Could the Zionist Occupation Collapse?

The academic Professor Ilan Pappe has argued that there are indications that Zionism could collapse. Is this a fantasy or a realistic assessment?

Just over a year ago the respected academic and author Professor Ilan asked: “Could the Zionist project in Palestine—the idea of imposing a Jewish state on an Arab, Muslim & Middle Eastern country—be facing the prospect of collapse?” He has argued this matter elsewhere in interviews he has given.

I reviewed this article some days ago, as it reappeared on my feed. Whilst I agree with some of the points in the article regarding the Zionist occupation of Palestine that calls itself “Israel”, I question some of his assertions and note there are important omissions.

After twenty-one months of a genocide that has been facilitated by “Israel’s” main sponsors in the world; which has gone unchecked by international institutions; ethnic cleansing which has been approved by the US President; the collusion of regimes in the Muslim world; the unashamed expansion into Lebanon and Syria; and the increased brutality in the West Bank - one could be excused for wondering where such a question could arise from.

Yet as Pappe argues the collapse of states often “begins as a slow process of disintegration that gathers momentum and then, in a short period of time, brings down structures that once appeared solid and steadfast.” This is true the case of real states but even more so in the case of occupying powers. 

In the article he identified five indicators. I think four have merit, one is questionable, and there is one major omission.

Indicator #1 be calls"the fracturing of Israeli Jewish society”. There is a real schism in the occupation that has been ongoing for decades.

In one corner is what he terms the “State of Israel” - who are the descendants of European colonisers who believe in a secular liberal state. He caveats this saying "Make no mistake, their advocacy of ‘liberal democratic values’ does not affect their commitment to the apartheid system which is imposed”. I would argue that such hypocrisy is a norm for many secular liberal states, and that this group are pragmatic insofar as some accept some degree of accommodation with Palestinians in order to advance their vision of the Zionist project.

In the other corner is what he terms the “State of Judea”  - the followers of revisionist Zionism predominantly among the settlers of the occupied West Bank” but which has increasing support across the country & political establishment. They have visions of a ‘Greater Israel’ that goes well beyond the borders of the existing occupation.

The schism is real. The “State of Judea” faction have exploited the hostility to Palestinians following the 7th October 2023 with this being reflected in “Israeli” public opinion. Netanyahu in turn has exploited the rise the support for the right wing in order to maintain the stability of his government - a fact that has led some supporters of “Israel” to argue that Netanyahu’s Victory Is Israel’s Loss.

But other evidence suggests that there is a divide between those who want to prioritise punishing Gaza and those who want to prioritise getting the hostages.

Moreover, prior to October 7th, the “State of Israel” was very hostile to Netanyahu’s corruption, so making his political position precarious.

Indicator #2 he calls "Israel’s economic crisis”. Pappe’s arguments about the poor economic situation could be said to be exaggerated one year later. Certainly there are issues that can affect any normal country.

Optimists emphasise its recovery potential, low unemployment, and innovation - while pessimists highlight inflation, fiscal strain, and geopolitical risks.

The reliance on the US for military aid buoys it up at a time where other countries would be suffering after a year and a half of military activity. Moreover, the foreign investment which is crucial for the high-tech sector & economic growth has not collapsed as you might expect in normal countries. The fact that hundreds of multinational corporations, including IBM, Google, & Intel, have R&D centres (⅔ are US companies) just proves how this genocide is every bit as much on them as it is on the troops on the ground.

Overall, the Zionist occupation should be extremely fragile, but it is less so because of the external support it enjoys. Without that, it would indeed be in crisis.

Indicator #3 is “Israel’s" growing international isolation. Whilst there may never have been so many critical voices in Europe (notably Ireland & Spain), and the BRICS (Brazil & South Africa) - in terms of governments there have been relatively few considering the scale of its violations in the past two years.

However, when it comes to public opinion - this is largely unfavourable in many countries despite their governments’ support for the Zionist entity.  Even in the United States favourability has dropped from 79% in 1991 to 54% in February 2025 according to polls by Pew & Gallup.

This has to be offset by the ‘normalisation’ by Arab countries, which have proved to be the real defence force for the Zionist occupation of Palestine. Yet these are even more at odds with public opinion, which is suppressed by authoritarian regimes.

Indicator #4 is what he calls "the sea-change among young Jews around the world”. This is palpable on social media and in protests supporting Palestinians and supported by poll evidence.

However, public opinion is a fickle thing. It has changed over decades and can change again.

Indicator #5 he says, are the weaknesses in the “Israeli army”, exposed by October 7th 2023. Many commentators have described structural issues: lack of purpose, over-reliance on reservists, high officer losses, the unpreparedness for asymmetric warfare, the impact of post-traumatic stress on some soldiers - as very real. There is no doubt that US money buys heavy weapons, missiles and air power that has devastated Gaza.  Yet the weaknesses in the armed forces themselves are certainly a risk.

These are the indicators that Pappe mentioned in the article.

Yet there is Indicator #6 - not mentioned in Pappe’s article - which he has mentioned in interviews: that is the fragility of the regional governments.

Whether the recent exchanges with Iran, or the maintenance of supply lines, the regional countries are the real “Iron Dome” that protects the Zionist occupation of Palestine. They have always been the factors that maintains its security. Yet they are unstable. They are regimes that can be relied upon for authoritarian security - but not for survival in the long term.

On Borrowed Time

In the end the Zionist project is indeed on borrowed time. But I do not agree with the idea that it will just collapse on its own. Most likely the extreme ‘State of Judea’ faction will dominate either entirely or else (as it does now) by influence in their political system by holding the balance of power. Public opinion has shifted in their favour within the occupation with opponents often leaving if they can. They play dirty and have use the styles of populists to manipulate public opinion and will continue to do so. In short, they will follow the pattern that many other democracies face currently - whether the United States or India or in Europe - and become more nationalistic and authoritarian, which is not hard for such a brutal occupation.

Yet the last matter - Indicator #6 - is their Achilles Heel. If one of those fragile regimes fall, it can be the catalyst for the re-establishment of the Islamic system. This civilisational change could be a catalyst for change in the whole region - offering an alternative to occupation and instability, apartheid and injustice. It is only Islamic civilisation that gave the region justice and stability for people of all faiths.

The region does not merely need its collapse. The region needs something better.

Abdul Wahid has been active in Muslim affairs in the UK for over 25 years. He has been published on the websites of Foreign Policy, Open Democracy, the Times Higher Educational Supplement, and Prospect Magazine. You can follow him on X/Twitter @AbdulWahid_X.