Israel Studies in Poland, Czech Republic, and Germany: paths of development, dynamics, and directions of changes

ABSTRACT

In recent years, Israel Studies have been gaining momentum in Europe, especially in the Central and Eastern parts of the continent. The aim of this paper is to scrutinize the genesis and evolutionary developments of Israel Studies as a separate study field in Poland, the Czech Republic, and Germany. The authors tackle the following aspects: the dominant intellectual traditions, historiographic approaches, and disciplinary frameworks; the teaching and research environment for Israel Studies in each examined country; potential entanglement of the discipline with political ties to the State of Israel and its consequences. The paper employs the qualitative research approach and relies on the case study methodology. However, an essential part of the study utilizes a comparative perspective and offers certain prospects for Israel Studies.

KEYWORDS:

• Israel Studies
• Poland
• Czech Republic
• Germany

Israel Studies straddles many fields – Jewish and Middle Eastern Studies, history and politics, language and culture … . If Jewish Studies is about Jews, Israel Studies is about Israelis, most of whom are Jews, but a quarter of whom are not.’ ‘The scholar of Israel Studies must seek allies in the quest for knowledge and understanding, crossing political barriers and refusing to conform to the scripts written by the conflict’s practitioners and ideologues.(Prof. Derek Penslar, EAIS Inaugural Lecture: What is ‘Israel Studies’? 2015)

Introduction

¹The point of departure for this paper is an assumption that there is a causal mechanism between the intensity of the development of Israel Studies and Central and Eastern Europe’s relations (both bilateral and multilateral) with Israel as well as its attitudes toward Jews and Jewish communities. Although such a causality is not surprising, it does not apply to all cases of area studies. Moreover, it may have consequences. For instance, research and curricula might be affected by political developments; the field itself may become a subject of stereotypization, or even mythologization.

The major goal of this paper is to contribute both to describing the intellectual history of studying Zionism and Israel in Poland, Czechia, and Germany and to evaluate causalities that were disrupted over time. The comparative analysis also includes a reflection on interdependencies between Israel Studies and Jewish Studies in the aforementioned countries. The three countries were selected not only as examples representing a vibrant diversity of the Central and Eastern European environment but also for the distinctive, yet interwoven, forms of how each society’s sociocultural and political discourses have been cocreated and influenced by their evolving relations with Israel and Jewish communities. In each of the countries in question, the links to the State of Israel (in all aspects) are inseparable from highly complex and ambivalent ties to their respective past- and present-day Jewish minorities.

The paper relies on the qualitative² research approach – in particular, on the case study methodology.³ However, an essential part of the study utilizes the comparative perspective which conventionally emphasizes the interpretation of differences and similarities between distinctive cases. In many regards, Israel Studies scholars have been dedicated to exploring these long-overlooked (or even carefully avoided) matters connected to individual and shared memory, collective self-image as well as future self-determination at an ethnic, national, and transnational level. The consequences of these sensitive and often painful issues are, perhaps now more than ever, vital for European reinvention.

The paper attempts to provide an in-depth analysis of the three mentioned case studies. Each subsection elaborating on a given country’s development and experiences with regard to Israel Studies addresses the issues of: (A) dominant intellectual traditions, historiographic approaches, and disciplinary frameworks; (B) the teaching and research environment of Israel Studies (C) potential entanglement with political ties to the State of Israel and its consequences. The subsequent part synthesizes the findings from the three case studies and offers detailed conclusions that emerge from comparing them. Finally, the paper ends with some predictions of potential future developments.

Specific case studies

Israel Studies in Poland: from sentimentality to academic professionalization

There is a commonly shared view that Polish-Israeli relations are of a special character. Their unique nature is derived from several factors,⁴ at least some of which should be taken into consideration when analyzing the development of Israel Studies. The first one is the heritage of shared history. Secondly, Israel and Poland are “countries forced by circumstances to be realistic in understanding that international conflicts, threats, the need to defend oneself, and aggression from neighbors are not merely problems of the past”⁵ – an insight that tremendously influences their foreign and security policy orientation, and provides a crucial context for the interpretation of their pro-Atlantic stance. Thirdly, Poland tends to perceive Israel as a leader in innovation and the Israelis as a “start-up nation.” Consequently, the political rapprochement has been accompanied by an increased interest in deepening economic cooperation and gaining access to innovative Israeli technologies. Bearing all this in mind, after Polish-Israeli relations were reestablished in 1990, they have been approached with a mixture of sentimentality and pragmatism which is reflected in how Israel Studies have developed in Poland.

Although it is assumed here that the studies on contemporary Israel in Poland have to a great extent been a function of the status and dynamics of bilateral relations, the nature of that correlation has shifted, resulting in outcomes that are not necessarily obvious. In order to introduce more clarity with regard to the state of bilateral relations and the development of academic studies on contemporary Israel, three main periods are distinguished.

In the first phase, i.e., 1948–1990, studies on contemporary Israel were very limited, verging on non-existent. While Poland recognized the State of Israel in May 1948, almost immediately after its establishment, its further policy toward Israel was nigh on entirely dependent on the USSR’s Middle Eastern policy and the Kremlin’s attitude toward the Jewish state.⁶ Soviet influence was also the main reason behind Warsaw’s decision to sever diplomatic relations with Israel upon the outbreak of the Six-Day War in 1967. Henceforth, Polish-Israeli relations (and academic studies on Israel, as well) remained frozen until the late 1980s.

On the rare occasions when Israel attracted the attention of Polish academia, interest in the Jewish state was somewhat indirect and originated primarily among historians, who tended to focus on the fate of the Jewish people. It should, however, be remembered that under the communist regime, the freedom of academic research was significantly curtailed. Moreover, social sciences and humanities were forced to serve political purposes, which meant that space for independent scholarship was extremely limited. Despite all such hindrances, enclaves of Jewish and Hebrew studies existed at several Polish universities even throughout the 1970s, thanks to the dedication of scholars such as Jerzy Tomaszewski or Witold Tyloch.⁷ According to Marcin Wodziński, head of the Department of Jewish Studies at the University of Wrocław, their efforts were, in a certain sense, a form of intellectual opposition, shaped by the rejection of the communist vision of nationalism (national communism). Polish culture was at that time very receptive to multiculturalism: there was interest not only in Jews but also in other minorities, although the significant development of Jewish studies in that period proved the importance of this particular area.⁸

Democratic transformation in Poland enabled the reestablishment of Polish-Israeli diplomatic ties in February 1990. It also initiated a new phase in the development of Israel Studies. From then on, this field of research has seen a continuous evolution, as Israel Studies progressively separated from Jewish studies and other related areas (e.g., Diaspora studies or Holocaust studies). There has been an increasing interest in contemporary Israel: its history, politics, and society. The abovementioned evolution carried with it a substantial emotional charge which sometimes facilitated or even fueled further interest in contemporary Israel but, on other occasions, proved to be an obstacle. One of the key features of the Polish Israeli academic cooperation and the Polish academia’s interest in the field of Israel Studies was the fact it was steeped in sentimentality. Frequently, cooperation has been initiated or supported by Israeli scholars who had Polish-born ancestors or were themselves born in Poland.⁹

This period may also be characterized by ad hoc cooperation between Polish and Israeli academic centers. While it took different forms, the most common was a joint organization of international conferences and symposia. Moreover, the period saw the blurring of lines between sociopolitical, cultural, or scientific initiatives and processes constituting the substance of Polish-Israeli relations. Academic conferences were attended by politicians, as organizers openly stated that their goal was to build bridges between Poles and Israelis, while an actual critical scientific reflection on contemporary Israel was relegated to being a secondary issue.

Finally, it may be assumed that the third phase in the development of Israel Studies in Poland began in the 2000s and moved the field toward global standards. Polish scholars started publishing their original research on topics related to Israel. The first modules of Israel Studies, combined with Hebrew language courses, were launched at Polish universities. Cooperation between academic centers was gradually institutionalized and became more systematic, providing added value to increasingly advanced studies on contemporary Israel. While scholarly publications available in Polish were mainly translations from foreign languages (English or Hebrew), they were, nonetheless, filling the bibliographical gap and enriching the academic discourse on Israel. Most of them were books devoted to Israel’s contemporary history.¹⁰ Simultaneously or soon afterward, Polish-speaking readers were treated to well-written popular science publications on Israeli politics and society, authored by Poles. Although they sometimes lacked the rigor of scholarly work, these accounts presented and explained Israel in an apt and objective manner to a wide audience. They could also serve as a resource for academic teachers. Examples of books of particular importance and impact include Israel by A. Chojnowski and Jerzy Tomaszewski,¹¹ A place under the sun. Israel’s wars by K. Gebert,¹² Israel Doesn’t Fly Anymore by P. Smoleński¹³ and his subsequent books or Israel 2020. Destined for power? by Agnieszka Bryc.¹⁴ One cannot forget about Polish scholars’ contributions on Zionism and Zionist movements which, throughout the 1990s and 2000s, were an important part of the Polish academia’s interest in the history of the Jewish state. Natalia Aleksiun’s pioneering monograph on the Zionist movement in Poland after the Holocaust¹⁵ certainly deserves readers’ attention. The same can be said of Jacek Surzyn’s book on the genesis of the Zionist movement, published by the Katowice University Press.¹⁶

Dominant intellectual traditions, historiographic approaches, and disciplinary frameworks

While analyzing the evolution, progress, and consolidation of Israel Studies in Poland over the past 15 years, one can identify two main, parallel disciplinary frameworks. The first one is a derivative path of Jewish studies, rooted in the interest in the history and culture of the Jewish nation. The second one is placed in the realm of political science and international relations (IR). At its center is the examination of the state: its politics, domestic sociopolitical and economic challenges, and position in the international environment. To a certain extent, this distinction is related to the circumstances and factors shaping Polish-Israeli relations (or, indeed, Polish perceptions of Israel) that were mentioned earlier.

An important part of Israel Studies in Poland is carried out by historians. It is precisely their research that departs from Jewish studies. The focus of their work is on investigating the “Polish roots of Israel” as they examine Zionism and the Zionist movement, the migration of Polish Jews to Israel as well as their impact on Israel’s contemporary history. For some prominent Polish historians who consider themselves Israel Studies scholars, such as Łukasz Sroka, research on contemporary Israel needs to contain and refer to the studies on the history of the Jewish diaspora and its fate which eventually led it to Eretz Israel.¹⁷ This way, Sroka argues, the research contributes to a better understanding of Israeli collective memory and identity. Such analyses¹⁸ provide a wider scholarly audience with insightful explanations of the adaptative circumstances and challenges faced by the Jewish pioneers coming to Eretz Israel from Poland. Jewish studies and Israel Studies undoubtedly share some common areas. Certainly, Israel Studies are studies of the Jewish state. However, as accurately noted by Wodziński “not everything that is in Israel is Jewish, while a majority of Jews actually live outside Israel.”¹⁹

At the same time, Polish scholars²⁰ who examine the history of the “Polish diaspora in Israel” and ask questions about how Polish heritage influences the social, political, and cultural orientations of contemporary Israel tend to be somewhat “Polonocentric” – a fact that can be a limitation in the cognitive sense. In practice, these kinds of studies often focus on the “Polishness” of the Israelis and Israel since, as one of our interviewees noted, “we still see Poles in these Israelis.”²¹ In parallel to these academic developments, scholarly works on Polish-Israeli relations were being published – most notably, Szanyok’s monograph,²² Rudnicki and Silber’s²³ selection of documents on relations during the communist period and Dyduch’s²⁴ work on Poland’s relations with Israel after the 1989 democratic transformation.

More recently, Israel as a research subject has been attracting increasing interest from Polish political scientists and IR scholars for whom Israel Studies are a part of Middle Eastern Studies which, in turn, belong to the type of area studies which rose in prominence and popularity in the early 2000s. Here, the peace process and Palestinian-Israeli conflict are merely one of several relevant topics,²⁵ unlike in Western Europe, where researchers largely focus on this aspect.

Furthermore, for some researchers Israel constitutes a very interesting case study for examining and explaining the evolutionary trends in states’ foreign policy,²⁶ the evolution of domestic political systems,²⁷ or the operational strategies adopted for public policies²⁸ (migration policy,²⁹ innovation policy, and energy policy).

The past 15 years have also seen the first critical scholarly discussions of issues related to contemporary Israel, held during academic conferences or in scientific publications on Israeli politics,³⁰ society, legal system,³¹ economy, and even the party system.³² Admittedly, Polish scholars initially debated these topics largely among themselves, as they published mostly in Polish.³³ However, this, too, has recently changed, as the results of research conducted in Poland is now more often presented to and published for the international audience, which means it may be debated globally. An example of this development is a book by Karolina Zielińska, Israeli Development Aid to Sub-Saharan Africa. Soft Power and Foreign Policy.³⁴ Nevertheless, even though the number of academic papers on these topics written by representatives of Polish academic centers is quickly growing, the country’s overall contribution to Israel Studies globally is still marginal.

Furthermore, developments pointed out above may be seen as a process of widening the research scope of Israel Studies research from humanities to social sciences – a direction which may be explained by: 1) the pragmatization of Polish-Israeli relations and 2) further professionalization of the scholarly effort in this field. The increasing interest in Israel’s economic and business models, observed in recent years, has gradually translated into socioeconomic studies on Israeli entrepreneurship and innovativeness.³⁵ This, in turn, has fueled public demand for in-depth knowledge of the mechanisms of Israel’s functioning in the social and market sense. Nonetheless, to maintain the dynamic growth of this promising branch of research, a certain degree of synergy between science and the market is required. One development worth mentioning in this regard is the emergence of Polish-Israeli open calls for research project proposals. Funds are being allocated for initiatives strongly linked to the research and development sector. This support’s stated aim is the fostering of innovative solutions that can be implemented in businesses and, more broadly, in the economic sector. The implementation of such projects does not always lead directly to a better understanding of contemporary Israel. However, a number of experts claim the initiative has actually had an impact on a continued academic interest in Israel.

