In 1970, the French third-worldist magazine Partisans – launched by the famous anticolonialist François Maspero (1932-2015) – released a special edition titled “The Palestinian people on the march.” Among the numerous articles addressing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict from a socialist viewpoint, Guy Desolre (1939-2016) – a Trotskyist activist and academic from Belgium – contributed his “Notes on the Algerian revolution and the Palestinian revolution.” The Marxist scholar emphasised both the similarities and differences between the two historical movements, reflecting the recent developments within the United Secretariat of the Fourth International, which had previously advocated for unconditional support not only for the Algerian Revolution but also for its leading pro-independence organization, the National Liberation Front (FLN). Nonetheless, Guy Desolre argued that the Algerian Revolution could impart valuable lessons for the Palestinian Revolution, particularly concerning the application of urban terror, which demonstrated both its “efficiency” – contributing to the “demoralization of the adversary” – and its “limits” – due to the indiscriminate assaults on civilians. Simultaneously, the Trotskyist theorist distanced himself from the Algerian authorities, which emphasized the need for a Palestinian “national united front” modeled after the FLN, as if the Palestinian people were regarded as a “people-class.” Furthermore, Guy Desolre cautioned that when fighters are physically separated from the people by borders, there exists a risk of establishing a professional army “detached from the people”, akin to the Algerian “border army” that supplanted the internal resistance in 1962, thereby facilitating authoritarian governance.
Nonetheless, this special issue of Partisans – which highlighted a notable evolution among francophone anti-imperialist thinkers – is primarily remembered for the significant input of Pierre Vidal-Naquet (1930-2006). In his piece, “Reflections at the margins of a tragedy”, the distinguished French historian, recognized for his advocacy of Algerian independence, sought to challenge the dominant “orthodoxy” of the revolutionary Left, which positioned itself in opposition to “Israeli and Zionist propaganda”.
Committed to revealing “some uncomfortable truths”, Pierre Vidal-Naquet offered a thorough yet critical examination of the history of Zionism, ultimately asserting that “Zionism triumphed – precariously – because it was the only movement providing Jews, who were a minority everywhere, the opportunity to become the majority somewhere.” However, the anticolonial scholar acknowledged that the Palestinians had emerged – since the Six-Day War – as an independent force contesting the State of Israel, despite their military influence being exceedingly limited: “any comparison with the Vietnamese National Liberation Front or even the Algerian FLN would be inappropriate”. This is the sole sentence in his article that explicitly – albeit negatively – references the Algerian revolution, yet it does not imply that this political experience was absent from his reflections.
Indeed, Pierre Vidal-Naquet characterized the Palestinians as the “wretched of the earth” – a direct allusion to the final work of Frantz Fanon (1925-1961), a Caribbean psychiatrist who championed Algerian independence led by the FLN – and as a people “with nothing to lose”: this underscores the necessity for genuine internationalists to support them, albeit without “the weapons of ideological illusion and soothing mystification”. In contrast, the leftist intellectual portrayed the Israelis as “having everything to lose and who will do anything, I mean anything, if the tide of war turns against them”. It is challenging to overlook the implicit reference to the mindset of the European settlers who, at the conclusion of the Algerian conflict, opted for the most detrimental choice by aligning themselves with the ultra-colonialist terrorist group known as the Secret Army Organisation (OAS), thereby precluding the development of a multicultural society.
The nuanced insights of Pierre Vidal-Naquet regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict were influenced by his personal history: as an atheist Jew whose parents perished in Auschwitz in 1944 and as a “Dreyfusard” intellectual who condemned the abduction of mathematician Maurice Audin (1932-1957) by the French military in Algiers. However, as he recounted in his memoirs, his Jewish identity was “put to the test” just before the Six-Day War. In fact, Pierre Vidal-Naquet, along with Jean-Paul Sartre (1905-1980) and numerous other anti-colonial figures, signed an “appeal by French intellectuals for peace between Israel and the Arab States.” This document, published in the prominent daily Le Monde on June 1, 1967, advocated for “Israel’s security and sovereignty” and rejected its association “with an imperialist and aggressive camp.” His dedication alongside leftist Zionists was further evidenced by his attendance at a meeting on May 31 in Paris with several signatories of the document, including lawyer Yves Jouffa (1920-1999) and philosopher Robert Misrahi (1926-2023).
