The Idea of Israel: A History of Power and Knowledge by Ilan Pappé

Introduction

Ilan Pappé, one of Israel’s so‑called “New Historians,” has made a career of challenging mainstream narratives about the foundation of the State of Israel, the nature of Zionism, and the fate of the Palestinians. In The Idea of Israel: A History of Power and Knowledge, Pappé turns his attention not merely to historical events but to the ways Israel as a state and society has constructed its identity through knowledge: histories, images, culture, education, and ideology. He examines how “power” and “knowledge” intertwine in creating what many accept as “the truth” about Israel, and how that truth has been contested and reworked over time. The Institute for Palestine Studies+2stephensizer.com+2

---

The Structure & Three Phases

Pappé divides his exploration into three main phases:

1. Classical Zionism: The early decades after 1948, when official Zionist ideology shaped the narrative of Israel’s birth, its wars, and its character. This includes government‑supported historiography, media, school curricula, folklore, and myths that cemented a particular image of Israel to its own citizens and to the world. The Institute for Palestine Studies+2Penguin Random House+2

2. Post‑Zionism: Emerging especially in the 1990s, this movement includes intellectuals, historians, and cultural figures who sought to question the dominant narratives: to re‑examine the events of 1948 (the Nakba), the treatment of Mizrahim (Jews from Middle Eastern and North African countries), and the role of Holocaust memory in shaping Israel’s identity. The post‑Zionist moment, according to Pappé, represented a relatively open space for critique, debate, and academic revision of national myths. The Institute for Palestine Studies+2Alberta Journals+2

3. Neo‑Zionism: Beginning in the early 2000s, following the failure of peace processes like Oslo, and amidst increasing insecurity and right‑wing political ascendancy, Pappé argues there was a resurgence of a more assertive, explicitly ethnocentric, nationalist Zionism. Neo‑Zionism, in his view, embraces more openly what earlier Zionism had often treated more ambiguously: questions of Jewish supremacy, the justification of expulsions or harsh policies, a firmer claim on land, and a dismissal of internal or external critique as traitorous or dangerous. The Institute for Palestine Studies+2Wikipedia+2

---

Key Themes

Here are some of the major ideas Pappé develops in the book:

1. Myth‑making & the Construction of Memory

Pappé shows how collective memory and national myths are constructed—not naturally arising, but shaped by choice, by policy, by what is taught, what is published, what images are circulated, and what is omitted. For example, the “war of 1948” is often framed in Zionist discourse as a heroic struggle of survival or liberation, rather than also acknowledging patterns of displacement and dispossession of Palestinians. The Institute for Palestine Studies+2stephensizer.com+2

2. The Role of Historiography & “New Historians”

The “New Historians” are central in Pappé’s account of the post‑Zionist moment. Scholars like Benny Morris, Avi Shlaim, Tom Segev, among others, opened archives, asked difficult questions, showed evidence of forced expulsions, or dispossession, of the Arab population. They helped legitimize parts of the Palestinian narrative, though often in contested ways. The Institute for Palestine Studies+1

3. Education, Media, Culture & the Transmission of Ideology

Beyond academic history, Pappé emphasizes how ideology is reproduced through schools, textbooks, films, news media, and popular culture. How the Holocaust is taught, which historical events are emphasized or downplayed, how Arabs or Palestinians are depicted, etc., all help shape the identity of young Israelis and global perceptions of Israel. The Institute for Palestine Studies+2Penguin Random House+2

4. The Internal Social Cleavages

Pappé doesn’t treat “Israel” as monolithic. He draws attention to internal divisions: between Ashkenazi (Jewish immigrants from Europe) and Mizrahi Jews; between secular and religious; between those who embrace nationalism versus those critical of Zionist ideology. He shows how Mizrahim were marginalized in narratives of “pioneering Zionism” and how their identities were often suppressed or reframed in ways that aligned with dominant Zionist myths. The Institute for Palestine Studies

5. Nationalism, Supremacy, & the Question of “Other”

One of Pappé’s central arguments is that Zionism has always included an element of supremacy—not always made explicit, but embedded in narratives about rightful ownership of land, “empty land,” “desert wasteland,” etc. The portrayal of Palestinians as “others,” as less civilized or less legitimate, or as terrorists, becomes part of the ideological apparatus that justifies policies of exclusion, displacement, or oppression in the name of security. Wikipedia+1