Another change that should be noted has occurred in the policy analysis sector (primarily public think tanks). The first permanent position for an Israel affairs analyst was established in the Polish Institute of International Affairs (Polski Instytut Spraw Międzynarodowych, or PISM) in 2017 and has since been held by Michał Wojnarowicz. Interestingly, the second most influential public think tank, the Center for Eastern Studies (Ośrodek Studiów Wschodnich, or OSW) has recently launched its Israel Research Programme with two permanent positions.³⁶ The move can be seen as a natural consequence of the Center’s development and it very much reflects the importance of Israel-related topics in Polish public debates and policy-making processes.

Teaching achievements and experiences

Over the past three decades (Table 1), occasional or regular courses on Israel have been taught at the main Polish academic centers, mainly in Warsaw, Krakow, and Wroclaw.

Table 1. Mapping Israel Studies in Poland, AD 2020.

	Academic center	Type of activity	Key staff and their specializations
1	Jagiellonian University Institute of the Middle and Far East → Department of Israel and Levant	BA Programme in Middle Eastern Studies: Specialisation Israel Studies MA in Middle Eastern Studies with several courses exploring Israel (e.g.: “Israel’s History,” “Israel’s Economy,” “Israel in the region and in the world,” “Israeli culture,” “Introduction to Hebrew literature,” “Israel on global markets,” “European-Israeli relations,” “Israeli armed forces and special services” Cooperation and exchange programs with Israeli Universities (e.g., Ben Gurion University, Tel Aviv University, Haifa University)	6 permanent positions in Israel Studies (two associate professors, three assistant professors, one senior lecturer) 3 PhD students Visiting scholars (1–2 professors on full semester programs per academic year plus short-term visits)
	Institute of Jewish Studies → T. Herzl and O. Thon Center of Israel Studies and Polish-Israeli Relations	2–3 academic courses per year on contemporary Israel or topics more broadly define Israel Studies (e.g., “Contemporary Israel,” “History of ancient Israel,” “Hebrew literature” and regular Hebrew language courses) Cooperation and exchange programs with Israeli Universities (Tel Aviv University, Hebrew University)	1 permanent position (assistant Professor) Visiting scholars
2	Pedagogical University of Krakow Institute of History and Archival Studies Institute of Social Affairs	Research and teaching activity (a regular course on Israel →“History of Israel”) Advanced, long-term cooperation and exchange programs with Israeli universities, especially Beit Berl College and Levinsky College of Education.	2 scholars (associate professor, one assistant professor) with Israel-related topics in their research portfolios
3	University of Warsaw Center for Research on Israel and the Jewish Diaspora	Research and teaching activity, focused primarily on the history of Polish Jews in Israel and Polish Israeli diplomatic relations (one course: “Israel-Poland. Jews-Poles”)	2 scholars (one professor, one assistant professor)
	Institute of History → Mordechaj Anielewicz Center for Research and Teaching of the History and Culture of Jews in Poland	Research and teaching activity, focused primarily on the history of Polish Jewry (one regular course on Israel: “History of Israel”)	1 scholar fully engaged in Israel Studies
	Faculty of Oriental Studies → Department of Hebrew studies	Conducts research and studies in the Hebrew language, both classical and modern, as well as on Jewish and Israeli culture Regular courses: “Hebrew literature,” “History of Jews and Israel,” “Israel in Film. Introduction to Israeli Cinema,” (in Hebrew) “War and Army in Israeli Cinema” as well as Hebrew language courses	6^37 permanent academic positions 7 PhD students
	Institute of International Relations	Research and teaching activity (a regular course on “Israel’s Foreign Policy”) Cooperation and exchange programs with Israeli universities	2 scholars (one professor, one assistant professor) with Israel-related topics in their research portfolios 3 PhD students
4	University of Wroclaw Department of Jewish Studies	Research and teaching activity (a regular course on “Contemporary Israeli culture” and Hebrew language courses) Cooperation and exchange programs with Israeli universities	1 scholar engaged specifically in researching Israel
	Institute of International Studies	Research and teaching activity Cooperation and exchange programmes with Israeli universities	1 associate professor 2 PhD students
Polish public think tanks
	Polish Institute of International Affairs Program: Middle East and Africa	Research and policy analysis of the internal and foreign policy of Israel and Palestine, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, security in the Middle East Established partnership with Israel Council on Foreign Relations	A single analyst post on Israeli affairs in the Middle East and Africa Programme
	Center for Eastern Studies Israel Research Programme	Research and policy analysis on Israel’s internal and foreign policy	Two analyst positions in the Israel Research Programme

Source: information comes from the academic centers’ official websites (https://orient.uj.edu.pl/, http://www.judaistyka.uj.edu.pl, https://iss.up.krakow.pl/, https://ihia.up.krakow.pl/, https://www.pism.pl/, https://www.osw.waw.pl/).

As the table above indicates, the most advanced study program focused on contemporary Israel is offered by the Institute of the Middle and Far East (IMFE) at Jagiellonian University. The Institute is home to the Department of Israel and Levant, with five permanent positions in the area of Israel Studies. Until 2021 it ran a full Bachelor program in Middle Eastern studies with a specialization in Israel Studies. Every year, up to 15 students graduate with a degree in Israel Studies. The Institute also provides an MA program in Middle Eastern Studies, that offers students courses on contemporary Israel. Along with a comprehensive study program dedicated to Israel, IMFE cooperates with several Polish and foreign scientific institutions working in the field of contemporary Israel Studies – its link with the Ben Gurion University being a flagship example.

The turning point in the development of Israel Studies in Kraków came in 2018 when the Jagiellonian University established the T. Herzl and O. Thon Center on Israel Studies and Polish-Israeli Relations at the Institute of Jewish Studies. The Center was created as a result of an agreement between the Washington-based Israel Institute and the Jagiellonian University’s Faculty of History. Its main task was to bring together the academic community, both at the Jagiellonian University and across Poland, interested in the history, culture, society, and politics of Israel.³⁸

Polish-Israeli academic exchange programs and their influence on Israel Studies development: teaching staff mobility and student exchange

The creation of a general, legal, and operational framework enabling systematic, institutionalized studies on contemporary Israel in Poland was closely tied with Polish-Israeli academic cooperation, launched as soon as 1991 and carried out under the umbrella of the intergovernmental Polish-Israeli agreement specified in multiannual “Executive programs.”³⁹ The program enables the exchange of scholars and students, many of whom continue their study of modern Israel after returning to Poland.⁴⁰

The last document of this type was adopted for the years 2011–2014 and, up to 2019, was extended annually.⁴¹ In 2019, the Israeli side informed the Polish National Agency for Academic Exchange (NAWA) that it would suspend funding due to limited financial resources and budgetary issues. Consequently, it halted the implementation of its portion of academic exchange programs with Poland.⁴² In reaction, NAWA unilaterally decided to cover the costs of hosting Israeli candidates who were accepted for the 2019/20 and 2020/21 academic years. However, since the elementary logic of exchange programs based on intergovernmental agreements makes them a bilateral and reciprocal tool, and given the fact that the Israeli side did not announce any scholarships for Polish candidates for the 2021/22 academic year, NAWA considered not providing scholarships for Israeli candidates after the current round of funding expires. Last-minute changes enabled the publication of the call for Polish candidates in 2021, which allowed for the continuation of the mutual exchange. It is worth noting that in December 2021, NAWA opened Interdisciplinary Center for Polish Studies at the University of Haifa.

On the other hand, the European integration process, which affects both relations among the EU Member States (MS) and their interactions with a broader international environment, became a game-changer when it comes to the presence of Israel-related topics in Polish academic life. From 2014 onwards, the EU’s Erasmus+ program has facilitated the exchange of students and academic staff between EU MS and the so-called program partner countries (including Israel) (Table 2). As a result, Polish-Israeli cooperation in this area gained new momentum, a fact clearly reflected in quantitative data.

Table 2. Polish-Israeli academic exchange within the framework of Erasmus+ program (data only for 2015–2017).⁴³

	2015	2016	2017	Total
Student exchange
Polish students to Israel	26	18	26
Israeli students to Poland	19	12	19
Academic staff exchange (teaching and training)
Polish scholars to Israel	21	28	83
Israeli scholars to Poland	23	34	79
Total:	89	92	207	388

Source: Narodowa Agencja Programu Erasmus+, https://www.frse.org.pl/badania/.

As the Erasmus+ program took root in the academic community, it offered a relatively easy path to cooperation for those Polish academic centers that had previously not been engaged with Israeli universities, such as Warsaw’s SWPS or Kraków’s AGH University of Science and Technology. Thus, it opened the door to developing or broadening studies in new areas, with Israel becoming an interesting case study, a source of knowledge and inspiration for Polish scholars. The outcomes of the academic exchange, impressive in terms of both quantity and quality, reflect the Europeanization of academic cooperation, followed by its standardization, professionalization, and systematization.

Contributions and input into Israel Studies as a globalized and pluralistic research field

The aforementioned process of pragmatization and professionalization of Israel Studies resulted in the internationalization of Polish academic efforts (research, publications, and, to some extent, teaching practices) in this field.

The European Association of Israel Studies (EAIS),⁴⁴ founded in 2011 at the University of London’s School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS), was effectively transferred to Poland in 2020. It now operates as an independent NGO based at the Jagiellonian University in Kraków. EAIS’s mission is to promote, encourage, and support the independent academic study of Israel across Europe and beyond. Since its establishment, the organization has fostered multidisciplinary academic perspectives on Israel. A lot of effort has been put into supporting young researchers in the early stages of their careers and consolidating the community of European scholars interested in contemporary Israel. By bringing its flagship event – an annual conference – to Europe (so far, it has been hosted by universities in Munich, Cagliari, Wrocław, Prague, London, Oxford, and Bucharest), EAIS seeks to enhance the European academic community’s understanding of Israel and the region.

Building on the scientific achievements of the 6^th EAIS Annual Conference, which took place at the University of Wroclaw (Poland), a Special Issue of the Polish Political Science Yearbook focused on Israel Studies⁴⁵ has been published. It marked the first time that any Polish academic journal was dedicated entirely to Israel Studies, thus reflecting the growing interest in this field among Polish academia. The volume included papers authored by scholars representing a number of academic centers from Europe, the US, Canada, and, of course, Israel, with a variety of backgrounds in Israel Studies. The papers represented a comprehensive approach to Israel’s history, politics, society, and culture. The authors investigated crucial research problems from different perspectives: historical, political, legal, and cultural. Editors placed a lot of emphasis on bringing together well-established, experienced names and early-stage scholars whose inquisitiveness and fresh outlook provided added value to the debates held within the area of Israel Studies. In 2022, EAIS and the Association of Israel Studies (AIS) organized a joint seminar on Public Policies in Israel. Participants were later invited to submit their papers to the Special Issue of the academic journal on Public Policies in Israel, due to be published in 2023.

EAIS cooperates closely with European academic centers with Israel Studies in their portfolios. The most relevant partners are three Israel Studies Centers funded by the Israel Institute: in Krakow,⁴⁶ Prague,⁴⁷ and Bucharest.⁴⁸ EAIS also has very close operational ties with the Moses Mendelssohn Center for European-Jewish Studies (MMZ) in Potsdam and the German Institute for International and Security Affairs (Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik, SWP).

Potential entanglement with political ties to the State of Israel and its consequences

Interestingly, similarly to other Central and Eastern European countries, Poland has never become a hotspot for BDS⁴⁹ activities. A majority of Polish scholars (including political scientists and IR researchers) have barely heard of this initiative (Interview 4). This can be explained by recalling a few factors. First of all, Poland has no substantial Muslim minority.⁵⁰ Secondly, the Palestinian-Israeli conflict has never been a top priority issue in Polish foreign policy.⁵¹ Thirdly, for Poles in general, Israel is first and foremost a Jewish State and as was mentioned previously, Polish academia’s interest in Israel has largely been driven by sentimentality emanating from shared historical experiences rather than from global trends.

Shared history, however, has not only been a reason for the specific interest of the academia but, as we have recently learned, became a battlefield while its interpretation has been increasingly politicized. In January 2018, the Polish Parliament adopted an amendment to the Bill of the Institute of National Remembrance (Journal of Laws 2018). According to the amendment, anyone who “publicly and contrary to the facts” attributed “responsibility or co-responsibility for the crimes committed by the Nazis and committed by the Third Reich” to the Polish people or the Polish state would now be subject to a penalty of up to three years of imprisonment (Article 55a). This sparked indignation among Jewish communities in many countries, including the US and Israel. Many historians, journalists, and politicians criticized the amendment and accused Polish authorities of historical revisionism and attempts to “whitewash” the country’s history.⁵²

Although there is no crystal clear evidence that the 2018 crisis has had any substantial influence on the field of Israel Studies and its development, one can already make tentative observations that shed some light on the possible correlation between the diplomatic tensions and the prospects for Israel Studies in Poland. From the short-term perspective, the crisis could have actually had a positive impact since Polish-Israeli relations gained more visibility. Their agenda and dynamics were, for several months, one of the staple topics of public debate, which also drove demand for expertise. However, in the long term, persistent tensions in political relations can discourage potential students from taking up study topics seen as risky.

As for the almost immediate consequences of the 2018 crisis, it can be said that the public discourse on Polish-Israeli relations (especially the narrative on the shared history) has become less confined by convention as well as political and sentimental correctness.

