RSS
How to Combat the Lie That Israel Is a ‘Settler Colonial’ State
The Western Wall and Temple Mount in Jerusalem. Photo: Wikimedia Commons.
Since the Hamas attack of October 7, 2023, there’s been a lot of public discussion of “settler colonialism” and the rights of indigenous peoples. Academics call for the “decolonization” of countries such as Australia, Canada, and the United States. Palestinian activists and their American student allies make the same demand regarding Israel, denouncing it as a “settler colonial project” and arguing that it must be “dismantled.”
Where did this movement come from? Does it have anything valid to say about Israel? Those questions are the subject of an important new book by Adam Kirsch, On Settler Colonialism: Ideology, Violence, and Justice.
The field of settler colonial studies has now been around for two decades. It began as an academic discipline centered on the rights of aboriginal Australians and Native Americans.
In the field, Kirsch argues, “the goal of learning about settlement in America and elsewhere is not to understand it, as a historian would, but to combat it.” Therefore, he says, “settler colonialism is best understood not as a historical concept but as an ideology, whose growing popularity among educated young Americans is already having significant political effects.” (Kirsch acknowledges that “To call it the ideology of settler colonialism is potentially misleading, since it means naming a political idea after what it opposes.”)
Settler colonial ideology closely resembles the antiracist ideology of Robin DiAngelo and Ibram X. Kendi. Thus, just as all white people are supposedly born with the original sin of racism, all non-indigenous people are born with the original sin of settler colonialism –- even those who have been around for generations. (This leads to the bizarre result that to some scholars, Black Americans whose forebears arrived in chains are viewed as colonists.) And as with Kendi’s ideology, settler colonialism takes a Manichaean view. Kendi maintains that you are either a racist or an antiracist. There is no such thing as a non-racist.
Similarly, with settler colonialism, you are either indigenous and belong to the land, or you are non-indigenous and your presence is irrevocably evil.
As Kirsch has pointed out, there’s a certain irony here: While settler colonialists view themselves as leftists, their ideology bears a definite resemblance to fascist, blood-and-soil nationalism: The land belongs only to those who are (or claim to be) its original inhabitants.
Also, because all non-indigenous people bear the irrevocable stain of settler colonialism, they can be collectively punished. As Kirsch has written, this logic is comparable to the communist belief that the bourgeoisie are “outside the realm of moral concern.”
All of this might have remained merely an academic discipline — a form of intellectual posturing with no feasible goal. After all, Australia, Canada, and the United States aren’t going anywhere.
“But what if there were a country,” Kirsch asks, “where settler colonialism could be challenged with more than words? Where all the evils attributed to it … could be given a human face? Best of all, what if that settler colonial society were small and endangered enough that destroying it seemed like a realistic possibility rather than a utopian dream? Such a country would be the perfect focus for all the moral passion and rhetorical violence that fuels the ideology of settler colonialism. It would be a country one could hate virtuously — especially if it were home to a people whom Western civilization has traditionally considered it virtuous to hate.”
Of course, he is talking about Israel.
As Kirsch writes, “while the concept of settler colonialism was first developed to explain the history of Australia, Canada, and the United States, today it is perhaps most often invoked in connection with Israel.” The settler colonial claim is especially popular with Palestinian think tanks like Al Shabaka, which recognize that it plays well in Western leftist circles. And it’s become central to the work of writers like Columbia University professor Rashid Khalidi. Indeed, Khalidi titled his latest book, The Hundred Years’ War on Palestine: A History of Settler Colonialism and Resistance, 1917-2017. He has called Zionism a “classic nineteenth-century European colonial venture.”
But as Khalidi conveniently fails to note, at least half the Jewish population of Israel is made up of Mizrahim, whose families were expelled from Arab countries before and right after the founding of Israel. They are not European at all. But for Khalidi, there’s no need to let facts get in the way of rhetoric.
In other important ways, Israel simply fails to fit the definition of a settler colonial project.
The original Zionists who populated the British Mandate were refugees, not colonizers. They came to escape oppression and reclaim their homeland, not to widen the boundaries of European influence. As Kirsch notes, they “did not have the backing of any government but were self-supporting or relied on private philanthropy.” Moreover, unlike typical colonial ventures, Israel “has no mother country obligated to defend it, or to accept millions of refugees if it fails.” And the Zionists did not come to exploit the land’s natural resources — there weren’t any.