---

Pappé’s Argument & Central Claims

Summarizing some of Pappé’s central claims:

• The idea of Israel is not simply a reflection of historical realities but is actively constructed through knowledge and power. What counts as “knowledge” is influenced by political power. The Institute for Palestine Studies+2Penguin Random House+2

• Narratives that support Zionist legitimacy—e.g. “Israel was accepted and then attacked,” “Arab states refused peace,” “Israel simply defended itself”—have been dominant, but often omit inconvenient truths, especially about Palestinian displacement and suffering. Wikipedia+1

• The post‑Zionist moment was a critical phase of introspection and challenge within Israeli society. But Pappé argues it was limited, frequently marginalized, and eventually countered by neo‑Zionism. The Institute for Palestine Studies+1

• Neo‑Zionism represents a kind of ideological consolidation where earlier more moderate or ambiguous positions get replaced by more explicit nationalist, ethnic, and supremacist positions, reducing space for dissent. It also embraces harsher treatments toward Palestinians, and frames some of what earlier critics called injustices as legitimate reactions or necessities. The Institute for Palestine Studies+1

---

Strengths & Contributions

• Intellectual history as lens: Pappé doesn’t focus only on political events or military conflicts; he examines how power operates through culture, education, historiography, media. This broad perspective helps illuminate how beliefs are shaped, not just by facts, but by how the facts are told.

• Challenging normative narratives: For many readers (especially in Israel or diaspora), dominant narratives are deeply ingrained. Pappé forces confrontation with uncomfortable questions, and with what is left out of popular accounts.

• Documenting post‑Zionism & neo‑Zionism: Pappé gives a well‑documented account of how critical voices emerged, how they were received, and how the political shifts later constrained them. Especially insightful are the chapters on culture, education, and image.

• Emphasis on agency: He gives voice to those inside Israel who critique Israel’s foundation myths, those marginalized within Israeli society (Mizrahi Jews, Palestinian citizens of Israel), and how they have been represented or misrepresented.

---

Criticisms & Caveats

As with any work that takes strong—and for many contentious—positions, The Idea of Israel has attracted critique:

• Some scholars argue Pappé’s analysis sometimes generalizes or emphasizes ideology over more complex socio‑political realities (e.g. security fears, regional war, multiple actors).

• Others critique that Pappé’s normative framework (what should have been or should be) influences his selection of evidence, or leads to presenting certain narratives more fully than their critics might agree is warranted.

• There is debate about terms like “ethnic cleansing” or “supremacist Zionism” — whether they are ethically or legally appropriate, or whether they oversimplify the diversity of Zionist thought or policy over time.

• Some criticism is of his “post‑mortem” characterization of post‑Zionism: that Pappé sometimes underplays how resilient or subtle critical or oppositional voices still are within Israeli academia, media or civil society.

---

Why It Matters

• For readers interested in Israel‑Palestine, The Idea of Israel shifts attention from debating only who did what in 1948, or the politics of settlements, to how narratives shape public consciousness, identity, policy, and power. It emphasizes that control over the story is a site of power.

• In debates about truth, justice, reconciliation, memory, and education, Pappé’s work is relevant: how history is taught in schools matters; who gets to frame terms like “terrorist,” “refugee,” “peace” or “legitimacy” can influence responses, policies, and perception.

• It speaks to broader questions around nationalism, memory, colonialism, and the politics of historical knowledge: how many states similarly sanitize or mythologize their foundations, and what consequences that has for minorities or oppressed peoples.

---

Conclusion

The Idea of Israel: A History of Power and Knowledge by Ilan Pappé is a provocative, challenging, and deeply researched work that refuses to accept national mythologies at face value. It asks not just what happened, but how people were made to believe what they believe, who benefits from certain stories, and which parts of history are silenced. Pappé’s narrative maps the evolution from Zionist establishment narratives, through a brief (but meaningful) period of post‑Zionist critique, toward what he sees as a more overtly nationalistic and supremacist neo‑Zionism.

For those who wish to understand not just the Israeli‑Palestinian conflict, but how states build legitimacy through knowledge, how public memory is shaped, and how the contest over history is itself a contest over power—this book is a vital contribution. Though controversial, its importance comes from pressing its readers to reckon with uncomfortable questions and to examine the stories we inherit.