Moreover, while the legacy of common history has long been recognized as part of the landscape in Israel’s relations with Poland, the national narratives on history have become increasingly politicized. It became a top priority issue on the foreign policy agenda in both Poland and Israel. As a result, political disputes over history became burdened with emotions, which made a constructive dialogue more difficult than ever. The message on the political meaning of history, addressed initially to the domestic audience, has simply, but surprisingly for many, “kidnapped” the foreign policy agenda and may influence the prospects for Israel Studies conducted in Poland and by Polish scholars. One sign of that may be the suspension of scholarship programs and the redirection of support for academic initiatives undertaken in this field. Growing tensions in diplomatic relations may put a heavy strain on pragmatic bilateral relations between Israel and Poland.

In addition to the above-mentioned challenges, Israel Studies in Poland have already been (and will continue to be) affected by processes observed in other social sciences and humanities research areas: limited funding, competition, and even overproduction.

Growing populism and illiberal tendencies worldwide, observable both in Poland and Israel, may certainly affect the public sphere, including the academic world. This may lead to redirecting of financial resources away from research and teaching but also from student and academic staff exchange programs. On the contrary, one can imagine that if the illiberal tendencies and ethnopopulism continue to rise in both countries, a new type of academic alliances and lines of analytical and scholarly exchange may appear. It can be expected that the cooperation would be driven more into the “security studies.” Another possible direction of evolution could be a progressive tendency to take up a more critical stance and perspective by Polish scholars while analyzing Israel: its history, politics, society, and culture. Somehow the atmosphere of “building bridges” between states and their societies, which predominantly shaped the paradigm of the mutual Polish Israeli cooperation (including academic), promoted specific directions and areas of studies and research and made others somewhat sensitive or risky (at least they were seen as such). This change of critical, comparative analysis could be, to some extent, seen as a liberal academic reaction (connected to a sense of academic freedom) to illiberal tendencies in public discourses limiting the freedom of speech and research.

The above analysis indicates that the future and prospects for the development of Israel Studies in Poland are influenced not only by the quality of bilateral intergovernmental relations but also by the Europeans’ perception of Israel and its policy (especially toward the Palestinians). Moreover, access to research funding, along with the need for further professionalization, plays a crucial role in Poland’s case. The atmosphere in EU-Israeli relations may also affect the development of Israel Studies. In short, the more amicable these relations are, the better prospects all Europeans interested in studying Israel will face.

To conclude this part, it can be said that as relations between Israel and Poland stabilized, Poles’ interest in Israel could grow. In the 1990s, it actually took on a form of fascination, in many cases related to the discovery of one’s Jewish roots. The attention granted to Israel was tinged with sentimentalism, while its institutional expression was driven by interpersonal contacts. From today’s perspective, the emotional charge that accompanied those developments could be seen as something of a burden that affected the course and objectivity of research. However, if one acknowledges that it was a piece in a complex puzzle of social and political transition, it can be argued that such a phase was necessary before moving on to more mature, methodologically rigorous critical studies. That nostalgic stage has now passed, and the current interest in Israel is driven by other factors. The sentimentality so typical for the 1990s has been replaced by pragmatism, which also forces professionalization.

Studying contemporary Israel in the Czech Republic

The ‘Mysterious bond’⁵³ and the origins of intellectual traditions forming the field of Israel Studies

When asked about possible parallels between the development of Israel Studies in the Czech Republic and the trajectory of Czech-Israeli relations, the Director of the Center for the Study of the Holocaust and Jewish Literature at the Faculty of Arts, Charles University, Jiří Holý, posits: “Undoubtedly, there is an existing causality. In the years 1950–1989, the longstanding and fruitful Czech-Jewish cooperation, originating from the times of Tomáš Garrigue Masaryk and Czechoslovak military help to the newly established State of Israel, was interrupted. From the 1990s onwards, the cooperation has been renewed and today is in motion in many different fields.”⁵⁴

Focusing on this very topic, Martin Wein has gathered and analyzed extensive material related to Czech-Jewish and Czecho(Slovak)-Israeli interactions, spanning between the end of the eighteenth and the beginning of the twenty-first century. Wein compared and deconstructed a number of particular connections between the histories of Czechs and Jews as well as Czechoslovakia and Israel, employing the approach of Histoire croisée. In the preface, he argues that

(…) a long, varied, and comprehensive record of Czech-Jewish interaction and mutual references has had considerable significance for collective memory, where the geographical location of a country, its status or size is not necessarily reflected accurately or proportionally. As a result, Czechs and Jews have long functioned as mutual reference societies, they created a shared pool of collective memory, and Czechoslovakia is often remembered as a founding state of Israel.⁵⁵

The relations between the Czech Republic (then Czechoslovakia) and the State of Israel are surrounded by myths. They are often portrayed as a truly unique form of friendship between two “small nations” which is sometimes romanticized as fated and unconditional.⁵⁶

In order to better understand this manifested affinity, it is crucial to look into the past. Even though its most significant parts were, rather inevitably, formed by the events of the twentieth century, one should not forget that Prague has been home to a strong Jewish community for more than 1000 years. In the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, Prague was one of Europe’s most renowned Jewish intellectual centers. The fame of the city in the Jewish world was expressed by its laudatory title, Ir ve-em be-Yisrael (literally, a city and a mother in Israel). As such, Prague became the ideal capital for the Ashkenazi Diaspora. One of this epoch’s most renowned Jewish theologians was Judah Leva ben Betsalel – the Maharal.⁵⁷

In 1876, Czech-speaking Jewish students founded the Association of Czech-Jewish Academics, which argued against Zionism with the motto “My Zion is Prague.” Martin Buber, one of the most influential modern Jewish philosophers, first introduced his “Three Speeches on Judaism” in 1909 in a Zionist student club, Bar Kochba. Buber’s listeners included other prominent Prague intellectuals, such as Franz Kafka, Max Brod, and Samuel Hugo Bergmann, who later became the first chancellor of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

The interactions intensified by means of Czechs’ and Jews’ almost parallel struggle for national self-determination. Ironically, in its search for a path toward sovereignty, a part of the Czech society excluded Jews, especially those speaking German. Nonetheless, the bond was further strengthened during the term of the first president and founding father of the Czechoslovak State, Tomáš Garrigue Masaryk.⁵⁸

As became apparent during the Hilsner Affair,⁵⁹ Masaryk did not tolerate antisemitism; he greatly supported Zionism and was the first head of a European state who visited Jewish and Arab settlements in the British Mandate for Palestine in 1927. Moreover, Czechoslovakia hosted three Congresses of the World Zionistic Organization: in 1921 and 1923 in Karlovy Vary and in 1933 in Prague. In this very context, in 1924, Masaryk shared his observation for a Yiddish newspaper, Haynt [Today]: “As far as Zionism is concerned, I see it as hope for the Jewish nation’s future and one mustn’t give up such hopes. Zionism for me is in all ways a thing of agreeable character (charaktervolle Sache). It carries the potential of willpower and gives the Jewish life a certain character.”⁶⁰

Specifics of Zionism in the first decades of the Czechoslovak state have been thoroughly scrutinized by Tatjana Lichtenstein. In her influential book Zionists in Interwar Czechoslovakia: Minority Nationalism and the Politics of Belonging,⁶¹ the author confronts i.a., the myth of Czechoslovak exceptionalism. The so-called “Czechoslovak myth”⁶² has portrayed Masaryk’s Czechoslovakia as an indisputably liberal democratic environment embracing minorities, including the Jews. Those characteristics have been challenged and perceived as questionable.⁶³

During the 1948 war, Czechoslovakia sold weapons to Israel despite an international embargo. The armament supplied by Czechs contributed to the Israeli victory, and later, this episode helped reestablish a narrative of mutual friendship on both sides. After the twentieth-century wars that Israel always carried out against multiplied forces, Israel became in the eyes of the Czech nation their more successful and stronger alter ego.

In June 1967, one of the main topics of the Czechoslovak Writers’ Convention was a protest against the severance of diplomatic relations between Czechoslovakia and Israel following the Six-Day War. Czech writer Pavel Kohout, a reformed Communist of Christian background, gave the following speech in which he compared the Six-Day War to the 1938 Munich Agreement: “If Czechoslovakia would have fired the first shot in 1938 instead of surrendering, would one of the rightful judges of that incident label them as the aggressor? In the moral sense, barely so.”⁶⁴ As Wein aptly observed, at that time, any identification with Israel was used as a pretense for antisemitic assaults on reformed Communists, regardless of whether they were Jews or Christians.⁶⁵

In many aspects, Václav Havel, the first president of Czechoslovakia after the Velvet Revolution in 1989, picked up on Masaryk’s intellectual legacy. In his first New Year’s presidential speech in January 1990, Havel embraced Masaryk´s political and moral patrimony and emphasized, inter alia, the need to restore diplomatic relations with Israel (as well as with the Vatican) even before the parliamentary elections.⁶⁶ Indeed, the reestablishment of Czech-Israeli diplomatic relations took place just one month later, on February 9, 1990. One of President Havel’s first trips abroad was to Israel. After his return, Havel shared a few impressions:

I have (also) realized one thing: that the State of Israel, it is something that can be hardly explained. The awareness of a hundred years of persecution in the diaspora is very much alive, that the state is therefore something like a spiritual principle. Zionism as a whole is a spiritual movement. That is exactly why the UN resolution that marked Zionism as racism is so absurd. It is a spiritual movement that originates from the ideal of a promised land, it has a completely different historical horizon, they do not care that they haven’t been there for a 100 or 1000 years — they simply feel like it is their home. It is based on their learning, they found their home there and they find refuge there from all the diasporas where they suffer from antisemitism in this or that way. It is a state that is structured a little differently and is based on a different principle than most states. That is one, but not the only reason why it is continuously a focal point of tension where bullets keep on flying and why it is the world’s neuralgic point.⁶⁷

It is hardly necessary to point out that toward the end of the twentieth century, Zionism being contextualized as a “spiritual movement” by one of the most respected world leaders and an authority in the area of humanities was a rather unique occurrence.

During the twentieth and twenty-first centuries, the bond to Israel was internalized as a part of Czech identity and self-perception as a “small nation,” a nation that was sold off by the big nations to Hitler in 1938 and that was abandoned again 30 years later by the international community that passively watched them being left to the mercy of, to paraphrase Milan Kundera, the “imperial ambitions”⁶⁸ of the Russian bear.

In this frame of reference, a recently published book analyzing in detail how the Munich agreement resonated in the press of the Zionist Yishuv in 1938–1939 should not be overlooked. This comprehensive study, based on more than 2500 newspaper articles in Hebrew and English, convincingly shows how the self-perception of a “small nation” was rooted in the Jewish collective consciousness and how the Yishuv “looked sympathetically upon Czechoslovakia as an inspiration for its own national enterprise (…),” concerned “by the possible consequences of the Munich Conference.”⁶⁹

Masaryk and Havel are to this day regarded as iconic role models of liberal thinkers and some of the most significant figures of modern Czech history. As is gradually evident from many following polemics, the aforementioned statements and ideas presented by Masaryk,⁷⁰ Havel, Kohout, and many others have become deeply rooted and eventually transmuted into “normative” concepts with a strong impact on Czech elites and mainstream society. The examples in question illustrate how sociocultural and political discourses have been cocreated in interaction with evolving relations to Israel in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries – confirming one of the main hypotheses of this article. Furthermore, due to these examples, one can trace the origins of selected intellectual traditions forming the current field of Israel Studies in the Czech Republic.

Apart from the writing mentioned above on Israel and Zionism, mainly but not exceptionally under Nazi and Communist rule, the discussed field was undoubtedly enriched by, inter alia, the following publications:

Karel Kaplan, one of the leading Czech historians of the twentieth century, dealt with the blunt instrumentalization of Zionism by communist propaganda in his famous “Report on the Murder of the General Secretary”⁷¹ in the early 1990s.

In 1997, Israeli diplomat and historian Moshe Yegar published a book entitled Czechoslovakia, Zionism, Israel⁷² that was, for a certain period of time, one of the very few sources on the theme written in Czech.

Among quite recent publications, there is The Jew in Czech and Slovak Imagination, 1938–89: Antisemitism, the Holocaust, and Zionism⁷³ by Hana Kubátová and Jan Láníček. In the chapter entitled “When They Write ‘Zionist,’ They Mean ‘Jew,’” the authors examine the image of the Jew as a “Zionist,” “the most persistent anti-Jewish stereotype”⁷⁴ abused by Communist propaganda. The researchers follow developments of this notorious anti-Zionist trope for half a century, abandoning the topic after the Fall of the Iron Curtain.

In a similar vein, Jiří Holý explores patterns of Communist indoctrination in his chapter “‘Anti-Zionism’ as the hidden and overt antisemitism of the time of the Communist regime.”⁷⁵

Considering the often ambivalent current relationship of Czech Jews with Israel, one of the factors to be studied according to the article “Ethno-religious Othering as a reason behind the Central European Jewish distancing from Israel”⁷⁶ is “the changing ethnic composition of the Israeli population”⁷⁷ or so-called Mizrahization.

Minorities and Law in Czechoslovakia, 1918–1992,⁷⁸ authored by Jan Kuklík and René Petráš, should also be mentioned.

A shared sense of persecution

Given the context, there is one more subject that should be addressed. Ever since Central and Eastern European states underwent a democratic transition in the 1990s, their societies have been consistently more sympathetic toward (or at least disproportionately less critical of) Israel, compared to Western Europe.

When looking for the source of this phenomenon, one could accept a simplistic explanation: in comparison to the West, the former Soviet bloc satellites have less developed democratic traditions. Hence, their potential criticism of Israel with regard to this area may seem to lack credibility. However, an alleged lack of democracy may not be the only reason why Central and Eastern Europe is more keen on Israel. Certain experiences from the times of the totalitarian regime remain present in the memory of local intellectual elites from both ends of the political spectrum. The communist era witnessed repeated instances when targeted anti-Israeli propaganda resonated throughout the entire Eastern Bloc. The image of a Zionist enemy was created at the behest of Moscow (with occasional contributions from some Arab states) and peddled by the media whenever the ruling ideologists saw fit.

