How the Zionist-Left Prolongs the Arab-Israel Conflict

zionThis is re-published from 2013.

The Zionist-Left is responsible, at least in part, for prolonging the long Arab war against the Jews of the Middle East.  It is also responsible, at least in part, for encouraging the movement to boycott, divest from, and sanction Israel (BDS) and for encouraging rising European hostility toward the Jewish state, if not toward Jews, more generally.

This is, of course, not their intention and many would scoff at the very notion without giving it any actual consideration.  Nonetheless, the Zionist-Left, through refusing to see past the Oslo Delusion, through giving credence to hysterical, toxic, and largely false Arab claims of Jewish wrong-doing, and through demonizing Jews who choose to live within the Jewish heartland of Judaea and Samaria, have provided cover and encouragement to the enemies of the State of Israel, and thus the enemies of the Jewish people.

The Oslo Delusion:

The Zionist-Left, just like Jewish people as a whole, desperately want peace.  Given the fact that the Jews of the Middle East are a tiny minority surrounded by a much, much larger hostile Arab-Muslim majority, the conclusion of the Arab-Israel conflict is of greater Jewish concern than the concern of Israel’s enemies.  It is because the Jewish Left is desirous of a peaceful conclusion of hostilities that they cannot bring themselves to accept not only the failure of the Oslo Accords but, more importantly, the implications of that failure.

To quote myself from an earlier piece:

The Oslo Delusion is the mistaken belief that if only Israel would jump through certain hoops then there would be peace between Arabs and Jews in the Middle East. At the center of the Oslo Delusion is the notion that the Jews of the Middle East have oppressed the Arabs in their tiny part of the world and if only Jews would be nicer then Hamas would have no reason to shoot rockets at them and dictator Abbas might stop encouraging genocidal hatred toward Jews on Palestinian Authority television.

Maintaining this delusion is at the heart of how and why the Zionist-Left prolongs the Arab-Israel conflict.  By demonstrating to the Arabs that large portions of the overall Jewish population throughout the world are willing to grovel at their feet, while offering them half of the Jewish capital of Jerusalem and almost the entirety of the ancient Jewish heartland it does not placate the local Arabs, but encourages them to demand more and to pour on additional pressures.  This is because no one respects weakness and the position of the Zionist-Left, viz-a-viz the conflict, is the very image of weakness.

Ironically, it is the Arabs, who allegedly come from a position of weakness, who speak in terms of confidence and strength.  For example, the Palestinian-Arab ambassador to Lebanon, Abullah Abdullah, told a Lebanese newspaper:

“Even Palestinian refugees who are living in [refugee camps] inside the [then-Palestinian] state are still refugees. They will not be considered citizens.” He added that the new state would “absolutely not” issue Palestinian passports to refugees, lest they be understood to be citizens of Palestine. “When we have a state accepted as a member of the United Nations, this is not the end of the conflict. This is not a solution to the conflict. This is only a new framework that will change the rules of the game.”

This is confirmation from a high-level Palestinian-Arab official that the Arabs have no intention of ending the conflict until they achieve all-out victory.  That is what someone coming from a position of strength within a conflict talks like.  It is talk of victory.  The Jews, however, never speak of victory.  We speak of compromise and negotiations and the desire for peace, but that is not what the Arabs speak of.

By framing the Israeli-Jewish position in terms of desperation and weakness, the Jewish-Left encourages further aggression toward the State of Israel and further violence against its Jewish citizenry.

Arab Claims of Jewish Guilt:

While the weakness of the Jewish-Left encourages aggression from the hostile Arab-Muslim majority in that part of the world, it is only one way in which the Jewish-Left encourages that aggression.  The second way is through affirming Jewish guilt and thus bolstering the “Palestinian narrative” of total victim-hood.

This is what I have called the Palestinian colonization of the Jewish mind.

The Palestinian-Arabs constantly cry to the world that the Jews are devils and much of the world, including many Jews, started to buy this nonsense many years ago.  The Palestinian-Arabs, and their western anti-Zionist allies, tell the international community that Israel is a racist, imperialist, colonialist, apartheid, militarist, racist regime.  They claim that they are victims of a military occupation and it is because of that military occupation that they have every right to kill as many Jews as they can possibly get their hands on, even as their leadership claims that “Palestinians” are, hysterically enough, the descendants of Jesus who they bill as “the first Palestinian shaheed.”

The Zionist-Left agrees with the first part of that equation, but not the second part.  That is, they agree that the “Palestinians” are living under a brutal military occupation, but do not agree that this gives them license kill.  The problem, of course, is if the local “indigenous” Arabs are living under military occupation, then why shouldn’t they resist that occupation by any means necessary, including violence?  So long as Jewish leftists continue to speak of the Occupation – particularly with the Big O – then they affirm the rights of those allegedly occupied to fight against their own people.

This is the second way in which the Jewish-Left encourages bloodshed toward the Jewish people.  It is not their intention, but it is certainly their effect.