One integral part of the settler colonial claim is the argument that, unlike Arabs, Jews are not indigenous to the land. But that turns history on its head. As Kirsch writes, “insisting that Palestinians are the indigenous people of Palestine, the ideology of settler colonialism finds itself unable to reckon with the Zionist principle that Jews are the indigenous people of the land of Israel.” Therefore, “because recognizing Jews as aboriginal to the land of Israel would turn one of settler colonial studies’ key theoretical weapons against itself, it simply declines to engage with this idea and its implications.” Of course some Palestinian leaders have no problem simply denying that Jews have a historical connection to the land.
Here’s the worst part. Settler colonialism precludes the only just resolution of the conflict: a two-state solution. That’s because, Kirsch says, “the actual effect of the ideology of settler colonialism is not to encourage” such a solution. “It is to cultivate hatred of those designated as settlers and to inspire hope for their disappearance. In this way, it abets Arab rejection of the State of Israel, which has helped to freeze the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in the same basic form since before 1948.”
Meanwhile, settler colonial ideology provides intellectual cover for academics and campus activists — a fig leaf for their hatred of Israel. It allows them to feel virtuous while condoning, even supporting, the eliminationist goals of groups like Hamas. As Kirsch puts it, such people “should be rebuked for their inhumanity, not praised for their idealism.”
Paul Schneider is an attorney, writer and member of the Board of Directors of the American Jewish International Relations Institute (AJIRI), an affiliate of B’nai B’rith International.
The post How to Combat the Lie That Israel Is a ‘Settler Colonial’ State first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Why Do Western Countries Treat Qatar Better Than Their Jewish Citizens?
Qatar’s Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim Al-Thani attends an emergency meeting of the United Nations Security Council, following an Israeli attack on Hamas leaders in Doha, Qatar, at UN headquarters in New York City, US, Sept. 11, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Eduardo Munoz
Growing up in communist Prague, I was exposed to antisemitism expressed largely by government officials and communist outlets, rather than by citizens themselves.
I learned in school about three major enemies of the socialist republic of Czechoslovakia: Germans seeking to conquer back the Sudetenland, American imperialists, and, you might have guessed, Zionists. And I was one of them.
The propaganda during the Six-Day War was unrelenting and hostile to Israel. Some years later, during my studies in medical school, I was invited to continue as a graduate student at the genetics institute after obtaining my MD degree. However, a year or so later, I was disinvited because I was Jewish.
Surprisingly, the old Jewish quarter in Prague was relatively well maintained — it was a big tourist attraction, especially for Germans, and a good source of Western currency for the state. There was also a permanent exhibit of art by Jewish children imprisoned in Theresienstadt during World War II. And we did read Anne’s Frank diary. Prague was still much better than the Soviet Union and Romania.
At that time, Western Europe, the US, and Canada were the beacons of freedom for everybody, including Jews. A few decades later, it appears to me that the sides have switched.
Central and Eastern Europe (not counting Russia) have become more hospitable to Jews, and Western Europe and Canada are outright hostile. The situation in the US is somewhat mixed. What happened?
Most Western officials and leaders blame Israel for the war in Gaza, and they accuse Israel of genocide, intentional famine, and starvation of Gazans. Hamas has become — or at least is becoming — a beacon of freedom, especially among younger generations. In the meantime, the EU, UK, and Canada are threatening Israel with sanctions and recognizing a State of Palestine, which is basically a reward for Oct. 7.
Affairs have further deteriorated after Israel’s bombing of a meeting of Hamas leaders in Doha last week. Everybody runs to the defense of Qatar — after all, Qatar is considered an “honest” mediator between Israel and Hamas. This is the same Qatar that is the instigator of anti-Zionism and antisemitism by infiltrating Western institutions, particularly universities and subverting the education of Western values into support for radicalism, and is also the host of Hamas leaders and financiers, including those who planned the October 7 massacre.
Do Western countries really believe that Qatar, led by an emir with three wives, with a track record of slave working conditions of its foreign workers and with funding of Hamas terrorists, deserves support?
Furthermore, the hate in Western Europe is not being directed just at Israelis (which is still wrong, since Israel is not a monolith) — but against all Jews.
