Ilan Pappé on Israel and Epstein and Why Zionism has No Moral Limits

The West should accept responsibility for suffering it has caused Palestinians and play a different role in defending Palestinian rights and building a future, moving from complicity in Zionism to active support for decolonization.

“involvement in the global west for the first time with totally understanding that the west is responsible to the suffering of the Palestinian and therefore has to play a very different role in defending them and hopefully also in building a different future.”

The US military has historically attempted to resolve political-structural problems (Vietnam) through naval and air force deployment, and failed to change the underlying realities through military means, demonstrating that military solutions cannot substitute for political transformation.

“American tried it before in Vietnam. So remind Americans that they used navies and air force before to change realities and they didn't change them. In the end of the day they didn't change them uh in Vietnam.”

Processes that internal actors can influence (civil society building, institutional reform, land use planning) are not directly controlling liberation or disintegration, but are crucial because they enable positive reconstruction after structural collapse, whereas processes beyond control (economic or military pressures) can cause destruction but provide no foundation for building afterward.

“I discern in the book two kinds of processes. One is those we have very little impact on. I mean they're happening anyway but those of us who are activists those of who are concerned and want to you know to contribute to a better future if you want put it in a simplistic rather way but I think an accurate one uh there are things you can't do you have no influence of but there are processes which you can influence and to my mind the processes that you can't influence can lead to destruction but not necessarily provide provide a very good opening for reconstruction. And the processes you can influence are important not because they would add to if you want to liberation or disintegration, but because they also have in them the the the potential for building something afterwards which is more positive.”

Total ethnic cleansing of Palestinians is not viable in the 21st century despite Israeli military superiority, because even the US's historical attempts to eliminate Native Americans and Australia's attempts to eliminate indigenous populations ultimately failed; Palestinian youth will not disappear or voluntarily leave regardless of Israeli aggression.

“in the 21st century uh if you think even if you have the power that Israel has to totally eliminate the people as done by the United States to so many Native Americans and by Australia and so on to my mind is not a viable project. It is a project that can be attempted with horrific consequences but it's not a successful project. uh uh you just have to go to to to the West Bank to the refugee camps, talk to the young teenagers, not to the old people, to the young teenagers. They're not going to disappear. They're not going to move out of the West Bank.”

The United Nations, despite flawed colonial origins, remains structurally necessary for addressing global problems (climate change, poverty, migration) that require international cooperation; reform must be deep (relocating UN headquarters from New York, relocating International Court of Justice beyond Europe) but the institution itself cannot be abandoned.

“we do need an international justice system and we do need an organization like the United Nation. That's my point. So what of course I didn't have time to develop everything in in in in one book but I do believe that there will have to be a very fundamental structural change in the United Nation itself but not about the concept. For example, there there's one very simple example one can give a as as almost as a preliminary stage, you know, or step not not not the final product but kind of putting us in the right direction. Take out the United Nation from from New York, put it in Africa.”

Progressive and conservative Americans who oppose continued US Middle East involvement can form a powerful coalition on Israel policy despite disagreeing on ideology, because both groups have convergent interests in reducing US military commitments and overseas entanglements.

“definitely those who regard themselves as the progressive members of the Democratic party of the American society. They don't have to be affiliated directly with a Democratic party on the one hand and those Republicans that for different reasons don't like uh to be any more involved in the Arab world or in the world as a whole can form together not the idealist and ideal u uh you know coalition but a very powerful one as far as the immunity of Israel is concerned.”

Progressive American opposition to Israel and AIPAC influence has dramatically shifted since the 1960s-70s when grassroots resistance to Israeli policy was minimal and easily suppressed; today's resistance from Palestinian Americans, second/third-generation Arab Americans, Muslim Americans, and progressive elected officials represents structural change that AIPAC cannot suppress through traditional means.