Additionally, one other noticeable aspect of those times was the completely unconcealed identification of local Jewish communities with Israel by the communist regimes. For example, in Czechoslovakia, the cold, almost hostile relations between the two states had a destructive effect on the quality of life among Czechoslovak Jews. At the time, the Czech establishment unquestionably viewed the Jewish community as an offshoot of the enemy state on its own territory – an assumption which, in this context, was used to practically define the local Jewish population. This phenomenon is quite sufficiently documented, not only in the printed press of the time but also in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs archives.

As a result of the above-mentioned historical circumstances, a dominant public discourse, which quite spontaneously emerged and intensified after the Velvet Revolution, brought on a very positive image of Israel and Czech Jews. Such perceptions sprang from both a real and imagined bond between two small countries abandoned by their allies in their struggle for survival against much greater and more populous enemies. For the Czechs, this identification also made it possible to experience at least a fictional sense of victory over preponderant enemies. The relations with the State of Israel have a long-term, important symbolical reach among the Czech/Czechoslovak society, as evident, for example, in some texts and speeches published before and during the Prague Spring of 1968. For some of the intellectuals and artists who actively worked against the communist regime, friendship with Israel was associated with the free world. Just like the Jewish minority, Czech/Czechoslovak dissidents that have formed the postrevolutionary ruling elite had previously experienced oppression. This shared sense of persecution, but also subsequent self-emancipation, has taken a common path. Later, the discourse found acceptance in the mainstream and was carefully cultivated in both Israel and the Czech Republic.⁷⁹ The coveted image has often been entangled and exposed together with Václav Havel and Tomáš Garrigue Masaryk’s personal and professional narratives.

In the last three decades, the academic, cultural, and businesses exchange between the Czech Republic and Israel has thrived as much as the two countries’ diplomatic relations.⁸⁰ An increased interest in relevant research in academia emerged as a natural consequence of these developments.

Institutional grounding of Israel Studies in the Czech Republic: teaching achievements and experiences

Among more than twenty Czech universities, the following four higher education institutions (HEI) display a stable interest and significant achievements in both educational and research areas in the field of Israel Studies.

Palacký university in Olomouc

In 2013, the Bachelor’s degree in Jewish and Israeli Studies was accredited at the Kurt and Ursula Schubert Center for Jewish Studies (CJS) at the Faculty of Arts, Palacký University in Olomouc.⁸¹ As such, it became the first (and up to date the only) university degree explicitly dedicated to Israel Studies in the Czech Republic.

In the academic year 2020/2021, the following specific courses in Israel Studies were offered as a part of the Israel Studies module: History of Ideology of Zionism, Realities and Culture of the State of Israel, Modern Israeli Literature – Comic Books, Modern Israeli Literature in Czech Translations, Israeli Domestic and Foreign Politics, Contextualization of the Jewish Law and the State Law. Moreover, several different seminars and workshops are included in the rich curricula. Additionally, along with modern Hebrew, the students who choose the Israel Studies module obligatorily complete at least one semester of the Arabic language.⁸²

Apart from becoming a highly recognized research and educational hub with a fairly unique focus on regional topics (namely: Jews in Moravia), the CJS’s mission statement pictures it as a place “stimulating interest in Israel which contributes to the formation of unbiased attitudes toward the Near East problematics.”⁸³

Charles university

Since 1990, Charles University (CU) has established close research cooperation with a large number of Israeli universities and institutions. Apart from the traditional focus on humanities and social sciences (which covers the main scope of this article), there has been a growing interest in natural sciences,⁸⁴ environmental studies, and technological exchange. Additionally, CU and Tel Aviv University have launched a joint doctoral program.

In 2013, CU’s Faculty of Arts held the first in a series of events entitled “Israel Week at Charles University: The Future of Israeli Studies in the Czech Republic.” So far, five editions of the event (2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, and 2019) have taken place. The patronage of the event was held by CU’s rector, the Faculty’s dean as well as the Czech Minister of Culture. For the first four years, the event was organized by the Prague Center for Jewish Studies (PCJS)⁸⁵ at FA CU. The fifth Week was coordinated by the Center for the Study of the Holocaust and Jewish Literature⁸⁶ at the Faculty of Arts.

Israel Week at Charles University, by its definition, aimed to identify the main subjects of Israel Studies covered by Czech and foreign scholars while also forging ties between the Czech academic world and Israeli as well as other international institutions. Apart from identifying Israel Studies as an interdisciplinary study of modern Israeli history, politics, society, culture, and art, the Week also focused on the study of Jewish communities in the diaspora since the creation of the State of Israel. Through that part of its program, it claimed its allegiance to the definition formulated in Israel Studies, published since 1996 by Indiana University Press.⁸⁷

The vision of Israel Week was to serve as a starting point for potential future research and teaching activities in the field of Israel Studies at Charles University’s Faculty of Arts. In particular, the Week involved theoretical debates delineating and specifying Israel Studies in its particular local⁸⁸ and broader European⁸⁹ context. Numerous internationally renowned scholars⁹⁰ debated often controversial, inflammatory topics.⁹¹ At the same time, the Week became an important platform for students’ presentations and discussions.⁹²

Embracing a great variety of topics, spanning from “Reflections on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in contemporary Hebrew and Arabic poetry”⁹³ through “Czech cubism in the desert”⁹⁴ or “Russian Speaking Jewish Immigrants in Israel”⁹⁵ to “The Shoah and Israeli identity,”⁹⁶ Israel Week at CU featured over fifty academic lectures and debates, more than twenty events aimed at popularizing Israel Studies as well as eighteen side performances, including commented Israeli movies, concerts or theater plays.

The Department of Middle Eastern Studies (DMES) at FA CU offers a degree in Hebrew and Jewish Studies, which includes several courses on Israel (namely: Culture of the State of Israel, History of Modern Israel, and The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict).⁹⁷ The Center for the Study of the Holocaust and Jewish Literature situated at the Department of Czech Literature and Comparative Literature offered several courses on Israel in the last decade, including Society and Culture of the State of Israel; Czech-Israeli Literary, Cultural and Diplomatic Intersections in the Twentieth and Twenty-First Century or Israeli Minorities: Ethnicity, Gender, and Religion.⁹⁸

Apart from its main focus on Jewish philosophy, mysticism, and Rabinic literature, the Department of Biblical and Jewish Studies at the Hussite Theological Faculty occasionally organizes lectures on Modern Israel. Along the same lines, several events have been held at the Protestant Theological Faculty.

Recently, CU saw two significant events in the field of Israel Studies. In September 2019, CU’s Center for the Study of the Holocaust and Jewish Literature hosted the eighth Annual Conference of EAIS with the title: “Democracy in Challenging Times: Israel, Europe, and the World.” The EAIS conference was attended by more than 140 participants from all around the world, and, according to Timea Crofony, it was widely seen as “one of the peaks of Israel Studies in the Czech academia.” The conference and its preparations were accompanied by a large number of passionate polemics, controversies, and academic power struggles, both locally and internationally, that provided fuel for a detailed analysis of the state of Israel Studies as a field of research. Going into the details of this matter would, however, go beyond the scope of this article. The conference was held under the auspices of CU’s rector, Tomáš Zima, and the Czech Minister of Foreign Affairs, Tomáš Petříček.

As Crofony observed, the second “great achievement” was the opening of the Herzl Center of Israel Studies (HCIS) in Prague. HCIS was officially established in 2018 at the Faculty of Social Sciences in cooperation with the Israel Institute in Washington, DC, and is dedicated to interdisciplinary research and teaching in the field of Israel Studies, mainly the study of Israeli society, politics, and history. Particular attention is paid to “historical and contemporary links between Central Europe and Israel.”⁹⁹ Even though the HCIS is institutionally grounded in CU’s Faculty of Social Sciences, the Center’s Board includes representatives of several faculties (Arts, Hussite Theology, Mathematics and Physics, Science) as well as of foreign universities (Jagiellonian University), so as to guarantee a plurality of opinions and perspectives. The Center periodically awards MA students travel Grants and PhD Fellowships, thus stimulating interest in Israel Studies among the Czech academia.

University of West Bohemia in Pilsen

At the University of West Bohemia, Israel Studies sit partly in the portfolio of the Department of Middle Eastern Studies. The Department occupies itself with “history, culture, and languages of the Middle East, Assyriology, Islamic studies and Judaic studies (and Israel Studies).”¹⁰⁰ Courses on modern Hebrew and the “Introduction to Israel Studies” are taught at the Department. When describing the open-minded, diverse environment and a large variety of different groups within the Department, Assistant Professor Zbyněk Tarant talks about the “Israeli section.” At the same time, Tarant notes the sections are not grounded in the official institutional infrastructure. He welcomes such an arrangement and emphasizes a harmonious coexistence with colleagues from other specific topic areas (e.g., Iranian Studies) under a single Middle Eastern umbrella. In this context, he mentioned that he would never dispute the well-known traumatic experiences of his American or British colleagues, whose long-standing efforts were suddenly jeopardized due to their focus on Israel Studies. “However,” he argues, “why should we, here in the Czech Republic, restrict ourselves by conflicts that are not ours; I will not delimit myself at any price against Arab Studies just because there is an ongoing conflict at some Western university¹⁰¹ (…) there is no need to passively accept everything coming from the West (…) there should be an exchange of good practices between us and the West, after all.”

Masaryk University in Brno

Masaryk University in Brno takes pride in its long-standing cooperation with many Israeli universities and institutions active in the field of Israel Studies. In order to support Czech-Israeli research, teaching, and scientific exchange, the Masaryk Distinguished Chair and The Herzl Distinguished Chair were established in cooperation with IDC Herzliya. Both Chairs are, however, solely focused on Humanities and Social Sciences.

Theoretical framework of Israel Studies: polemics on the current and future direction of the discipline

The following part intends to discuss the everlasting dilemma of institutional grounding of Israel Studies within Humanities and Social Sciences. Israel Studies might be naturally seen through the prism of area studies as a geographical part and parcel of the Middle East, thus located within universities’ Middle East departments. Alternatively, they could revolve around Jewish history and consequently belong in the Jewish Studies departments, with a focus on the Jewish Diaspora and Zionism.

According to Martin Kramer, in the US, Israel Studies tended to be marginalized within the Middle East departments of universities.¹⁰² It could be assumed that the status of Israel Studies as a fairly independent area of academic interest (i.e., the way they are portrayed by the Israel Studies Associations: AIS and EAIS) is a consequence of this particular experience. Another aspect that should not be overlooked is the “myth of exceptionalism” that portrays the Israeli case as unique and, thus, incomparable with other societies around the world. This perception is often coupled with a Eurocentrist premise that frames Israel as a European offshoot that has blossomed in the troubled area of the Middle East in spite of challenging circumstances.

Concerned with that subject, Johannes Becke calls for a complete division between the research fields of Israel and Jewish Studies, considering the latter to be “unequipped to explore the reality of Israeli politics, culture, and society.”¹⁰³ The above-mentioned, barely attained independent status of Israel Studies (or, in Becke’s words, “Israel Studies as Enclave studies”) is sustaining a “legacy of methodological exceptionalism” which threatens to deprive the field of relevance and turn it into a variation on “Afula studies.”¹⁰⁴ Becke is instead pleading for a reorientation toward Middle Eastern Studies.¹⁰⁵

Meanwhile, Anna Fontánová argues that area studies might still be contested for initially representing the infamous colonial concepts of “studying the other.” with their strongly Eurocentrist connotations. Nevertheless, according to Fontánová, the trap of Eurocentrism should also be carefully avoided in the case of Israel Studies, since reducing their scope to studying only Israel risks forming a questionable image of Israel as a Western outpost in the “flood of the Middle East.” Fontánová understands the complexity that makes the classification of Israel Studies so troublesome: “the idea of the State of Israel was conceived in Europe but its realization has taken place in the Middle East, where the State has undeniably been influenced by its surroundings. Therefore, interdisciplinary cooperation is strongly encouraged to achieve relevant research results.”¹⁰⁶

When reflecting on some major challenges which the field faces in the Czech Republic, Zbyněk Tarant mentions bureaucratic procedures as the main obstacle. “Here it is not a problem that accreditation of Israel Studies would be rejected due to antisemitism. Even those scholars who are pro-Palestinian respect the academic plurality of differing opinions. We do not deal with the same problem that is seen in the West, where student activists storm into the meetings of accreditation committees with placards accusing Israel Studies of propaganda. This is not our problem here. Instead, our issue is fitting Israel Studies into the rigid bureaucratic categories.” Tarant further explains that “despite the promises of support to interdisciplinary subjects, this support often does not go beyond declarations. In reality, a study program must be accredited to one of the large established fields and if it crosses multiple fields, the applicants are required to appeal to multiple panels at once and meet indicators such as grants or publications relevant to each respective panel. The bureaucratic process and publication requirements thus grow exponentially for such inter-disciplinary fields.”¹⁰⁷ While he questions the inclusion of Israel Studies in humanities and social sciences, Tarant understands that area studies are the most appropriate concept, which also happens to be a well-established position in the Czech academia. Eventually, he reluctantly adds that at some universities, positioning Israel Studies as area studies prevents a “certain antipathy” based on the assumption that “Jews want something special.” “Turning it at any cost into something special can be quite counterproductive,” he concludes.¹⁰⁸ Additionally, Tarant sees the inclusion of Israel Studies in the Middle Eastern area studies as an opportunity to legitimize the position of the State of Israel within its regional interactions.¹⁰⁹