“Ten Myths About Israel” by Ilan Pappé: Debunking Narratives

Ilan Pappé, an Israeli historian and one of the New Historians, published Ten Myths About Israel (2017) to challenge widely accepted narratives and assumptions that, he argues, underpin the legitimacy of the State of Israel and its policies. His goal is to expose how certain myths—pervasive in media, politics, and public discourse—have shaped public understanding of Palestinian history, and how they continue to influence policy and justice. National Library of Israel+3PenguinRandomhouse.com+3Middle East Monitor+3

Below is a summary of the main myths Pappé identifies, his arguments against them, and some reflections.

---

The Myths and Pappé’s Counterarguments

Pappé divides the myths into three broad sections: fallacies of the past, fallacies of the present, and looking ahead. libraries.sa.gov.au+2Zinned Project+2

1. Palestine Was an Empty Land
   Myth: On the eve of Zionist settlement and British involvement, Palestine was largely empty, or underpopulated, often misportrayed as barren or uncultivated—awaiting Jewish settlers to bring progress. Middle East Monitor+2Zinned Project+2
   Counterargument: Pappé draws on historical evidence showing that Palestine had long been inhabited by Arab communities; there was cultivation, social structures, trade, and even early modernizing trends under Ottoman rule. The idea of an empty land, he claims, serves to justify settler colonization by erasing indigenous presence. Middle East Monitor

2. The Jews Were a People Without a Land
   Myth: This is the idea that Jews historically lacked a homeland, implying that Zionism was merely a return to what was theirs. Middle East Monitor+1
   Counterargument: Pappé argues that Jewish identity does include strong historic religious ties to the Land of Israel, but the political and national dimension of “peoplehood” is more recent, emergent in 19th‑century European nationalism. Therefore, claims that Zionism simply re‑established a lost homeland gloss over the constructed national dimensions and the colonial framing. Middle East Monitor

3. Zionism Is Judaism
   Myth: The conflation of Zionism (a political movement) with Judaism (religion, culture, identity) as if they are inseparable or identical. Zinned Project+1
   Counterargument: Pappé notes that many Jews do not identify with political Zionism; there has historically been—and continues to be—a diversity of opinion among Jews about nationalism, Israel, secularism, religion, diaspora etc. To equate Zionism with Judaism suppresses internal dissent and diversity, and misrepresents both Jewish religion and Zionist politics. Middle East Monitor

4. Zionism Is Not Colonialism
   Myth: The narrative that Zionism was simply a national liberation movement or a movement for Jewish self‑determination—not a colonial project, unlike European colonialism. Middle East Monitor+1
   Counterargument: Pappé argues that Zionism shares many features with settler colonialism: migration, land acquisition, displacement of indigenous population, establishment of political control. He criticizes narratives that deny or soften these features. Middle East Monitor

5. The Palestinians Voluntarily Left Their Homeland in 1948
   Myth: That the Palestinian exodus in 1948 was mainly voluntary—either persuaded by leaders or fleeing wars or calls from Arab states—rather than caused by expulsions, fear, or organized operations. Middle East Monitor+1
   Counterargument: Pappé presents archival evidence, oral histories, and other sources to show that many Palestinians were forced out, intimidated, or expelled; that there were plans (explicit or implicit) among some Zionist leaders for population transfer; and that voluntary narratives downplay the coercive and violent contexts. Middle East Monitor+1

6. The June 1967 War Was a War of “No Choice”
   Myth: Israel and its supporters often argue that the 1967 war (leading to occupation of territories) was forced upon Israel, that it had no viable alternative and was acting defensively. Middle East Monitor+1
   Counterargument: Pappé questions this portrayal. He argues that Israel had strategic plans, military advantages, and options, and that the narrative of “no choice” obscures responsibility, premeditation, and the way Israel used the war to achieve long‑term territorial goals. Middle East Monitor

7. Israel Is the Only Democracy in the Middle East
   Myth: The claim that Israel is unique in the region as a democratic state, especially as contrasted with its neighbors. Middle East Monitor+1
   Counterargument: Pappé challenges this by pointing out how democratic norms and rights are applied unequally within Israel and in the occupied territories. He examines issues of citizenship, civil rights, military rule over certain populations, the law of return for Jews, restrictions on non‑Jewish citizens, and the treatment of Palestinians in the Occupied Territories. Arab America+1

