OCTOBER 8TH ‘CONCEPTSIA’

How Hamas Weaponized Progressive Discourse to Generate the Highest Wave of Jew-Hatred Since the Holocaust and What Needs to Be Done to Fight It Effectively

The Playbook to Fighting Antisemtism in America

DOWNLOAD AS PDF

Founder's Note

As these lines are written (August, 2025), antisemitism is rampant, and Israel’s international standing is likely at its lowest point ever. Images from Gaza have detonated decades of efforts to weaponize progressive language against the Jewish state and American Jewish communities.  The purpose of this document is not to undermine the legitimacy of criticism of Israel, even when we disagree with it or believe it to be one-sided and superficial. Similarly, the document does not aim to propose a political agenda to "reduce the pressure" on Israel, as the security considerations and implications of such an agenda fall outside the scope of the document. Instead, this document focuses on the trends that have allowed Israel to become a symbol and a victim of the American zeitgeist. This is a phenomenon where celebrities proudly stand against it, where academics automatically adopt genocide claims without intellectual integrity, and where Israel serves as a political litmus test in Western democracies.

Like Israel on October 7th, American Jewish leadership was caught in a collective failure – an "October 8th conceptsia." They failed to grasp how deeply enemies had penetrated Western institutions and discourse, catalyzing the most significant wave of Jew-hatred since World War II. An orchestrated campaign, led by Western organizations, promoted the false narrative of Israel as a rootless colonial project. This narrative is effective because it complements Hamas’s indoctrination in Gaza, where the humanitarian crisis was a premeditated strategic goal, planned with the knowledge that Israel's necessary response would harm Palestinian civilians.

Our adversaries’ core strategy has shifted to weaponizing language. Just as Hamas used dual-use materials for terror infrastructure, the anti-Israel campaign employs “dual-use terminology.” Ambiguous phrases are deployed not always as explicit hate, but to ‘troll’ the Jewish community, forcing endless, unproductive debates over definitions. The aim is to undermine the Jewish lived experience and violate the sanctity of safe spaces, in K–12 schools, or university campuses.

By obsessively seeking perfect clarity on what constitutes antisemitism, we play our detractors' game while real harm continues. Conversely, overly broad definitions from some quarters cheapen the term and dilute its power. The focus must shift from defining the threat to defeating it. The mandate is not to win a semantic argument, nor to undermine the legitimacy of criticism over Israeli policy, but to protect our communal spaces and lived experience.

The Jewish community's response is often hampered by a flawed premise: a "minority mindset" that fosters self-defeating, reactive strategies. This persists despite polling — including the latest Harvard Harris Poll conducted before the publication of this document [August 2025] — showing core support for Israel is far larger than the anti-Israel base. We are failing to turn majority sympathy into effective action. Moreover, the community's serving elite often seems ethically confused, adapting to external pressures instead of leading with moral clarity. This has left the community adrift precisely when it needs firm direction.

Jewish communal leadership paralysis is often driven by the internal dilemma of ‘liberal cred’ versus ‘Jewish cred.’ A desire for validation from liberal circles causes leaders to equivocate, balancing support for defensive actions with criticism and avoidance – such as in the case of the largely ambiguous references to the current administration’s actions against campus antisemitism.

It is time for a new approach: a confident, proactive, and principled offense. Externally, this means refusing to fight on our detractors' terms. We must champion Zionism as a decolonization movement and frame the fight against pro-Hamas antisemitism as an essential defense of Western democratic values. Communities must meticulously map and counter the infiltration of mainstream institutions – universities, school boards, and city councils – and expose how this agenda aligns with broader movements aimed at undermining pluralism. The goal must be clear: prevent antisemitism’s normalization by safeguarding the Jewish experience. This demands leaders who not only adapt, but lead with unwavering ethical clarity to forge a stronger, more resilient particularistic Jewish identity for the future. 

The immediate emphasis should be on ensuring Jewish serving elite, professionals and lay, adopt a more particular Jewish approach. In the era of identity politics, where minority groups adopt a much more proud and confident particular identity and use universalist frameworks to promote their interests, the universalization of the Jewish community has generated an ambiguous identity clarity that often paralyzes the Jewish professionals and lay leaders in front of a form of hate that is masked with universal terminology.

Even if Israel's situation improves slightly after the end of the campaign (and this development is also questionable in light of the expected international press reporting from devastated Gaza), the loss of the young American generation, including young conservatives who vote for the Republican Party, may place Israel in deep chronic political distress for years to come. Recovering to deal with this challenge is a necessity for Israeli national security.

