By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar attributed the fatal shooting of two Israeli embassy staffers in Washington to a climate of “toxic antisemitic incitement” emanating from unnamed European officials. He directly linked this incitement, particularly heightened since the October 2023 Hamas attack, to the murder, asserting a causal relationship between anti-Israel rhetoric and the violence. Saar’s accusations followed recent criticism of Israel’s Gaza operation from European allies, including warnings of potential consequences. He specifically cited accusations of genocide and war crimes as fueling this hostile environment.
Read the original article here
Israel’s accusation that Europe is responsible for antisemitic incitement following the Washington, D.C. shooting is a remarkably tone-deaf response, to say the least. The sheer audacity of blaming a European entity for an act of violence committed on American soil by an American citizen is breathtaking. This isn’t a case of misplaced blame; it’s a complete disregard for geographic and political realities. It also reveals a deeply ingrained tendency to deflect criticism and avoid responsibility for their own actions.
The timing of this accusation is particularly suspect, occurring shortly after Israeli forces fired upon a European diplomatic delegation in the West Bank. This raises serious questions about Israel’s motives. Could this be a calculated attempt to shift the focus away from their own actions and onto a convenient scapegoat? The blatant attempt to manipulate the narrative is transparent, even cynical.
The assertion that European policies must be adjusted based on the actions of American radicals is preposterous. Each nation has its own sovereign right to determine its foreign policy, independent of events in other countries, particularly those driven by the actions of individuals, not representative of any broader European sentiment.
This incident highlights a much larger issue: the increasing tendency to label any criticism of Israeli policies as inherently antisemitic. While genuine antisemitism is a serious concern that must be condemned unequivocally, using this accusation as a blanket shield against legitimate criticism only serves to erode the credibility of the claim when true instances occur. The conflation of valid criticism of government actions with anti-religious bigotry is a tactic that has clearly worn thin.
There’s a clear connection between the actions of the Israeli government – such as the treatment of Palestinians – and the negative sentiments expressed towards Israel. The argument that these sentiments are solely due to antisemitism is simplistic and ignores the very real and deeply troubling consequences of those actions. To claim otherwise is to dismiss the suffering of many and to ignore the root causes of discontent. Attributing complex geopolitical issues to a simple explanation of antisemitism ignores a much more nuanced and legitimate argument.
The claim that the UN’s retracted statement about impending deaths in Gaza caused the shooting directly demonstrates a failure to understand cause and effect and a further attempt to scapegoat. While misinformation is a serious problem, the leap from a false statement to an act of terrorism is vast. It’s a gross oversimplification of complex issues and a convenient way to avoid confronting their own responsibility in fostering these feelings.
Moreover, the constant invocation of antisemitism as a response to criticism creates a chilling effect, silencing legitimate voices and hindering constructive dialogue. This deflection tactic, while perhaps effective in the short term, ultimately damages Israel’s international standing and reinforces the perception of a state unwilling to engage in self-reflection or accountability.
Finally, the suggestion that Europe is somehow responsible for an act of terrorism committed in the United States because it is less supportive of Israel than the US represents the epitome of illogical thinking. It’s the kind of argument that undermines any serious attempt to address the real issues at stake. The blatant attempt to shift blame is as alarming as it is unconvincing, revealing a dangerous lack of introspection.