24 March 2026

Will the State of Israel Survive? Does Israel Deserve to Survive?

Are we seeing the beginning of the end of Zionism?


How will Israel Collapse?

One of the most common tropes is that Israel has ‘a right to exist’. It is as if any state has a right to exist. Only people have that right.

What Israel is really saying is something entirely different. Israel is an illegitimate state and therefore it fears those who question its legitimacy. From 2009 onwards the Reut Institute, Israel's ‘premier strategy policy group’, devoted itself to what it called the 'delegitimization' of Israel.

The Reut Institute defined 'delegitimization' as the "convergence of seemingly unrelated movements and associations” that delegitimised the Jewish nature of the Israeli State.

Israel’s founding myth (the Jewish ‘return’) does not stand up to scrutiny. Israel was founded on the dispossession of another people who ironically are the real descendants of the ancient Hebrews.

How the Jews of Judea Became the Arabs of Palestine

However much Israel portrays itself as just another hi tech western state it is a state with a difference. It is a ‘Jewish’ ethno-nationalist state. What does this mean?

Is Israel like for example Britain which is nominally a Christian state? Absolutely not. In 1858 Parliament passed the Jews Relief Act which removed restrictions that prevented Jews entering Parliament. It was the beginning of Jewish Emancipation.

No longer were the rights of British citizens dependent upon their religion. This was a rejection of the medieval model whereby the identity of a state was based around a particular religion and those not of that religion were discriminated against.

This marked the transition from a state which accorded rights depending on one’s religion to a secular state. Except for the fact that no-one Jewish can become the monarch Jews face no disability in the UK.

Israel is not just a state where Judaism is the official state religion. In Israel one’s rights and privileges are related to one’s religion or rather race. In Israel a Jew can be recorded in the Population Registry as being of no religion but is still recorded as being of Jewish nationality. There is no Israeli nationality. There are dozens of other nationalities, none of them entitling anyone to anything.

This was spelt out in the Jewish Nation State Law 2018 which states:

1.B  The State of Israel is the national state of the Jewish people, in which it exercises its natural, cultural, and historic right to self-determination.

1.C    Exercising the right to national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people.

7.    The state views the development of Jewish settlement as a national value.

Netanyahu described what this meant when he said that

“Israel is not a state of all its citizens... Israel is the nation state of the Jewish people – and only it."

In Israel state land is Jewish state land - that is why half the Arab villages in Israel are 'unrecognised'. They have no right to be on state land and like Umm al Hiran they face demolition - something that never happens to a Jewish settlement

In Israel there are two categories of citizen – Jewish and non-Jewish. From this flows one’s rights and privileges. This is the basis of Israel as a Jewish Supremacist State. Israel is a throwback to medieval times.

For example 93% of Israeli land is controlled or owned by the Jewish National Fund in conjunction with the Israeli Lands Authority. The JNF by its constitution only leases land to Jews not non-Jews. The JNF is not some voluntary charitable organisation. It is a para-state body established by the 1953 JNF Law.

In Adalah v. The Israel Lands Administration the JNF argued that it was entitled to lease land to Jews. 80% of its landholdings, 13% of total land in Israel, was confiscated from the Palestinian refugees who were expelled in 1948.

It is as if 93% of English land were owned by the Christian National Fund and when I sought to rent a flat built on its land I was told that I couldn’t because I wasn’t a Christian.

This is why Israel is so sensitive when anyone questions its legitimacy. Apartheid and discrimination against non-Jews is part of Israel’s constitutional DNA. All else is hasbara (propaganda).

Brian Berletic: Iran War - A Gateway to War with China & Russia

October 7, Expansion & Israel’s Forever Wars

When you are in the middle of great historical events it is difficult to see which direction things are heading in or  what is happening with any great clarity. This is especially true of Israel today, with the current war with Iran.

It is not helped by having an imbecile as the US President. Trump’s inability to outline his goals reflects not just his own inadequacies but US imperialism’s arrogance of power, its ‘manifest destiny’ and the belief that might is right. It is not helped by the fact that each statement of Trump contradicts his previous utterances.