It should also be noted that by framing the conflict within what is essentially the “Palestinian narrative” they also wipe out thirteen centuries of Jewish history as second and third-class non-citizens under Arab-Muslim imperial rule in the Middle East.  Furthermore, by speaking of “Occupation” they inevitably frame the conflict as one between a powerful and brutal majority population, the Jews, versus a weak and pathetic minority population, the “Palestinians.”  So, if you were a European who was basically ignorant of the conflict, not to mention a mujaheddin ready to kill for the cause, why would you not believe that the “Palestinians” are the innocent party while the Jews are the aggressors?

The Zionist-Left, which represents the majority of diaspora Jews, is telling the world that the Jews of the Middle East are essentially the aggressors and that the “Palestinians” are essentially the victims.  The problem is that from an historical perspective it is entirely false and from a contemporary perspective it eliminates the vast majority of forces arrayed against Israel.  From an historical perspective it fails to place Jewish efforts at self-defense, which is what the “Palestinians” call the “occupation,” within many long centuries of Jewish abuse under the brutal system of dhimmitude.

If the Zionist-Left wishes to deflate the conflict than they need to stop speaking of it in terms that prolongs the conflict and gives Israel’s enemies every reason to stay on the attack.

The Demonization of their Fellow Jews:

The lead in a  Y-Net article by Elior Levy reads as follows:

As Israel announces plans to build 1,400 new settlement housing units, Palestinians petition US to halt move, ‘save the peace process’

It has been obvious for years, now, ever since Obama demanded “total settlement freeze” as the price that Israel must pay for the privilege of speaking with the “Palestinian” dictator and his cronies, that they would use the fact that Jews build housing for themselves in Judaea as an excuse to avoid negotiations and a conclusion of hostilities.  This was a little gift given to the “Palestinians” by Barack Obama upon the opening of his first term.  Never mind that the long history of non-Jews telling Jewish people where we may, or may not, be allowed to live is entirely anti-Semitic.  It also affirmed to the “Palestinians” that their tactic of avoiding negotiations, and blaming that avoidance on the Israelis, is one that will receive backing from both the US and the EU.

If Barack Obama had affirmed the idea that Jews building housing for themselves on what he calls the “West Bank” is insufficient reason not to negotiate than the local Arabs would have much less traction on this issue.  Instead Obama affirmed the idea, thus giving Abbas all the excuse that he needs to end negotiations and blame Israel.  This will lead to a further embrace of BDS by the EU and universities around the world and it will lead to an increase in violence against Jews, particularly in Israel. It may even lead, as John Kerry threatened, to a Third Race War (intifada) against the Jews in the Middle East.

One question to ask yourself, however, is just how is it that Barack Obama embraced the racist notion that Jews should not be allowed to live on, and thus build on, the traditional heartland of the Jewish people?  Did he just conjure that notion out of his own head.  I do not think so.  The reason that Obama could embrace this racist notion, and thus serve it up on a platter to dictator Abbas, is because his Zionist-Left friends and advisers likewise falsely confirmed that the settlements represented an impediment to peace.

They do not.

Unless one believes that any future state of Palestine must be Judenrein then there is no reason why Jews should not be allowed to live and build there.  But the point is that Obama would not likely have embraced this racist notion if it was not presented to him as a reasonable demand upon Israel by so much of the American Jewish Left.  People like, for example, Alan Dershowitz, who says that he publicly opposed the settlements since 1973, primed the pump.  Dershowitz, and many Jews of his generation, can be forgiven for opposing Jewish township construction in Judaea and Samaria when the Oslo Peace Accords were still in full-swing, prior to the Second Race War.  But after that race war it should have been clear to everyone that the local Arabs are not prepared to live in peace with the local Jews and therefore opposition to Jews building housing for themselves on Jewish land is simply unconscionable.

By refusing to truly acknowledge the failure of Oslo, and thus through maintaining the Oslo Delusion, the Zionist-Left helps prolong the conflict, encourages BDS and violence toward Jews.  It is long past time that they started to finally rethink old assumptions and until they do so they will continue to contribute to the ongoing war against the Jewish people in the Middle East.



Check Also

Since Netanyahu won the election the world has come forward to acknowledge the result. Opinion: Nov 2022.

This most recent Israeli election, the fifth in the current cycle, proved to be quite …


  1. Michael, I agree with your arguments, but it is not just the Zionist-left that fall into the trap you are describing. Coming from a democratic country, people automatically have the mindset that compromise is desirable if people are to achieve peaceful coexistence. and assume that others feel the same. Sadly they do not.

    Osama was right about ““When people see a strong horse and a weak horse, by nature, they will like the strong horse”, In many parts of the world, especially in the Middle East, compromise is seen as weakness, to be taken full advantage of.

    I believe we in free countries are so obsessed with ‘the other’ and respecting their human rights, we fail to understand there is no reciprocity.

    We must uphold human rights, but I believe we must start to insist those we are negotiating with are held to the same standard.

