In the nineties, Oslo was still hoped to yield a peaceful solution to the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians. Abraham Burg, a longtime figure in Israeli and Jewish leadership, carried heavy responsibilities as president of the Parliament, the Jewish Agency, and the World Zionist Organization. Today, he voices concern about the rise of extremism in his country, expressing his views through books and university lectures across three continents. In an interview with El Periódico de Catalunya, published by the Prensa Ibérica group, Burg reflects on tragedy, the Gaza situation, and the prospects for a hopeful path forward in the midst of darkness.
Did Israelis awaken from dreams after the Hamas massacre on October 7?
Yes, but the truth we wake up to remains uncertain. The State of Israel was built to prevent collective harm against Jews at all costs, to shield against pogroms or another Holocaust. Yet the country now confronts one of the darkest moments in Jewish history. The belief that a strong state could shield its people from all evil has collapsed. What remains unclear are the deeper causes behind these events and the reality that Gaza will not disappear, nor will the Palestinian issue simply vanish after years of hopeful rhetoric. Israelis are left grappling with a reality that defies easy answers.
Why were prior warnings about the attack overlooked?
Only a formal inquiry will reveal who said what to whom and why warnings were ignored. History often shows that states and societies cling to their own version of reality, which can close off viable alternatives. The same stubborn view can blind one to emerging threats, and an equally limited understanding can leave an adversary unexamined until it catches everyone by surprise.
The vast majority of Israelis did not connect October 7 with the daily sufferings endured by Palestinians. The country appeared to be under a sudden assault by terrorists, as if a normal nation were invaded by a criminal gang.
It is more troubling than that. For a generation, some Israelis have been conditioned to believe they could manage crises without paying for responsibility. They have grown accustomed to an uninterrupted comfort, with Gaza and the West Bank far from daily contemplation. Leaders associated with Netanyahu, alongside allies who influenced public perception, have fostered the belief that the Palestinian problem no longer exists.
The government says it aims to destroy Hamas and free hostages, while Gaza endures devastation and its people suffer. What is the point of this approach?
The answer is simple yet grim. War offers no clear plan or endpoint, and revenge has become the driving force. There is no coherent strategy to end the conflict, and the outcome will likely disappoint many on both sides once the dust settles.
Can you introduce yourself?
If the Palestinian Authority were to regain influence in Gaza, directly or indirectly, it could disappoint those who claim the prime minister will never permit such a shift. The same holds if Hamas remains in control or if Israel reoccupies the Strip. Any outcome would be disappointing given the reluctance of leaders to implement a sustained plan for the coming years.
Many worry about the global reaction to the beating of more than 8,000 children in Gaza. How does Israeli society respond?
First, Burg emphasizes a personal stance: Hamas’s crimes are horrific, without context or justification. They are crimes against humanity. Yet such acts do not justify mass violence against innocent people in Gaza. One evil does not excuse another. Few Israelis feel fully accountable, as many perceive Palestinians as terrorists while many Palestinians view Israelis as soldiers and settlers. The tragedy lies in a society increasingly driven by separation, where neither side recognizes the humanity of the other side.
The Netanyahu government has discussed deporting Gazans to Egypt. How should survivors cope in a shattered landscape?
Significant reconstruction is required, but international aid will hinge on a broader agreement that envisions a Palestinian state. Without such a framework, Gaza’s poverty and disease become Israel’s burden, creating a moral and strategic dilemma that could define the region for years to come.
You led some of Israel’s most important institutions, yet you became sharply critical over time. What changed?
Politics attracted Burg after the Lebanon War, focusing on ending the occupation and separating church from state. Four decades later, his goals remain constant: peace, justice, equality for all. The changes, he notes, are in Israel itself—leaning more toward radicalism, religiosity, and nationalist impulses that reshape the political landscape.
Was there a turning point that explains this drift?
The shift intertwines local dynamics with a broader era, including the 1967 occupation of Palestinian territories. The nation feels pulled toward ethnic or nationalist models seen in other places, a shift Burg argues reflects broader zeitgeist trends rather than a single event.
What was Burg’s reaction when Israel’s UN Ambassador appeared with the Yellow Star on the lapel?
He dismissed it as ill-advised, highlighting a comparison to the Holocaust that he felt distorted history. The gesture, Burg argued, risked Holocaust denial by equating contemporary actions with past atrocities, a move he saw as counterproductive to honest discourse.
What might happen in Israel when the war ends?
The outcome depends on the duration of the conflict and the political shifts that follow. A commission of inquiry would need to clarify the sequence of events, followed by elections. Predicting winners is beyond his purview, but the process itself is seen as essential to resolving the current crisis.
Is it possible to reverse decades of occupation and settlement policies?
Burg points to a shared responsibility across the Zionist leadership, from Rabin and Peres onward. Netanyahu’s decision to engage with Hamas complicates prospects for a lasting settlement, and he argues that real change would require a serious, sustained approach from Palestinian and Israeli leaders alike to coexist peacefully rather than pursue a cycle of conflict.
Could there ever be a peace agreement in Burg’s lifetime?
He invites a provocative question: before October 7, could Hamas have defeated the Israeli army? The implied answer is that if such a scenario were possible, a lasting peace would eventually follow when both sides recognize the need to move beyond violence and toward a workable settlement.