Aura of building a state

Pearl spoke about his childhood, the intellectual roots of Zionism, the persistence of conflict between Israelis and Palestinians, and what he calls “Zionophobia” – a term he uses to distinguish opposition to Jewish sovereignty from traditional antisemitism.

Pearl began with his origins in pre-state Israel, describing what he called the “aura” of building a state. Born near Tel Aviv, he grew up in a community founded by Polish immigrants who had come under the British Mandate. He described a society focused on two aims: establishing a functioning Jewish state and rescuing European Jews.

By the mid-1930s, he argued, Jewish institutions there had already created much of the infrastructure associated with statehood — schools, health care, transportation, and an electrical grid. He characterized the period as one of intense civic mobilization and educational investment, shaped in part by German Jewish intellectuals who fled Nazi persecution and taught in local schools.

He recalled peaceful days of playing with Palestinian kids as well as British soldiers in a multi-ethnic region. Pearl also recounted the 1936–1939 Arab Revolt and Britain’s subsequent restrictions on Jewish immigration, arguing that limits on entry certificates contributed to the inability of many European Jews to escape persecution.

From scientist to public intellectual

Though internationally known for his work in artificial intelligence and causal inference, Pearl said he did not begin writing publicly about Jewish identity and Zionism until around 2000. The Second Intifada prompted him to revisit foundational Zionist texts and examine what he viewed as misunderstandings about the movement’s original aims.

Central to his argument is the idea that Zionism represents a “quest for normalcy” — the desire for Jews to be treated as a nation among nations, rather than as a tolerated minority. He suggested that support for Israel’s existence has often been conditional, dependent on behavior rather than recognition of sovereign legitimacy.

After the October 7, 2023, attacks, Pearl said, he observed what he views as a shift in public discourse, with more open questioning of Israel’s right to exist. He contrasted Israel’s status as a state founded in 1948 with the dozens of states created in the post-colonial era whose legitimacy is rarely debated.

‘Zionophobia’ and legitimacy

Pearl introduced the concept of “Zionophobia” to describe opposition to Jewish sovereignty specifically, rather than hostility toward Jews as individuals. On university campuses, he said, criticism is often directed at “Zionists,” which he interprets as targeting supporters of Israel’s existence.

He argued that policy responses focusing solely on antisemitism miss what he considers a distinct ideological challenge. In his view, the central barrier to peace is not borders but recognition — mutual acceptance of Jewish and Palestinian legitimacy.

‘Without a single day of normalcy’

Pearl endorsed a two-state solution but added a condition: “two states for two peoples, equally legitimate and equally indigenous.” By indigeneity, he said, he means recognition of both Jewish historical connection to the land and Palestinian continuous residence.

He contended that failed negotiations — from Oslo to later rounds of talks — faltered because of what he described as an unwillingness on one side to accept Jewish sovereignty in any part of the land.

In a question-and-answer session, students and audience members pressed Pearl on current Israeli politics, the war in Gaza, and the feasibility of coexistence. He acknowledged internal and external threats facing Israel and said the country has lived “without a single day of normalcy” since 1948.

When asked whether Palestinians should relocate to other Arab countries, Pearl rejected the idea. “I don’t want to tell people where to move,” he said. “I want to tell them how to think.”

He emphasized that coexistence, not expulsion, is the only viable path.

Pearl’s book, Coexistence and Other Fighting Words, moves between technical discussions of causal reasoning and reflections on violence, democracy, and ethical responsibility.

Throughout this work, Pearl argues that rigorous thinking — the same standards that apply in scientific inquiry — should guide political and moral debate.

The Jan Koum Israel Studies Program fosters cross-disciplinary education and research on modern Israel. The program offers courses, mentorship, internships, research support, webinars, conferences, and other in-person and online events to educate Stanford students and the broader Stanford community about the state of Israel.