Shlomo Sand is a Professor Emeritus of History at Tel Aviv University and one of the most controversial and courageous Israeli historians today. Born in a displaced persons camp in Austria to Polish Holocaust survivors and Communists, his “outsider” upbringing—combined with his advanced studies at the EHESS in Paris—provided him with a sharp, critical lens. Sand is dedicated to deconstructing the construction of modern nationalism, focusing particularly on the tension between Jewish identity and secular Zionist narratives.
Sand caused a seismic shift in international academia with his “Invention” trilogy. His masterpiece, “The Invention of the Jewish People,” was a bestseller in Israel for 19 weeks and has been translated into dozens of languages. In it, he uses extensive historical evidence to argue that modern Jewish national identity is largely a 19th-century “invention” by historians to facilitate nation-building. He followed this with “The Invention of the Land of Israel” and “How I Stopped Being a Jew,” further challenging the foundations of traditional narratives and establishing himself as one of the most subversive thinkers in the “New Historians” movement.
Sand’s stance is one of thorough “non-Zionism” or “post-Zionism.” He is a steadfast supporter of Palestinian rights, arguing that Israel’s current definition as a “Jewish State” is inherently exclusionary and anti-democratic. He publicly criticizes the occupation of Palestinian territories, viewing expansion based on myth rather than historical right as the root of the regional tragedy. In 2014, he published an open letter declaring he “stopped being a Jew” as a protest against the identity being used as a pretext for oppressing another people. He believes a true universalist should focus on common human justice rather than being held hostage by bloodlines or religious myths.
One-State Solution OR Two-State Solution
While he believes the state—whether it be a future Israel or Palestine—must shed its ethnic character and transform into a “state of all its citizens,” a vision that seemingly aligns with the ideals of a One-State Solution, his assessment of current realities leads him to dismiss such a proposal as “not serious” at this stage. He states bluntly that Israel has devolved into “one of the most racist societies in the Western world.” In his view, a society long steeped in narratives of nationalism and ethnic superiority is psychologically unprepared to share power with the oppressed. Consequently, he advocates for a Two-State Solution based on the 1967 borders, coupled with the withdrawal of most settlers, viewing this as the only viable path currently available.