8. The Oslo Mythologies
   Myth: That the Oslo Accords (1993‑ mid‑1990s) represented a genuine peace process with mutual concessions, were a turning point toward justice, or a fair template for resolving core issues. Arab America+1
   Counterargument: Pappé argues that Oslo served to entrench Israeli occupation and control, delay solutions, fragment Palestinian society, and shift power imbalances rather than correct them. The accords’ structures, according to him, perpetuated Israeli dominance by leaving settlement issues, refugees, Jerusalem etc., unresolved or subject to Israeli control. Middle East Monitor+1

9. The Gaza Mythologies
   Myth: Claims such as that Israeli actions in Gaza are strictly defensive; or that withdrawal from Gaza in 2005 was a peace‑gesture; or that Hamas is purely a terrorist organization in ways that justify all Israeli responses. Arab America+1
   Counterargument: Pappé deconstructs these narratives. For example, he argues that the 2005 disengagement was not so much peace‑minded as strategic; that Israel maintains control over Gaza’s borders, air‑space, maritime access etc.; that many deaths in Gaza are disproportionate; and that portraying Gaza solely as a terror problem obfuscates the effects of occupation, siege, blockades, humanitarian crisis, and structural violence. Arab America

10. The Two‑States Solution Is the Only Way Forward
    Myth: That partition into a sovereign Israel and sovereign Palestine is the only realistic route to peace, justice, and political legitimacy. Many international actors still treat it as the baseline framework. Middle East Monitor+1
    Counterargument: Pappé argues that the two‑state formula has been undermined by facts on the ground: Israeli settlement expansion, control of land, infrastructure, fragments in the West Bank, the reality of occupation, and the political unwillingness on Israel’s side to truly concede key issues (refugee return, borders, East Jerusalem, etc.). He raises the possibility (or necessity) of alternative models—one democratic state, equal rights etc.—arguing that the two‑state myth keeps alive illusions rather than confronting entrenched injustices. Middle East Monitor+1

---

Themes & Purpose

• Myths as Power Structures: Pappé stresses that myths are not just mistaken stories; they are politically useful tools. They legitimize dominant power, shape international diplomacy, influence public opinion, and guide policy. ― Myth making is part of how states justify claims to legitimacy. Middle East Monitor

• History, Memory, and Erasure: A recurring theme is that historical narratives often marginalize or erase Palestinian experiences—oral histories, archival documents are conflicted or suppressed. Pappé seeks to bring them into the picture to challenge hegemonic versions of history. Middle East Monitor

• Colonialism, Settler Colonialism, and Occupation: Pappé treats Zionism in many respects as a settler colonial project. He traces how colonial logics—land appropriation, displacement, demographic concerns—have shaped Israel from its foundation through to its current policies. Middle East Monitor

• Imbalance of Power & “Myth of Choice”: Many myths Pappé deconstructs involve the idea that Palestinians had real choices, options, or agency, when in his view the structures of power, violence, displacement, and international complicity constrained or foreclosed those choices. Middle East Monitor+1

• Toward Justice: Ultimately, he uses myth‑debunking not merely to critique— but to make space for what justice might look like. He challenges whether the current frameworks (notably the two‑state solution) still offer real justice or whether they serve more as myths perpetuating stalemate. Middle East Monitor

---

Criticisms & Controversies

Pappé's work is not without its critics. Some of the criticisms include:

• Bias & Motivation: Critics say that Pappé has an ideological agenda; that his interpretation of history is driven by political commitments, which can influence selection of sources or emphasis. Some argue he overstates certain claims or downplays opposing ones.

• Debate Over Evidence: On certain events or claims, opponents challenge Pappé’s reading of archival material, question whether evidence is sufficient, or whether contexts allow alternate interpretations. For example, the degree to which population transfer was consensually planned or was ad hoc amid war is contested among historians.

• Inhomogeneous Narratives: Some say that Pappé’s counter‑narratives, while important, may simplify complexities, smooth over disagreements inside Israeli society and among Palestinians, or underappreciate security, geopolitical, and international pressures that shape events in ways that are not reducible to myth vs. reality.