Jews, and particularly Israeli Jews, are disinvited from conferences, art performances, collaborations with their colleagues, sports events, and more. They are dehumanized and physically attacked on the streets of Western cities. The Spanish Prime Minister has been attempting to throw out Israeli athletes from several competitions because they were attacked by pro-Palestinian demonstrators rather than preventing demonstrators from attacking Israelis.
What is going to happen to Jews living in the West? Will they really be protected? Overall, Western governments appear to be willing to throw their Jewish citizens under the bus. Why is that? Do they really trust Qatar as an honest mediator, and even more as the most important non-NATO ally? Do they pretend they’ve never heard about Qatar’s subversive role in Western countries and support of the Muslim Brotherhood? Are they afraid of their increasing Muslim populations due to immigration and high birth rates in their own countries? Don’t they realize that they are falling into a moral morass at an accelerating rate?
It is unclear how long Western outrage at Israel will last. Is it going to be short-lived, like when Israel bombed Iraq’s nuclear reactor in 1981? Or will the West try to humiliate Israel and force (or at least attempt to do so) a solution to the war that leaves Hamas in power and isolates Israel internationally? One can only hope that the West, led by the US, will make the right decision not only for Israel, but for all democratic countries.
Dr. Jaroslava Halper has been a professor of pathology at The University of Georgia in Athens, GA for many years. She escaped from communist Prague because of antisemitism, and lack of freedom and free speech. The gradual increase of antisemitism and anti-Zionism in certain circles in her second homeland, and the devastating October 7 massacre by Hamas, led her to realize that more active engagement is necessary to combat antisemitism, including anti-Zionism.
RSS
Palestinian Authority: Marco Rubio’s ‘Invasion’ of the Western Wall Is a Crime Against Islam
Benjamin Netanyahou and Marco Rubio. Photo: David Azagury, US Embassy Jerusalem
On Sunday, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Ambassador Mike Huckabee visited the Western Wall of the Temple Mount, together with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
The Palestinian Authority (PA) was incensed by this visit, and publicized a long condemnation by the PA Jerusalem Governorate against what they called a “crime” against Islamic holy places:
The participation in these invasions by high-ranking American officials in an official capacity constitutes unacceptable collusion with the occupation’s policy, and dangerous willful blindness to the daily crimes committed against the holy city, its residents, and its holy places.
When Jews and Christians pray at the Western Wall or on the Temple Mount, the PA condemns what they call “Talmudic ceremonies.” The visit “offends the feelings of our Palestinian people”:
The Jerusalem Governorate viewed the invasion of the occupation’s Prime Minister — Benjamin Netanyahu, American Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and American Senator [sic, Ambassador] Mike Huckabee into the Western Wall plaza, and the fact that they held Talmudic ceremonies at this purely Islamic site, as a provocative step that offends the feelings of our Palestinian people and constitutes a blatant violation of the historical and legal status quo in the occupied city of Jerusalem.
Even though Muslims built a mosque in Jerusalem on the site of the Temples specifically because it was a Jewish holy site, today the PA proclaims that the Western Wall is a solely Islamic site:
The governorate emphasized that the Western Wall is an inseparable part of the blessed Al-Aqsa Mosque and that it is part of the Islamic Waqf lands under Palestinian sovereignty. It further stressed that there is no legitimacy for any Israeli or foreign presence within it, without the approval of the relevant Palestinian authorities.
The PA even threatened that this “escalation” would have “consequences”:
The governorate warned of this escalation’s consequences on the situation on the ground within the city. It emphasized that the Palestinian people would not agree to any harm to the Arab identity of Jerusalem or its Islamic and Christian holy places, and that they would resist all attempts to impose the occupation’s sovereignty over the land and the people. The governorate called on the international community… to curb the occupation’s violations and stop the American involvement in support for the Judaization projects of the occupied city.
[PA Jerusalem Governorate, Facebook, September 14, 2025]
The author is the Founder and Director of Palestinian Media Watch, where a version of this article first appeared.
RSS
What Charlie Kirk Meant to Jewish Conservatives
Charlie Kirk speaking at the inauguration of Donald Trump in January 2025. Photo: Brian Snyder via Reuters Connect
The horrific assassination of activist Charlie Kirk has left Jewish conservatives asking who will weaken the anti-Jewish hostility brewing in some corners of the far right now that Kirk has left us.