Contemplating the crucial challenges facing Israel Studies in the Czech Republic and Europe, Jitka Pánek Jurková suggests one should be wary of any efforts to instrumentalize Israel Studies, both by those groups that endorse the field’s legitimacy and those that question it. Nonetheless, based on her personal experience as a former Israel Studies Ph.D. student at CU and a cultural attaché of the Israeli Embassy in Prague, Pánek Jurková maintains she has never noticed any aspirations from the official Israeli establishment to instrumentalize university chairs established abroad.“In Israel, there is a long-rooted respect for the autonomy of the academia and arts and Israeli academic milieu is traditionally oriented toward liberal ideals, often highly critical of Israel itself.”¹¹⁰

Tarant, Fontánová, and Pánek Jurková alike admit they are fully aware of the pitfalls of positioning Israel Studies within Middle Eastern Studies. Nevertheless, eventually, all of them argue in favor of the case. Pánek Jurková sees the close connection with Jewish Studies even as “detrimental” and suggests that Israel Studies should, with greater sensitivity, pay close attention to the “new Middle Eastern context and ongoing geopolitical trends.”¹¹¹ Crofony claims that Israel Studies are often mistakenly confused with “contemporary Jewish Studies.” However, she perceives establishing Israel Studies “as an independent and unique field of knowledge” as a primary challenge.¹¹²

Moreover, Pánek Jurková posits that there is a huge unexploited potential in certain segments of the academia, culture, and arts that could be employed to create a safe space for listening to each other. Such an environment might help overcome (and prevent) the conflict of polarizing perspectives which arises when we turn to Middle Eastern Studies.¹¹³

Crofony also warns against the susceptibility of Israel Studies to the influence of politics. However, she extends her claim to every scientific field and reminds us that “the production of knowledge, in Foucauldian terms, is always connected to the power and thus, is never neutral. For me as a doctoral student, it means that we need to be aware of the myth of neutrality and also explicitly reflect on our standpoint or the politics of location,” she concludes.¹¹⁴

When it comes to analyzing the position of Israel Studies vis-à-vis Jewish Studies, yet another methodological claim deserves attention. In 2018, the University of Graz hosted a conference entitled “Intersections between Jewish Studies and Israel Studies in the twenty-first Century.” As an outcome of the event, a revealing book including many differing perspectives was published.¹¹⁵

In the call for papers, the organizers specifically contemplated “whether we are witnessing a shift from Jewish Studies to Israel Studies. To what degree can Israel Studies replace or complement Jewish Studies? What are the chances and risks associated with this shift?”¹¹⁶ Even though the conference participants often disputed the relevance of such questions, the sheer fact the call for papers focused on such topics might be revealing. Needless to say, by focusing on any discourse, we are contributing to its creation. Addressing such matters as this risks implying answers. Hence, a thorough application of the reflexive methodology should precede any effort to frame or define a given topic.

To end the polemic on a conciliatory tone, one might compare the lack of clear-cut focus within Israel Studies with the phrasing of the 1917 Balfour declaration. The famous document also lacks an exact delimitation and definition of the Jewish homeland.¹¹⁷

When analyzing the genesis of the discussed field in the Czech Republic, it can be assumed that emerging research will gradually attract wider attention from both researchers and students. The author’s own personal experience as a lecturer teaching Israel Studies over the last decade strongly hints at a growing number of Czech students who express their interest in topics ranging from the situation of Arabs (Palestinians) in Israel through Halakhic rulings to the position of women in the modern Israeli society. Ph.D. students opting for such subjects are not an exception anymore.¹¹⁸ This also applies to international students from all around the world who study at Charles University. These findings can be confirmed by the number of well-attended courses launched by the recently established Herzl Center for Israel Studies at the CU, which undoubtedly provides a valuable base for teaching and research development of the field in the Czech Republic.

One major challenge for Israel Studies might be found in the aforementioned mythologization and politicization processes. Instead of grounded revisiting of metanarratives, epitomized by the “Mysterious Bond” exhibition portraying the exceptional friendship of “two small nations,” we are witnessing the surge of traditional celebratory rhetoric.

As an example of such politics-driven tensions, one may recall the circumstances around the preparations for the 2019 EAIS conference. Given the field’s susceptibility to politicization, the organizers opted to invite the Israeli ambassador as a guest of honor, but not to ask him to give the opening speech. In reaction, a senior Czech diplomat expressed strong dissatisfaction with their approach. Subsequently, their decision was interpreted as a concession to unwelcome progressive Western influences.

Such a hyper-protective approach toward Czech-Israeli relations could be interpreted in the light of the Czech’s ambiguous self-perception within the European Union. Following this train of thought, one might notice subtle feelings of unappreciation and insufficient acceptance of the Czech Republic as a member state of equal importance. At the same time, Czechs seem keen to participate in “Israeli exceptionalism.” The role of a self-appointed renegade still occasionally resonates with the Czech mental landscape, fueling the tendency to back Israel unconditionally in the international arena. The opening of a “fully-fledged diplomatic mission” in West Jerusalem may serve as the latest example of such attitudes.

As the threat of politicization is obviously intrinsic to many other fields, the deep undercurrents of persisting, nostalgic affection should always be borne in mind when Israel Studies are considered as a field of academic research in the Czech Republic.

Israel Studies in Germany: between financial shortage and pluralistic approaches

Unsurprisingly, the genesis of Israel Studies in Germany shares certain peculiar similarities with the emergence of political and social relations between the two countries. Dressing it into positive phrases, insiders and outsiders speak of a “special relationship” from the very beginning – a wording that leaves room for many interpretations.¹¹⁹ In view of the extremely different formative conditions of both states – Israel and postwar Germany (bipartite) – at the end of the 1940s, it is still disputed to what extent the relations between both countries can be normal. Is the same true for Israel Studies?

It took until 1965 for the diplomatic relations between Israel and the Federal Republic of Germany to be established. Developing relevant academic ties required even more time. Former Oriental Studies departments and, to an even greater extent, those (Christian) Theological Faculties that had dealt with the “Judaist” tradition, turned their attention to the newly established State of Israel. Christian theologians had an additional motive to do so after the Holocaust: given that Christian-Jewish relations had been failing in Europe for so many centuries and that the churches did not intervene against the genocidal anti-Jewish politics of the Nazis in World War II, it became even more important to learn and study contemporary Jewish life, including the modern Jewish nation-state.

Israel as a focal point for Judaic and Jewish Studies: dominant intellectual traditions, historiographic approaches, and disciplinary frameworks

It is therefore hardly surprising that the young State of Israel first appeared – as a subject of academic/scientific interest – in departments of (Christian) theology. Committed Protestant theologians and professors developed distinct programs on Israel for their students. Some went as far as declaring that a certain form of study of modern Israel should become an essential part of every student’s theological education. Protestant theologians, in particular, pushed for cooperation between German theology departments and Israeli universities. In 1978, scholars Peter von der Osten-Sacken, Rolf Rendtorff, Martin Stöhr, and Michael Krupp launched a program entitled “Study in Israel” (Studium in Israel) for German theology students of several Christian congregations. The program still operates today.¹²⁰

From the 1960s, the traditional modules of “Judaic Studies” in departments of theology were supplemented by a new field of Jewish Studies. The latter developed into a stand-alone discipline at several West German universities (Berlin, Cologne, Frankfurt). Similar development at East German (G.D.R.) universities was unthinkable throughout the Cold War. No departments of Jewish Studies existed there at all. When theological faculties (or individual theologians) developed a (scientific) interest in the modern State of Israel, it was seen as their private issue (and risk). Israel Studies as a professional discipline of area studies was also illusive, all the more since the G.D.R. did not form any diplomatic relations with Israel. The few publications on Israel from that era focused primarily on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict¹²¹ or simply painted the Jewish State as a militant, violent actor.¹²² Nonetheless, a very small department (named “Hebraistics”) was established at Humboldt University in East Berlin. It combined an intense interest in the modern Hebrew language with a focus on literature, area studies of Israel as a Middle Eastern state, the history of Zionism, and “Jewish culture” (as the term “religion” was diligently avoided). The number of students was extremely limited and academic exchange with Israeli scientific institutions was not initiated.

However, after the fall of the Berlin Wall and German reunification, it was precisely this small department of Hebraistics at Humboldt University that successfully transformed itself into a department of Modern Israel Studies (or, in German, “Israelwissenschaften”). The opening of Israel Studies at Humboldt University in 1992 briefly looked promising. Huge interest among students of quite different backgrounds confirmed the plausibility of the concept and the scope of possible combinations with other disciplines made it even more attractive. Students could, for example, combine Israel Studies with History, Politics, Journalism, Cultural Science, but also with Islamic Studies – an option particularly appreciated by those who wanted to specialize in Middle East Studies, intercultural topics, or even conflict resolution. The core of the curriculum, however, centered around Israeli politics and society.

Unfortunately, only six years later, in 1998, “Israelwissenschaften” became the victim of the first serious budgetary cuts in reunified Berlin. The institute was quietly shut down amid unsuccessful protests from several political and social groups as well as students.¹²³

After the closure of the department at Humboldt University, there was a renewed debate over how to adequately deal with Israel Studies in the modern academic landscape. All attempts to build a similar structure at other universities proved futile, be it due to a lack of political will and prospects or budgetary restraints. Gradually, the discussion shifted toward the resurgent departments of Jewish studies which developed particularly dynamically at several universities in former G.D.R. For example, the Universities of Potsdam, Halle, and Leipzig sought to build Israel Studies programs, albeit with varying intensity and relying primarily on the commitment of individual scholars. Structures similar to those existing in the U.S. remained merely a Utopian vision.

In this context, it is not surprising that seminal works, studies, and publications on the modern State of Israel were authored by a few select scholars, such as the political scientist Abraham Ashkenasi¹²⁴ at the Free University of Berlin, historian Michael Brenner¹²⁵ at the University of Munich, historian Michael Wolffsohn¹²⁶ at the University of the Bundeswehr in Munich, educationist Micha Brumlik¹²⁷ at the Goethe Institute in Frankfurt and Angelika Timm,¹²⁸ who chaired the Israelwissenschaften at Humboldt University Berlin up to its closure. In a certain manner, these scholars (along with several others) could – at least partially – compensate for the obvious deficiencies in researching and teaching Israel Studies in Germany at the time. Nonetheless, the idea of establishing modern Israel Studies as an independent field of academic work or simply institutionalizing it at any German university remained a far-fetched wish for at least a couple more years. It was the emergence of new, hotly debated issues related to modern Israel (the role of religion in Israeli politics, the impact on Russian-speaking Jews from the former Soviet Union, European-Israeli relations, the Second Intifada, Israel and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in the German media) that accelerated and inspired further development of Israel Studies.

In recent years, another batch of diverse topics related to today’s Israel appeared on the German academic agenda, including critical studies of Israeli politics toward the Palestinians (both inside and outside Israel), the Gender movement, Feminism and LGBT in Israel, transnationalism, Israel and its own “(Israeli) Diaspora.” The latter context also generated a surprising phenomenon in the form of intense interest in the Israelis presently living in Germany. In fact, a research project on “Migration of Israeli Jews to Germany since 1990” funded by the German Israeli Foundation (GIF) and implemented in cooperation with the University of Wuppertal as well as the Hebrew University of Jerusalem between 2014 and 2018, became one of the still rare, more in-depth and comprehensive empirical studies on Israel and the Israelis to be initiated (at least in part) by German scholars (also see below).

Israeli scholars became increasingly interested in joint research projects with their German counterparts and institutions. Their attention turned, for instance, to the wave of Russian-speaking Jewish immigrants from the Soviet Union whose rhetoric targeted not only Israel and the United States but increasingly also Germany (Eliezer Ben-Rafael, Larissa Remennick), the politics of memory in both countries (Irit Dekel) and, for the first time, also to the Israelis moving to Berlin (Fania Oz-Salzberger).

Other scholars began to focus on German-Israeli relations and perceptions, far away from the routine political contacts and the well-organized exchange programs in politics, economy, culture, and sports. A survey initiated by the Bertelsmann Foundation¹²⁹ and conducted in both countries yielded some surprising results. While especially younger Israeli age groups increasingly developed an interest in and sympathy toward contemporary Germany, their German peers were distanced from Israel for complex reasons. Follow-up studies are needed to find out whether these divergent trends are stable – and, if so, why they are so markedly disparate.

Meanwhile, many Ph.D. dissertations focusing on the modern State of Israel have been defended at German Universities. Their focus has varied from religion and society to urban development, Israel in the German media, immigration to Israel, and past and present German-Israeli relations. Many of them offer potential space for follow-up studies.

At the same time, it seems that the academic and institutional structures have not been able to keep up with these dynamics. More than ever, there is a great demand for an interdisciplinary institute of modern Israel Studies, bringing together experts in Zionism, Hebrew language and literature, Israeli arts and economy, political scientists, and experts in security research. For the time being, local academic initiatives are bridging the structural gap.

Institutionalization of Israel Studies in Germany: scholarly achievements and teaching experience

The University of Munich established a Center for Israel Studies in 2015, providing it with an interdisciplinary conceptualization and clear intentions of international cooperation. The Center is, however, organized under the Department for Jewish History and Culture.¹³⁰ Since 2009, the Hochschule für Jüdische Studien Heidelberg (University of Jewish Studies in Heidelberg) has kept a Ben Gurion Endowed Chair for Israel and Middle East Studies.¹³¹ The Moses Mendelssohn Center for European-Jewish Studies at the University of Potsdam¹³² maintains a visiting professorship in Israel Studies (biannual), funded by the German Ministry of Science since 2012 and supported by the Selma Stern Center Berlin.¹³³

Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik (German Institute for International and Security Affairs) is another body strongly involved in the studies and discourse on current trends in Israeli society (within the Africa and Middle East Research Division).¹³⁴ Its work often highlights the complexity of problems and challenges facing such a small state with a diverse population in terms of ethnicity, politics, culture, and religion, especially given the volatility of the region.

