seemingly, this is an unobjectionable exercise of religious freedom. Yet the event aroused consternation in Israeli society, and university employees appealed to then-Minister of Public Security Uzi Landau to prevent it. In Israel as elsewhere, mosques are all too often a magnet for radical Arabs and seditious political activities. Speeches that virulently incite against Israel are common in mosques all over Israel, and universities in the Palestinian Authority constantly stir up anti-Israeli sentiment and encourage terrorism among their students. Israelis regularly pay the price of such activities in blood. An official in the Students Association of Tel Aviv University warned: “In the past we came across Arabic posters noting the Naqba day [which mourns the establishment of Israel as a “catastrophe”] that spoke about destroying and conquering the Zionist enemy. The distance between these and incitement is very thin.”

    The university approved the mosque despite these fears. Yet, when several years ago religious Jewish students at the university tried to open a synagogue where lectures and prayers could take place, the university administration encountered ferocious opposition by leftist faculty members and, in response, adamantly refused to allow it.

  • Last December 5, an international conference called “Resisting Israeli Apartheid” was held at the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) of the University of London. Gavin Gross, chairman of the SOAS Jewish Society, told the Jerusalem Post that the conference, which was organized by the university’s Palestine Society, was nothing but a “one-sided rant against Israel.” The word genocide was used often to describe Israeli actions against Palestinians. Lisa Taraki, a professor of sociology at Birzeit University, argued in her speech for an academic boycott of Israel, stressing the role played by most Israeli academics and institutions in supporting the “racist and oppressive nature” of the Israeli state. British poet and academic Tom Paulin, who has openly called for the murder of Israelis living in the West Bank and Gaza, was the keynote speaker and encouraged a boycott of Israeli goods based on the South African model of the apartheid days. Betty Hunter, representative of the Palestinian Solidarity Campaign UK, said: “our aim is to make Israel a pariah state.”

    Yet none of this prevented a considerable participation by Israeli academics. Ilan Pappe, a prominent member of the History Department at the University of Haifa, strongly backed the boycott calls in his speech and called for a concerted, international effort guided by the Palestinian leadership. Ur Shlonsky, an Israeli linguistics professor now teaching at the University of Geneva, spoke on “Resisting Apartheid and the Charge of Anti-Semitism.” Haim Bresheeth, currently film studies scholar at the University of East London and until 2002 dean of the School of Media, Film and Cultural Studies at Sapir College in Israel, stated in his talk: “there is no valid comparison between South Africa and Israel; Israel is much worse.” Omar Barghouti, a doctoral student at Tel Aviv University, informed the audience that “the Hebrew University in Jerusalem is sitting on ethnically cleansed Arab land” and that “IDF actions are similar to, though certainly not on the same scale as, the Nazis.” He did not stop to ponder whether – to extend the grossly false comparison – Jewish students studied freely in German universities during the Holocaust and traveled abroad to freely criticize the German government.

    This review of recent outrages by Israeli academics – and it is, emphatically, only a small sample – does not ignore the fact that anti-Zionist radicalism is not a new phenomenon in the Israeli academy. Indeed, in his much-discussed book The Jewish State: The Struggle for Israel’s Soul, Yoram Hazony argues that it was a group of mostly German Jewish, anti-Zionist professors at the Hebrew University, with roots in 19th-century Jewish anti-Zionism and led by the philosopher-academic Martin Buber, who gravely damaged Israeli nationalism and did much to produce the “post-Zionist” trend and self-accusatory attitudes that became widespread among Israeli academics, artists, writers, journalists, and politicians. In two powerful chapters, “The Incubator: The Hebrew University, 1948-1961” and “The Triumph of the Intellectuals,” Hazony marshals impressive evidence about the encounters in those years between young Israeli students from patriotic Labor Zionist homes and antinationalist Hebrew University professors, encounters from which the students, many of whom later became major cultural and political figures, often emerged with grave ambivalence, or worse, about Israel’s basic legitimacy as a Jewish state.27

    Such phenomena are not, of course, unique to Israel. Universities throughout the Western world, particularly their departments in the humanities and social sciences, are staffed by academics who consider themselves part of a transnational elite and characterize their own societies, or Western civilization in general, as nefarious engines of plunder, discrimination, and oppression. In Western Europe, arguably, such attitudes have prevailed, and the results include pacifism, virulently anti-American and anti-Israeli sentiments, and growing sympathy or submission to Arab and Islamic civilization. In America, where holders of postgraduate degrees are known to be typified by far-Left views, the politically-correct, self-accusatory ethos has deeply penetrated the mainstream of the Democratic Party and distanced the party so much from the values and mindset of the general population as to make it increasingly incapable of winning national elections.

    The propagation of such attitudes in Israel, however, is especially worrisome. While remaining a lone democracy in a sea of Arab societies whose rejection and hatred of the Jewish state in their midst shows no signs of abating, Israel is also a target of growing anti-Semitic agitation in the broader Muslim and European worlds. Israel’s immediate neighbors, the Arab countries, are saturated with anti-Semitic incitement transmitted in media, mosques, and education, and the Palestinian terror war against Israel has been generously assisted, financially and operationally, by such Arab states as Egypt, Syria, Saudi Arabia, and pre-Saddam Iraq, as well as Iran. In such a situation, for Israel’s university teachers to instill attitudes of self-doubt, self-blame, and self-contempt is mortally dangerous; Israel is not a country that can afford the “luxury” of having its young minds poisoned.