“Now they have to battle uh you know they have to confront very important undercurrents from the mayor of New York through uh progressive uh members of of the house and maybe even later of the senate who are pro Palestinians. They have to confront the second generation third generation of Arabameans, Palestinian Americans, Muslim Americans. This is not the world that they are used to uh in the 60s and the 70s where there was no opposition apart from few as I say in my in the book on the lobbying apart from few individuals that they easily crushed.”

The fundamental internal contradiction within Israel is not primarily about Palestinian displacement (settler colonialism), but rather the attempt by a state to define a religion (Judaism) as nationalism, which inevitably creates two incompatible societies and produces existential problems for the state itself.

“there's a a fundamental challenge for Zionism that is overlooked the second one which is the idea that Judaism is nationalism And as if that if if you kind of uh solve the problem by by words it's okay the reality would somehow find a way of adapting to this uh intellectual exercise by which you say well it's not a religion it's nationalism everything will be will be fine. Well, we we learned from this is that actually when a state not an individual, when a state defines a religion as nationalism, uh it creates a lot of problems. In fact, I think it creates eventually existential problem for the state”

The shift of Israel's international coalition from 'moral members' (social democrats, progressive Jews and Americans, civil rights advocates) to cynical strategic partners (financial, military, high-tech, pharmaceutical interests) signals that Israel has abandoned civil society support and now relies on fear-based and interest-based manipulation.

“The transformation of Israel in the 21st century made it less re it relies less and less on these moral uh uh members of the alliance because they left it. They moved to the to the global alliance that supports the Palestinian rights. And so Israel is left with this um need to recruit people on the basis of financial, economic, strategic, military, maybe high-tech, maybe pharmaceutical uh uh interests and still working on the fear of Jewish communities about the sec next holocaust and still working with Christian Zionist maintaining the idea that they are still the fulfillment of the divine scheme to bring back Jesus Christ. But more importantly are these more cynical if you want kind of interest.”

Israel's military-industrial and security export industry creates structural incentive for unlimited expansion of unethical activities, because weapons sales, security devices, and spyware require both revenue maximization and political influence-buying, making moral constraints incompatible with business model.

“and I tell you why there is no limit and that is the the the essence of what is really the most important Israeli export and that's military industry securitization industry. So of course there's no limit. I mean if you if you need both to make you're not only making money by selling uh weapons and security uh securitization devices and so on. You are also buying influence and you are also um uh creating the kind of alliance of immunity I was talking about and and much of it has to do to be done behind the scene.”

The host believes the UN, like the League of Nations before it, will fail and lead to major conflict if structural reform doesn't occur, following a pattern: World War I → League of Nations failure → World War II → UN → potential World War III.

“if if you do the the pattern of we had this awful thing called World War I and we were like, 'Oh, we're never going to do that again. Let's do the League of Nations.' And then that disintegrates and we have World War II and we're like, 'We're never going to do that again. That was really bad.' And we have the United Nations. Well, then fill in the blank. The next line of that sentence is the other path that certain things can go.”

Israelis, even those who regard themselves as moral people and moral guides of society, are not engaging in moral self-examination or reflection about the information revealed in Epstein-type scandals and about Israel's military support, spyware, and security operations—this absence of self-examination is remarkable and concerning.

“there's no any retrospective exam moral examination among people who regard themselves not only as moral people but even the moral guides of their own society”

Netanyahu has faced allegations related to Israeli submarine deals with Germany where intermediaries increase submarine prices to gain commission, exemplifying the kind of behind-the-scenes corruption that emerges when military sales become central to state function and foreign policy.

“one of the reasons Netanyahu one one of the allegation against Netanyahu is not the only one has to do a lot to do with the Israeli deal with Germany about buying submarines. You know you know of course people who are getting commission for buying submarines from from Germany would uh increase the the the price of the submarines because it increases their commission.”

