The establishment of Israel represents one of history's most significant acts of decolonization—the return of an indigenous people to their ancestral homeland after nearly two millennia of foreign rule and persecution. Yet this fundamental truth is often obscured by those who seek to delegitimize Jewish self-determination through historical revisionism and double standards that would never be applied to any other people.
The Historical Reality of Jewish Persecution Under Foreign Rule
For over two thousand years, Jews in their ancestral homeland endured systematic oppression under a succession of foreign powers. This wasn't incidental discrimination—it was institutionalized persecution that made normal life impossible and self-determination not just desirable, but necessary for survival.
Roman and Byzantine Oppression
The Roman destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE began nearly two millennia of foreign rule over the Jewish homeland. The Romans not only destroyed the Second Temple but systematically expelled Jews from Jerusalem and much of Judea. The Byzantine Empire continued these policies, often prohibiting Jews from living in their holy city and restricting their religious practices.
Historical records document how Jews were banned from Jerusalem except for one day a year—Tisha B'Av—when they were permitted to mourn the destruction of their Temple. This wasn't merely religious restriction; it was ethnic cleansing designed to sever the connection between the Jewish people and their homeland.
The Crusader Period: Violence and Expulsion
The Crusader conquest of Jerusalem in 1099 CE brought unprecedented violence against the Jewish population. Contemporary accounts describe how Crusaders burned Jews alive in synagogues and sold Jewish children into slavery. The Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem officially excluded Jews from the city, continuing the pattern of systematic exclusion from their spiritual and historical center.
This period demonstrated that foreign rule over Jewish lands consistently resulted in persecution, regardless of the rulers' religion or culture. The pattern was clear: when others controlled Jewish ancestral lands, Jews suffered.
Islamic Rule and the Dhimmi System
Under various Islamic empires—Umayyad, Abbasid, Fatimid, Ayyubid, Mamluk, and Ottoman—Jews were classified as dhimmis, second-class subjects with severely restricted rights. This wasn't the peaceful coexistence often romanticized today; it was institutionalized discrimination codified in law.
The dhimmi system required Jews to pay the jizya, a special tax imposed on non-Muslims, often at burdensome rates. Jews were prohibited from building new synagogues, riding horses, carrying weapons, or testifying against Muslims in court. They were required to wear distinctive clothing to mark their status and were forbidden from positions of authority over Muslims.
These restrictions weren't theoretical—they were rigorously enforced and backed by severe penalties. Jews who violated these laws could face imprisonment, heavy fines, or death. The system was designed to keep Jews in a state of permanent subjugation, making normal economic and social life extremely difficult.
Ottoman Rule: Continued Discrimination
The Ottoman Empire, often portrayed as more tolerant than its predecessors, maintained the dhimmi system throughout its rule over Palestine. Jews faced legal discrimination, economic restrictions, and periodic violence. The Ottoman authorities frequently imposed additional taxes on Jewish communities and restricted Jewish immigration to the Land of Israel, particularly during times of European persecution.
Travel accounts from the 19th century describe Jewish communities in Palestine living in poverty and precarious conditions, subject to the whims of local Ottoman officials and Arab notables. The system of foreign rule consistently failed to protect Jewish rights or allow for normal development of Jewish life in the ancestral homeland.
The Holocaust and the Failure of Foreign Protection
The most tragic consequence of Jewish statelessness became apparent during World War II. The British Mandate's 1939 White Paper severely restricted Jewish immigration to Palestine precisely when European Jews faced genocide. This policy directly contributed to Holocaust deaths by denying refuge to Jews who could have escaped Nazi persecution.
The SS Struma incident exemplifies this tragedy. In 1942, a ship carrying 769 Jewish refugees was denied entry to Palestine by British authorities and forced back to sea, where it sank with nearly all passengers lost. These weren't abstract policy decisions—they were death sentences for Jews whose only crime was seeking safety in their ancestral homeland.
The Holocaust demonstrated that Jewish survival could not depend on the protection or goodwill of others. When Jews had no state to defend them, six million died while the world largely remained silent. The lesson was clear: Jewish self-determination wasn't a luxury—it was a necessity for survival.
