Israel’s foes seem surprised that the Jewish state’s people prefer the defeat of existential threats over applause from antisemites and an indifferent world. Opinion.
Even Israel’s harshest critics must confront two realities post–Oct. 7, 2023:
- The strategic map of the Middle East has shifted in Israel’s favor.
- Despite international criticism, Israelis prioritize survival over global approval.
This refusal to be victimized again is often misunderstood in the West—particularly by liberal and left-wing observers—as insensitivity or moral failure. But as Tobin argues, the Jewish historical experience leaves no room for naiveté about the price of defenselessness.
The Double Standard
Israel’s actions are judged by a moral yardstick applied to no other nation. While the country fights genocidal threats like Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran, it is portrayed in Western media—led by outlets like The New York Times and CNN—as the aggressor. Meanwhile, the October 7 massacre, the worst slaughter of Jews since the Holocaust, is quickly overshadowed by pro-Hamas narratives that label Israel as the perpetrator of “genocide” in Gaza.
Tobin calls this obsession with condemning Israel an extension of the historical preference for “dead Jews,” referencing Dara Horn’s 2021 book. The global community appears more comfortable mourning Jews than accepting Jews who defend themselves.
The Times’ Accidental Truth
Even The New York Times, in a rare moment of candor buried deep in an analysis piece, admitted:
“Many Israelis welcome the prospect of a future in which they are no longer surrounded by well-armed enemies… even if it means being viewed negatively by the rest of the world.”
To Tobin, this isn’t just rational—it’s morally obvious. Yet Western elites mock Israeli concern for survival as paranoia, echoing Thomas Friedman’s infamous 1989 insult that Israel is “Yad Vashem with an air force.”
Failed Peace, Real Costs
Tobin revisits the litany of failed peace efforts—Oslo, Camp David, the Gaza disengagement—all of which led not to peace but to more terrorism. He argues that Israel traded land not for peace, but for rockets, suicide bombings, and ultimately, the horrors of Oct. 7. Critics ignore these historical facts, either out of ignorance or ideology.
In particular, intersectionality and critical race theory have led many Western progressives to reduce the Israeli-Palestinian conflict into a binary:
- Jews = white colonial oppressors
- Palestinians = people of color, always victims
This distorted worldview blinds them to terrorism, extremism, and antisemitism.
A Surge in Antisemitism
Since the war began, open antisemitism has exploded worldwide. From pro-Hamas mobs on college campuses to anti-Israel banners at European cultural events like Glastonbury and Pamplona, the hostility now extends far beyond political circles.
Diplomatic isolation and efforts to brand Israel a pariah state do harm—economically, culturally, and politically. But Tobin argues that such pressure cannot and should not force Israel to sacrifice its security.
The Price of Defense
Yes, Israeli operations in Gaza and elsewhere have caused real suffering, especially where civilians are used as human shields. But critics ignore the alternative to military action: further genocidal attacks.
Iran’s decades-long pursuit of nuclear weapons is not theoretical; it’s a blueprint for mass murder. And Hamas’ actions on Oct. 7 weren’t spontaneous—they were the logical outcome of an ideology bent on eradicating Jews.
Moral Clarity
Tobin’s message is unambiguous:
“There have already been enough dead Jews.”
The willingness of Israelis to fight for survival—against propaganda, terror, and global isolation—is not just defensible. It is admirable. And any morally serious person should not only understand it, but support it.
