A leading genocide scholar has issued a stark diagnosis of Israel’s trajectory, arguing the country has drifted far from its founding ideals into a hardened, exclusionary state. Omer Bartov, an Israeli-born historian, says the current war in Gaza is not an aberration — but the culmination of decades of political and ideological shift.

His intervention is intensifying an already volatile global debate over Israel’s conduct, identity and future.

From Founding Promise to Fractured Reality

Bartov traces Israel’s roots to a dual vision: a refuge for a persecuted people and a national project with territorial ambition. That tension, he argues, was never resolved.

Instead, key early decisions — no formal constitution, undefined borders, and unresolved Palestinian displacement — set the stage for a state increasingly driven by ethno-nationalism rather than liberal democracy.

‘Genocide’ Claim Ignites Firestorm

The historian has gone further than most establishment voices, publicly describing Israel’s assault on Gaza as genocide. The claim has cost him professional relationships and drawn fierce backlash.

Yet Bartov insists distance has sharpened his view, arguing that proximity within Israel makes dispassionate assessment nearly impossible amid ongoing conflict.

Memory, Power and Political Identity Collide

Central to his critique is the role of the Holocaust in shaping Israeli identity. Bartov argues its memory has been politicised — not to diminish its horror, but to explain how it underpins a narrative of permanent threat and justification for force.

That dynamic, he says, has helped entrench a cycle where security concerns override reconciliation, with profound consequences for Palestinians.

War Abroad, Pressure at Home

The analysis lands at a moment of acute strain. Israel faces simultaneous conflicts across multiple fronts, while international support — particularly in the United States — shows signs of erosion.

Bartov argues that without sustained external backing, Israel may be forced into a reckoning with its own direction — one that prioritises diplomacy over dominance.

A Narrow Path — But Little Time

Despite the bleak outlook, Bartov points to potential alternatives, including confederation models that would allow Israelis and Palestinians to coexist within shared structures.

For now, that vision remains distant. With violence ongoing and divisions deepening, the question he poses — what went wrong — is rapidly being overtaken by a more urgent one: what happens next.

What went wrong in Israel? A genocide scholar examines ‘what Zionism became’

It's about time a respected academic spoke out about Israel. One definition of a failed state is one that has been at war every day of its existence.

Israel has hypermilitarised its entire society. That indicates a point of no return.

It has been amply demonstrated Israel has no interest in peace.