Letters invite questions about Israel's election and self-definition

Jonathan Freedland is surely right that the Israeli political parties opposed to Benjamin Netanyahu should make common cause with their Palestinian fellow citizens, as suggested in his article regarding the hard lesson from Israel's election on 30 October. He correctly argues that to stop nationalist populists, one cannot play by gentlemen's rules.

Freedland is also right to be pessimistic, recognising that “Israel’s Jewish-led parties have long shunned the mainly Arab parties because the latter identify as anti- or non-Zionist, meaning they reject Israel’s self-definition as a Jewish state”. Yet, the author also points to the very reason why this is unlikely to change. He notes that “it demands a reshaping of Israeli society, breaking a pattern of systemic discrimination and inequality within the country that has existed since the founding of the state”.

Freedland’s clarity on these matters surely invites a further question. One might ask if Israel’s self-definition as a Jewish state – in other words, Zionism – lies at the very heart of the discrimination and inequality that have persisted since the state’s founding. It is worth considering if this is also fundamental to the perilous situation in which Israel now finds itself, and the increasingly bleak prospects for its future. This is a position held by many Jews who reject Zionism.

Netanyahu’s domination of Israeli politics in recent years is no accident, any more than is the failure of Israeli society more broadly to rein in his excesses. Both have deep historical, cultural and ideological roots, and they go hand-in-hand with the discrimination and inequality that Freedland describes. These are issues that must be confronted seriously by anyone who wishes to see an end to the continuing bloodshed and avert the prospect of Israel’s pariah status and gradual implosion, according to Dr Richard Skues of London.