Israel’s global battle against antisemitism—and the divisions within

Israel, under the leadership of the Minister of Diaspora Affairs and Combatting Antisemitism Amichai Chikli, has extended an invitation to political and cultural leaders worldwide: Attend an “International Conference to Combat Antisemitism” in Jerusalem.

This initiative reflects a critical truth—Israel must lead this battle. For years now, antisemitism has been the ideological backbone of the broader woke coalition in which so-called “oppressed” groups wage war against their so-called “oppressors.” At the heart of this narrative lies an effort to delegitimize, even destroy, Israel.

What we are witnessing is no longer a fringe phenomenon but a flood. The oldest hatred has taken on a new, modern form—manifesting in public squares and university campuses as a revolt against the core Judeo-Christian values of the West. The Oct. 7 massacre, in which Hamas terrorists slaughtered Israeli civilians, revealed an unexpected twist. Instead of sympathy, it sparked a wave of global political antisemitism. Today, every Jew—left or right, secular or religious—feels the threat.

Israel, understanding this, has expanded its battleground. It is now fighting not only for physical security but also for moral clarity. The government seeks to assume global leadership in the fight against antisemitism, opening its doors to both left-wing leaders who rightly denounce the few remaining neo-fascists, and to the growing right-wing forces in Europe who, without hesitation, name radical Islam—and its alliance with the radical left—as one of the primary engines of modern antisemitism. And they are not wrong. The data, the attacks, the studies—all point to the same conclusion: Today’s antisemitism thrives on school campuses and in public protests where anti-Zionist hate morphs into raw terror against Jews.

But just days before the conference, some invitees withdrew. It’s a familiar pattern. Since Oct. 7, the silence—and worse, the refusals—have been staggering. From the United Nation’s failure to explicitly condemn Hamas’s atrocities, to the global reluctance to acknowledge the rape and mutilation of Israeli women and the cold refusal to mourn murdered infants—the world has chosen equivocation over moral responsibility. U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres famously said the massacre “did not happen in a vacuum,” as if that could ever justify it.

What’s worse, many of these same voices have condemned Israel, even calling it “genocidal”—a grotesque inversion of reality, as Hamas, not Israel, is the genocidal actor. The refusal to attend the Jerusalem conference is rooted in the claim that some right-wing European invitees are themselves antisemites. French, German, Austrian and Hungarian political leaders have been dismissed for their political affiliations.

But if that’s the case, shouldn’t these concerns be voiced at the very conference convened to confront antisemitism? Refusing to show up is a political gesture that delegitimizes not only the guests but Israel itself. Why?

Among the most controversial invitees was Jordan Bardella, the 29-year-old president of France’s National Rally. Yes, he succeeded Marine Le Pen, who in turn broke from her father Jean-Marie Le Pen—a notorious antisemite. But Marine Le Pen has consistently and publicly repudiated her father’s legacy, even calling the Holocaust “the greatest horror in history.” Bardella, too, speaking to Israeli journalist Eldad Beck, declared his “total commitment to fighting antisemitism.”

Yet his presence, along with representatives from Spain’s Vox, Sweden’s Democrats and the Dutch Party for Freedom, caused an uproar. Jewish organizations, including the European Jewish Congress, members of Italy’s and France’s Jewish communities, and the chief rabbi of the United Kingdom, distanced themselves from the event. By rejecting the entire forum, they allowed their disagreement with Israel’s current government—particularly Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu—to overshadow the conference’s true purpose.

A particularly revealing example comes from an academic in La Stampa, who wrote that the far right and Evangelicals have aligned not with the Israel that she approves of, but with “Netanyahu’s racist and anti-democratic Israel.” This academic mocked the conference’s premise, claiming it focuses on “so-called antisemitism” by the United Nations and international courts, rather than the “real” threat. But how can one debate such hollow logic? Israel remains a vibrant democracy, often painfully so, where dissent flourishes. And the persecution Israel faces at the United Nations and its affiliated bodies is not hypothetical—it’s documented, studied and widely condemned for its obsessive anti-Israel bias.

Even Bernard-Henri Lévy, usually a voice of clarity, declined to attend—publishing a strangely self-referential explanation that amounts to an intellectualized self-accusation. He acknowledges that the right is no longer inherently antisemitic and that Israel is right to broaden its alliances. Yet, guided by instinct or nostalgia, he still refused. Is it nostalgia for the resistance trenches of 76 years ago? That era is over.

As for the concern that nationalism contains dangerous elements, of course. But the nobility of Zionism lies in its goal—to save the Jewish nation in a painful war for survival. Young Israelis, from across the political and religious spectrum, fight together to defend that goal.

And what do we hear in Western streets? “Kill the Jews,” chanted not by skinheads, but by leftist Palestinian supporters. The portrayal of Israel as a colonial, racist, genocidal state has deep roots in Soviet anti-American, anti-Zionist propaganda. A few pages of postwar history are enough to trace the line. Since the 1960s, antisemitic hatred has hidden behind anti-Zionist rhetoric, following the three Ds: demonization, double standards and delegitimization. Terrorism has always marched beside antisemitism. This is the truth.

With cautious determination, Israel now acknowledges what some refused to see for years—that it may find more allies on the right than the left. Even Bardella.