Trump is not unique. He reflects the dilemmas of the United States as its ambitions to remake the world fall foul of reality and its waning influence.

However we should not believe that but for Trump all would have been well. Trump reflects a political consensus that ‘something must be done’ about Iran. The question is what. Why? Because Iran’s insistence on being politically independent falls foul of US plans. It also obstructs Israel’s desire for political hegemony in the region.

It is also worth emphasising the point that Marx made in The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte, that people make history, but not of their own time or choosing.

This is particularly true of Hamas. When it launched the uprising on October 7, little did it realise that it would have the consequences that we are seeing today, both inside and outside Gaza. The whole world order and the US’s role as the world’s hegemon is being challenged and thrown into doubt.

NATO countries are reluctant to join in with Netanyahu and Trump’s attack on Iran. Even as servile a creature as Starmer has had his doubts about the Mafioso boss who doubles as President of the US and his zombie assistants although he has since fallen into line.

There are those who see the war against Iran in terms of Netanyahu having dragged Trump into it. This is a fundamental misconception. If Trump hadn’t wanted to go to war he wouldn’t have. Rather I see the situation as analogous to the Suez War where Israel’s attack on Egypt was the pretext for Britain and France’s invasion of Egypt.

When Hamas planned the break-out on October 7 it clearly misjudged Israel’s reaction. It didn’t aim to bring down the Zionist entity. Rather it wanted to capture Israeli hostages in order to exchange them for Palestinian captives.

What it failed to understand was the profound political changes taking place in Israel itself. In particular the rise of the Messianic Religious Nationalist Right led by Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar ben Gvir. These are Jewish Nazis. Even Moshe Yalon, the former Likud Defence Minister said so.

From 1948 to 1967 Israel consolidated what it had seized when it was established. Although it wanted to expand (for example the Suez War) it had to give back its ill-gotten gains. Israelis look back at this period as one when Israel was relatively ‘normal’ despite Israeli Palestinians living under military rule until 1966.

In the 1950s Israel was still too weak to expand and it lacked the settlers. That didn’t stop Israeli leaders entertaining many ideas of how to expand and destabilise their neighbours.

Livia Rokach published a book Israel’s Sacred Terrorism’ based on the Diaries of Moshe Sharrett Israel’s second Prime Minister. It described how on February 25, 1954, Syrian troops stationed in Aleppo revolted against Adib Shishakly's regime.

After lunch Lavon [Defence Minister] took me aside and started trying to persuade me: This is the right moment to act this is the time to move forward and occupy the Syrian border positions beyond the Demilitarized Zone. Syria is disintegrating. A State with whom we signed an armistice agreement exists no more. Its government is about to fall... This is an historical opportunity, we shouldn't miss it.

I was reluctant to approve such a blitz-plan and saw ourselves on the verge of an abyss of disastrous adventure. I asked if he suggests to act immediately and I was shocked when I realized that he does. ... He repeated that time was precious and we must act so as not to miss an opportunity which otherwise might be lost forever. Again I answered that under the circumstances right now I cannot approve any such action.... (25 February 1954, 374)

The next day the Shishakly regime actually fell. The following day, February 27, Sharett was present at a meeting where Lavon and Dayan reported to Ben Gurion that what happened in Syria was - "a typical Iraqi action." The two proposed again that the Israeli army be put on the march. Ben Gurion, "electrified," agreed. Sharett reiterated his opposition, pointing to the certainty of a Security Council condemnation, the possibility of the use against Israel of the Tripartite Declaration of 1950, hence the probability of a "shameful failure" The three objected that "our entrance [into Syria] is justified in view of the situation in Syria. This is an act of defense of our border area." Sharett closed the discussion ...

Lavon's face wore a depressed expression. He understood this to be the end of the matter. (27 February 1954, 377)

On Sunday, February 28, the press reported that no Iraqi troops had entered Syria. The situation in Damascus was under the complete control of President Hashem Al Atassi. The cabinet approved Sharett's position and rejected Lavon's vehement appeal not to miss a historical opportunity. ...