Nonetheless, in the aftermath of the Israel Defense Forces’ decisive victory, Pierre Vidal-Naquet experienced a sense of “shame” and was unable to rejoice in the defeat of the Arab armies. On June 12, Le Monde published his article titled “After,” in which the intellectual referenced the Algerian conflict to elucidate the “crazy days” that French society had just undergone during the Six-Day War, highlighting the unsettling “hope for revenge among the embittered members of the OAS, the vanquished of the Algerian War, who relied on the Israelis to seek retribution.” Nevertheless, outside the French context, the historian asserted that in recent times, “Europe has, in a sense, absolved itself of its collective guilt regarding the tragedies of the Second World War and, further back in history, for the persecutions that, from the pogroms in Russia to the Dreyfus affair, led to the emergence of Zionism.” Furthermore, as a rationalist, Pierre Vidal-Naquet argued that the idea of a “holy land” was no more logical than the notion of a “holy war.” Ultimately, he concluded his nuanced essay by voicing his support for the establishment of a Palestinian State, which would be supported by an Israeli Republic “free from colonialism.” This article resulted in accusations against him of being both “pro-Israeli” and “pro-Palestinian” from angry readers.
A few days later, Pierre Vidal-Naquet took part in a debate organized by the center-left daily Combat, published on 22 June under the title “Israel and the Left.” During this discussion, the historian distanced himself from French activists who were particularly dedicated to supporting the State of Israel, such as Claude Lanzmann (1925-2018), a journalist associated with Jean-Paul Sartre. Additionally, he appeared to align himself with his friend Maxime Rodinson (1915-2004), a Marxist and pro-Palestinian academic. In fact, Pierre Vidal-Naquet even remarked that “Israel should dezionize itself.” What might account for this seemingly contradictory stance? The release of a special issue of the esteemed leftist magazine Les Temps modernes, focused on the “Israeli-Arab conflict,” created a significant impact in intellectual and political spheres, particularly due to Maxime Rodinson’s influential article “Israel: a settler-colonial state?” Moreover, the vibrant atmosphere of this period led to the formation of several committees, either complementary or rival, which Pierre Vidal-Naquet joined without sectarian bias: Committee of Intellectuals for a Negotiated Solution to the Israeli-Arab Conflict; Gaston Crémieux Circle; Union of Jewish Progressives; Research and Action Group for the Settlement of the Palestinian Question…
Pierre Vidal-Naquet’s initial position – which did not reject either his Jewish identity or his anti-colonial beliefs – along with his interactions with leftist individuals known to be either “pro-Israeli” or “pro-Palestinian,” allowed him to dialectically counter the most ludicrous proposals from both factions. This was exemplified by two articles – “The Shukeiris of the spiritual” and “On a certain delirium” – that appeared in December 1967 in the leftist Christian magazine Esprit. He cautioned pro-Israeli audiences that “there is no task more urgent than denouncing the theopolitics that today risks leading Israel to catastrophe.” Conversely, he urged pro-Palestinian readers: “Let us put an end once and for all to this bastardized form of Stalinism that is the sanctification of Third World movements.”
As a rationalist, Pierre Vidal-Naquet articulated the validity of the “Palestinians’ right to national existence” in a 1969 article published by Raison présente, titled “From Zionist affirmation to Palestinian affirmation.” However, his critical endorsement was intertwined with the recollection of the most tragic aspects of the anti-colonial revolution: “Most of those who supported the Algerian people’s struggle did not feel obliged to approve of the Melouza massacre.” In doing so, the subtle historian recalled the 1957 slaughter of several hundred villagers – supporters of Messali Hadj (1898-1974) – by an armed faction linked to the FLN. This served as a reminder that the end does not justify the means. Nonetheless, the leftist intellectual deemed it “unrealistic” to reproach Palestinians for resorting to “guerilla warfare and terrorism” in the absence of alternative options. Furthermore, Pierre Vidal-Naquet expressed caution regarding the “dezionization” of the State of Israel – suggesting it was “probably too early” – and the potential alliance between the Israeli and Palestinian Lefts or proletariats: “an illusion that I shared.” His sense of “humility” concerning the Israeli-Palestinian conflict appeared more as disenchantment, in stark contrast to the revolutionary declarations made by Matzpen and echoed by the French far left.
