The verb in this title is not misspelled. Perhaps readers might think “defending” is more correct, but indeed, the choice of “defeating” is intentional.

On July 7, CNN interviewed Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and one of the questions posed dealt with Israel becoming a “litmus test” in Democratic Party primaries, especially as certain Jewish politicians asserted Israeli actions were making American Jews feel unsafe.

He mentioned Rep. Haley Stevens, a Jewish Democrat in Michigan running for the Senate, even backed by AIPAC, in connection with her comments in a CNN interview the previous day. She had said that Netanyahu “has not made us safer, has not brought us closer to peace, and he’s endangered Jews here in America and around the world.”

Netanyahu countered that the real issue is that “it’s made her uncomfortable because she can’t stand up for the truth.” He added that “she’s trying to probably excuse antisemitism.”

The next day, as Politico reported, she retorted: “It is very clear that Mr. Netanyahu has not made us safer. … And he’s endangered Jews here in America and around the world. This is why he was just trashing me today on CNN.”

If Stevens is referring to the feeling of being “safe” objectively or subjectively, and that he is not being helpful to her political campaign, I can assure her that Netanyahu was not responsible for the Holocaust, the Farhud in Iraq or the Petliura pogroms in Ukraine during the Russian Civil War. And those are examples just from the 20th century.

As an aside, I’m not sure Netanyahu is fully aware of the threat posed by her opponent in the Michigan Democratic primary. Abdul El-Sayed calls for the United States to stop supplying Israel with both offensive and defensive military weapons. He declared that Netanyahu was a war criminal and that Israel’s government is just as “evil” as Hamas. He also suggests treating Israel like a “rogue nation” that violates international law. He’s very anti-AIPAC.

He campaigned with Hasan Piker and, responding to an attempted bombing attack on Michigan synagogue Temple Israel in March, which could have killed dozens of young children, he offhandedly and callously uttered, relying on a psychiatry rotation while he was in medical school, that “hurt people hurt people,” seeking to morally equalize Israel’s actions against Hezbollah terrorists with the Michigan event. Of course, Abdul El-Sayed is courting Jewish voters “without moderating his views on Israel.”

It’s clear that the “Jewish factor” is front and center now in American politics. CNN seems to be caught up with the “being Jewish” element in running for office.

CNN anchor Elex Michaelson, at the end of a recent panel discussion on whether Rep. Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.) can run for the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination in 2028, blurted out that Ossoff is one who “may not read as Jewish as Josh Shapiro does, for whatever that’s worth.” Michaelson was referring to the governor of Pennsylvania, who attended a Jewish day school and views Israel favorably.

For the record, he apologized.

As for the phenomenon of American Jews playing up their Jewish identity to weaken American support for Israel, my impression is that it is something no other ethnic community does to any comparable extent, if at all.

Not only do they castigate their Jewish homeland, but they also attack legal American institutions supporting Israel, like AIPAC, which only feeds antisemitism. And when an anti-Jewish backlash builds, they continue to blame Israel while ignoring their own contribution to the ruckus.

Rahm Emanuel has also joined the fashionable fray. The former Chicago mayor, a Democrat exploring a 2028 presidential run, was in Israel last week. He spoke at Tel Aviv University, schooling the country on politics and the U.S.-Israel relationship (his father was born in Jerusalem). In an interview on Channel 12, he said, “Israel does not have a problem in the Democratic Party. Israel has a problem in America.”

He further asserted that Netanyahu “has led Israel into a dead end and has put the [U.S.-Israel] alliance at a tipping point. … Today, Israel is a pariah. Israel has lost the United States; it’s lost Europe.”

Emmanuel has lost the plot. He isn’t alone. There is long-time Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, of course, and the waffling New York Sen. Chuck Schumer. There is California state senator Scott Weiner, who pushes the blatant falsehood of genocide in Gaza. There are funders George Soros and his son, Alexander Soros. There are all the anti-Zionist organizations and those renewing the glory of the Diaspora or neo-Bundism. There is Hollywood actress Hannah Einbinder, who seemingly can’t help herself from bashing Israel.

Professors Omar Bartov and Norman Finkelstein misconstrue “genocide” and the “Holocaust,” and Ken Roth, who similarly corrupted the concept of “human rights.” The public intellectual slot can be filled by journalist Peter Beinart, who doesn’t seem to want the State of Israel to exist, even though it most definitely does.

What has resulted from their activities and misinformation campaigns? The result is that it is reported that “30% of Jewish American adults say Israel committed genocide in Gaza.” One of those polled told the reporter that “I realize they’re in a very difficult situation, but what they have done is just an unspeakable horror. They’re trying to wipe out a civilization, as far as I’m concerned.”
That was sculptor Harold Kalmus.

He is a 69-year-old Democrat from Arden, Del. His identity politics is that he “describes himself as Jewish by birth.” Incidentally, he also makes custom kitchen knives (and I hope that’s not a subliminal, post-traumatic reaction to circumcision, whether or not he had one performed). But being a “Jew by birth” is simply not enough to represent “Jewish opinion” faithfully and honestly.

These Jews are just repeating the slogans and thinking of Reform Judaism—that which dominated Jewish liberals until the 1937 Pittsburgh Convention, along with anti-Zionist English elites who fought the issuance of the Balfour Declaration. They are adopting a form of doykeit, preferring a “here” over one “there.”

What they have not grasped is that what they are digging for will most probably not serve as their temporary foxhole, but rather, will wind up being a deep pit of increased animosity. The alternatives to Zionism historically failed. Their understanding of a Jewish identity is weak and nigh-hollow. More critically, their criticism is factually wrong.

All of this, quite simply, is feeding the beast of hatred they presume they are riding.