Quantum Theory & the Israeli–Palestinian Conflict

I recently found myself in an exchange with a distinguished physicist about Israel, Zionism, and the war in Gaza. A colleague I long regarded as a thoughtful interlocutor had undergone a profound transformation in his views. What began as a painful disagreement revealed something larger: how easily moral outrage slides into sweeping historical judgments, and how rarely we demand from ourselves the epistemic discipline we instinctively require in other domains of knowledge.

I asked my colleague, who is an expert in quantum theory, whether in his experience, most people truly understand quantum mechanics. We both know the answer. Quantum physics requires years of formal training, deep mathematical competence, and sustained engagement with a vast literature before one can responsibly make strong claims.

Yet the same colleague, and many others, feel comfortable asserting now that the establishment of Israel was a mistake; that Zionism was a historical error; that Jews should have been settled somewhere else, perhaps in Africa.

The contrast could not be starker.

When it comes to quantum mechanics, we readily accept that ignorance disqualifies authority. When it comes to Israel, however, many otherwise thoughtful people feel licensed to pronounce definitive moral verdicts about an entire national movement and a state born from centuries of violence and persecution.

Zionism did not emerge from colonial fantasy or abstract nationalism. It arose from the sustained vulnerability of Jews in Europe and the Middle East, from centuries of expulsions, pogroms, legal prohibitions, entrenched discrimination, and mass violence. The Holocaust revealed in its most catastrophic form what had long been structurally present. Two-thirds of European Jewry were annihilated. The world learned, at unbearable cost, what Jews already knew: that reliance on the goodwill of others had repeatedly failed. This momentous tragedy brought the world to acknowledge the need for a Jewish state, that the Jews should have a home for themselves, home they can protect and defend from prosecutions and wanton violence.

One may oppose particular Israeli governments. I do unequivocally. In my assessment, the current Israeli government is the worst in the country’s history, and Israel has had many bad governments. One may condemn settlement expansion, systemic discrimination, abuses in the West Bank, and failures of moral leadership. I do all of that. One may insist on a two-state solution, Palestinian self-determination, and an end to occupation. I have devoted most of my adult life to articulating precisely these ideas.

But criticizing policies and condemning them in the strongest possible terms is categorically different from declaring the foundational legitimacy of Israel itself void. That move does not deepen moral critique; it negates history. It transforms moral protest into historical erasure.

My colleague is correct that Israel is losing support among American liberals and the world at large. He is also correct that many who hold strong views about Israel are not experts on Middle Eastern history. Acknowledging a sociological trend does not convert that trend into a sound argument. Popularity is not truth. Moral passion is not historical understanding.

Here the quantum analogy becomes more than rhetorical flourish.

If I were to announce confident conclusions about quantum field theory after skimming popular media, I would rightly be dismissed not because I lack intelligence, but because complex domains demand disciplined entry. The Israeli–Palestinian conflict is no less complex. It encompasses Ottoman land law, British imperial policy, competing national movements, regional wars, terrorism, refugee crises, Cold War alignments, religious attachments, and profound internal divisions on both sides. Serious understanding requires years of sustained study, not episodic news consumption.

What troubles me most is not criticism of Israel. Criticism is indispensable and welcome. What troubles me is the moral shortcut: the slide from “Israel is behaving terribly” to “Israel should never have existed”.

That move quietly removes Jews from history as agents with legitimate collective aspirations. Jews, uniquely, are advised that their bid for self-determination should never have occurred.

One can support Palestinian statehood without denying Jewish peoplehood. One can demand an end to occupation without demanding national erasure. One can hold Israel to the highest moral standards without stripping it of the right to exist.

The Gaza war has been catastrophic. On 7 October 2023, Hamas committed a monstrous crime against Israeli civilians. Israel’s subsequent destruction of Gaza has inflicted immense suffering on Gaza and demands searching moral reckoning. Both acknowledgments can, and must, be held simultaneously.

I cherish peace. After my health and family, it is the central value of my life. That is why I continue to research, write, and advocate for a negotiated resolution to the conflict. That is why I oppose extremists on all sides. That is why I reject both Hamas’s genocidal ideology and Israeli messianic nationalism.

But peace will not be built on denying a people’s right to self-determination. It will not be built by replacing complexity with slogans. It will not be built by erasing history.

If we expect rigor before speaking about quantum mechanics, we should demand no less before declaring entire nations’ mistakes. Anything less is irresponsible moral negligence.