At Atchalta, we are moving from analysis to action, collaborating with key state initiatives, and already translating the ideas in this playbook into RFPs and KPIs for dozens of organizations. We also work directly with US-based organizations to build and implement these strategies using cutting-edge tools. Finally, we develop technological tools aimed at activating the silent Jewish majority on campuses, in K–12 schools, and in trade unions.

The path forward demands both strategic sophistication and unwavering moral clarity. Indeed, our work is made exponentially harder when inflammatory statements by some Israeli ministers hand propaganda victories to our enemies. We must be as shrewd as our opponents without ever compromising our values. The stakes could not be higher – the future of Jewish life in the West and Israel's place among the nations hang in the balance.

Eran Shayshon, Founder

Acknowledgements

We are deeply grateful to the many individuals who contributed to this document. While the content represents the final opinion of Atchalta, the insights, support, and guidance from our collaborators were essential to its formation.

We especially want to thank David Bernstein, Founder of the North American Values Institute (NAVI) and Fern Oppenheim, founder of Brand Israel Group, whose thinking sessions catalyzed many of the core ideas in this document, including David’s mere framing of the subject as ‘conceptsia’.

For their unwavering support, trust, and invaluable advice, we thank Linda and Mike Frieze, Mark Sokol, Jeffrey H. & Debbie Margolis, Mark Mandel and an Anonymous donor from Orange County. We also extend our gratitude to those who offered their intellectual or material support and heavily impacted the make-up of this document: Rabbi David Gedzelman, Phil Darivoff, Mike Diamond, Daniel Arbass, Mike Leven, Jessica Myers, Ephraim and Donna Greenwall, Ed Heyman, Ellen D. & Dr. James M. Weiss, David Fine, Steven Lurie, Roi Feder, and Ron Brummer.

Several members of Atchalta’s General Assembly, Board, and steering committee played an active role in shaping this document, beyond their ongoing support for our work. We would like to acknowledge Uri Steinberg, Roi Mekler, Rabbi Leor Sinai, Dikla Zehavi, Ronnie Benatoff, Navah Edelstein Berger, Nevet Basker, and Ronald Weiner.

We also express our gratitude to Maccabi World Union for their trust and partnership. They opened a door for us and gave us the privilege of impacting a global campaign. For their friendship and trust, we thank Amir Gissin, Director General of Maccabi World Union (MWU), and Ayala Yosef, head of the initiative to combat antisemitism within Maccabi.

Finally, this document was authored by the Atchalta team: Eran Shayshon, Esq. Dor Lasker, Dr. Jael Eskenazi-Zilcha, and Dr. Carmit Padan.

Executive Summary

American Jewry, much like Israel before October 7th, was caught in a "conceptsia" (a fixed mindset – the term was used to describe the Yom Kippur War failure) that led to a fundamental surprise on October 8th, as a severe wave of antisemitism emerged.

This stemmed from underestimating the fusion of Israel's delegitimization, the rise of identity politics, and the universalization of Jewish identity. Like in Israel, American Jewish leadership didn't lack information or intelligence but suffered from incorrect assessment and a failure to understand implications – largely due to a tendency to define antisemitism in ways that primarily capture its right-wing expressions.

By de facto accepting the progressive binary discourse that frames Jews as privileged, many Jews have been experiencing an identity crisis that challenges communal cohesion. This has resulted in the absence of a shared definition of left-wing antisemitism, leaving the American Jewish response weak and incoherent. Consequently, the inability of Jewish organizations to define shared interests has made creating a unified front against Jew-hatred a failed mission.

The weakening of distinct Jewish identity, replaced by a universalist framing, has diminished connection to Israel and communal solidarity, leaving many Jews ill-equipped to recognize or confront antisemitism. When incidents arise in K–12 public schools - whether overt harassment or subtle bias disguised as “legitimate criticism” of Israel or progressive activism – parents often feel isolated, unsure of how to respond, and unable to identify such acts for what they are.

Mainstream Jewish organizations are not structured to support political and social activism. The U.S. Jewish community, while historically influential, has specialized more in fundraising than in leading social or grassroots movements. This has diminished the relevance of traditional communal organizations to younger generations and reflects a broader societal mistrust of centralized representation. As a result, Jewish organizations have lost ‘street cred’, making it difficult for them to effectively counter the pro-Hamas wave at the local level.