German Jewish families' wealth became visibly externalized during economic crises, creating resentment and contributing to 19th-century antisemitism, whereas British Jewish families (including Rothschilds) married into existing aristocracy and remained embedded in Anglo-aristocratic networks, making their wealth less conspicuous.

“In Germany they became they were not part of the aristoc German aristocracy they were the newcomers uh and and therefore they they kind of externalized the their uh affluence at the time of an economic crisis which doesn't justify anything that happened to my family, but is is part of a more cold, if you want, objective explanation of some of the undercurrents that were in the German society in Britain. Those who acquired, including the Rothschild, you have to remember that they married into families that were aristocratic Jewish families uh centuries before. So, so they were part of an Anglo aristocratic elite of Britain.”

Herzel (early Zionist founder) went to European rulers and wealthy Jewish families (like the Rothschilds) seeking funding for the Palestine settlement project, but was largely disappointed by their response because European rulers wanted Jewish bankers to remain in Europe to serve their capitalist systems, not emigrate to Palestine.

“I think we shouldn't overrate the importance of the Rothschild in the Zionist project. Uh in fact uh was very disappointed in the end of the day by the response of the Rochilds. uh and as I show in the book uh also the the the the eur European rulers and and kings and and princes he went to uh who were very much aware of the wealth of Jewish bankers especially in Germany and in Britain uh uh did not want this part of their society to move to Palestine. they wanted them very much to to remain in uh uh in in the capitalist world that they began to believe in themselves.”

When a state depends heavily on weapons sales and securityization exports, the moral examination of state actions is systematically corrupted because actors convince themselves that personal benefits are also national security benefits, creating a 'murky ocean' of intoxicated decision-making where even people who regard themselves as moral guides fail to exercise moral reflection.

“whoever is your middleman, you don't care. You don't anymore examine who they are, what they are as long as that is for your own personal benefit and you convince yourself that this is also a national security benefit, you know. Yes, it's it's murky. It's a murky pond. It's a murky lake. Not a pond, maybe an ocean even. It's a murky ocean. It's it's already an intoxicated water. Uh so if you swim in it, uh either you're if you're immune to the intoxication means that you are poisoned yourself or or if you're a normal person, you won't survive there.”

Israel's current government dreams of ethnic cleansing Palestinians from Gaza entirely and of incrementally but ultimately ethnically cleansing them from the West Bank, creating a 'greater Israel from the river to the sea' with drastically reduced Palestinian population.

“Certainly the Palestines are facing uh a a new onslaught on their existence by Israel. Uh the current Israeli government is still dreaming of ethnically cleansing them from Gaza altogether. they they think that they have the power to ethnically cleanse them more incrementally but eventually from the West Bank uh and make uh the whole of greater Israel from the river to the sea uh with a much smaller number of Palestinians in it”

A future where the global North (especially the US) withdraws financial and military support from Israel while the Arab and Muslim world organizes effective pressure could allow Palestinians to lead their own liberation with reduced external violence, but requires prior transformation of US domestic politics to elect non-AIPAC-aligned leadership.

“There is and I this is the one part I really had trouble with uh eventually deciding upon uh whether because on the one hand I have this sense as many of we activists on the left in a way have that the world not the world but that the Middle East would be a better place without American involvement altogether that uh it's sort of if we look back at at American involvement especially since the second world war... on the other hand I I wanted also to be realistic you know and kind of saying this whatever transformation in Americans in the in American global standing will happen it will still be a force to reckon with.”

The book 'Israel on the Brink' imagines a 2048 transition to a single post-Zionist democratic state through a series of detailed diary entries (4th and 5th Intifada, Palestinian right of return, land redistribution, street renaming, monument removal, settlement dismantling/repurposing), showing that even for Zionists who fear this outcome, the practical mechanisms are imaginable and possible.

“the end of the book is a an exercise that Elon did where he where he imagines a future artifact with a a diary entry every year leading up to the year 2048, which is when he imagines symbolically, of course, um this kind of one democratic state, a sort of post Zionist Palestine really emerging and taking hold.”

