

Opposition to Zionism and Israel continues today in Israel, led by Muslim leaders who are associated with the Muslim Brotherhood, and, of course, those under the Palestinian Authority/PLO and Hamas. They are supported by the international community, such as the UNHCR, and by the EU and European nations which fund anti-Israel NGOs, some of which support terrorist organizations. They also gave hundreds of millions of Euros to Palestinians to build homes (illegally) in Israeli-controlled territory in order to create ‘facts-on-the-ground’ for a Palestinian state.
Some Jews also opposed a Jewish state –and still do -- claiming that Jews should not rule over Arabs, and that Arab Palestinians are also entitled to a state; its modern form is the two-state-solution (2SS). Some argued for a bi-national or secular state –but they became irrelevant in view of Arab hostility and violence, and the need to rescue Jews who sought to escape from Europe and endangered Jewish communities in Arab countries.
The basis for Amnesty’s opposition to Zionism and a Jewish state is that they claim that it discriminates against non-Jewish Arabs – there are many Jews who came from Arab countries – and therefore is inherently immoral.
This is the same argument that is presented by leftist Israelis and many in the international community who oppose “the occupation of Palestinian territory (OPT)” – a term which the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) arbitrarily designated as the areas conquered by the IDF in the Six Day War. According to the ICRC, the presence of Jews in these areas and control by the Israeli government is a violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention, and therefore “illegal according to international law.” The ICRC refuses to explain the basis for its decision, since the notion of “OPT” had never been used before.
The UN, which established UNRWA to care for Arabs who fled or were expelled from Israel during the 1948 war is based on the principle of the “right of return” which is a basic to “the Nakba” (catastrophe) narrative in which Arabs lament their loss in that war. That is the core of Arab Palestinian identity, and it explains why they have rejected any recognition of the legitimacy of Zionism and a Jewish state, and all offers of a compromise. A Jewish state, under any and all circumstances is unacceptable. For Islamists, it violates Islamic law.
Their theological and political arguments are the reasons why Iran seeks to produce weapons of mass destruction dedicated to wiping out Israel, and why Iran’s proxy, Hezbollah, has a vast arsenal of missiles in Lebanon directed at Israel, and what Hamas, supported by the Muslim Brotherhood, seeks to accomplish in the Gaza Strip. Their goal is to destroy the Jewish state. Invoking a false moral argument against Israel as an “Apartheid state,” therefore, is, in fact, a call for genocide.
The Arab-Israeli conflict is not about “settlements” – Jewish communities that were built in Judea, Samaria and eastern Jerusalem after 1967 – nor about returning to the 1949 Armistice lines; it is about Israel’s establishment in 1948. It is what is taught in mosques and Arab-run schools and is promoted by the PA/PLO and Hamas. It is why the PA/PLO pays families of terrorists and honors them as “martyrs and heroes.”
It is part of their century-old opposition to Zionism and a Jewish state. It is the basis for their claim that “Palestine” is “from the river to the sea.” That is what Palestinianism means and why Amnesty supports it.
Dr.Moshe Dann is a PhD historian and journalist in Israel.