Anti-Zionist arguments are rooted in international law

The argument

The position distinguishes two things that are often treated as one, and the distinction it draws concerns the grounds on which each rests. Anti-Zionist arguments, on this account, are rooted in international law and in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights — bodies of principle that exist independently of any particular people and are applied to states generally. That grounding is what proponents say gives the position its character. Many anti-Zionists oppose Israel's occupation of Palestinian lands on the basis that the occupation is illegal, and, they argue, on that basis and nothing more. The objection is framed in the vocabulary a legal objection is framed in: which actions a state may take in territory it holds, what obligations follow from the instruments it is party to, what rights the inhabitants of that territory retain. Arguments of that form are made about many states, and the fact that they are being made about one does not alter what they appeal to. The underlying commitment proponents identify is equality — upholding the basic human rights of the Palestinian people, on the same terms on which such rights are claimed for anyone. A position built from a universal principle is answerable to that principle, which means it can be tested, contested, and found wrong on its own ground. Anti-Semitism, by contrast, is not borne from a claim about law at all. It originates in racial prejudice and resentment directed at Jewish people as such, and it does not become something else when it borrows political language. Because its source is hostility to a people rather than an argument about a state's conduct, it cannot be refuted by legal argument and does not consist of one. The conclusion is that the two differ in kind and not merely in degree. Criticism grounded in law and rights is acceptable, on this view; prejudice directed at a people is not — and treating the first as though it were the second removes from debate the very standards by which the second is condemned.

Context

The root of anti-Semitic and anti-Zionist arguments also highlight the differences between the concepts and demonstrate that one is bigoted while the other is political opposition to Israeli policy.

Premises

Counter-arguments

Not all anti-Zionist arguments stem from international law and the respect for human rights. Some subscribe to anti-Zionist beliefs for religious reasons. For example, the American Presbyterian Church holds anti-Zionist beliefs not because of a respect for Palestinian human rights, but because it believes Jews "are condemned to suffer for their rejection of Jesus and complicity in his death". These beliefs are clearly anti-Semitic. Consequently, those who hold anti-Zionist beliefs based on purely religious beliefs are expressing anti-Semitism in their anti-Zionist beliefs. This means that in some instances, anti-Zionism is equivalent to anti-Semitism and the two have a much closer relationship with some aligned goals.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P1] Anti-Zionism can also be rooted in bigotry and prejudice.