    The ideas taught by the radicals – that Israel is a criminal “colonial” entity responsible for the Arab violence against it, that the Arabs are the victims, and that Israel can end the violence by satisfying Arab demands – have already penetrated Israel’s more mainstream Left as currently represented by the Labor and Yahad parties. Such ideas formed the background of the Oslo agreement that Israel signed in 1993 with Yasser Arafat and the PLO in the belief that it was launching a “process” of ultimate reconciliation and peace. The notion that Israel’s “occupation” of strategically crucial territory that it had won in a defensive war in 1967 was the true, remaining bone of contention between Israel and the Arabs, and that Arafat and the PLO, who for decades had engaged in murderous terrorism, had become moderates reasonably seeking a state to exist peacefully alongside the Jewish state, bore the unmistakable stamp of the self-accusatory mentality represented, albeit in more extreme form, by the academics mentioned in this article. For such attitudes to be fervently adopted by traditional, once nationalistic and hawkish Labor Zionist figures like Shimon Peres and even Yitzhak Rabin, while becoming not only widespread among the “elite” but also staples of the left-of-center political parties (and even penetrating, some would argue, the right-of-center ones), marked a watershed in Israeli history for which the price has been the horrendous Oslo catastrophe of blood, economic devastation, and plummeting immigration.

    The role of North American universities in propagating destructive attitudes has led to the rise of websites like Campus Watch and others that monitor abuses in these institutions and expose the activities of academics who constantly characterize America as an evil force and “teach” this outlook to their students. The same sort of abuses, but with even more alarming consequences, occur at Israel’s universities, and the IAM site is a new initiative aimed at ensuring that this situation receives the attention that it warrants. Israel’s academic institutions are, indeed, a crucial resource for the state, but if they become nests for people who identify with Israel’s enemies and promote their causes, they risk harming the Jewish state more than they benefit it and, ultimately, contributing to its destruction. These universities are highly dependent on overseas donors and contributors. The IAM site seeks to reveal to these people some of the appalling things being done with their money, hoping they will condition their future contributions more carefully.

    IAM, for its part, will continue to expose, monitor, and counter Israel’s tenured insurgents. The fight against radicals who calumniate and condemn the democratic societies that grant them freedom and comfort, show sympathy for the deadly foes of these societies, and strive to train generations who will think and act as they do, is a fight of nothing less than existential proportions.



Jeff Halper “The Message of the Bulldozer,” Counterpunch, August 13/19, 2002.  


Neve Gordon, “Silence in the Face of Israeli Apartheid”, Alternatives, November 7, 2003. 


Ilan Pappe, Al-Ahram, July 11-17, 2002. 




Moshe Zimmerman, interview in Yerushalayim, April 28, 1995. 


Tanya Reinhart, “Stop Israel,” Indymedia, Israel, October 25, 2001. 


8, 2002. 


Neve Gordon, “Defining Terrorism, and Assigning the Label,” National Catholic Reporter, April 4, 1997


Neve Gordon, “The Fascisization of Israel,” Information Brief No. 86, the Palestine Center, February 4, 2002. 


Neve Gordon, “Silence in the Face of Israeli Apartheid”.  


Lev Grinberg, “State Terrorism in Israel,” Tikkun, May/June 2002. 


Lev Grinberg, “Israel Strikes Again,” Al-Ahram Weekly Online, April 4-10, 2002. 


Lev Grinberg, “Israel’s State Terrorism,”


Lev Grinberg, “Symbolic Genocide,” La Libre Belgique, March 29, 2004 (French). 


Oren Yiftachel, “The Shrinking Space of Citizenship: Ethnocratic Politics in Israel,” Middle East Report 223, Summer 2002. 


Oren Yiftachel, “Between Apartheid and Peace,” Tikkun, January/February 2001. 


Interview with Amnon Raz-Krakotzkin,, Dialogue with the Islamic World, Institute for Advanced Studies, Berlin. 


Amnon Raz-Krakotzkin, interviewed in Lily Galili, “A Jewish Demographic State,” Haaretz, June 28, 2002. 


Jeff Halper, “Despair: Israel's Ultimate Weapon,” Center for Policy Analysis on Palestine, March 28, 2001. 


Jeff Halper, “Sharon's National Unity Government: Shoring Up the ‘Iron Wall,” Middle East Report, March 13, 2001. 


Jeff Halper, “How to Start an Uprising,” ICAHD, November 15, 2000. 


Sam Bahour and Michael Dahan, “Genocide by Public Policy,” Arabic Media Internet Network, May 19, 2004. 


Dalia Shehori, "Clipping the Fringes of Academic Freedom,” Haaretz, August 5, 2002. 


Quoted in Yoram Hazony, The Jewish State: The Struggle for Israel’s Soul (New York: Basic Books, 2000), p. 46. 




Hazony, Jewish State

P. David Hornik is a freelance writer and translator living in Jerusalem who has been contributing recently to The Jerusalem Post,, the American Spectator Online, and Israeli news-views websites.