    • Hi Pam,

      I would say that in the US, at least, both the Oslo Delusion and the Palestinian colonization of the Jewish mind come mainly from the left. And, as I always like to remind people, I come out of the left.

      I certainly agree with this, however:

      Coming from a democratic country, people automatically have the mindset that compromise is desirable…

      And, needless to say, compromise is desirable but, as you well know, only when both sides are actually willing to do the compromising.

      I tell you, it galls me that Israel is (foolishly) willing to give up murderers and Jihadis in return for the privilege of sitting at dictator Abbas’ table and now John Kerry is dangling Jonathan Pollard before the Israelis like bait.

      This whole process is a disgrace.

      • Hi Michael,

        I too come out of the left, and even after I became disillusioned, it took me years to finally leave, as it was like breaking from family. Once I did leave, the people I had considered my friends dumped me, as they are loyal to the cause, not to people.

        I agree that what you aptly term the Palestinian colonization of the Jewish mind comes virtually entirely from the left. Sadly many Jews who are from the left on many issues have been put in an untenable position – loyalty to the progressive movement or support for Israel.

        I too totally oppose Israel releasing terrorists in return for ‘peace’. How can releasing unrepentant terrorists into society possibly lead to peace!

  2. Totally agree with you Michael. I have often thought the Jewish progressives are the best advocates the Palestinians & Arabs have.

    • Hi Michael,

      I have to say, I actually have considerable sympathy for the Jewish left these days. US politics is at once more narrow than politics elsewhere and, yet, still exceedingly polarized.

      Thus it is becoming more and more difficult to be a Jewish progressive who stands up for Israel.

      In fact, it is becoming basically impossible. One can be pro-Israel or one can be progressive, but it is increasingly difficult to be both.

      Well, if the progressive-left insists upon forcing a choice between loyalty to my family and my people versus loyalty to the progressive movement, heck, that decision is easy!

    • Michael, it certainly seems that way in Melbourne, where the progressive Rabbis often advocate for the Palestinians and our (misnamed) Australian Jewish Democratic Society openly supports the Friends of Palestine.

  3. I can think of one particular Rabbi in the heart of Caulfield who insists shoving his leftist progressive views down the throats of his congregants [ this Shule is not a left wing progressive Synagogue like TBI or Shira.]
    I have many friends who go there who cringe and just wish he would stick to his Rabbinical duties.
    I can just imagine the uproar from the left & progressive congregants if Rabbis who are fearlessly pro- Zionist kept including their views in their sermons in what should be mainstream Synagogues.

  4. In the big picture I believe the survival of Israel as a Jewish state is in jeopardy not form the Arabs and Muslims but from the Jewish left/ Progressives with in Israel taking into account the 5 th Columnist Haaretz and NGO’s who are being propped up in the diaspora by their leftist/Progressive colleagues.
    As far as I can see they would be quite willing to sacrifice the notion of a Jewish state and give away almost any land that would appease the Arabs and international community .

    It is scary when you have high profile Jewish academics subsidized and respected by the Jewish community here in Australia that believe the Israeli Flag and National anthem should go because it offends the Muslim/ Arab minority in Israel. This is just one small example of the danger these Progressives or leftists are causing.

  5. Y’know, I am not exactly sure what “right” or “left” even means when it comes to the ongoing Arab war against the Jews?

    Typically, a “right-winger” is someone like Caroline Glick or Martin Sherman who supports the annexation of the entirety of Judaea and Sumaria, while the Left might be represented by someone like Tzippi Livni who supports the two-state solution and “painful concessions.”

    But what makes any of this “right” or “left” seems entirely arbitrary.

    For example, within the American context, at least, Black Nationalism is considered “left-wing,” while Jewish Nationalism is considered “right-wing.”

    The rationality behind that I find elusive.

    My guess is that there is no rationality behind it and, yet, they still line up like lemmings behind the labels.

    • I believe God gave the Jewish People the entire Land of Israel (on both sides of the River Jordan. I guess that makes me, not only “right-wing”, but “a fascist, religious bigot”.

      I can live with that 😉

  6. The Jewish Left / Progressives in the context of left and right is to appease the Palestinians, Arabs, Muslims & International community at the expense of the Jews in israel.
    In their minds it means give up what ever it takes to make peace or [ ‘Hudna’ a word these idiots wouldn’t understand] and not to expect or demand anything in return other than the mere word of our enemies and those [ ie Russians, EU in particular ] that finance and back our enemies.
    In the context of the Israeli/ Arab- Muslim conflict I have been called right wing but would support [ may not agree with ] what ever deal a democratically elected Israeli government manages to get through the Knesset .
    I,m sure that imaginary deal would include Israel remaining a Jewish state.

  7. I entirely agree with the author in this conflict there is NO room whatsoever for compromiss and any kind of apeasement which led us already to 2 world wars! The peace-ticker will only start when arabs are transferred to eastern Palestine and it is a total mistake to think that a “palestinian” state which, in fact would only be a fire-ship in the middle of ,Israel can achieve peace! If it came to be it would only achieve a 3rd ww.