While the aforementioned initiatives are often worthwhile, their far-reaching, diverse foci call for linkup work and attempts at synergizing, not least for the sake of students, Ph.D. candidates and junior researchers, who are still in search of their specific areas of expertise and opportunities for applying their research results.

Much of Israel Studies in Germany naturally revolves around the relations between Israel and Germany (in several distinct spheres of society and life). Some blind spots in researching their past ties remain, including the surprisingly early beginning of intelligence cooperation (from the 1950s onwards), intelligence operations during the Cold War (in both countries), secret deliveries of arms and military cooperation in general, German experiences in volunteer services in Israel (since the 1960s) or the history of German-Israeli cooperation in science.

Beyond this, two relevant long-term research topics are the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as well as the past, present, and future European-Israeli relations. At a closer look, the two subjects are very much intertwined. The periodic escalations of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict (especially in Gaza and the West Bank) cause repercussions in Europe and affect the public discourse as well as the political arena. For a long time, European politicians and leaders were also inclined to act as mediators between the two camps, although Europe is nowadays losing ground and importance as an on-site protagonist.

However, the unresolved Israeli-Palestinian conflict is only one of the meaningful and continual topics connecting Europe and the Jewish State. There are also dynamic developments in the bilateral relations between Israel and specific EU-member states (for example the Visegrad states) as well as cases of alienation or even conflict (e.g., with Sweden). Germany generally performs the function of forging connections within and outside the EU,¹³⁵ including in matters of global diplomacy. Thus, at least some determinants of German-Israeli relations cannot be considered without noting Germany’s role and position in the European Union.

Disputes over basic research and methodology

It seems that despite the aforementioned developments, basic research is still missing from the discipline. To quote one of its pioneers, Michael Wolffsohn: “In German science – and that includes the Israel Studies – Israel was written and commented on, more than actually explored, in contrast to what was happening in the Anglo-Saxon countries and of course, Israel itself.”¹³⁶ Some scholars agree with Wolffsohn, pointing to the lack of earlier empirical examination, as much of the research is limited to microstudies. Historical research is considered important but does not cover the entire agenda. Finally, there is the odd chapter on the “exoticization” of Israelis from a German perspective and the special relations of some non-Jewish Germans to Israel (for historical, religious, and other reasons). However, none of these topics have been explored systematically.

From the methodological perspective, there appears to be a huge demand for developing more multidisciplinarity and, ideally, combining it with continuing research positions and maximum academic independence. Congruencies, as well as distinct odds between Jewish Studies and Israel Studies, have to be defined in more detail. This is all the more important since students enrolling in Israel and/or Jewish Studies in Germany come with different interests and motives, and from various backgrounds. In contrast to other countries, students of these subjects in Germany often have a non-Jewish background but are nonetheless strongly interested in topics of Jewish/Israeli history and present. Even the issue of religious conversion has become a huge point of academic interest in this context.¹³⁷ As the Potsdam scholar of Israel Studies Ines Sonder concludes, for many German students, interest in modern Israel Studies is clearly connected with specific topics, for example, the impact of the Jewish immigration (aliyot) on the Yishuv and later to the State of Israel, the cultural clash between Ashkenazim and Mizrachim, myth and reality of the kibbutzim, religion in politics and society, gender roles in Israel, history of Israeli culture and arts as well as the emergence of an Israeli diaspora in Europe.¹³⁸

This distinct interest also reflects the subject clusters selected by the students, many of whom are studying in parallel to Jewish and/or Israel Studies history, politics, the science of religions, theology,¹³⁹ sociology, literature, conflict research, journalism, and pedagogics.¹⁴⁰ Similar interests are also to be found in the dissertation works of German Ph.D. candidates continuing their development in the field of Israel (and Jewish Studies). Since intercultural studies and research on ethnocultural minorities are gaining increasing importance in both countries, future combinations of Jewish studies, Israel Studies, and Islamic studies appear as a worthwhile experiment, too.¹⁴¹ Regarding the growing interest in Islamic Studies in Germany, possibly connected with the growing Muslim community in the country, it seems, at least in the long run, expedient to establish an Institute for Palestine Studies, ideally at a university where Israel Studies are already present.¹⁴²

External impulses: Israeli Diaspora, rising antisemitism, Palestine Studies

Let us once again return to the question posited earlier: to what extent are Israel Studies in Germany entangled with the political relations between both states? Indeed, some bilateral issues can affect both political and academic discourse with the same intensity and sharpness. An illustrative example is the study by Dani Kranz and Uzi Rebhun, “Israeli Jews in Contemporary Germany: Social Integration and the Construction of a Group Identity.”¹⁴³ On the one hand, the study made it clear that the issue of Israeli “migration” to Germany is rather exaggerated in the media. On the other hand, the authors admit it is a new reality and outline the multidirectional impacts on society and public discourse. Especially the case of a growing Israeli community in Berlin raises the issues of a new, unexpected (Israeli-)Jewish diaspora in the former “Reichshaupstadt” (Nazi capital). Kranz and Rebhun have convincingly shown that especially young, highly qualified, and secular Israelis tend to make Berlin their home. This sows discord in both directions. At least some parts of the Israeli political establishment disapprove of the trend, while some of the “new Berliners” use their adopted home and the distance it affords them to criticize the politics and society of their homeland. Admittedly, the study could be designated as part of “Diaspora studies” or “transnational studies” rather than covering “core topics” of Israel Studies. However, the funding of the study by the German Israeli Foundation shows also a strong political interest in exploring the phenomenon.

Another significant entanglement between politics and social science that has directly affected Israel’s present reality has been the study on “Jew Hatred on the Internet,” published by the Berlin philologist Monika Schwarz-Friesel one year ago.¹⁴⁴ Schwarz-Friesel and her team came to the conclusion that hatred toward Israel is the most accepted form of current Jew-hatred, both in Germany and beyond. Once again, this study could instead be labeled as “research on antisemitism” or as “studies on prejudice,” but hatred toward Israel emerges as a peculiar element, similar to how antisemitism is present in research on group-related enmity in Germany. The long-standing and complicated dispute on whether research on antisemitism is a legitimate part of Jewish Studies might be seen as analogous to the problem of integrating studies on hatred toward the State of Israel into Israel Studies.

In this context, the last example shall highlight the (real or alleged) overlaps of spillover effects of the Israel-Palestinian conflict, (political) pro- and contra-Israel initiatives, rivalry for interpretive dominance, and scholarly positioning. In May 2019, the German parliament (Bundestag) passed a resolution condemning the anti-Israel Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) campaign, referring to antisemitic forces inside the movement. The Bundestag recommended political bodies and public administration distance themselves from BDS and avoid cooperation. While a huge majority of the parliamentarians backed the resolution, a critical public debate continues until today. Especially artists, along with some intellectuals and renowned scholars (Jews and non-Jews), present the resolution as a counterproductive action endangering freedom and diversity of opinions.

Distinguished scholars from the area of Israel Studies rarely participate in the dispute. This is a notable contrast to what happens in the media, where the conflict is prioritized. However, a few scholars of Israel Studies feel a strong need to reach a broader audience in Germany to address perceived deficits of knowledge in public discourse on Israel and its conflicts. Thus, for example, Daniel Mahla from the Center for Israel Studies at the University of Munich states: “The public debate on Israel is often informed by a rather shallow knowledge of the state and its history. During the last years/decades, we have witnessed a strange tension between public announcements and political declarations, which are often strongly positive and hesitant to express any criticism of concrete policies, and on the other hand, the fact that more and more Germans hold highly critical or negative opinions of the state and especially its policies toward the Palestinians. Israel Studies can make a crucial contribution in this regard, as the knowledge and critical analysis of modern Israel help challenge preconceptions and paint a more complicated and diverse picture of Israeli society and state.”¹⁴⁵ Mahla sees a creative academic potential inside Israel Studies in Germany for contributing to more objective debates on Israel. Some of his colleagues, e.g., Peter Lintl from the Berlin-based foundation Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik (SWP), are concerned “that polarization and partisanship are becoming stronger in the field.” Working against polarization – even as opinions on various topics are bound to be different – is in Lintl’s eyes “one of the most important tasks of the field and its protagonists itself.”¹⁴⁶

Another similarly significant challenge emerges in the shape of the unanswered question about the scope(s) and limits of possible interdisciplinarity in Israel Studies. There seems to be a consensus that the idea of Israel Studies as a “pure,” country-specific field is unsatisfying. At the margins of the “core issues,” historians, ethnologists, cultural anthropologists, conflict researchers, philologists, and scholars of religion continue to find their specific topics of interest. Dani Kranz, the aforementioned leading coresearcher of the G.I.F.-funded study on Israeli Jews in Germany, shares her understanding of Israel Studies in the following words, “I look at Israel as an anthropologist who is interested in ethnicity, migration, integration, state, law, and politics: Israel is good to think about with ‘bonne à penser’ in the sense of Claude Levi-Strauss. I think one needs to look at the Israeli experience in a wider frame of things. I do not think mere national studies are that promising, they make for methodological nationalism and an odd exceptionalism.”¹⁴⁷

When in search of a future profile for Israel Studies in Germany, it seems reasonable to work toward at least one or two independent centers and institutions of Israel Studies while at the same time keeping interdisciplinary ties with Jewish Studies as a corresponding field on top. For Israel Studies in Germany, it might also be useful to expand cooperation with European, Middle East, and Palestine Studies. Peter Lintl presents that idea in a nutshell by stating: “What is lacking is a stronger integration of Conflict Studies, the conflict with the Palestinians and, in that context, also expertise from a Palestinian perspective. Since Israel is so entangled with Palestinians, there are quite a few topics where it is hardly possible to separate Israel Studies also from something like Palestinian Studies.”¹⁴⁸

We can also expect that such a specification and widening of the scope might increase or at least stabilize the number of enrollments in Israel Studies and Jewish Studies, which have recently been declining.

Conclusions

This article analyzed the genesis and current developments of Israel Studies in three Central European countries: Poland, Czechia, and Germany, all of which were, at least partially, formerly trapped in the Moscow-dominated, communist Eastern bloc. The latter state has permanently struggled to come to terms with its Nazi past and role as the aggressor in World War II and the perpetrator of the Holocaust. At a closer look, however, it turns out that all three states have made claims regarding their alleged special relationship with Israel from the early days of their modern statehood until the present day. The relations between the Czech Republic (previously Czechoslovakia) and the State of Israel are often characterized as a very unique form of friendship between two small nations and are sometimes even romantically viewed as fated and unconditional. However, after the Velvet Revolution, the often mutually exclusive, bilateral, and steadily growing academic, diplomatic, and business exchanges provided an authentic framework without uprooting the original myth. Polish-Israeli relations are considered unique in three distinct aspects: the heritage of shared (Jewish) history, the supposed role of “countries forced by circumstances to be realistic in understanding international conflicts,” and a pragmatic, mostly economically-driven cooperation. For Germany, the dictum of a “negative symbiosis,”¹⁴⁹ typical for the complicated relations between (non-Jewish) Germans and Jews after Auschwitz, might continue to affect the relations with Israel even today, although Germany’s cooperation, mutual exchanges, and political ties with Israel are superior compared to those enjoyed by most other European countries.

Once three geographically close countries declare presumed special bonds, it may give an impression of a rare yet somehow understandable coincidence. However, Becke argues that such a perception of the exceptional nature of relations is more a norm than an exception, adding that Israel Studies scholars in both “India and Germany will emphasize the special nature of (…) [bilateral] ties.”¹⁵⁰ If this notion applies, the alleged uniqueness would be obviously rather of an imaginary nature. Nevertheless, undeniably, in the respective environments of the three chosen countries, the metanarratives have already become deeply rooted and have taken their own paths, producing a strong impact on the Weltanschauung and established self-perceptions of the nations in question.

Yet through the course of the analysis it was possible to indicate key variables and drives of the Israel studies development in respective countries based on researchers’ comparative analysis (Table 3). In the following paragraphs, the original research questions/(A), (B), (C)/, posed at the beginning of this article, will be introduced.

Table 3. Variables and drives of the Israeli studies development in respective countries based on researchers’ comparative analysis.

	Poland	Czechia	Germany
European Jewish History	***	***	***
Political ties with the State of Israel	**	**	*
Impact of the European integration and the EU approach to Israel	**	***	*
Importance of the Middle Eastern dimension of the studies and key topics related to the Middle Eastern regional dynamics	**	**	**
Professionalization and pragmatization of studies on contemporary Israel	**	**	***

*irrelevant.

**relevant.

***significant.

A) Dominant intellectual traditions, historiographic approaches, and disciplinary frameworks

While all these “special relationships” – whether real or imagined – have influenced Polish, German, and Czech academic interest in Israel throughout recent decades, they have not necessarily defined it. Pre-fields and catalysts for modern Israel Studies in the three countries are derived not only from politics and diplomacy but also, for example, from (Christian) theology, “Judaistic” studies, and, beginning from the late twentieth century, also Jewish Studies (especially in Germany). In all three countries, protagonists and pioneers of Israel Studies have been (and still are) in a difficult position as they strive to establish an independent academic discipline. However, the uncertain status of Israel Studies presents simultaneously problems and opportunities. There seems to be a near consensus among the Central European academia that Israel Studies are – and should be – a research field of multidisciplinary composition, including, among others, (Zionist and Israeli) history, politics, (Jewish) religious studies, cultural studies, modern Hebrew (and Arabic) linguistics/literature, cultural anthropology, and many others. Controversy continues around the “ideal” proportions of the components listed above as well as Israel Studies’ relations to its neighboring disciplines, primarily Jewish Studies, Middle Eastern Studies, Social Sciences, and (possibly with growing importance) Palestine Studies.

