A new academic institute aims to separate Zionism from Jewish studies and critique it as a form of colonialism and racism.
What is the Institute for the Critical Study of Zionism?
The Institute for the Critical Study of Zionism (ICSZ) is a newly formed academic group that seeks to “delink the study of Zionism from Jewish studies”, presenting Zionism as a subject for critical inquiry rather than a movement for Jewish self-determination. The institute was co-founded by Emmaia Gelman, a trustee of the Sparkplug Foundation, and Christine Hong, a professor of literature and critical race and ethnic studies at UC Santa Cruz. The institute’s website states that its mission is to “examine the historical, political, and cultural contexts and impacts of Zionism, and to support scholarship that challenges its assumptions and practices”.
Why is the institute controversial?
The institute has sparked controversy among Jewish studies scholars and pro-Israel advocates, who accuse it of being anti-Semitic, anti-Zionist, and biased. The institute’s inaugural conference, titled “Battling the IHRA Definition: The Frontlines of Campus Activism”, will take place in October 2023 at UC Santa Cruz and NYU Law School. The conference will feature speakers who oppose the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) working definition of anti-Semitism, which includes some examples of anti-Zionism as forms of anti-Semitism. The conference organizers claim that the IHRA definition is being used to silence criticism of Israel and stifle academic freedom.
The institute also has connections to the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement, which calls for economic and political pressure on Israel to end its occupation of Palestinian territories and grant equal rights to Palestinian citizens. Gelman is a member of the Ireland Palestine Solidarity Campaign, which supports BDS, and Hong is an advisory board member of the US Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel (USACBI), which promotes BDS in academia. The BDS movement has been widely condemned by Jewish organizations and governments as discriminatory and harmful to peace efforts.
How does the institute view Zionism?
The institute views Zionism as a form of western imperialism, white supremacy, and settler colonialism that oppresses Palestinians and other marginalized groups. In an interview with the Speaking Out of Place podcast, Gelman said that “Israel studies programs were deliberately created not to study Israel in a critical way, but to center pro-Zionist ideas about Israel… as if it’s possible to separate this incredibly violent… process of colonization that every Israeli is involved in every day.” She also accused Zionist institutions, such as the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), of being involved in anti-communism, orientalism, and racism.
Hong echoed Gelman’s sentiments, saying that “We understand that a critique of Zionism is part and parcel of a field [ethnic studies] that takes as its mandate a critique of all forms of imperialism.” She added that the institute aims to “challenge the hegemony of Zionist thought within Jewish studies and beyond”.
How do Jewish studies scholars respond?
Many Jewish studies scholars have criticized the institute’s approach and agenda, arguing that it misrepresents Zionism and Jewish history, excludes diverse perspectives, and undermines academic integrity. In an open letter published by The Forward, over 90 Jewish studies scholars expressed their “deep concern” about the institute’s conference, saying that it “promotes a one-sided perspective on a complex and contentious issue” and “undermines the scholarly study of Zionism”. They also questioned the institute’s legitimacy, noting that it is not affiliated with any academic institution or department.
Some Jewish studies scholars have also defended Zionism as an integral part of Jewish identity, culture, and history. In an article published by Tablet Magazine, David Myers, a professor of Jewish history at UCLA, wrote that “Zionism is not an aberration or a detour in modern Jewish history; it is one of its central strands”. He argued that Zionism should not be reduced to a political ideology or a state policy, but rather understood as a diverse and dynamic movement that reflects the aspirations and challenges of the Jewish people.
