Managing the demonisation of Israel

However, if Eisenkot’s government comes to fruition—perhaps even with external support from Israel’s Arab parties—will they cease downplaying the anti-Semitism sweeping the West, portraying it as the result of the genocidal policies of that monster Netanyahu? Will they cease propagating claims of apartheid in Israel, given that Arab members of the Knesset have at times played a decisive role in forming a government (a fact often overlooked in anti-Zionist discourse)? And if Eisenkot pledges to work toward liberating Gaza from the military control of Hamas, does he thereby become a perpetrator of genocide? Let us remember Rabin, later canonised after being assassinated by a Jewish fundamentalist extremist who was, in biblical terms, opposed to peace with the Palestinians: he too had been branded with infamy, like all leaders of any Israeli government – from the left-wing Golda Meir or Shimon Peres, to the right-wing Begin who had made peace with Egypt by returning the Sinai to Sadat, to the ‘sinister’ Sharon – so sinister that in 2005 he forcibly dismantled the Jewish settlements in the Gaza Strip, amidst the drama of the Jews who, in protest, all wore the yellow star (every single one of them; not a single Jew remained in that strip of land, which was then occupied). By now, the anti-Zionist obsession—often so indistinguishable—has taken on such a malicious twist that even Netanyahu’s eventual (democratic) departure will certainly fail to stem the tide.

A serial liar such as Francesca Albanese – revered and feted by left-wing councils, yet from whom even the UN is now distancing itself – has trotted out once again the sickening lie about dogs allegedly trained by the evil IDF to rape Palestinian prisoners: an implausible tall tale which, however, is not enough – in the weak and trembling trenches of a democratic culture on the brink of surrender – to stop Albanese from being regarded as a credible interlocutor. Will it be Eisenkot who changes their minds? And when another Israeli government – one that does not have Netanyahu as prime minister and excludes the arrogant fascists of Ben-Givr from its ranks – were to respond to the missiles launched by Hezbollah at northern Israel, would the chorus about Israel’s ‘disproportionate’ reaction then resume? Would it be claimed that if synagogues are set alight in Europe and if Jewish students who dare to wear kippahs are attacked on university campuses amidst the complicit silence of the academic authorities, the blame lies not with the anti-Semitic scum but with the indefensible Eisenkot government? And what of the Houthis? Can Israel respond to this wing of the Islamist international coordinated by Tehran? And by the way, setting aside Trump’s reckless and deranged behaviour, should we be concerned or not – with or without the Eisenkot government – if the Pasdaran, who wish to annihilate Israel, were to acquire the super-bomb?

Ultimately, there is only one question: regardless of which democratically elected government is in power – the only exception in the Middle East, whether right-wing or left-wing – does Israel have the right to exist and to defend its existence? If an Eisenkot government were indeed to come to power, would Decaro, the Democratic governor of Puglia, stop joining in with absurd slogans such as ‘a free Palestine from the river to the sea’ – that is, without Israel, permanently wiped off the map? Then, of course, there are burning issues, such as the policy to be adopted towards the settlers who believe they have the right to persecute Palestinian civilians in the West Bank by demolishing their homes, but the fundamental question remains: is Netanyahu’s departure from the political scene enough to put an end to the demonisation of Israel, and to the silence of democratic culture in the face of those who, at rallies, hail 7 October as a ‘revolutionary act’ to be welcomed with joy?