When J Street, the liberal pro-Israel lobby, met last weekend in Washington for its annual policy conference, it had to scramble to adjust to a joint U.S.-Israel war on Iran that had begun two days before. J Street’s president, Jeremy Ben-Ami, reiterated his opposition to the war, calling it a “war without a plan to achieve … unclear objectives.”

That position put J Street at odds with many other mainstream Jewish groups, who tended to throw their support behind the United States and Israel and pin the blame on Iran.

It’s a familiar place for J Street and other “liberal Zionist” groups, who can appear to occupy an increasingly lonely place in Jewish and political life. While committed to Israel, they are often critical of its government or disagree with its policies. (On Sunday, Smol Emuni US, an organization of Orthodox and observant Jews committed to “opposing the occupation”  and seeking peace for Jews and Palestinians, will hold its second annual conference in New York.) They also hold onto a vision of two states that is at odds with the current political direction of the country and rejected by a far-left that backs  a “binational” state of Jews and Palestinians.

In polarized discourse, “Zionist” is frequently heard by progressives as shorthand for endorsement of occupation or oppression, while on the pro-Israel right, criticism of Israeli policy is read by some as betrayal.

The word “Zionist” has become so fraught that some feel the need to disavow it. That includes a surprisingly large cohort of American Jews who support Israel, as a recent JFNA poll of American Jews recently suggested.

Is there space for liberal Zionism — as an ideology and a term of art — in this binary world? Last month, before the attacks on Iran began, JTA spoke with a Jewish activists and thought leaders who identify as liberal Zionists — even if they do not always agree on the precise meaning or application of the term. Most acknowledged that the term “Zionist” has become a lightning rod and offered the language they use to build bridges. A few said that the “betrayal” of Jews on the left has been exaggerated and that coalition-building is still robust despite fractures over Oct. 7 and its fallout. 

Although they were interviewed separately, we present their answers in a virtual “panel” form, as they responded to what were essentially similar questions. Their answers have been edited for length and clarity.

Clockwise from top left: Shanie Reichman of Israel Policy Forum, NYU professor Susie Linfield, Ken Bob of the World Labor Zionist Alliance, Rabbi Jill Jacobs of T’ruah, Hadar Susskind of New Jewish Narrative and J Street president Jeremy Ben-Ami. (IPF; Annette Hornischer; courtesy Ken Bob; T’ruah; Americans for Peace Now; J Street)

Do you find “Zionist” a useful term and relevant term for your relationship with Israel?

Hadar Susskind, president and CEO of New Jewish Narrative (formed in 2024 with the merger of Americans for Peace Now and Ameinu, the former Labor Zionist Alliance): I have always and continue to identify as Zionist. But I also don’t place my emotional and intellectual value on the term. I place it on trying to see Israel be the kind of country we want it to be.

Rabbi Jill Jacobs, CEO of T’ruah: The Rabbinic Call for Human Rights: The word Zionist, and also anti-Zionist, tends to shut down conversation more than it opens it up. We can have conversations about what’s our relationship to the biblical Land of Israel, what’s our relationship to the people, what’s our relationship to the state, which is ultimately a state like any other state that has to follow international law. The word Zionism has largely ceased to be useful in that it prevents us from having an actual conversation about the state of Israel, which is not an idea or a theory, it’s a country.

Ken Bob, chair of the World Labor Zionist Alliance: In 1982 I hosted a ballroom talk by the late, great Israeli author Amos Oz. He stated: “Zionism has always been a surname, not a first name. No one person was ever allowed to claim Zionism for himself.” This commentary on Zionism has guided me in discussions, explaining why I can be supportive of a peace-seeking, Jewish, democratic Israel while speaking out publicly against destructive Israeli government policies

Jeremy Ben-Ami, president of J Street: If you go back and look at our materials, since 2008 when we launched, never once did we proactively use the word Zionist. Calling ourselves “pro-Israel, pro peace” was a very conscious decision right from the start, and not to proactively use the word Zionist. I’ve written plenty of columns about my liberal Zionism … but I think for us, the concepts beneath the words are the important thing: Do the Jewish people and the Palestinian people both have national rights of self-determination? These are two distinct peoples, and they both have this right.

Shanie Reichman, director of strategic initiatives and director of IPF Atid at Israel Policy Forum: I inherited Zionism from my grandfather, who became committed to the cause in 1940s Iran. His framed photo of Israel’s declaration of independence hangs on my wall, reminding me of the principles that guide my work. It doesn’t matter how much the word gets co-opted by the far right or demonized by the far left, being a Zionist is core to who I am. My Zionist identity means I stand for a secure, Jewish, democratic Israel, the preservation of which requires a Palestinian side alongside it. 