• Implications & Practicality: Criticism also arises about what follows from debunking myths: if two‑state solution is no longer viable, what alternative is feasible? Some argue Pappé’s proposals (or the implications) are radical, and hard to implement in current political climates.

---

Significance in Public Debate

Ten Myths About Israel has become one of the more accessible works for readers who want a critical perspective on Israeli historiography and the Palestine/Israel conflict. It is often cited by activists, educators, scholars, and media in discussions about narrative, propaganda, and historical memory. It contributes to:

• Reframing Discourse: By challenging "common knowledge", Pappé forces readers (and public discourse) to question what is taken for granted.

• Empowering Other Voices: Bringing in Palestinian archival materials, witnesses, and histories not usually prominent in mainstream narratives.

• Policy Implications: If his arguments are accepted, they pose challenges to widely assumed solutions like the two‑state model, and push for rethinking rights, justice, and equality.

---

Reflection: Strengths & Limitations

Strengths:

• Clarity & Organization: The myth/antimyth structure makes the book accessible, especially for those new to the subject.

• Rich Use of Sources: Pappé references archival material, eyewitness accounts, historical scholarship to support his challenges.

• Moral clarity: The book does not shy away from normative questions – justice, human rights, responsibility – which many historical works tend to avoid.

Limitations:

• Debates in historiography are complex; in some cases, Pappé’s claims are controversial and not all historians agree with his readings.

• The framing tends to be binary: myth vs. truth. In many historical realities, there are shades, ambiguities, contested interpretations.

• Because of political sensitivity, some readers might find the arguments polarizing; acceptance of Pappé’s work often depends on political orientation or prior assumptions.

---

Conclusion

Ten Myths About Israel by Ilan Pappé is an influential work that seeks to challenge dominant narratives about the history and present of Israel/Palestine. By systematically unpacking ten widely held beliefs, Pappé aims to reveal underlying power structures, historical erasures, and myths that legitimize occupation, displacement, and inequality. Whether one agrees with all his conclusions or not, the book is valuable for forcing critical reflection on narratives many of us have inherited.

For students, activists, and anyone seeking a deeper understanding of the Israel‑Palestine conflict in its historical, political, and ethical dimensions, Pappé’s book offers both a critique and a provocation: if peace, justice, and equality are to be achieved, it may require abandoning some myths — or at least seeing them for what they are.

A History of Modern Palestine: One Land, Two Peoples by Ilan Pappé – A Critical Re-examination of a Divided Land

Introduction

Few conflicts in modern history have generated as much political, emotional, and academic debate as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. At the heart of this conflict lies a contested narrative about land, identity, displacement, and justice. Among the historians who have challenged mainstream understandings of this history is Ilan Pappé, an Israeli scholar and former professor at the University of Haifa, now based at the University of Exeter.

His book, A History of Modern Palestine: One Land, Two Peoples, first published in 2004, presents a bold, revisionist account of Palestinian history under Zionism and Israeli statehood. The work distinguishes itself by rejecting the conventional Zionist narrative and instead emphasizing the experiences and dispossession of the Palestinian people. Pappé's book is a foundational text for the “New Historians” of Israel and remains deeply influential — and controversial — in academic and political circles.

---

The Premise of the Book

The central thesis of A History of Modern Palestine is that the creation of the state of Israel in 1948 was not an inevitable triumph of national liberation but rather a settler-colonial project that led to the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians. Pappé argues that both peoples — Jews and Palestinians — have legitimate claims to the land, but that the Zionist movement systematically marginalized, displaced, and disenfranchised the indigenous Palestinian population in the process of state-building.

Pappé tells this story not simply through politics or diplomacy but through social history, focusing on everyday life, economic structures, class divisions, and power dynamics. He weaves Palestinian and Israeli experiences into a single narrative, framing the conflict not as a clash of civilizations or religions, but as a tragic outcome of colonialism, nationalism, and asymmetrical power.

---

Historical Structure and Periodization

The book spans from the Ottoman era in the late 19th century through to the early 21st century, tracing key developments that shaped modern Palestine:

1. Late Ottoman Period (1856–1917):
   Pappé explores the emergence of Palestinian society under Ottoman reforms, including land laws and urbanization, as well as the initial waves of Jewish immigration (Aliyah) driven by European anti-Semitism and nationalist ideals.

