Vladimir Jabotinsky’s 1923 essay “The Iron Wall” established foundational principles for Revisionist Zionism that continue shaping Israeli policy under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. In July 2023, Netanyahu explicitly affirmed continuity: “One hundred years after the ‘iron wall’ was stamped in Jabotinsky’s writings we are continuing to successfully implement these principles,” adding that “the need to stand as a powerful iron wall against our enemies has been adopted by every Government of Israel, from the right and the left.”
This acknowledgment reflects Netanyahu’s longstanding alignment with Jabotinsky’s strategic framework, which his father Benzion Netanyahu—a historian and Jabotinsky’s assistant secretary—helped develop. The Conversation documented that Benjamin Netanyahu “saw the Oslo peace process as the sort of territorial compromise Jabotinsky had warned about,” believing “compromise would only invite conflict, and any show of weakness would spell doom.”
Core Tenets of Iron Wall Doctrine
Jabotinsky’s essay, published after British Colonial Secretary Winston Churchill prohibited Zionist settlement east of the Jordan River, fundamentally diverged from mainstream Labor Zionism led by Chaim Weizmann and David Ben-Gurion. The essay argued Palestinian Arabs would never accept Jewish majority in Palestine, stating: “Zionist colonisation must either stop, or else proceed regardless of the native population… under the protection of a power that is independent of the native population – behind an iron wall, which the native population cannot breach.”
Unlike British proponent Israel Zangwill’s “land without a people for a people without a land” theory, Jabotinsky acknowledged Palestinian population existence yet prescribed force that eradicates hope as the solution. He criticized mainstream Zionists for believing technological progress and economic improvements could win Arab hearts, asserting they “are trying to persuade us that the Arabs are either fools, whom we can deceive by masking our real aims, or that they are corrupt and can be bribed.”
Academic analysis emphasizes Jabotinsky believed the Zionist movement should exclusively focus on building superior Jewish military force—a metaphorical iron wall leaving Arabs no choice but accepting a Jewish state on their land. While “expulsion of Arabs from Palestine is impossible,” they could be made to surrender, and only after leadership and armed resistance elimination, causing population hope loss, does it “become possible to talk about giving those who remain rights.”
Ideological Distinctions and Historical Context
Revisionist Zionism’s founding in 1925 created the chief right-wing opposition to dominant Labor Party, opposing Labor’s socialist economic vision while emphasizing Jewish militarism cultivation. Revisionists mirrored prevailing Eastern and Southern European ethos—more nationalist and racist in former regions, more Catholic in latter—with ideas revolving around “sacrosanct” power notions. Mainstream Zionists relied on broader references including labor movements and socialism, with foundational moments like the Dreyfus Affair splitting France as nationalist and religious anti-Semitic forces accused an innocent Jewish officer of spying.
Benzion Netanyahu’s alarmist hypothesis—that antisemitism would target Jews regardless of actions, even if converted to Christianity—reflected deep pessimism about humanity and hostility toward Enlightenment optimism regarding humankind and historical progress. This worldview held that humanity, politics, diplomacy, and negotiation become viable only after enemy decisive defeat and fait accompli imposition.
Fascist Connections and Institutional Support
Until 1938, Fascist Italy remained Revisionist Movement’s greatest ally. The youth wing “Betar” adopted symbols, costumes, salutes, and paramilitary structure of Italian Fascism. Mussolini and Jabotinsky exchanged letters affirming movement parallels and mutual admiration. In Fascist Zionism, Mussolini saw an ally fighting British Mediterranean influence.
Jabotinsky wrote in his autobiography regarding ideological formation years in Italy: “All my views on nationalism, the state, and society were developed during those years under Italian influence.” Mussolini stated in November 1934: “For Zionism to succeed, you need to have a Jewish State with a Jewish flag, and Jewish language. The person who understands that is your fascist, Jabotinsky.”
Italy established the Betar Naval Academy where Italian officers trained recruits. However, cooperation ended in 1938 when Mussolini set race laws acquiescing to Hitler, expelling Jewish Fascist Party members and shutting Jewish institutions including the Naval Academy.
Netanyahu Family Lineage and Ideological Continuity
Benjamin Netanyahu’s father Benzion was Revisionist movement activist, publications editor, and Jabotinsky’s private secretary. In 1993, Benjamin Netanyahu published “A Place among the Nations: Israel and the World,” arguing Arabs took land from Jews rather than reverse. He viewed Israel-Arab relations as “permanent conflict, as never-ending struggle between forces of light and forces of darkness,” claiming “Violence is ubiquitous in political life of all Arab countries… the primary method of dealing with opponents.”
For Netanyahu, no Palestinian self-determination right existed, and no compromise was possible “because they were out for the liquidation of Israel.” At 2017 Jabotinsky Memorial, Netanyahu stated: “I have Jabotinsky’s works on my shelf, and I read them often,” reminding audiences he keeps the Zionist leader’s sword in his office.
Evolution Through Likud Party Structure
Jabotinsky’s Revisionists were initially outvoted by Ben-Gurion’s Labor Zionism favoring semi-organic state creation through Jewish agricultural and industrial proletariat development. However, hardline positions helped move entire movement toward militarism. Following 1947-48 civil war victory and Israel declaration, violent expulsion of over 700,000 Palestinians occurred—the Nakba—as neighboring Arab states declared war.
One Jabotinsky follower, Menachem Begin—Holocaust survivor, Soviet gulag veteran, and leader of 1948 Deir Yassin massacre killing over 100 Palestinians—co-founded Likud coalition of Israeli right-wing parties. Begin became first Likud prime minister in 1977, propelled by Labor Party anger for failing to detect 1973 Yom Kippur invasion. Academic research documents Begin oversaw largest settlement expansion from 1977-1983, declaring at 1981 Ariel settlement: “I, Menachem, the son of Ze’ev and Hasia” would maintain Israeli West Bank and Gaza control.
Netanyahu defeated Begin’s son for Likud leadership in 1992, becoming prime minister four years later partly due to openly desiring Oslo Accords peace process slowdown. After 2000 violent Palestinian uprising and succession of terror—Palestinian suicide bombings, Israeli army killings—hardliners elevated and peace voices sidelined. Netanyahu returned to office in 2009, serving as prime minister for thirteen of fourteen subsequent years.
Doctrinal Interpretation and Contemporary Application
Israeli historian Avi Shlaim distinguished Netanyahu’s approach from Jabotinsky’s original conception: Netanyahu’s “version of the iron wall did not see Jewish military power as a means to an end”—Jewish state foundation—”but sometimes as a means to achieving security and sometimes as an end in itself.” Chapman University analysis concluded that “perpetual war formed the centerpiece of this ideology” since “if Zionism can only exist with an iron wall and negotiations can be made only when Arabs have lost all hope, the return of hope is doomed to repeat that process.”
Jabotinsky considered it “utterly impossible to eject the Arabs from Palestine,” envisioning that “there will always” be Arab majority resistance. He called upon readers recognizing all historical instances where colonizing peoples entered occupied territories never worked peacefully, making it “unthinkable to expect the Palestinians to accept Jewish immigration.”
Current analysis emphasizes Netanyahu’s government acts according to Iron Wall Doctrine constructed by Jabotinsky, with similarities extending to settlement policies, territorial control priorities, military force emphasis, and rejection of negotiated territorial compromise. The doctrine’s influence spans Israeli political spectrum, though most concentrated within Likud and right-wing coalition partners.
Original analysis by Hazem Saghieh from Asharq Al-Awsat. Republished with additional research and verification by ThinkTanksMonitor.