Susie Linfield, professor of journalism at New York University and author of “The Lions’ Den: Zionism and the Left from Hannah Arendt to Noam Chomsky”: I would describe myself as a left-wing Zionist. To me, the word Zionist means someone who believes that the Jewish people have a right to a state within some part of what used to be Mandatory Palestine. But, you know, Zionism created the State of Israel. So in a way, even to debate that term means that you’re still debating the, quote, legitimacy of the state of Israel, which I think is sort of absurd. The state exists. The question is, what kind of state should it be? 

How do you define “liberal Zionist”?

Shanie Reichman: My constant grappling with the tension between being both Jewish and democratic is what makes me a liberal Zionist. 

Ken Bob: I continue to identify as a progressive Zionist, based upon my belief in Jewish self-determination, coupled with my understanding that this objective is still far from being fully realized. I deeply believe that it cannot be deemed successful without a just resolution to the conflict with the Palestinians. In this light, I am reminded of this framing by my dear friend Vivian Silver z”l, the peace and shared society activist who was murdered in her Kibbutz Be’eri home on Oct.7. She called herself a “conditional Zionist,” linking our right to self-determination to that of the Palestinians.

Ken Bob, center, joins a march of the “peace bloc” at the World Zionist Congress in Jerusalem, Oct. 28, 2025. (Courtesy New Jewish Narrative)

Jeremy Ben-Ami: I think it’s very important to make the case that when Zionism began, it was fundamentally liberal. There was no distinction. Zionism was inherently liberal, and it’s part and parcel of being a Zionist is to hold liberal values, in my view.

Jill Jacobs: Liberal Zionist has become even more of a useless term than Zionist. Some people use it for themselves, and it could mean anything from, “I’m an anti-occupation, progressive activist who believes Israel should continue to exist and Palestine should exist…” to, “I’m basically socially and economically liberal when it comes to the U.S., but I’m never going to criticize Israel to really anything else.”

Susie Linfield: When I say I’m a left-wing Zionist, it’s not just a belief in a Palestinian state. It’s a belief that Israel, which is becoming less and less democratic, itself should be a democratic state.

Do you think it is a legitimate critique that the left has betrayed their Jewish allies, or that the left or the Democratic Party is “anti-Israel”?

Susie Linfield: It really depends on what part of the left that you mean. There’s a left in Israel. BDS takes a very staunch and absurd stand against partnering with anyone in Israel. But there are other parts of the left I hope do not take those positions, although, again, Zionist can mean many different things.

Hadar Susskind: I think it is overwhelmingly, not entirely, but overwhelmingly, a construction. So often, particularly in our Jewish communal communication space, people talk about, “Oh, progressives are so anti-Israel.” I don’t think that’s true. I think it is largely a political argument manifested by the right. I sit on the board of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, which includes all kinds of progressive and economic justice groups, racial justice groups, labor groups. They all know that I am Jewish, that I run a Jewish organization, that I’m an Israeli citizen, and that I served in the IDF, and not one of them has ever said to me, “You shouldn’t be here,” or “You shouldn’t be in the conversations we’re having about Israel and Palestine.” They don’t say Israel doesn’t exist, and I work very closely with both Jewish and non-Jewish progressives from all kinds of different places who, if you ask them if they’re Zionist, would probably say no.

Jeremy Ben-Ami: It’s a huge mistake for those who are leading some of the larger [Jewish] organizations to be calling the Democratic Party anti-Israel. That is not the case. It’s anti this government and pro the vision of Israel we all knew 10, 20, 30 years ago. … Of course, you’re going to have the people who get the headlines, and you’re going to get a handful of characters running out there who are going to take the most extreme position. But there’s hundreds and hundreds of people running for the House and the Senate right now, particularly in the Democratic Party, which is where 70+% of Jews identify, and most of them are looking for a bridge, rather than to isolate themselves on one side of the divide. And the language we encourage people to use is the language of “and” — you know, to not make everything a binary whenever you are talking about this issue, but to recognize there are two peoples, there are two narratives, there are two rights, there are two sets of grievances.

Jill Jacobs: The left is a very big place. The left includes the farthest, most radical left where, yes, Zionism has become a dirty word, and there’s often no place for Zionists. It also includes the labor movement and the civil rights movement and the kind of classic national and local organizations that tend to be more pragmatic. There is a lot of space for difference [of opinions] in other areas, including on Israel.

How do you make your case to those on the left who reject Zionism? Do you have those conversations, and what do you say?

Shanie Reichman: I recently started a graduate program in Middle Eastern studies where many believe Israel fits neatly into a settler colonial paradigm. In those spaces I’ve had the most success leading with the tangible policy steps, which Israel Policy Forum outlines, that can bring Israelis and Palestinians closer to reconciliation and stability while rooting the discussion in my personal identity. While classmates may not align with my view for the future — which includes a Palestinian state alongside a Jewish state of Israel — we can often find common ground around details that better the daily lives of Palestinians on the ground. At the very end of these discussions, I will “out” myself as a Zionist, and explain my belief in self-determination for all peoples which is embodied by my Zionism. 