On December 12, 1954, however, a Syrian civilian plane was hijacked by Israeli war planes shortly after its takeoff, and forced to land at Lydda airport. Passengers and crew were detained and interrogated for two days, until stormy international protests

It must be clear to you that we had no justification whatsoever to seize the plane,... I have no reason to doubt the truth of the factual affirmation of the U.S. State Department that our action was without precedent in the history of international practice. ..... What shocks and worries me is the narrow-mindedness and the shortsightedness of our military leaders. They seem to presume that the State of Israel may or even must-behave in the realm of international relations according to the laws of the jungle. (22 December 1954)

All the madcap schemes that Sharrett prevented in the 50s have come to pass today.

Israel's Two Jewish Neo-Nazi Ministers - Ben Gvir & Smotrich

In 1967, the Labour government of Levi Eshkol launched a war against Syria, Jordan and Egypt. The genie was out of the bottle. The conquering of the West Bank and Gaza gave rise to a messianic settler movement. Many on the ‘left’ of the Zionist movement – Yitzhak Tabenkin, Yisrael Galili and Yigal Allon – were to the fore of the settler Greater Israel Movement.

Settlement in the West Bank started with very few settlers at first but by 2021 they had grown to 720,000 when Ben Gvir of the Jewish Nazi Otzma Yehudit was elected to the Knesset.

The break-out on 7 October 2023 took place less than a year after the 2022 elections which brought Ben Gvir and Smotrich into the Israeli government. They took full advantage of October 7 to destroy Gaza, with a view to colonising it and also launched an open reign of terror in the West Bank.

Their viewpoint was summed up on October 9 by Yoav Gallant who described the Palestinians of Gaza as ‘human animals’. The very same phrase used by Heinrich Himmler about non-Aryans in his address to senior SS Generals:

I have ordered a complete siege on the Gaza Strip. There will be no electricity, no food, no fuel, everything is closed. We are fighting human animals and we act accordingly.”

Israel's Protests Against the Judicial Reforms

Throughout 2023 there had been massive protests in Israel against the judicial reforms with sections of the military, in particular the airforce, saying they would refuse to serve.

It must have seemed to those planning October 7 that the contradictions within Zionism were leading to a fundamental breakdown in Israeli society. What they did not understand was that the whole basis of the Judicial Protests was they had been launched on the basis of protecting Israeli Jewish democracy whilst ignoring the occupation of Gaza and the West Bank.

Although Israeli activists made efforts to inject those issues into the protests the campaign allowed only token representation for Israeli Palestinians and anti-Occupation groups.

As Yiftach Golov, spokesperson for Brothers and Sisters in Arms said: “(while) it’s important to one day solve the [Israeli-Palestinian] conflict, this is not an immediate threat” to Israeli democracy.’

Moshe Yaalon, ex-Likud Defence Minister describes Smotrich & Ben Gvir as 'Mein Kampf reversed'

Hamas failed to understand that the protests against the judicial reforms, a product of the ascendancy of the messianic fascists, took place within Israeli Jewish society and on the basis of an acceptance of the position of the Palestinians.

When October 7 happened, the protests folded as Israeli Jewish society came together. The Israeli state was now prepared to embark once more on a program of expansion with the full support of all wings of Zionism.

During the course of the Genocide in Gaza, Israel occupied both Lebanon and Syria. The ‘left’ Zionists, in so far as they existed, fully accepted all Netanyahu’s wars. Yet when Iranian missiles hit Israeli civilian areas, Israelis - without a hint of irony - complained bitterly at these 'war crimes' - having done their best to discredit the International Criminal Court and all international law.

How will Israel Collapse

In the video How will Israel Collapse? five factors are listed that will lead to Israel’s collapse. They are:

1.           The weakening of United States Support

2.           The weakening of support from American Jews

3.           The breakdown in Social Cohesion

4.           The Fight for Survival

5.           The Economy

Although all of these are important, the most important is the first factor, US support. Today we are seeing a fracturing of the political alliance in support of Israel with sections of the Democrats splitting off coupled with a division in the MAGA base. In particular there has been a sea change in American political opinion such that a majority of the population now sympathise more with the Palestinians than the Israelis. This is true of the West as a whole.

