When Diaspora Jews turn against Israel
A growing divide between Israel and the Diaspora may be the most dangerous Jewish fault line in decades.
A dangerous rupture is opening in Jewish life. For decades, Diaspora Jews defended Israel instinctively. They did not always agree with Israeli policies, yet they understood that Israel’s strength and security mattered to Jews everywhere.
That instinct is now eroding.
Recently, thousands of Diaspora Jewish leaders signed public letters urging Israel to restrain Jewish settlers in Judea and Samaria from attacking Palestinians. Former British foreign secretary Malcolm Rifkind and other prominent Jewish figures warned that Israeli actions were harming global Jewry and increasing antisemitism abroad.
Jewish extremism in Judea and Samaria is a problem. Yet Palestinian attacks on Jews there dwarf the reverse by a factor of 20, so it is difficult to understand how a handful of thuggish Jews are the primary driver of instability unless one has a fundamentally distorted view of the conflict.
Jews have criticized Israel before. That is neither new nor unhealthy. Yet something about this moment feels sharper, louder, and more consequential.
The argument is no longer that Israeli policies are misguided, but that Israel itself is becoming a liability.
That is a bold and dangerous claim.
Part of this shift is driven by what can only reasonably be described as Netanyahu Derangement Syndrome.
Criticism of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has increasingly blurred into something more obsessive and emotionally charged. Netanyahu is not merely seen as wrong. He is portrayed as uniquely malevolent, dangerous, and responsible for nearly every negative development in Israeli and Jewish life.
Netanyahu is polarizing. Many on the Left oppose his judicial reforms and his coalition agreements with far-right parties. These are legitimate political disagreements for Israelis to have, though it is unclear what Diaspora Jews gain that is helpful by holding them.
Netanyahu’s place in Israeli history will always be shadowed by the October 7 massacre happening on his watch and by his refusal to take responsibility for it. Yet any fair reading of history must also acknowledge the extraordinary strategic and military gains Israel has made under his leadership during the subsequent war.
Unfortunately, nuance has largely disappeared from the discussion. Netanyahu is not just criticized; he is pathologized.
This creates a predictable outcome. Criticism of Netanyahu gradually becomes criticism of Israel itself, and no amount of sophistry can dispute that there is a meaningful difference. If you support Israel only when a leader you like is in charge, then you do not support Israel.
Diaspora Jewish discourse increasingly treats Netanyahu not as a democratically elected Israeli leader, which he unquestionably is, but as a rogue actor.