The Moral Imperative of Self-Determination
After World War II, the international community recognized that peoples have the right to self-determination in their ancestral lands. This principle was enshrined in the UN Charter and applied to decolonization movements worldwide. Yet when it comes to Jews, this universally accepted right is often questioned or denied entirely.
Decolonization, Not Colonization
The establishment of Israel represents decolonization—the restoration of indigenous people to their ancestral homeland after centuries of foreign rule. Jews are not colonizers; they are the original inhabitants returning home after being expelled by actual colonial powers like Rome.
Archaeological evidence, historical records, and genetic studies all confirm the ancient Jewish connection to the Land of Israel. Hebrew inscriptions, ancient synagogues, and Jewish artifacts throughout the region testify to thousands of years of continuous Jewish presence and connection to the land.
The Double Standard
Today's criticism of Jewish self-determination reveals a troubling double standard. The same people who celebrate national liberation movements elsewhere condemn Jewish efforts to return to their ancestral homeland. This inconsistency suggests that the objection isn't to nationalism per se, but to Jewish nationalism specifically.
Every other people's right to self-determination is taken for granted. Arabs have over 20 states, Muslims have nearly 50 majority-Muslim countries, and Christians are majorities in dozens of nations. Yet the idea that Jews deserve one small state in their ancestral homeland is somehow controversial.
The Continuation of Ancient Hatred
Opposition to Jewish self-determination often masks ancient antisemitic patterns in modern political language. The same hatred that blamed Jews for plagues, economic problems, and social unrest throughout history now blames the Jewish state for regional conflicts and global problems.
This pattern of hatred has persisted across cultures, religions, and political systems. Romans blamed Jews for refusing to assimilate, Christians blamed them for religious differences, Muslims blamed them for rejecting Islam, fascists blamed them for communism, communists blamed them for capitalism, and now anti-Zionists blame them for nationalism.
The consistency of antisemitism across different societies and eras suggests the problem lies not with Jewish behavior but with deep-seated prejudices that manifest differently in each age. Today's anti-Zionism often serves as a socially acceptable way to express these ancient hatreds.
International Law and Jewish Rights
International law clearly supports Jewish rights to self-determination. The 1947 UN Partition Resolution 181 legally established the framework for Jewish statehood. The 1922 League of Nations Mandate for Palestine explicitly recognized "the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country."
Multiple UN resolutions and international treaties have reaffirmed these rights. Those who claim Israel's establishment was illegal are simply incorrect about international law and historical fact.
Modern Israel: A Diverse Democracy
Modern Israel demonstrates that Jewish self-determination doesn't require the exclusion of others. Israel is home to Arab citizens who serve as judges, members of parliament, doctors, and teachers. Israeli universities, hospitals, and businesses are integrated spaces where Jews and Arabs work together daily.
This reality contradicts the false narrative that Jewish self-determination is inherently exclusionary. Israel shows that Jewish sovereignty can coexist with minority rights and democratic values, just as other democracies do worldwide.
Conclusion: The Inexcusable Nature of Anti-Jewish Hatred
After millennia of persecution under foreign rule, Jewish self-determination in Israel represents justice, not injustice. The establishment of Israel didn't create conflict—it responded to the reality that Jews could not safely live as minorities under foreign rule in their ancestral homeland.
Those who demand that Jews return to minority status under foreign rule are asking for something that history has proven impossible: that Jews accept permanent vulnerability and second-class status in their own ancestral land. This demand would be considered outrageous if applied to any other people.
The hatred directed at Jews and Israel today is not legitimate political criticism—it is the continuation of ancient antisemitism in modern form. Just as we recognize that racism against other groups is inexcusable regardless of political context, we must recognize that hatred against Jews is equally inexcusable, whether expressed as traditional antisemitism or modern anti-Zionism.
History has shown repeatedly that Jewish survival depends on Jewish self-determination. After two thousand years of persecution under foreign rule, Jews finally returned home. That this return is controversial says more about persistent antisemitism than it does about Jewish behavior. It is time to recognize that Jewish self-determination is not only justified—it is a moral imperative learned from centuries of tragic experience.