However we haven’t seen any significant diminution in the support of corporate America and establishment opinion, not least the military-industrial base in support of Israel.

It is important that public opinion is now moving against Israel and no longer buys into the idea that Israel is the ‘only democracy in the Middle East’. However we should not forget that US foreign policy has never depended on public support.

It will take a concerted campaign from below to force US corporations to disinvest and withdraw support from Israeli apartheid. What may happen is that the US will reduce its support for Israel and refuse to automatically support every Israeli adventure that Netanyahu or his successors propose.

The aftermath of an Iranian missile strike

What the video doesn't mention, but which the Iran war is demonstrating,  is the elephant in the room - the corrupt and authoritarian Arab regimes. Their overthrow are key to the US dropping its support for the Zionist state. They are Israel's junior allies. What is missing is the Arab masses themselves who have tolerated or acquiesced in the maintenance of these regimes.

The weakening of support from American Jews, although welcome, is not a decisive factor for the simple reason that contrary to the propaganda of the imperialist politicians and the anti-Semitic Right, US support has never depended on Jewish support for Israel. Jews provided the moral alibi and political shield for that support. They have never been the reason for that support.

Israel is a settler colonial state that is bound together by its antagonism to the Palestinians. War and expansion are part of the Zionist DNA. Without the Palestinians and external enemies Israel may already have been engulfed in a civil war.

Israel's War for Survival Means Endless Wars and the Dehumanisation of Non-Jews

That is why Israel will never be a ‘normal’ capitalist state. It sees itself as the bulwark of the West in a hostile region. As Joe Biden said, if Israel did not exist it would have to be invented. Israel will never be content with its existing borders. Israel is the only state in the world not to define its borders.

However we should not fool ourselves that Israel will be destroyed or collapse from within. Rather there will be an incremental erosion of democratic rights even for Jews. It will be increasingly intolerant even for Jews.

The days of a steady stream of immigrants from the Jewish diaspora via Aliyah are over. The direction of migration is out of the country not into it.

As Israel moves further to the neo-Nazi right and increasingly theocratic under the influence of halachic rather than civil law, coupled with the never ending wars, so we can expect an increasing number of Jews to emigrate. Emigration today is at a record high. Israel will more and more come to resemble a theocracy with religious nationalists in the driving seat.

The Zionist organisations invested heavily in capturing diaspora Jewish organisations like the Board of Deputies. Increasingly, despite the weaponisation of anti-Semitism, they will have greater difficulty in controlling Jewish opposition to the Israeli state, not least amongst the young. Already today it is clear that the Board is to the right of most Jews in Britain.

As we see in the war against Iran, the further Israel extends itself the weaker it will become. Expansion has its downside and those Zionists who dream of a Jewish Empire should remember the fate of all empires.

Western politicians will continue to pretend that Israel is a democracy. In so doing they ignore the genocide in Gaza, the apartheid and settler terror on the West Bank and the open racism such as the ‘Death to Arabs’ marches. To say nothing of the racism and apartheid within 1948 Israel.

We saw after October 7 how those who considered themselves part of the Zionist ‘left’ accepted the narrative of the Israeli Right. Over 60% of Israeli Jews support the extermination of the Palestinians of Gaza and 56% support the expulsion of Israel’s Palestinians.

The Israeli Jewish working class will play little or no part in opposing these things. In a settler colonial state the working class sacrifices its class interests for what it sees as its national interests. The Israeli working class has never broken from Zionism.  Mechanical and economistic Marxists who reduce everything to a sociological definition of class will continue to be baffled as to why their predictions of working class unity with the Palestinians never come to pass.

The Israeli working class has never been able to create its own independent political organisations. Its ‘trade union’ Histadrut was at one and the same time the largest employer after the state itself. It was a colonising agency not a trade union except in the narrowest sense. Zionism is an alliance between the settler working class and the settler capitalists.

