Despite the claims of post-Zionists, anti-Zionists, and even a few on Israel’s extreme right, not only is Zionism compatible with liberal democratic ideals, but it arises naturally from them. A look at the history of Zionism makes this clear, argues Gadi Taub:

If we understand that liberty can only be anchored in a democratic form of government, and that democracy is anchored in a democratic nation-state—which is based in a national identity—then we can understand the predicament of the Jews of Europe, even without resorting to the simplistic explanation that Zionism was a reaction to anti-Semitism. . . . A considerable Arab minority does not share the national identity of the Jewish state; but this is the case in almost all democratic nation-states. Zionism was one of the pioneers in trying to articulate the idea of the right of the majority to self-determination, without discriminating against minorities.

Considering the current state of Israel-Arab relations, Ghaith al-Omari writes

First and foremost, no ceasefire will be possible without the release of Israeli hostages and commitments to disarm Hamas and remove it from power. The final say on these matters rests with Hamas commanders on the ground in Gaza, who have been largely impervious to foreign pressure so far. At minimum, however, the United States should insist that Qatari and Egyptian mediators push Hamas’s external leadership to accept these conditions publicly, which could increase pressure on the group’s Gaza leadership.

Washington should also demand a clear, public position from key Arab states regarding disarmament. The Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas endorsed this position in a June letter to Saudi Arabia and France, giving Arab states Palestinian cover for endorsing it themselves.

Some Arab states have already indicated a willingness to play a significant role, but they will have little incentive to commit resources and personnel to Gaza unless Israel (1) provides guarantees that it will not occupy the Strip indefinitely, and (2) removes its veto on a PA role in Gaza’s future, even if only symbolic at first. Arab officials are also seeking assurances that any role they play in Gaza will be in the context of a wider effort to reach a two-state solution.

On the other hand, Washington must remain mindful that current conditions between Israel and the Palestinians are not remotely conducive to . . . implementing a two-state solution.