The 'New Antisemitism': A Historically Informed Case Study Analysis

In a December 2009 Knesset address, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu identified three major strategic threats imperilling the State of Israel: 'the Iranian [nuclear] threat, the [Hamas] missile threat and a threat I call the Goldstone threat'.1 In 2015, Netanyahu declared that Israel was 'in the midst of a great struggle' against the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) Movement-an 'international campaign to blacken its name' and delegitimise 'our very existence'-
while President Reuven Rivlin characterised BDS as a 'strategic threat of the highest degree'.2 What motivated the identification of these forces as strategic or existential threats? What consequences did this representation have for Israeli politics? Should these tocsins be interpreted as sincere professions of alarm or as public diplomacy driven by other concerns? These questions are significant for scholars and political actors alike. The former must judge the extent to which such statements accurately reflect Israeli officials' beliefs and hence account for and predict their behaviour. The latter must consider them when formulating political strategy. My doctoral research will take the four threats cited by Netanyahu-Iran, Hamas rockets, Goldstone, and BDS-as case studies to investigate the institutional and discursive politics of 'existential threat' in Israeli discourse. It will attempt to answer, in respect of each case study, three inter-related questions: 1. How is external pressure on Israel interpreted and translated in Israeli official and media discourse?2. How is 'existential threat' deployed as a resource in Israeli political contestation?3. What is the institutional architecture underpinning 'existential threat' discourse in Israel?