The Israeli working class, like the White South Africa working class, is on the right of Israeli politics. If South Africa is any guide, the first sections of the Israeli population that will be prepared to abandon Zionism will be its capitalists and middle class not the Israeli working class.

Israel sees itself as in an existential battle for survival as in the slogan of Israel’s ‘right to self defence’. ‘Self defence’ means Israel’s right to attack anyone who challenges its hegemony.

It is an essential component of Israeli settler identity that it is always the victim, even when it’s the aggressor. This is true of all settler colonialism. It was the ‘left’ Zionists of Mapam (long since disappeared) who talked of ‘shooting and crying’. Today the Zionists don’t cry when they kill – that is the main difference between ‘left’ and ‘right’ Zionism.

This self pity is a characteristic of colonialism in general. The British Empire according to Rudyard Kipling’s poem had to:

Take up the White Man's burden—

And reap his old reward,

The blame of those ye better,

The hate of those ye guard

Israel’s economy is bound up with Israel’s role as a projection of US power. Whatever the strain of war on Israel’s economy it will survive as long as it is bailed out by the United States.

Also missing from How will Israel Collapse is any mention of the solidarity campaign outside of Israel, BDS or Arab and Palestinian agency. It presupposes that Israel will just collapse.

What will Happen to the Settler State?

The Palestine solidarity movement rarely discusses what will happen to the settlers if there is a solution. There are approximately 7 million Israeli Jews. This question is vital to the de-Zionisation and decolonisation of Israel. It may be crucial to achieving a settlement along the lines of apartheid in South Africa.

It is naive to suppose that all Israel’s Jews will emigrate to Europe or the USA. For many Israeli Jews there will be nowhere to go. As Israel becomes increasingly a theocratic police state under the Ben Gvirs and Smotrichs, social tensions will be exacerbated within the settler community. The question how to take advantage of these tensions and divisions is crucial.

Between early 2022 and mid-2024, more than 125,000 Jewish citizens left Israel than entered. The trend is believed to have continued through 2025. The current war with Iran is almost certain to ensure that emigration increases.

Knesset Immigration Committee chair MK Gilad Kariv warned that

this is no longer a trend — it’s a tsunami. Many Israelis are choosing to build their future outside the State of Israel, and fewer and fewer are returning.”

If this emigration continues Europe and the USA may raise their immigration barriers and prevent Israeli Jews coming.

Israel has now become a state of permanent war. If Iran is defeated then it will look for a new enemy such as Turkey. Israel cannot survive without an external enemy.

It is essential that any movement for decolonisation holds out the promise that Israeli Jews who wish to live in peace and equality will be able to do so. That is why the old PLO call for a Democratic, Secular State is more relevant now than ever. Those who call for the expulsion of all the Jews in Israel are holding up a mirror to the Ben Gvirs and Smotrichs.

Israel is an artificial state that is not destined for a permanent place in the sun. With the rise of the messianic settler right it is going to be increasingly uncomfortable for secular Israelis.

The aftermath of an Iranian missile strike in Arad

Israel’s existence is a temporary one. I doubt that it is even going to last for the first 100 years. There is no going back from the forever wars as Israel expands into Lebanon, Syria soon to be followed by Jordan and possibly Egypt.

It is important that anti-Zionists abroad enters into a close relationship with that section of the Israeli Jewish population, however small, that is prepared to reject either Zionism, Jewish Supremacy or apartheid. It is possible that a small section of Israeli Jewish workers will realise that their class interests and Zionism do not coincide.

My fear is that Israel, like South Africa before the end of apartheid, is going to have a very bloody end before Zionism is finally ended. Many people both in Palestine and the wider Middle East region, are going to have to pay a very heavy price for its demise.

Tony Greenstein

19 March 2026

Open Letter to a Holocaust Denier - The Reverend Lord Biggar, Oxford’s Regius Professor Emeritus of Moral and Pastoral Theology

Those Who Deny the Holocaust in Gaza are No Different to those Who Deny the Nazi Holocaust


The truth about the British Empire and slavery: Mehdi Hasan and Nigel Biggar | Head to Head

I first came across Tory Peer and author of In Defence of War, the Revd. Lord Biggar, when a friend, Adam Waterhouse, sent me a link to an article he had written. Adam’s article was in response to an article Biggar had written, Israel’s acts are not ‘genocidal.’ Biggar had been replying to an article by the Archbishop of York, Stephen Cottrell which spoke of Israel’s actions in Gaza as ‘genocidal acts’.

