In 1975 a UN resolution pronounced Zionism another form of racism; not until 1991 would the Israelis and Americans be able to get this revoked. Today many consider Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians to be analogous to South Africa’s treatment of its Black population under apartheid… including quite a few Israeli Jews. While America’s peace movement has been conspicuous by its post-9/11 silence and disorganization, Israel has a vocal antiwar and human rights movement which has only grown stronger as the carnage has continued. A growing number of them have proposed a radical solution: the annexation of the Occupied Territories as part of a multicultural Israel wherein Arabs and Jews work together as citizens of one state.

Under Israel’s liberal “law of return,” any Jew could come to Israel and claim citizenship, with all its benefits (integration into a relatively prosperous society) and responsibilities (military service). Unfortunately, the “Land without People for a People without Land” was already home to approximately 1 million people. Most of them left during the 1948 war and partition; today, almost 4 million of their ancestors seek their own Return. Should they be allowed back into Israel proper, the Jews of Israel would soon find themselves outnumbered. Even if they are not allowed in, current demographic trends show the Palestinian population growing faster than Israel’s – particularly since of late more Jews have been emigrating from Israel than immigrating to Israel. Any multicultural Israel would have to address the right of return: in the most likely scenario, both the Jewish and Palestinian “right of return” would be restricted. This would be a hugely controversial decision on all sides, particularly if anti-Semitism flares up elsewhere in the world and large numbers of Jews find themselves in need of new lodging.

While a multicultural Israel might well enjoy better relations with its neighbors, it would still require a standing army. Unlike Israeli Jews, Israeli Arabs are not required to serve in the military: in fact, most are forbidden to do so. This means they do not have access to military scholarships or military financial aid for higher education. Allowing Israel’s new Arab citizens into its army en masse would give them those opportunities – and access to Israeli weaponry. This could become a major issue should post-Zionist Israel deteriorate into civil war. In any event, transforming two warring parties into one coherent and unified army is going to be a Herculean task.

Giving the Palestinians passports and suffrage might be a good first step, but it will be just that. Widespread economic and social inequalities persist within Israeli society. Once they get the vote, the Palestinians of the Occupied Territories will certainly demand more say in managing their affairs. They will also expect freer access to the West Bank’s water table for their crops, thereby exacerbating Israel’s chronic water shortage. They will also expect more state money for preservation of their religious institutions and for educating their children. At present only about 2% of Israel’s preservation budget goes toward non-Jewish communities and buildings, despite the fact that Moslems and other religious groups make up over 25% of Israel’s population. (No matter the outcome, it would behoove Israel to spend more money on educating Palestinian children. Currently many go to schools run by “charitable organizations” like Hamas, wherein they learn reading, writing, and hatred for Jews: these schools also provide a fertile recruiting ground for tomorrow’s militants and suicide bombers.)

A multicultural unified Israel would have to take into account the holy places of three major world religions. Before 1967, Jews could only access the Wailing Wall (part of the Second Temple and one of Judaism’s holiest spots) through a cramped, garbage-strewn alleyway. Even after the Israelis took Jerusalem in the 1967 Six Day War, they kept Jerusalem’s mosques open; the Israeli authorities have even stopped radical right-wing Jews from damaging the Dome of the Rock, a mosque which sits atop Temple Mount in the place where many believe the Holy of Holies once stood. In the past Christian Arabs (a sizeable percentage of the population, particularly in Bethlehem and Nazareth) have complained about harassment from Moslems: there have also in the past been tensions between Arab Moslems and the Druze, a sect which combines Islam and Gnosticism. The Druze have historically had good relations with the Jews. Druze soldiers guard the Temple Mount and have distinguished themselves in the Israeli Army. Tensions between Arab Christians, Moslems, and Druze led to bloody civil war in neighboring Lebanon: the same tensions could surface in a post-Zionist Israel.

Some religious Jews claim that turning Israel into a post-Zionist multicultural state would be the “end of Judaism as we know it.” They are both right and wrong. The State of Israel has played a central role in postwar Judaism; if Israel were to cease to exist as a Jewish state, it would certainly have a major impact on the way in which religious and secular Jews view themselves and their place in the world. On the other hand, Judaism has survived the destruction of the first Temple, the destruction of the Second Temple, the Shabbatai Tzvi scandal, the Holocaust, and a whole host of other difficulties. For all its emphasis on tradition, Judaism is a remarkably flexible and adaptive religious philosophy. Still, a post-Zionist Israel would mean the end of a dream; once again, the Jews would be a minority in their own land.

Could Israel exist as a multicultural, multilingual state? The record is not promising. Four hundred years has not served to cool tensions between Irish Catholics and Scots-Irish Protestants in Belfast and Ulster, while Kurds and Turks continue to slaughter each other in Turkey. Even the success stories have been of limited scope: Tito was able to keep Yugoslavia together, but the whole ball of wax melted after his death. At present, this vision appears Utopian; time and demographics may yet make it the only available choice.