Th Israeli war against Hamas has heightened the incidents of anti-semitism in the United States and around the world. It should also be acknowledged that the increase of violent attacks and intimidation of Jewish citizens whether on college campuses or in the general public should be condemned and those who perpetrate those acts should be brought to justice. The same applies to those who commit acts of violence against Palestinians in America. The terrorist attack by Hamas is deserving of retribution by the Israeli government. The rapes and beheadings that occurred cannot be nuanced with the constant refrain of “you have to understand.” Those who cannot acknowledge October 7th as a terrorist attack are not capable of engaging in honest and fruitful discussions about how to resolve this conflict.
Nonetheless the reality is that anti-semitism has always been a part of the landscape of America and the world at large. Whether from the alleged anti-semitism of prominent and influential Americans such as Joseph Kennedy, Henry Ford, Fr. Coughlin, Charles Lindbergh and even today people like candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Kanye West and Nick Fuentes, the infamous Charlottesville March or the biblical story of the Jewish people being enslaved by Egypt, blood libel to the Holocaust the history of Jewish oppression has been long and arduous. This history is only exacerbated by holocaust deniers or people like Arkansas Senator Tom Cotton who called the holocaust a “necessary evil.” (He also said the same about slavery)Tragically anti-semitism tends to be overt as opposed to racism where people try to be subtle giving them plausible deniability. This is not to excuse nor rationalize it but rather to point out the historical depths of it. The present Israeli war against Hamas has only exasperated an existing problem. The resolution of this problem will not wipe away the disease of antisemitism but it can remove a source of the present animosity directed at Israel.
When it comes to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict there is no doubt that both sides share culpability in the inability to resolve this issue. Unfortunately the present college campus protests while understandable have too often been binary and some have said it’s resulted in the intimidation of others who may have a different perspective. Even American politicians who have sided with Palestinians have wasted the opportunity to create a diverse network of support.
While people have condemned college students who are protesting against Israel’s policy against the Palestinian people they are virtually silent or become apologists for American politicians who parrot talking points of Russia when it comes to Ukraine.
The problem however is that being against Israel’s policy is too often conflated with anti-semitism. While one can be against policies of the Israeli government it is important not to conflate the two. To be pro BDS (boycott, disinvestment and sanction) is not in of itself anti-Semitic. To be pro-Palestinian is not the same as being anti-Semitic.
On the other hand to be pro-Israel and their right to defend themselves is not to be anti-Palestinian nor colonialist.The two are not mutually exclusive. Those who are protesting US policy in this issue have a first amendment right to do so providing it doesn’t impede upon the rights and safety of others.
To be supportive of Palestinians because you empathize with them due to your own communities experience of oppression is not anti-semetic. Bill Mahr’s inane critique of the LBGTQ community’s support of Palestinians because Israel has a thriving gay community is a non sequitur and reeks of stupidity on the highest level.
While the United States was the first to give de facto recognition to Israel it was actually the Soviet Union that first granted de jure recognition of the new state it must be understood that America’s relationship with Israel is based on geo-political considerations.
From the Eisenhower administration’s critique of Israel as well as Britain and France for their ill-advised attack on Egypt in 1956 to regain the Suez Canal to President George HW Bush’s refusal to guarantee loans to Israel unless they agreed not to use money to assist Israeli settlements in Palestinian territories, America has always walked a fine line when dealing with Israel. Nonetheless, despite Israel’s refusal to sanction Russia because of its attack on Ukraine as well as its refusal to send defense weapons to Ukraine, despite Netanyahu asking Ukraine President Zelensky to protect the Hasidic Jews who will conduct their annual pilgrimage to Uman in Ukraine, the United States remains Israel’s staunchest ally and defender. In fact without US technology the recent attack by Iran could possibly have been devastating.
While there is religious ideology that fuels anti-semtism the reality is that the Palestinian plight lies at the heart of the present condemnation by groups around the world.
Until there is a resolution which the present Israeli government does not seem willing to seek, animosity will continue to fester. While it is clear that most of the protests are void of any clear historical and political context of the present conflict those who call for Palestinian liberation are not wrong. Many people from the United Nations, Human Rights Watch to Amnesty International equate Palestinian territories with South African apartheid. There must be a two state solution. Those within the Netanyahu government who claim they don’t want to create a nation that may be hostile to them are either ignorant of history (which they are not) or have a belief that Palestinians are not deserving of their own nation. At the creation of Israel they were surrounded by enemies. With the assistance of the United States some of those nations such as Egypt and Jordan are now partners with Israel. There is no doubt that with the creation of a Palestinian state there will be a process that enables Israel and a new Palestinian state to be partners. Quite possibly one of the reasons to resist the two state solution was enunciated by Israel National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir who said “We must promote a solution to encourage the emigration of the residents of Gaza.” This was followed by the far-right finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, who said that Israel “will rule there. And in order to rule there securely for a long time, we must have a civilian presence.” These comments were taken seriously enough by US Secretary of State Antony Blinken who responded by saying “These statements are irresponsible, they’re inflammatory, and they only make it harder to secure a future of Palestinian-led Gaza with Hamas no longer in control, and with terrorist groups no longer able to threaten Israel’s security.”
Should this happen it will exponentially enhance anti-Israel sentiment as well as anti-Semitism.
The reality is that anti-semitism like racism will never be completely eradicated. It is embedded in the DNA of human nature that finds it necessary to designate a community as inferior and an implicit threat. Even within the Jewish diaspora community despite the horrific experience endured as a result of the holocaust racism reared its ugly head. A little known and acknowledged aspect of Jewish history is the acceptance by many Jewish South African citizens of apartheid who viewed the Afrikaner’s as protection against black people. Don Krausz who served as chairman of Johannesburg’s Holocaust survivors association said “The Jew in South Africa sided with the Afrikaners, not so much out of sympathy, but out of fear sided against the blacks. I came to this country in 1946 and all you could hear from Jews was ‘the blacks this and the blacks that.” While this certainly was not the position of all Jews as many opposed apartheid and others worked to make sure people like Nelson Mandela received proper treatment while in prison there was a strain of racism on the part of some like holocaust survivor Vera Reitzer who felt that Africans were inferior and did not deserve to be rested as equals.
The question is how can both anti-Israel and anti-Palestinian sentiment be confronted. Unfortunately, when it comes to understanding this deep rooted conflict there has never been an adequate mediating institution that has explained the conflict from a historical, religious and political perspective. You either get a nonsensical right wing religious context from zealots like Senator Tom Cotton or a knee jerk reaction from extremists on either side. While most networks cover the issue from a daily head count perspective it would serve the public well if respected historians were featured to educate the public about this long standing conflict. College campuses as well should begin conversations about the issue. As long as the conversation remains in the political realm it will remain incendiary as politicians tend not to be honest brokers on this particular issue. One only has to look at recent congressional hearings with college presidents to understand the performative nature of it.
Secondly those who have suffered from oppression and discrimination must band together to condemn it whenever it occurs. Discrimination is ultimately an equal opportunity destroyer. Those who are silent about anti-semitism and racism today will find themselves at the wrong end of the oppressive stick tomorrow. Third and this may be the hardest. The White House should convene a meeting of the non-extremist stakeholders from Europe and the Middle East that will design a process that can culminate in a solution to this crisis. In fact the recent attacks on Israel by Iran provides a unique opportunity to convene such a meeting as nations such as Jordan and Saudi Arabia assisted Israel in defending itself against the recent attacks by Iran.
As the two sides view each other as existential threats both sides must understand that their existence and long term security and prosperity is contingent upon their ability to co-exist. Anything short of that will ultimately result in another October 7th and subsequent actions.