B) Teaching and research environment of Israel Studies in Central Europe

The content-specific and structural determinants within the Israel Studies in Poland, Germany, and the Czech Republic appear quite distinctive, regardless of the (deplorable) fact that fully-fledged and independent institutes of Israel Studies do not yet exist or are only in their infancy. Multidisciplinary studies on contemporary Israel carried out at academic centers in all three countries are rather fragmented in terms of their institutional shape. It can therefore be said that as a research field, Israel Studies remain an area in statu nascendi rather than a mature and independent discipline.

At several Polish universities, there is an impressive number of positions dedicated to Israel Studies. However, almost all of them concentrate on political studies, economics or are located within the framework of Middle East Studies. In Czechia, Israel Studies are partly connected with Jewish/Holocaust and cultural/literature studies, and also partly linked to political science and international relations. In Germany, Israel Studies are strongly connected with university departments of Jewish Studies or Jewish History.

The fact that Israel Studies have such different anchoring points in the three countries in question (or sometimes even at various universities within a single country) might be seen as carrying certain benefits of pluralism. At the same time, for students and/or PhD candidates, it may also generate problems when it comes to selecting a specific orientation. Especially in Germany, the discussion on whether Israel Studies could be integrated under the roof of Jewish Studies seems fruitless. Israel Studies are multidisciplinary by their nature – much like Jewish Studies, although the two are obviously far removed from each other in some facets.

When it comes to discernible research foci of contemporary Israel Studies in Poland, Germany, and the Czech Republic, specific intersections with respective “neighboring fields” clearly crystallize: In Poland, with the social sciences and (to a certain degree) contemporary history; in Germany, with Jewish History, Jewish Studies, and religious studies; and in the Czech Republic, the research focus is echoing the areas where Israel Studies are being taught.

In all three countries, we find the history of Zionism logically as an integral part of the teaching programs/courses in Israel Studies.

A controversial discussion also continues with regard to the amount of sufficiently grounded, empirical research (such as that conducted by Anglo-Saxon and Israeli scholars) or the supposed overabundance of descriptive work and publications on contemporary Israel and Israeli society. This, however, might be again a problem of politics (especially academic politics) or a problem of resources and funding.

Regarding academic teaching and students’ specializations, it is emerging that a considerable number of students are primarily interested in aspects of modern Israeli society, ethnocultural developments, migration, Israeli-European (and country-specific) relations, state and religion, or the Israeli Diaspora. A certain portion of students also focuses on the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The latter trend seems more prevalent in Germany while being less present in Poland and the Czech Republic.

Beyond students’ interests, a general discussion is in progress on whether the Israeli-Palestinian conflict should gain more importance in the curricula. The outcome of this debate, however, seems completely open in all of the countries in question. Should the conflict gain more attention also within the departments of Israel Studies, a closer bridging with Middle East Studies, Conflict Studies and Palestine Studies (under construction) might be of mutual enrichment.

In addition, current trends of growing antisemitism in Europe (including the EU) raise the question about if and how to integrate Antisemitism Studies into this discipline. This seems likely when considering that among all kinds of antisemitic expression in Europe, Israel-focused hatred recurs most frequently across the continent.

C) Potential entanglement of the discipline with political ties to the State of Israel and its consequences

Even though an immediate impact of the current diplomatic changes or ongoing political crises (like the one between Poland and Israel) on Israel Studies has not been observed, it would be highly recommended to revisit this topic periodically in the near future. Furthermore, a careful analysis of such potential developments would also require parallel research on the evolution of Czech, Polish, and German Studies at Israeli Universities.

At the same time, the example of the 2019 European Association of Israel Studies annual conference in Prague clearly shows that the integrity of the discipline is constantly challenged by the omnipresent risk of politicization and instrumentalization of this area on the part of political actors on both sides.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

The research for this publication was supported by a grant from the Priority Research Area Heritage under the Strategic Program Excellence Initiative at Jagiellonian University and by the grant EUphony [2022-1-CZ01-KA220-HED-000089285] “Jews, Muslims, and Roma in the 21st Century Metropolises: Reflecting on Polyphonic Ideal and Social Exclusion as Challenges for European Cohesion.”

Notes on contributors

Joanna Dyduch

Joanna Dyduch is an associate professor at the Institute of Middle and Far East, Jagiellonian University in Krakow, where she chairs the Department of Israel. Her research interests focus on intersections between international relations and public policies. She specialises in Israel Studies, with a particular focus on Israel’s foreign policy and its relations with Europe. Most recently, she has been working on a research project devoted to the impact of history on contemporary political international relations, examining a case study of Israel’s relations with Poland in the wider context of Polish-Jewish relations, their historical legacy and heritage. Joanna in the past was a Visiting Scholar at Maryland University, USA (2022); the University of Potsdam, Germany (2020); Matej Bel University in Banska Bystrica, Slovakia (2019); University of Vienna, Austria (2017); and a research fellow of the German Institute for International and Security Affairs (SWP) (2018). From May 2023 until January 2024 she is based at the Oxford Centre for Jewish and Hebrew Studies, University of Oxford as a part of the NAWA Bekker Scholarship Programme. From 2019-2022, she served as the President of the European Association for Israeli Studies and, since 2021, she has been a Member of the Board of Directors of the Association of Israel Studies.

Marcela Menachem Zoufalá

Marcela Menachem Zoufalá, PhD is a cultural anthropologist, lecturer, and researcher at the Centre for the Study of the Holocaust and Jewish Literature, Faculty of Arts, Charles University. Her research interests include Jewish and Israel Studies, precisely the quality of life of contemporary European Jewish communities in the context of a sense of belonging, transnationalism, and antisemitism. In the field of Israel Studies, her research interests combine Mizrahi Studies, ethnicity, and gender. Recently, she has focused on Jewish-Muslim relations from a transurban comparative perspective. Marcela (co-)authored and (co-)edited a number of monographs and articles. She is a principal investigator of the international cooperative research project: Jews, Muslims, and Roma in the 21st Century Metropolises. She is also a member of the Jewish and Muslim Minorities in Urban Spaces of Central Europe research team. Marcela is the European Association of Israel Studies's vice president (2023-2026).

Olaf Glöckner

Olaf Glöckner, PhD, is a Senior Researcher at the Moses Mendelssohn Centre for European-Jewish Studies in Potsdam (MMZ). He is also Lecturer at the Historical Institute and at the Department of Jewish Studies at the University of Potsdam. Glöckner’s main foci of research are on Jewish Migration, European Jewry after 1989/90, German-Israeli relations and modern anti-Semitism. Glöckner has also worked for several Jewish journals and papers in Germany, including “Jüdische Allgemeine” and “Zukunft”. Glöckner has worked and participated in several empirical studies on Jewish migration, Jewish education, and Jewish experiences with modern anti-Semitism (incl. Studies on Antisemitism for the Fundamental Rights Agency 2012/13 and 2017/18). Currently he is involved in the EU-funded projects “’United in Diversity’ – An Interdisciplinary Study of Contemporary European Jewry and its Reflection” and ”Euphony - Jews, Muslims and Roma in the 21st Century Metropolises” as well as in the joint research project “ASJust – Struggling of the Judiciary in Germany with anti-Semitism”. Among Glöckners recent publications: Being Jewish in 21st Century Central Europe. Berlin/Boston 2020 (ed. together with Haim Fireberg and Marcela Menachem Zoufalá); Das neue Unbehagen. Antisemitismus in Deutschland heute. OLMS, Hildesheim 2019 (hrsg. zus. mit Günther Jikeli).

Notes

1. The authors owe gratitude to editors and anonymous reviewers for some significant suggestions that enriched the whole text immensely.

2. One of the indispensable qualitative research tools is an expert interview which was selected as the most suitable for this particular investigation. We attempted to emphasize experts’ unique views impacting social practices in a field in focus. Following a complex debate, it was determined beneficial for our readership to openly introduce most of the experts (our respondents/conversation partners) under their real names, as this might be of interest in the context of their professional activities, affiliations, and publishing. However, once the respondents’ names were to be revealed, their statements’ interpretation and analysis had to become more subtle, or even latent, clearly differing from the interpretation of anonymized accounts. Such statements are naturally not treated in the same manner as those coming from anonymous respondents. It was taken into account that our conversation partners are primarily individual personalities with established academic networks and reputations. Due to this choice, the original research behind this article partly relies on explicit expert knowledge rather than implicit one.

3. Reza, Potentials and Limitations, 113-125. Beck, The Comparative Method, 533–554.

4. On factors shaping relations between Israel and Central and Eastern European states, see: Dyduch, Die Visegrád-Staaten, 352–353.

5. Rubin, Unfinished Business, 45.

6. For more on Polish-Israeli relations in the communist period, see: Szaynok, Poland-Israel;Rudnicki and Silber, Stosunki polsko-izraelskie.

7. Detailed elaboration and analysis on trajectories of Jewish studies development in Poland in: Wodziński, Jewish Studies,102.

8. Wodziński, Interview.

9. More on Polish-Israeli relations in the field of science in 1990’s: Dyduch, Stosunki, 252-263.

10. Among the most relevant examples are (in chronological order): Bensimon and Eglal, Żydzii Arabowie;Gelvin, Konflikt; Shindler, Historia.

11. Chojnowski and Tomaszewski, Izrael.

12. Gebert, Miejsce pod słońcem.

13. Smoleński, Izrael już nie frunie.

14. Bryc, Izrael 2020.

15. Aleksiun, Dokąd dalej? Ruch syjonistyczny w Polsce.

16. Surzyn, Antysemityzm, emancypacja, syjonizm.

17. Sroka, Interview.

18. Sroka and Sroka, Polskie korzenie Izraela.

19. Wodziński, Interview.

20. Most prominent examples of scholars examining the history of the ‘Polish diaspora in Israel’ include Łukasz T. Sroka (Pedagogical University of Cracow), E. Kosssewska (University of Warsaw) and B. Szaynok (University of Wroclaw).

21. 3^rd Interview this is too cryptic – if the interviewee chose to be anonymous at least give us their general position. (Anonymous interviewee affiliated to an academic center based in Warsaw, December 12, 2020).

22. Szaynok, Poland-Israel.

23. Rudnicki and Silber, Stosunki polsko-izraelskie.

24. Dyduch, Stosunki.

25. Among the publication representing the highest quality of scholarship analyzing the Palestinian-Israeli issue one may recall: Bojko and Góra, Wybrane aspekty; Bojko, Izrael a aspiracje Palestyńczyków.

26. E.g., Szydzisz, Sekurytyzacja.

27. E.g.. Rudnik, Państwo Izrael.

28. Eg., Dyduch and Olszewska, Israeli Innovation.Chaczko and Iwińska, Innowacyjne.

29. E.g., Dudzińska, Tożsamość żydowska.

30. E.g., Chaczko, et. al., Demokracja izraelska.

31. E.g., Hic, Prawo ustrojowe Izraela; Rataj, Sąd Najwyższy Izraela.

32. E.g., Szydzisz and Pokrzywiński, Szas; Skorek,

33. As for examples of high quality monographs and edited volumes on Israel see: Albin and Tokarz (eds). Izrael i Autonomia Palestyńska;Skorek, Żydowskie ugrupowania religijne; Czapnik and Omelan (eds.), Żydzi, Izrael i Palestyńczycy.

34. Zielińska, Israeli Development Aid.

35. See: Marzec and Sliż, The Specificity of Polish and Israeli Start-Ups.

36. At the moment, these positions are occupied by K. Zielińska and M. Matusiak.

37. Since July 2020 there are only 5 permanent positions..

38. See. “Zarządzenie nr 66 Rektora Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego z 24 września 2018 roku w sprawie utworzenia Pracowni Studiów nad Współczesnym Izraelem i Stosunkami Polsko-Izraelskimi im. Teodora Herzla i Ozjasza Thona w Instytucie Judaistyki Wydział Historycznego UJ” [Directive no. 66 issued by of the Jagiellonian University Rector on September 24th, 2018 on the establishment of the Theodor Herzl & Ozjasz Thon Center for Studies on Contemporary Israel and Polish-Israeli Relations in the Institute of Jewish Studies, Faculty of History, Jagiellonian University], accessed January 10, 2021

39. See: “Umowa między Rządem Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej a Rządem Państwa Izrael o współpracy kulturalnej, naukowej i oświatowej, podpisana w Jerozolimie dnia 22 maja 1991 r” [Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Poland and the Government of the State of Israel on cultural, scientific and educational cooperation, signed in Jerusalem on May 22, 1991], accessed January 08, 2021, http://isap.sejm.gov.pl/isap.nsf/DocDetails.xsp?id=WDU19920160060.

40. In recent editions, following options of scholarships were available on an annual basis: five specialist scholarships for an eight-month research stay in Israel for students with a minimum bachelor’s degree and young scientists, one scholarship for an eight-month research stay in Israel for students and researchers representing various fields, four scholarships for a summer Hebrew language course, the so-called ulpan.

41. “Rządowe stypendia naukowe w Izraelu” [Government research scholarships in Israel], accessed January 8, 2021, https://nawa.gov.pl/images/Informacja-o-rzadowych-stypendiach-naukowych-w-Izraelu-2018-2019_copy.pdf.

42. Agata Bader, Head of the bilateral cooperation team, Office of Programmes for Scientists, The National Agency for Academic Exchange, email to author, December 18, 2020.

43. Fundacja Rozwoju Systemu Edukacji (FRSE), Narodowa Agencja Programu Erasmus+ na lata 2014-2020. Statistics on cooperation with partner countries (KA107) between 2015 and 2017 are available online at: https://www.frse.org.pl/badania/(accessed January 8, 2021). As the agreements dated from 2018 onwards are still being implemented, no corresponding statistical data has been published as of yet.