Jeremy Ben-Ami: I begin with the understanding of the Jewish people as a people. And for a lot of progressive activists, that’s sort of an “aha” moment. When you really have dialogue and you start to dig into it, you try to draw that commonality between the two peoples, and that both of them have equal rights, and both of them have equal needs and equal pain and horrible narratives. And you know, you begin to build common ground.

Hadar Susskind: Talking about the values, and what does that look like. What turns that into reality, and how do we get to it? When [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu came to speak to Congress [in July 2024], we actually did tell members [of Congress] that they shouldn’t go to the speech. And we planned an event where we brought together a number of different speakers, including Palestinian activist Aziz Abu Sarah and Israeli activist Maoz Inon. We said, “Instead of going to listen to Netanyahu, come listen to peacemakers, to people who are actually doing this work.” Part of it also was that a lot of the groups, like [Service Employees International Union], were being pressured by other partners, or maybe some folks in their field, to join the protests outside of the Capitol, which you may recall, turned very, very ugly that day.  One of the things we did, working with these partners, was helping them find a response that was value-added and that was positive, and that was highlighting peacemakers.

Jill Jacobs: Within the last year, I was having a conversation in a coalition space where I was the only person from a Jewish organization. And I started talking about the Israeli democracy movement and what we learned from that. And I found that people were actually interested. I acknowledged the complexity of talking about Israel in the middle of the war, [but] people were actually able to engage in the way that they would engage if I told them about a democracy movement, you know, in Poland or anywhere else.

Ken Bob: In many cases I can find areas of agreement with progressives, many of whom are unaware of the nuances around supporting the existence of the state of Israel while being vehemently opposed to government policies. This can bring them to a place of dialogue rather than confrontation. 

I find that providing specific examples of colleagues and organizations in Israel who are on the front lines in the struggle for peace and justice is helpful. I speak about how those on the ground working on Israeli-Palestinian collaboration deserve and need our support. This approach can take a conversation from theoretical, ideological points to a practical conversation about progressives worldwide supporting each other, whether the opponent is Trump, Netanyahu or Putin. 

But certainly there are people who don’t want to hear such messages. How do you regard the movement to boycott Israel, which often targets the Israeli academic and artistic sector, where liberals are presumably over-represented?

Hadar Susskind: I think those are ineffective and un-useful, specifically academic and artistic boycotts when people get mad because some musician is playing in Tel Aviv or when people don’t want to hire, you know, a math professor at Rutgers because he grew up in Israel.

Jill Jacobs: There’s a part of the left that is really immersed in theory and in purity. [Meanwhile,] progressive Israelis are involved with Palestinians every single day. If it came to any other country most people on the progressive front would go looking for the voices internal to that country that are working on civil rights and human rights and want to support those voices. 

Susie Linfield: I just think that this is a time when there isn’t really a lot of debate. All of this boycotting is a way to really stifle debate.

Rabbi Jill Jacobs, with microphone, speaks at a rally for Israeli democracy by Israelis and American Jews outside Israel’s consulate in Manhattan, March 27, 2023. (T’ruah, via Twitter)

How optimistic are you about the message of liberal Zionism, or whatever you prefer to call it, getting through to folks on the left and making a difference in the discourse around Israelis and Palestinians?   

Jeremy Ben-Ami: Overall, J Street and our movement has grown dramatically over the course of the last four years. There’s a group of people for whom J Street was a home, initially because there was nothing else to our left. But that only opened up even more space for people who were disaffected from the right to come into the J Street family. Today, we endorse 75% of the Democrats in the United States Senate. When we started, we endorsed zero. We are constantly adding people to our list who…support aid to Israel and believe that Israel is a valued ally and has real security needs, [and] express opposition to the policies of an Israeli government that is pursuing annexation and violating international law and human rights norms.

Susie Linfield: When people are willing to discuss, I am willing to discuss, but I think, frankly, there are very few people willing to discuss on the [anti-Zionist] left. I think that Peter Beinart is probably an exception. I wrote a very negative review of his book for Quillette and, to his credit, he called me up and interviewed me on his podcast.

Shanie Reichman: There are definitely people so extreme they cannot be convinced to accept any part of Israel. But my goal is to build credibility among the many reasonable people on the left who aren’t exposed to enough nuanced perspectives about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Those who are perceived as parroting Israeli government talking points are dismissed as untrustworthy, but when we cultivate a reputation as being balanced and willing to recognize failures in both sides we can shape the discourse more effectively among the majority of Americans — this is what I try to embody in my conversations with progressives who are skeptical of Zionism. I’ve had a lot of success speaking with pragmatists on the left who are willing to engage in thoughtful debates. 

Jill Jacobs: Our coalitions have stayed really strong, and our relationships have stayed strong. That’s been really a testament to the fact that we’ve built relationships, that people have seen us show up in different situations. We can work with groups that maybe would self-define as anti-Zionist because that’s actually how you win: You build relationships through which you can have difficult conversations.”

Click to share on X (Opens in new window) X

Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook

Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp

Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email

© The Jewish Week