In 1970, Pierre Vidal-Naquet journeyed to Israel to conduct an investigation for the center-left weekly Le Nouvel Observateur. His report, published on April 27, emphasized that “Israel, whether one likes it or not, is a nation.” Primarily, he aimed to shed light on the dissent within Israeli society, despite its inclination “to establish a directly colonial economy.” In the immediate future, he placed his hopes in the New Left, but in the long run, he acknowledged the significance of Matzpen and the “Stalinist” Communist Party as means to directly confront the Zionist “establishment.” To achieve this, the Jewish Diaspora needed to engage in a struggle to prove that the Israeli government and Jewish institutions did not possess the “overwhelming support” they professed.
That same year, Pierre Vidal-Naquet released a comprehensive article for Partisans and a shorter piece for Éléments, the magazine associated with the Research and action group for the settlement of the Palestinian question, edited by the French writer Clara Malraux (1897-1982). Concerning the plight of the Palestinians, the anticolonial intellectual urged the Left to “balance support and critique.” The historian voiced his concerns regarding the one-State solution advocated by Palestinian organizations, which he believed could potentially result in an Arab State. Meanwhile, preserving the status quo would likely transform Palestine into “a new Algeria or a new South Africa with fully-fledged citizens and strangers in their own land.” To avoid the deportation of Jews – and a war of widespread destruction – Pierre Vidal-Naquet advocated for a “compromise solution” that entailed supporting any initiative aimed at the withdrawal from Palestinian territories occupied by the State of Israel since 1967. By taking this stance, he dismissed the perspective of a “joint revolution of Israelis and Arabs” – a well-known slogan among leftist activists – which appeared improbable: “Achieving a balance between support and criticism is challenging, as every political commitment is linked to a certain level of idealism. At this moment, I do not believe that this balance has been attained.”
Three decades later, during a discussion with Elias Sanbar, the editor-in-chief of the Revue d’études palestiniennes, Pierre Vidal-Naquet conveyed his “angst” regarding an Algerian model in relation to the ongoing colonization. He was alarmed by the mindset of Israeli settlers, which evoked memories of the Algerian War and even the extreme colonial activists of the OAS. He warned that if the settlements were not dismantled, there was a danger of the “Algerianization” of Israeli territory. However, his perspective shifted, mirroring the evolving circumstances. The seventy-one-year-old historian subsequently concurred with Palestinian-American scholar Edward Said (1935-2003) on the idea of a “binational and secular structure”. Unlike his earlier beliefs, this viewpoint no longer seemed “utopian”. It transformed into “the horizon towards which proponents of authentic peace must direct their efforts in the long run.”
Pierre Vidal-Naquet passed away in 2006, shortly after endorsing the appeal “Enough!”, published by the center-left daily Libération (27 July 2006), which condemned an “abominable aggression conducted in the name of Israel against the Lebanese and the Palestinians.” This marked his final public statement. His friend, the Algerian intellectual Mohammed Harbi (1933-2026), wrote an obituary in the Revue d’études palestiniennes, highlighting his capacity to “reassess his judgments” and the integrity of a “historian committed to the truth.” Leila Shahid (1946-2026), representative of the Palestinian Authority in France, was present at his funeral.
Nedjib Sidi Moussa holds a PhD in political science and is a teacher and author of 6 books, including ‘Histoire algérienne de la France’ & ‘Algérie, une autre histoire de l’indépendance’.
This article was first published on the Left Renewal Blog.
More content from this blog
- When Movements Become Cults, by SAFTU – 16 February 2026
- The New Frontline. The US-China Battle for Control of Global Networks, by Ilias Alami, Jessica DiCarlo, Steve Rolf, Seth Schindler – 4 February 2025
- A Gazan Worked in Israeli Kibbutzim for Decades. Then Came Oct. 7, by Yuval Abraham – 6 November 2023
- A Colonial Empire Without Colonies: Russia’s State Colonialism in Comparative Perspective, by Michael Khodarkovsky – 17 April 2021
- Syria’s Unions: Yesterday and Today, by Sulaiman Abdullah – 9 September 2024