A rebuttal to Omer Bartov’s New York Times op-ed reveals the dangerous double standards, historical distortions, and willful ignorance that underpin the demonization of Israel.
I consider myself a reasonably intelligent person—and I know demonization of Israel when I see it.
In a recent New York Times op-ed, Brown University professor Omer Bartov penned a piece that could be chiseled into the Mount Rushmore of intellectual dishonesty. With language dressed in academic gravitas, Bartov claims to deliver a definitive judgment on Israel’s conduct in Gaza—charging it, in essence, with genocide.
For all its eloquence, Bartov’s op-ed amounts to a vile accusation built on a faulty premise. His logic: civilians have been displaced, buildings destroyed, lives tragically lost—therefore, Israel must be committing genocide. This leap from the horrors of war to the presumption of genocidal intent is not just illogical; it’s slanderous.
Let’s be clear: there is no genocidal intent. For all the finger-pointing, Bartov offers no serious reckoning with Hamas. Instead, he strains to see only the worst in Israel’s actions, blinding himself to the complexities of urban warfare, the indiscriminate brutality of Hamas, and the IDF’s documented efforts to protect civilians.
In this Rorschach test of war, Bartov sees only the shadows of Israeli malice. He has crafted not an analysis, but a hateful screed—remarkable not for its insight, but for its omission of context, facts, and proportionality.
Bartov seeks credibility by invoking his Israeli background—employing the tired “As an Israeli…” trope, as though his former address absolves him of his current bias. It mirrors the “As a Jew…” device often wielded by organizations like Jewish Voice for Peace or IfNotNow—weaponizing identity to grant legitimacy to their vilification of Israel.
There’s a disturbing pattern: Israeli academics who move abroad and find academic stardom by joining the anti-Israel echo chamber. Their insider status makes them prized darlings of progressive forums, lauded for their “bravery”—when in fact, they are just selling recycled tropes to an eager audience.
Bartov is also simply wrong on the facts. If Israel were committing genocide, it wouldn’t be evacuating neighborhoods, dropping leaflets, risking soldiers to minimize civilian harm, and providing humanitarian aid even while under fire. War is terrible—but moving people and targeting infrastructure does not equal genocide.
The true genocidal actor here is Hamas. October 7 wasn’t just a mass murder—it was an expression of genocidal intent. When a terrorist calls his mother to boast of killing Jews and she praises him to do more, that’s not resistance. That’s Exhibit A.
When Hamas hides behind children, hospitals, and mosques to shield itself, knowing Israel will hesitate, it displays utter disregard for Palestinian lives. That’s not martyrdom. That’s sacrificial cynicism.
And where is the outrage over the actual attempted genocide of the Druze community in southern Syria? The world is silent—except for Israel. No op-eds, no UN resolutions, no progressive outcries.
Bartov’s selective moral outrage betrays an agenda. This isn’t about justice—it’s about delegitimization. It’s about holding Israel to a standard no other democracy in wartime is expected to meet.
It’s time to call this what it is: double standards, hypocrisy, and historical inversion. We must be able to recognize false narratives when we see them—and speak the truth just as loudly.
