By Julio Levit Koldorf
In 1492, Spain expelled its Jewish population, a monumental tragedy for Sephardic Jewry. The existence of a “Palestinian people” was not even a concept then, nor was it discussed when, centuries later, the Nazi puppet government in Norway sent the last Jews of Oslo to extermination camps in 1942.
This was long before Netanyahu or the creation of the State of Israel. In fact, the prime minister of Ireland, Éamon de Valera, went as far as expressing condolences for Adolf Hitler’s death in 1945—a shocking gesture that highlights Europe’s historical complicity in antisemitic violence.
Fast forward to today: Spain, Norway, and Ireland have taken the bold step of unilaterally recognizing the State of Palestine, a political move that raises more questions than it answers. Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez of Spain spoke of recognizing a state encompassing Judea, Samaria (the West Bank), and Gaza within the 1967 borders, with East Jerusalem as its capital. But which government would Sánchez be recognizing?
Before 1967, the West Bank was administered by Jordan, and Gaza was controlled by Egypt. Today, the territory is divided between the Palestinian Authority (PA) in the West Bank and Hamas in Gaza. The PA has not held elections for nearly two decades, fearing a loss to the more radical Hamas. Hamas, a designated terrorist organization, not only refuses to recognize Israel but openly calls for its destruction, along with that of all Jews worldwide. Are these European nations acknowledging a government whose curriculum and public discourse is riddled with antisemitic rhetoric and whose policies incentivize violence against Israeli civilians? It seems less a move for peace and more a political maneuver rooted in latent antisemitism, as noted by the Simon Wiesenthal Center.
The Unfolding Tragedy
The events of October 7, 2023, rewrote the rules of the current Middle Eastern conflict. In an unprecedented attack, Hamas executed a detailed plan of mass murder, mutilation, and kidnapping of civilians, targeting young pacifists attending a music festival. This was not a military operation but a pogrom—a term that most thought belonged to history books, now reemerging in the stark reality of Israel’s ongoing struggle.
Hamas’s intent was clear: to shatter the prospects of an imminent peace agreement between Israel and Saudi Arabia, Iran’s regional adversary. The scale and brutality of the attack left Israel with little choice but to respond decisively, seeking to eliminate the masterminds hiding within the labyrinthine tunnel networks beneath Gaza, funded by millions of dollars that could have gone towards humanitarian relief.
Hamas’s strategy is as cynical as it is effective: use civilians as human shields, hide weapons in schools and hospitals, and leverage the infrastructure of the UN Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) to mask their operations. Each civilian casualty becomes a propaganda victory for Hamas, painting Israel as a criminal state. Meanwhile, Israel continues to prioritize the safety of its citizens, with the Iron Dome and bomb shelters mitigating what could have been far more catastrophic damage from incessant rocket fire.
The West’s response has been ambivalent at best, and outright hostile at worst. Antisemitic incidents in Europe have surged to levels unseen since World War II, fueled by a toxic mix of far-left activism and far-right extremism. Both ends of the political spectrum have found common ground in their disdain for Israel, cloaking their prejudice in the language of human rights. Yet the hypocrisy is blatant: those who loudly decry Israeli policies have little to say about the true apartheid regimes in the Middle East, where LGBTQ+ individuals face persecution and women’s rights are virtually non-existent.
The Progressist Distortion
One of the most glaring contradictions lies in the stance of contemporary progressives. The privileged elites of Western society, who enjoy freedoms unthinkable in the Middle East, feel entitled to criticize Israel, a nation that guarantees these very freedoms to all its citizens, including its Arab minority (comprising 20% of the population). Progressivism has morphed into an ideology that is neither inclusive nor egalitarian, but exclusive and elitist, blind to the realities of life under authoritarian rule in Gaza, Syria, or Iran.
Even more paradoxical is the convergence of far-left anti-Zionism with far-right antisemitism. The radical right, traditionally hostile to Jewish communities, now finds itself in agreement with segments of the progressive left that equate Zionism with white supremacy. This unholy alliance is a stark reminder of the perils of ideological extremes and the dangerous consequences of aligning with authoritarian regimes in the name of social justice.
The Calculated Gamble of Terror
For Hamas, the war is not just about defeating Israel militarily; it is a propaganda campaign designed to manipulate global opinion. Each image of a Palestinian civilian casualty, each story of a destroyed home, is weaponized to erode Israel’s legitimacy. This is not a side effect but the crux of Hamas’s strategy: provoke a response that will elicit sympathy from the West and condemnation of Israel, thereby fracturing any potential unity among Arab nations seeking to normalize relations with the Jewish state.
Israel’s challenge is immense. The trauma of October 7 remains fresh, and the stakes are higher than ever. The task is not only to neutralize the immediate threat posed by Hamas but to navigate the complex web of international opinion, influenced by decades of distorted narratives and deep-seated biases against the Jewish state.
The Path Forward
If Europe truly seeks peace, it must first confront its own historical antisemitism and the modern manifestation of this prejudice. Unilateral recognition of a Palestinian state without a clear, democratic, and peaceful leadership only emboldens groups like Hamas, which thrive on chaos and conflict. Instead of aiding the Palestinian cause, such actions prolong the suffering of Palestinian civilians, trapped between a terrorist organization that exploits their plight and a world that uses them as pawns in a geopolitical chess game.
The only viable path to lasting peace is through genuine dialogue and a recognition of the historical and present-day realities of the region. This requires a nuanced understanding that goes beyond simplistic narratives and acknowledges the legitimate security concerns of Israel, a country the size of New Jersey surrounded by hostile entities.
For Israel, the objective remains clear: protect its citizens, eliminate threats, and seek a future where its neighbors choose cooperation over conflict. For Europe and the rest of the world, the challenge is to distinguish between true support for the Palestinian people and the appeasement of radical ideologies that perpetuate violence and hate. Anything less is not a step towards peace, but a regression into the darkest chapters of history.
Dr. Julio Levit Koldorf is a post-doc researcher on political antisemitism at the University of Valencia and University of Zaragoza, Spain.