The host has never seen a variable like declining US financial and military support for Israel before in the historical context, which could change the dynamics of the Zionist project very quickly if it materialized.

“the one variable that none of us have seen who are have always been maybe morally opposed to the Zionist project and and wanting a lot of the things in your book to to happen. Um, the one variable we've never seen before that gives me some hope is what happens to the Zionist project when it when it no longer has the financial backing of the largest empire on planet Earth from the British and then and then the US.”

The more aggressive Israeli military action becomes against Palestinians, the more it will provoke pushback from the region and international community, which is necessary and desired, because without this pushback ethnic cleansing could continue unchecked—creating a relationship between Israeli aggression and resistance that prevents worst outcomes.

“I do believe that the would require Israel, the current Israel, to be even more aggressive. And the more aggressive it is, that's my great hope, but also my analysis. it will there will be a push back both from the region and from from the world. Uh uh and I'm also calling of course for that push back because I'm very afraid what would happen if there isn't a push back.”

Zionism as a project has suffered foundational cracks that are inevitably causing its collapse, which is already underway as a historical process—not a prediction but a description of an ongoing structural phenomenon.

“the book actually starts with the premise of okay, if this thing called Zionism um has suffered sort of foundational cracks that are inevitably causing its collapse and it's kind of already underway, we're in that historical process.”

Throughout the conversation, both topics of deep darkness (war in Iran, annexation, slaughter in Gaza, Epstein files, antisemitism) and hopeful reconstruction are necessary to address together—neither pessimism nor optimism alone provides adequate understanding.

“But like all conversations about the situation in Palestine, there's a lot of darkness to get through. And so uh we touch on the potential war in Iran. We touch on the the for all intents and purposes the annexation that's happening in the West Bank now, the continued slaughter in Gaza, um and even as you saw in the intro, the Epstein files and the conversation about anti-semitism and anti-ionism.”

History moves in cycles, and the current state of militarized, amoral Israeli governance is not permanent—there will be another historical cycle, which provides grounds for hope that the world the speaker experiences today will not be the world that exists tomorrow.

“I have to be hopeful that the world we live in uh in a cyclic historical point of view is not what you see today is not what we will see tomorrow because I do think history is cyclic and and and we are going hopefully to another cycle”

A bolder Europe and bolder EU opposition to the state of Judea would make American progressives bolder in their opposition, creating a dialectical mutual reinforcement where processes influence each other and amplify change.

“a bolder Europe a bolder EU in its opposition to the state of Judea, as I call it, makes the American progressive more bolder, I think, make them bolder in in their willingness uh uh to to change more dramatically the American policy towards Israel.”

A potential Iran-Israel military conflict would be destructive with massive casualties (like the recent 12-day exchange), but would not resolve underlying structural issues (Palestinian occupation, Iranian regime nature), functioning instead as temporary release that returns conditions to status quo without solving fundamental problems.

“I think it will be very much like the the war of the 12 days as they call it. you know, the last round between Israel and Iran, a lot of innocent people being uh uh hurt, victimized, and the reality returning to be more or less what it was before, namely without solving the the fundamental issues, whether it is the nature of the regime in Iran, whether it is the Israeli uh destruction of Palestine, we will still be facing as Iranians and as Israelis and Palestinians.”

Multiple Israeli commentators and journalists from different perspectives have independently reached the conclusion that Zionism is dead or Israel as previously conceived is dead, a convergence that is more significant than individual declarations because it reflects widespread elite recognition of the project's terminal status.

“I was surprised that quite a lot of Israelis uh pandit if you want Israeli pandits let's call them uh journalists and and and commentators uh in the last two years or three years in from a different angle maybe but came to the same conclusion. Some call it the death of Zionism. Some call it the death of the old Israel. Others don't call it anything. They just peck and leave. Which is for me even a more powerful indication that something is wrong.”