The Archbishop had visited the West Bank and he was quoted as saying that after his visit the previous week “It gives me no joy whatsoever to use these words,” but that he had been left wondering, “What other words do you use” to describe the situation in the West Bank?

What’s happening in the West Bank is not what happened in South Africa, but you’re left thinking: what other language do I use to describe such a two-tier system, where one group of people is so persistently and systematically denied their human rights and having to live a parallel life? What is happening is deliberate and systematic, persistent, and intentional, and its impact is devastating.

You may wonder why Nigel Biggar even felt the need to respond to the Archbishop’s mild words. We have the horrors of Gaza: the starvation of children, the bombing of hospitals and schools, the Flour Massacre and the shooting of people collecting food, the mass murder of innocent civilians and the genocidal statements of Israeli leaders, to say nothing of the open apartheid in the West Bank, yet the only thing that aroused the ire of our Professor of Morality was the description of what is happening in Gaza 'Genocide'. 


Israeli officials' rhetoric fuelling Gaza genocide through dehumanisation and incitement: B’Tselem

One can only assume that Biggar was doing his best to prevent any expression of solidarity by the Church of England with the Palestinians of Gaza. Not that there had been much anyway. Until he resigned for his role in covering up child abuse in the Church of England, Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby had not only refused to condemn the genocide but had all but supported it.

Biggar is not a historian but an academic engaged in historical revisionism and moral relativism. He is no different from those who downplay the magnitude of the Nazi holocaust.

Although Biggar dresses up his arguments in the clothes of moral theology his mission is political, the rehabilitation of the reputation of the British Empire and its offspring, Israel.

That is why he defends the actions of Israel and minimises the genocide in Gaza. In this he is given enthusiastic support by the same Tory press which turned a blind eye to Hitler's anti-Semitism in the 30s.

Zionism was the product of the late colonial era. He could hardly exculpate British colonialism whilst condemning its bastard child, Israel. That is the impulse which drives Biggar and he is not averse to resorting to every verbal and rhetorical trick in pursuit of that goal even if he plays fast and loose with facts.

The reason why I have penned an Open Letter to Biggar is two fold. Firstly Adam Waterhouse was too polite by half when tackling as devious and dishonest a character as Biggar. Politeness is not one of my faults!

Secondly there are many questions that Adam did not ask concerning Biggar’s motive in writing his turgid essay.

To:  nigel.biggar@theology.ox.ac.ukbiggarn@parliament.uk@NigelBiggar  

Open Letter to the Rev. Lord Biggar

Dear Lord Biggar,

You are the Regius Professor Emeritus of Moral and Pastoral Theology. It is a grand title for such an immoral, (or is it amoral?) man. You are the King’s Professor no less.

I puzzle over what kind of morality and theology leads a person to deny that a genocide is taking place when the evidence to the contrary is so overwhelming?

You state, in the Church Times of 28 November 2025, that Israel’s acts are not ‘genocidal’ in response to the Archbishop of York’s declaration that Israel is committing ‘genocidal acts’. 

Israel bombs school in Gaza killing children and parents under the pretext that they were Hamas

What was it that went through your mind when you read Archbishop Cottrell’s article that impelled you to write in defence of Israel’s genocide? What emotion was it that led you to defend a state that has bombed refugee camps, tent encampments and burnt and buried children alive? A state which has destroyed hospitals and schools, murdered doctors and first responders?

By the most conservative estimate, when your article appeared, 70,100 people had been murdered by Israel in Gaza yet you reduce it to 44,000. Why?

According to a study published in The Lancet, some 83,000 had died by January 2025. If this is true then over 118,000 had died by the time your article appeared.