2. British Mandate Period (1917–1948):
   This era marks a turning point, as Britain’s Balfour Declaration (1917) and the League of Nations Mandate facilitated increased Jewish immigration and land acquisition, often at the expense of Palestinian tenant farmers. Pappé emphasizes the British role in laying the groundwork for future conflict through their contradictory policies and failure to establish a binational framework.

3. 1948 and the Nakba (Catastrophe):
   Perhaps the most controversial section of the book, Pappé argues that the 1948 Arab-Israeli War was not simply a defensive war by Jews under threat, but a premeditated campaign of ethnic cleansing against the Palestinian population. Drawing on declassified Israeli military archives, he alleges that over 700,000 Palestinians were expelled, and over 500 villages destroyed.

4. Post-1948 to 1967:
   With the establishment of Israel, Pappé focuses on the transformation of the state into an exclusively Jewish polity, the continued marginalization of Palestinian citizens within Israel, and the failure of Arab regimes to protect Palestinian interests.

5. Occupation and Intifadas (1967–2000):
   After the Six-Day War, Israel's occupation of the West Bank, Gaza Strip, East Jerusalem, and the Golan Heights changed the nature of the conflict. Pappé examines settlement expansion, military governance, and the rise of Palestinian resistance movements, including the First Intifada (1987) and the Oslo Accords (1993).

6. The Second Intifada and Beyond (2000–2004):
   The book concludes with the Second Intifada, portraying it as a reaction to the failures of the peace process, deepening Israeli occupation, and worsening living conditions for Palestinians.

---

Challenging the Traditional Narrative

Pappé’s work sharply departs from the official Zionist version of events, which often frames Israel’s founding as the fulfillment of a historical right and a response to centuries of Jewish persecution. In contrast, Pappé reframes Israel as a colonial entity, and Zionism as a movement that, while seeking safety for Jews, was built on the displacement of another people.

One of the book’s most controversial assertions is the use of the term “ethnic cleansing” to describe the events of 1948. While other historians might speak of “refugee crises” or “war-time displacements,” Pappé insists that archival evidence shows intentional planning by Zionist leaders to remove the Arab population.

This position aligns him with the New Historians — a group that includes Benny Morris, Avi Shlaim, and Tom Segev — but Pappé goes further, taking a more explicitly moral and political stance, rather than claiming neutral objectivity.

---

Reception and Criticism

The response to A History of Modern Palestine has been deeply polarized:

• Supporters praise it for giving voice to the Palestinian narrative long ignored in mainstream Western scholarship. They commend Pappé for challenging national myths and using declassified Israeli archives to reveal uncomfortable truths.

• Critics, however, accuse him of ideological bias, selective use of sources, and ignoring the broader historical context, such as Arab rejectionism, intra-Palestinian divisions, or the existential fears of Jewish communities post-Holocaust.

Benny Morris, another New Historian, famously clashed with Pappé over methodology, with Morris accusing him of distorting facts for political ends, while Pappé criticized Morris for being “an apologist for ethnic cleansing.”

Regardless of one's stance, few deny that Pappé’s work has reframed the discourse, especially in academia, activism, and public policy circles.

---

Broader Impact and Legacy

Pappé’s book has had a significant influence on pro-Palestinian scholarship and advocacy, particularly in Western universities and global human rights circles. It has helped shape conversations about settler colonialism, apartheid, and decolonization, placing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in the broader context of global struggles against oppression.

Additionally, A History of Modern Palestine has served as a bridge for understanding Palestinian history for non-Arab audiences, presenting the narrative not merely as a political issue, but as a human and moral one.

---

Conclusion

One Land, Two Peoples — the subtitle of Ilan Pappé’s A History of Modern Palestine — captures the essence of the conflict: two nations with historical, emotional, and spiritual ties to the same land, yet trapped in a tragic cycle of violence, dispossession, and failed diplomacy.

By presenting a deeply researched, unapologetically critical account of modern Palestine’s history, Ilan Pappé challenges us to confront the uncomfortable truths at the heart of the conflict. Whether one agrees with his conclusions or not, his work has become indispensable for anyone seeking a fuller understanding of one of the most enduring and painful conflicts of our time.