The myth of numerical inferiority that prevents 'winning' is a key component in the October 8th ‘conceptsia.’ Polls across Western countries, especially the U.S. – Including the latest one released before the publication of this report in August 2025 by the Harvard Harris Poll – show that support for Israel remains greater than support for Hamas. That is even the case in supposedly anti-Israel university strongholds. This myth is the result of two trends:

• First, Jewish communities fail to translate Israel sympathy into activism, unlike opponents who succeed at impressive rates from a much smaller supporter base. Their secret: framing anti-Israel struggle as relevant to Americans by presenting it as integral to internal fights against racism and discrimination. Meanwhile, attempts to generate Israeli relevance for mainstream audiences have completely failed 

• ·Second, social networks create 'collective illusions' of non-existent majorities, producing distorted perceptions of consensus that silence pragmatic voices through fear of social ostracism. Anti-Israel investment in promoting content reflecting small percentages of noisy voices, combined with algorithmic manipulation, creates the appearance of a false majority.
  

The big opportunity to address Jew-hatred on campus is being squandered due to the Jewish community's internal “conceptsia.” The administration's declared war on the “DEI industry” has created a rare opening, but these actions are often met with skepticism, and community inaction may forfeit the chance to alter the campus dynamic. This is critical, as most Jewish students experience antisemitism and feel isolated, while efforts by Jewish organizations to engage this silent majority have seen limited success. This is even more crucial within the K–12 school system, as it is a far less structured arena, with no obvious Jewish address to turn to.

The Structure of Pro-Hamas Jew-Hatred

The resulting Jew-hatred and Israel's isolation stem from an organized network campaign undermining Israel's legitimacy, promoted by Western organizations with involvement from bodies sympathetic to the Islamist Muqawama axis in the Middle East. Hamas acknowledges this reality and launched the October attack knowing the Israeli response would harm Palestinian civilians and generate an anti-Israel global campaign.

American Islamist organizations lead efforts to undermine Israel's legitimacy as part of the Muslim Brotherhood's anti-Western agenda. These organizations underwent "Americanization," adopting progressive rhetoric to strengthen partnerships and create alliances with the radical left (known as the Red-Green Alliance).

The fusion of progressivism and Islamism fundamentally challenges Western liberal democracies. Contemporary progressive discourse often undermines democratic values and adopts an anti-patriotic stance, exemplified by actions such as burning American flags and calls to defund the police. These groups operate as agents of chaos, promoting a purist and uncompromising approach in the name of combating alleged discrimination. In practice, however, their ideology undermines pluralism, meritocracy, freedom of speech, and even scientific principles.

Islamist organizations, for their part, currently operate behind a “progressive curtain,” employing what they describe as a “civilizational jihad” — a process aimed at weakening Western civilization from within. This so-called “Red-Green Alliance” creates a coordinated global pressure campaign, receiving encouragement, moral support, and in some cases, more tangible backing from openly anti-American powers such as Iran, Russia, and China.

Amid the backdrop of images from Gaza, the fixation on foreign affairs and chaotic diplomatic operations contributed to Israel's diplomatic isolation. Despite having optimal conditions after October 7th, Israel saw its international sympathy evaporate within weeks, effectively becoming a“pariah.” At least partly, this is a result of a tendency to view politics as secondary to security. The Hebrew version of this document focuses more on this aspect.

The Playbook for Jewish and Pro-Israeli Leadership in North America

Play #1: Define the End Zone — Neutralize Normalization: The single, unifying objective is to halt and reverse its normalization in the mainstream. This strategic focus transforms an endless fight into a winnable campaign with a defined, measurable goal: making antisemitism less acceptable in public discourse and institutions. Every other play and tactic must be measured against this standard, enabling focused planning, smart resource allocation, and measurable results.

Play #2: Reframe the Battlefield — A Threat to America, Not Just the Jews: The old framing of antisemitism as a uniquely Jewish problem is a strategic dead end. The new approach positions it as a direct assault on American identity and Western democratic values. Two key moves:

• Shift the Focus: Frame the wave of Jew-hatred as part of a broader progressive extremism threatening America’s core principles. When protesters burn flags and call for disruption of the American order, they reveal that Israel is a proxy target – the real aim is dismantling the West.

• Abandon the "Canary": The “canary in the coal mine” metaphor is obsolete. Pro-Hamas antisemitism is not a warning sign of future dangers; it is an active threat to American society today, alongside attacks on meritocracy, pluralism, and free speech.
  

Play #3: Flip the Mindset – Act Like the Majority You Are: Our greatest handicap is psychological: a “minority mindset” that sees us as outnumbered. Polling consistently shows core support for Israel far exceeds anti-Israel sentiment.  Two-pronged approach:

• External Play: Project confidence. Stop apologizing for Jewish existence or defending against bad-faith claims of “colonialism.” Assert Zionism as a decolonization movement and frame the fight against pro-Hamas antisemitism as defending Western democracy.