According to Stuart Casey Maslen, head of the Geneva Academy of International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights, Gaza’s population had declined by more than 10%, which would suggest roughly 200,000 people had died by February 2026.

In your article you do your best to minimise the number of dead. Morally you are no different from deniers of the Nazi holocaust who also did their best to minimise the number of those killed. You say that ‘the large number of civilian casualties alone — maybe around 44,000 — is not sufficient evidence’ of genocide. Is this what the morality of pastoral Christian theology amounts to?

The definition of genocide owes nothing to numbers. The death of 8,000 at Srbenica was held to be a genocide. ‘Genocide’ refers to the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group. The question is whether Israel had the necessary intent and did it commit any of the acts that constitute genocide, viz. 

Ø    Killing members of or Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group

Ø    Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction, in whole or in part

Ø    Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group

Ø    Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group

Apart from the last category it is clear that the acts of the Israeli state are clearly acts of genocide. It is also clear that you have no expertise in genocide, history or any relevant academic discipline.

Raz Segal, an Israeli and Associate Professor of Holocaust and Genocide Studies does have that expertise. Segal wrote:

Israelis are explicit and unashamed about their genocidal intent because they have imagined and prosecuted a war against people who they see as colonised “savages”.

A survey by Professor Tamir Sorek of Pennsylvania State University showed that 82% of Israeli Jews supported the expulsion of the Palestinians of Gaza and 47% agreed that

when conquering an enemy city, the Israel Defense Forces should act as the Israelites did in Jericho under Joshua's command – killing all its inhabitants.

56% supported the expulsion of Palestinian citizens of Israel. The statements of intent to commit genocide by Israel's leaders are too many to count.

You question why Archbishop Cottrell ‘thinks that his view should carry weight’ when he ‘is an expert neither in the ethics of war nor in Middle Eastern affairs’. But this applies even more so to you, the author of a book In Defence of War?

You also criticise the Genocide Convention because it ‘fails to distinguish the morally different ways in which a people can be “destroyed”.’ For most people there is nothing moral in destroying a people.

You compare the Allies killing of thousands of French and Italian civilians in the fight against the Nazis with Israel’s ‘war against Hamas’. But there is no  comparison. 

Hamas is a resistance organisation waging a guerrilla war against the world’s fourth most powerful army. The Nazis had an army consisting of armed soldiers complete with tanks and aircraft. So too does Israel. It is the IDF not Hamas which is comparable to the Nazis.

It is also noticeable that you avoid mentioning the word ‘Palestinians’. To you they are ‘Arabs’. This too is part of a genocidal mentality whereby indigenous people are invisible.

What is clear is that your morality is not politically neutral. You say that

THERE is no doubt that Hamas intended to kill indiscriminately on 7 October 2023, because we know that they deliberately hunted down the old, the young, and the infant.’

Hamas mass rape a ‘hoax’ and ‘fake news’, says University of Sydney professor

But there is doubt. Israel has waged a war of atrocity propaganda. The first lies were the 40 beheaded babies hoax. Then there was the mass rape hoax. Hamas’ principal aim was to capture Israeli hostages in order to exchange them for Palestinian hostages.

Whereas you attributed to Hamas the worst of motives, you went out of your way to excuse the actions of the Israeli army. You wrote that:

In contrast, the fact that the Israeli military have targeted buildings where they know civilians are present is no proof that they intend to kill them; for it may be that their intended targets are Hamas sites, to which, tragically, civilians are located dangerously close.

So when Israel bombs and attacks hospitals it is because they are Hamas sites? And ambulances? Universities? What about schools?  How about reservoirs and water treatment plants? Was Hamas hiding out in them too? How about the Trades Union Centre? Are bakeries and kindergartens also Hamas bases.

I know that you are an expert in moral theology, but that begs the question of whether moral theology is a genuine academic discipline or an invented and imagined subject. It is entirely subjective and without any means of independent verification.

Everything you have said could justify any and everything that the Nazis did. Your morality seems to depend on which side you take.  Are there any universal principles that can be distilled from your writings?