44. European Association of Israel Studies, accessed January 8, 2021, https://www.israelstudies.eu/.

45. See: Special Issue of the Polish Political Science Yearbook on Israel Studies vol. 47(2) (2018), accessed January 8, 2021, https://czasopisma.marszalek.com.pl/pl/10-15804/ppsy/533-vol-47/issue-2.

46. T. Herzl and O. Thon Center on Israel Studies and Polish-Israeli Relations at the Institute of Jewish Studies, Jagiellonian University, accessed January 14, 2021. http://www.judaistyka.uj.edu.pl/pracownia-badan-nad-wspolczesnym-izraelem-oraz-relacjami-polsko-izraelskimi.

47. The Herzl Center for Israel Studies (HCIS), Faculty of Social vs, Charles University, accessed January 12, 2021, https://herzl.cuni.cz/HERZL-1.html.

48. The Theodor Herzl Center for Israeli Studies - SNSPA, Romania, Bucharest, accessed January 8, 2021, http://csis.snspa.ro/.

49. The Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement (BDS) is a Palestinian-led movement promoting boycotts, divestments, and economic sanctions against Israel.

50. Muslim population in Poland is estimated to be less than 10,000 people. For more, see: Pew Research Center Demographic Study, accessed January 8, 2021, https://www.pewforum.org/2017/11/29/europes-growing-muslim-population/.

51. This has a lot to do with a lack of historical burdens related to colonialism and strong pro-American stance in Polish security policy.

52. Dyduch, Israel and East Central Europe.

53. On the occasion of the 30th anniversary of the renewal of diplomatic relations between the Czech Republic and Israel, the Embassy of the State of Israel, together with the Czech Ministry of Foreign Affairs, launched an exhibition titled “Mysterious bond” that was introduced in the following manner: [“The exhibition] visualizes the mysterious and deep bond, that has existed between the Czech and the Jewish nation for centuries.” (source: Prague Castle website) The Embassy of the State of Israel invited Czech spectators with similar words: “The bond which is mysterious and deep is not arising from a calculation, ‘a quid pro quo,’ but it is reaching back to the very onsets.” (Embassy of the State of Israel in the Czech Republic, Email Newsletter, March 2020) The exhibition was followed by a book of the same title and a conference where the Czech Minister of Foreign Affairs, Tomáš Petříček, expressed his conviction that “The exhibition and book shed light on the unique Czech-Israeli bond which is mysterious, yet at the same time perfectly natural.” (Tomáš Petříček, February 9, 2021).

54. Holý, Interview.

55. Wein, A History of Czechs,xiv.

56. It is not unusual for Czech experts to define Czech-Israeli relations as ”special” (Kalhousová, “Relations between Israel and the Czech Republic”) or evaluate factors related to ”such a strong bond between the two countries in the European and world context,” questioning whether it is ”a deep historical bond, stemming from the very beginning of the Czech and Israeli statehood” or if it is rather connected to current Czech political interests (Čejka, “The Narrative of the Czech-Israeli Strategic Relations”).

57. Sládek, Judah Leva ben Betsalel.

58. For the most recent cutting-edge research on the history of the Jews in the Bohemian Lands written by an international team of scholars, see Čapková, and Kieval, Prague and Beyond.

59. Tomáš Garrigue Masaryk defended a Jewish man, Leopold Hilsner, against a blood libel during a series of antisemitic trials.

60. Pojar, T. G. Masaryk, 155.

61. Lichtenstein, Zionists in Interwar Czechoslovakia.

62. Orzoff, Battle for the Castle.

63. Ibidem; Lichtenstein, Zionists in Interwar Czechoslovakia.

64. IV. Czechoslovak Writer’s Convention, 1968, 40.

65. Wein, A History of Czechs.

66. Havel, The Václav Havel Library.

67. Ibid. 1. 1. 1990. ID number: 11611.

68. Kundera, The Tragedy of Central Europe.

69. Tarant, Československý churban, 283.

70. Translations of the texts of Tomáš Garrigue Masaryk, Václav Havel and Pavel Kohout were made by Anna Marie Hupcejová.

71. Kaplan, Report on the Murder.

72. Yegar, Českoslovesko, sionismus, Izrael.

73. Kubátová and Láníček, The Jew in Czech and Slovak Imagination.

74. Ibid., 13.

75. Holý, “Antisionismus‘ jako skrytý i zjevný antisemitismus”.

76. Menachem Zoufalá, “Ethno-religious Othering”.

77. Ibid., 185.

78. Kuklík and Petráš, Minorities and Law.

79. On the occasion of the visit to Prague in 2012, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said “Israel has no better friend in Europe than the Czech Republic,” see in: Winfrey and Muller, Czech Vote.

80. E.g., the Israeli-Czech Forum or government-to-government sessions are exclusively bilateral political and diplomatic events that have been held on a regular basis in the last decade.

81. Kurt and Ursula Schubert Center for Jewish Studies (CJS) at the Faculty of Arts at Palacký University in Olomouc, https://judaistika.upol.cz/en/.

82. Study Book 2020/2021: Faculty of Arts at Palacký University in Olomouc https://www.ff.upol.cz/fileadmin/userdata/FF/studium/st_plany/2021/FF-web_MK_zaveseni.pdf. Accessed April 25, 2023.

83. Kurt and Ursula Schubert Center for Jewish Studies (CJS) at the Faculty of Arts at Palacký University in Olomouc, https://judaistika.upol.cz/en/.

84. E.g., Prague-Weizmann School on Drug Discovery co-organized annually since 2014 by CU and Weizmann Institute of Science.

85. https://pcjs.ff.cuni.cz/en/.

86. https://holokaust.ff.cuni.cz/en/.

87. Israel Studies https://iupress.org/journals/israelstudies/.

88. 2014 Keynote lecture: “Israel Studies as a Field of Study: The Possibilities for a Czech Perspective”: Ilan Troen (President of The Association for Israel Studies; Stoll Family Chair in Israel Studies at Brandeis University and founding director of the Schusterman Center for Israel Studies).

89. “Future Prospects of Israel Studies in Europe,” Joanna Dyduch (University of Wrocław; European Association of Israel Studies).

90. 2013 Keynote lecture: “Motherlands of Choice: Ethnicity, Belonging and Identities among Jewish-Latin Americans,” Raanan Rein (historian and Vice-president, Tel Aviv University) or 2019 Keynote lecture: “Jewish and Israeli Revenge Following World War II: Myth and Reality,” Dina Porat (Former chief historian of Yad Vashem, Jerusalem; Director of Center for the Study of Contemporary European Jewry, Tel Aviv University).

91. 2016 Keynote lecture: “The Palestinian-Arab Minority in Israel: Between Integration and Alienation,” Elie Rekhess (Crown Visiting Professor in Israel Studies at Northwestern University; Associate Director of the Crown Center for Jewish and Israel Studies) or 2015 Keynote lecture “Is Zionism colonialism?” Yoav Gelber (American University, Washington, DC; Haifa University and the Interdisciplinary Center, Herzliya).

92. In 2013, “Whither Hebrew Studies?” Presentations by Hebrew Studies students and professors on the historical context of the field, contemporary tuition policy, study opportunities in the Czech Republic and abroad as well as employment opportunities. A scheduled discussion on the prospects for Israel Studies in the Czech Republic followed. In 2015, “What we think we know: Israel through the eyes of contemporary Czech society” – A presentation of the findings of a original public survey and media analysis by first-year students of Hebrew Studies at FA CU.

93. Graduate students: Monika Tintěrová (University of West Bohemia, Charles University), Denisa Glacová (Charles University).

94. D. Ziss (Charles University).

95. Glöckner, “(Modern) Culture and Arts as Elixir for Russian Speaking Jewish Immigrants in Israel and Germany”.

96. H. Yablonka (Ben-Gurion University of the Negev).

97. http://rozvrhy.ff.cuni.cz/ft/detail/4077.

98. https://uclk.ff.cuni.cz/en/about-us.

99. HCIS, Official Website, https://herzl.cuni.cz/HERZL-11.html.

100. ‘Israel Studies’ are listed only in the Czech language version of the website, not in English; see: https://kbs.zcu.cz/en/; https://kbs.zcu.cz/.

101. Anonymized by the authors.

102. Kramer, Ivory Towers on Sand.

103. Becke, Methodological Canaanism.

104. Ibid., 200.

105. Ibid.

106. Fontánová, Interview.

107. Tarant, Interview.

108. Ibid.

109. Ibid.

110. Pánek Jurková, Interview.

111. Ibid.

112. Crofony, Interview.

113. Pánek Jurková, Interview.

114. Crofony, Interview.

115. Jewish Studies and Israel Studies in the Twenty-First Century: Intersections and Prospects.

116. https://juedischestudien.uni-graz.at/de/neuigkeiten/detail/article/intersections-between-jewish-studies-and-israel-studies-in-the-21st-century/.

117. Shenkar, The Politicization of Israel Studies, (Quoted in Zoufalá, 2013).

118. Timea Crofony. Dissertation thesis: “The Impact of Religion on The Dating Patterns Among Secular Israeli Jews.” (Ongoing). Marina Vohralík Šternová. Dissertation thesis: “The compatriot community in Israel from an anthropological perspective; integration into local society and the relationship to the original homeland,” 2022. Jitka Pánek Jurková: Dissertation thesis: “Cultural Representation of a Divided Society: The Case of Israel in the Czech Republic,” 2019. Irena Kalhousová. Dissertation thesis: “Our Jews, our Israel! Origins of the foreign policy of Poland, the Czech Republic, and Hungary towards Israel,” 2019. Anna Fontánová (Née Pokorná), Dissertation thesis: “Zionists without Zeal: Imagination and Performance of Transnational Belonging,” 2017. Marcela Menachem Zoufalá. Dissertation thesis: “Religion, Gender, and Culture: The Influence of Orthodox Judaism Authorities on the Status of Jewish Women in Contemporary Israel,” 2010. Marek Čejka. Dissertation thesis: “Religion and Political Cleavages in Israel and their Impact on the Israeli Party and Political System,” 2006. Marek .

119. For interpretations of the special relationship between Germany and Israel, see: Pallade, Germany and Israel.

120. Studium in Israel e. V., accessed December 20, 2020, http://www.studium-in-israel.de/.

121. Timm and Timm, Westbank und Gaza.

122. Jörgensen, Israel Intern - Ereignisse, Tatsachen, Zusammenhänge.

123. On the disciplines of Hebraistics and Israelwissenschaften at the Humboldt University of Berlin, see: Timm, Israelwissenschaften an der Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, 79-93.

124. Ashkenasi and Ibrahim, Der Friedensprozess im Nahen Osten. Eine Revision; Ashkenasi, The Future of Jerusalem.

125. Brenner, Zionism: A Brief History.

126. Wolffsohn, Eternal Guilt?; Wolffsohn, Nahost. Geschichte und Struktur des Konflikts.

127. Brumlik, Kritik des Zionismus.

128. Timm, Israel: Gesellschaft im Wandel.

129. See: Hagemann and Nathanson, Deutschland und Israel heute.

130. See: The Center for Israel Studies (Ludwig Maximilian University), accessed December 20, 2020, https://www.en.zis.geschichte.uni-muenchen.de/index.html.

131. See: http://www.hfjs.eu/hochschule/bengurion/.

132. Moses Mendelssohn Zentrum für europäisch-jüdische Studien (MMZ),), accessed December 20, 2020, https://www.mmz-potsdam.de/willkommen.html.

133. Selma Stern Zentrum für Jüdische Studien Berlin-Brandenburg, accessed December 20, 2020, https://www.selma-stern-zentrum.de/.

134. https://www.swp-berlin.org/en/projects/israel-and-its-regional-and-global-conflicts/ (accessed December 20, 2020).

135. At present, Germany is considered the most important partner country of Israel within the European Union. This might have been a result of the especially close relations between Germany and Israel during Chancellor Kohl’s final years in office, i.e., the 1990s. At that time, many efforts from politicians of both countries started to strengthen the economic, political, and cultural bonds between Israel and the European Union, finally resulting in a formal association agreement.

136. Wolffsohn, Interview.

137. Steiner, Die Inszenierung.

138. Sonder, Interview.

139. The University of Potsdam has no special department of Israel Studies, but has a long-standing, strong collaboration with the Jewish Studies and Science of Religion as well as the Moses Mendelssohn Center and its Visiting Professorship of Israel Studies. Students of Jewish studies and religion who are at the same time interested in modern Israel issues can find ideal crosslinks.

140. The broad variety of disciplines chosen by students who are involved in the Jewish and Israel Studies also opens up opportunities for a prolonged educational work in the public domain. Thus, for example the Center of Israel Studies at the University of Munich also serves the local population e.g., by organizing special seminars for pedagogues and teachers who teach Israeli history in Bavarian high schools.

141. Thus, for example the University of Heidelberg already offers a course on Near East Studies (Nahost-Studien) as a joint degree-offer of the department of Islamic Studies at Heidelberg University and the Ben Gurion Chair of Israel Studies at the University of Jewish Studies (Hochschule für Jüdische Studien) in Heidelberg, accessed December 20, 2020, https://www.uni-heidelberg.de/de/studium/alle-studienfaecher/nahoststudien.

142. At the Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, the Jewish Studies program is strongly recommended to be combined with Arabic and Islamic Studies, which might offer a better approach to studying the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, accessed December 20, 2020, https://studienangebot.uni-halle.de/judaistik-juedische-studien-master-45-75.

143. Some of the results see in: Kranz, Forget Israel – the future is in Berlin, 5-28.

144. See: Schwarz-Friesel, Judenhass im Internet.

145. Mahla, Interview.

146. Lintl, Interview.

147. Kranz, Interview.

148. Lintl, Interview.

149. Diner, Negative Symbiose.

150. Becke, Methodological Canaanism, 201.