The 31-year-old, a devout Christian and founder of the organization Turning Point USA (TPUSA), understood that a society that turns on its Jews is a society that is rotting at its core.
When it came to quieting the antisemitic energies of the far right, Kirk knew that the conspiratorial scapegoating was a symptom of a serious malady, aggravated by an anxious and unhappy generation living in a digital den within an increasingly secularized America.
Kirk said that rejecting antisemitism, which he called “demonic,” was directly tied to defending Western civilization and protecting America’s Judeo-Christian identity.
That’s sadly ironic, given that many far right conspiracists online have blamed the Jewish people or Israel for Kirk’s murder.
In what may have conveyed a warning to the crop of influencers seeking to manipulate the Kirk assassination to advance their anti-Jewish objectives, US President Donald Trump released an image on Friday, showing the US leader and Kirk embracing against a backdrop of a US and Israeli flag with the caption reading, “Everybody Loved Charlie!”
Kirk’s speaking engagements at college campuses across the country drew thousands of students, admirers, and protestors. The informal open-air events provided participants with a platform to ask the late conservative influencer his thoughts on a host of issues, with many questions focused on Israel, Gaza, and the Jews.
Always respectful, Kirk carefully articulated why antisemitism is anti-Americanism.
Whether coming from the progressive left or the far right, Kirk defended Israel through a strategic and historical lens, and rejected the slew of libelous accusations leveled against the Jewish State.
Most recently, the TPUSA President exposed liberal media outlets for their role in fomenting the lie that Israel was starving the citizens of Gaza.
I just debated at Cambridge and Oxford. At Cambridge, instead of focusing on their own decaying country, they are obsessed with Israel. The lack of moral clarity on this topic is chilling. I decided to put this bouncy Brit in his place.
Watch: pic.twitter.com/RRnLiXJE2X
— Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) May 21, 2025
He also inspired Jewish conservatives to confront toxic positions with serious rebuttals, rather than with reflexive smears, while affirming that the path to a healthier country required responding to unsavory ideas through thoughtful and critical reason.
Acknowledging that it’s “hunting season for Jews right now in this country and that is a sick thing,” Kirk recently instructed an Israeli student who was harassed on a US campus to get “tougher.”
Indeed, he encouraged Jews to fight hate not with grievance, but with grit.
Jewish victimhood may have worked as a convenient tool of the political left, but Kirk saw the necessity and beauty in Jewish strength.
He emboldened Jewish Americans to lean into faith, and showed us that religion is the moral and divine anchor in today’s complicated and liberalized world.
Kirk advocated for issues that were in American Jews’ best interest, even as many of our own leaders resisted departing from the liberal sensibilities that undermined Jewish safety, and refused to acknowledge the dangers embedded in liberal immigration regulations.
As mainstream Jewish groups ignored the challenges associated with the increasing number of Muslims with radical ideologies entering the US, Kirk was firm in his assertion that radicalized Islam was incompatible with Western civilizational values.
Kirk granted right-leaning American Jews the space and the courage to sharpen our arguments as to why adopting strict immigration provisions was sound policy. He also defended Israel his whole life, and was an astute observer of the cracks in the emerging debate among younger conservative cohorts as it relates to safeguarding the US-Israel bond.
Warning of an “earthquake coming on this issue”, Kirk convened a focus group over the summer featuring Gen Z conservatives to discuss America’s alliance with Israel.
It was a candid discussion, and the panel provided a blueprint for what constituted “persuadable” pro-Israel arguments, and why, according to the young TPUSA supporters, focusing on shared values, radical Islamist threats, and intelligence cooperation was more of a motivator for bolstering support for Israel than unveiling public campaigns that underscored the progressive policies undertaken by the Jewish State.
The horrific assassination of Charlie Kirk has left Jewish Americans with an intense sadness over losing a friend who was critical to sidelining the anti-Jewish rumblings occurring across the cultural and political landscape.
As an Evangelical Christian, Kirk also taught American Jewry the value of adhering to our Jewish inheritance. He delivered a roadmap for how strong Jews, who commit to channeling conservative ideals through robust debate, are crucial to preserving the Judeo-Christian character of our country and will organically yield a US-Israel alliance that will be a bulwark against the enemies of Western civilization.
Irit Tratt is a writer who resides in New York. Follow her on X @Irit_Tratt.