You say that ‘the Nazi death camps are the paradigm of genocide’. But are they? One of the main characteristics of Genocide is that there is no paradigm except perhaps the presence of colonialism/imperialism/nationalism.

The death of between 12 and 15 million Africans as a result of slavery might also be considered paradigmatic but your main concern when it comes to colonial slavery is to oppose reparations by indulging in whatabouttery in your book The Tyranny of Imagined Guilt.

As Professor Alan Lester writes:

Whataboutery seems to me a very fragile ethical edifice upon which to build an anti-reparative argument.

It seems that ethics have no place in your moral theology. Lester writes that you

accuse(s) reparations activists of “the reckless, dismissive brushing aside of concerns about the truth.” One wonders if he was looking in the mirror.

For you there seems to be only one genocide, the Jewish holocaust. Contrary to Zionist propaganda it was no more unique than any other genocide.

Was the Genocide in the Congo  where amputations and the skinning alive of the 10 million Africans were perpetrated, less cruel or paradigmatic? 

Was the Herero/Nama genocide in SW Africa to be disregarded when it was based on the same principles of racial supremacy and even involved some of the same actors who perpetrated the Nazi holocaust, such as Eugen Fischer?

The Nazi genocide of Jews has become an imperialist narrative, shorn of its political and social  roots, as the main rationale for everything that Israel does. It is no surprise that you do not deploy your ‘moral’ arguments against reparations for slavery against the reparations that were paid by the Germans to Israel.

I can only assume that the real reason for your anguish is that as a Christian Zionist you are prepared to justify any atrocity and any war crime that Israel commits because without the ‘return’ of the Jews to the Holy Land Christ will not be returning. In other words the ends justify the means.

When I saw you in the debate hosted by Mehdi Hassan you brought to mind Percy Shelley’s Masque of Anarchy, written in the wake of the massacre at Peterloo in 1819:

I met Murder on the way—

He had a mask like Castlereagh -

Very smooth he looked, yet grim;

Seven blood-hounds followed him.

You are also the author of Colonialism: A Moral Reckoning, which attempts to provide a defence of the British Empire. In your own words it is ‘Empire Without Apology’.

Although you conceded in the debate hosted by Mehdi Hassan that the Empire contained ‘‘elements of racism’ you see the Empire as not having been ‘essentially racist’. On balance it was a force for good.

It is no surprise that you were ennobled by Kemi Badenoch who like most Black people in the Tory Party goes out of her way to prove that she’s politically White. Badenoch is the Black Face of White Supremacism. It is no surprise that she has been called a coconut by Black anti-racists.

Kenan Malik, in his review of your book describes how, in 1919, the architect of British support for Zionism, Foreign Secretary, Arthur James Balfour,

dismissed the idea that the new League of Nations should adopt a statement about equality, insisting it unimaginable “that a man from central Africa could be regarded as the equal of a European or an American

This is the racism that led to Britain’s support of Zionism.

Your real function as an academic was to provide the religious and ideological underpinnings for the new imperialism that we are seeing play out in the wars in the Middle East today. Your academic discipline, Moral Theology, is little more than a religious justification of imperialism and its work. It is political chicanery dressed up in academic jargon.

Virtually every human rights organisation in the world recognises that what has occurred in Gaza is genocide. Organisations as disparate as Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Israel’s B’tselem and the UN’s own Commission of Inquiry. The Association of Genocide Scholars voted by 86% to describe what was happening in Gaza as a genocide.

Perhaps you would like to inform people just what your own qualifications are that enables you to contradict not only every human rights organisation but the testimony of doctors like Dr Mark Perlmutter. In an interview Perlmutter described how, when volunteering at the European hospital of Khan Younis in southern Gaza he "saw two children that were shot twice". He added: "No child gets shot twice by mistake."

Virtually every doctor who has volunteered in Gaza has the same story. Israel is using children as target practice. Does this not tell you something about what has happened in Gaza or does your allegiance to the Tory Party and mammon preclude this?

It seems to me that a far better title for you to use would be the Professor of an Immoral Theology, not forgetting the Regius bit of course!

Tony Greenstein