• Internal Play: Build resilience. Invest in education that fosters proud Zionist identity and establish clear red lines that reject internal fringe voices who parrot opposition talking points.
  

Key Tactic: Activate the silent campus majority – 70–80% of Jewish students who face antisemitism yet remain disengaged. Empower them to act independently with tools, clarity, and agency, transforming them into a visible, decisive force.

Play #4: Shatter the Collective Illusion The apparent numerical inferiority of the pro-Israel voice is a manufactured perception amplified by extreme online actors. Three moves:

1. Educate and Inoculate: Teach communities that the online flood of hate is likely an illusion, not reality, converting despair into resolve.

2. Strategic Tech Diplomacy: Engage Big Tech in sustained negotiations for algorithmic transparency, disruption of hostile bot networks, and policy enforcement tailored to pro-Hamas antisemitism.

3. Build a Superior Tech Arsenal: Invest in AI-driven tools to detect disinformation, track hostile narratives, and arm the pro-Israel network with advanced digital capabilities.

Play #5: Go on Offense – Dismantle the Red-Green Alliance: A defensive stance is a losing stance.  Four moves:

• Capture the High Ground: Influence boards, editorial rooms, unions, and political institutions.

• Drive the Wedge: Highlight the contradictions between progressive values (women’s rights, LGBTQ rights, religious freedom ) and Islamist partners’ oppressive stances.

• Create a “Price Tag”: Expose funding and ideological links to terror groups and impose social, economic, and legal consequences.

• Empower New Allies: Strengthen anti-Islamist Muslim voices to create a counter-narrative from within.
  

Play #6: Build the Big Tent Coalition: An offensive strategy requires allies. Four pillars:

1. Rebuild Our Diplomatic Corps: Revitalize professional community relations work at all levels.

2. Forge a Coalition of the Targeted: Unite with other groups harmed by progressive orthodoxy. 

3. Activate the Sympathetic Majority: Focus on non-Jewish allies who see antisemitism as a threat to their own values.

4. Make Pluralism the Rallying Cry: Defend the pluralistic society that has enabled Jewish and minority prosperity.

Play #7: Develop a more Particularistic Jewish Identity: Start with the serving elite of the Jewish Community. A strong external posture requires an equally strong internal foundation. The Great Reversal: Internally, emphasize Jewish particularism; externally, universalize the fight against antisemitism. Five moves:

• Champion Proud Particularism: Elevate Jewish values and Hebrew learning.

• Focus primarily on educating the Jewish serving elite, professional and lay leaders.

• Re-engineer Jewish Education: Immunize youth against corrosive identity politics.

• Deepen the Israel Connection: Use the post–October 7th moment to forge emotional ties with Israel.

• Recruit Allies from the Jewish Left: Harness disillusionment among progressive Jews to challenge anti-Israel sentiment from within.

Play #8: Expose and Disarm the Weaponization of Language: Antisemitic activists deploy “dual-use terminology” to troll, confuse, and divide Jewish communities. These ambiguous phrases derail debate, erode safe spaces, and infiltrate school environments.  Five moves:

1. Identify and Catalog: Map the most common weaponized terms and phrases.

2. Train for Counterplay: Equip leaders, educators, and students with language tools to flip the script and expose the tactic in real time.

3. Set Institutional Boundaries: Push schools, universities, and workplaces to recognize and act against the misuse of such language as harassment.

4. Apply a ‘Jewish standard’ in Jewish public spaces to ‘dual-use’ terminology, which often aims at challenge the Jewish lived experience.

5. Big Jewish Tent – The left's support for Hamas has created a moment of profound cognitive dissonance for many progressive Jews who now feel betrayed. This creates a strategic opening leverage their discomfort to acknowledge their recognition of the double standards and dual use terminology within progressive circles to recruit them.

State-Level Playbook: Israeli National Policy

Directive #1: Redefine Victory — Make Legitimacy a Strategic Objective

Israel’s national security paradigm must evolve from focusing solely on battlefield outcomes to measuring victory by the political and diplomatic trends that follow. The enemy’s core strategy is to turn Israel into a pariah state; therefore, true victory is defeating that narrative while strengthening Israel’s strategic position. Three moves:

1. Make International Standing a Core Metric: Legitimacy and diplomatic outcomes are not by-products - they are primary objectives that shape military goals from the start.

2. Integrate Military and Political Action: Align operational planning with diplomatic, humanitarian, and media strategies to convert battlefield wins into strategic advantage.

3. Think Globally, Act Strategically: Plan to defeat Qatar’s influence at Harvard with the same rigor used against Iran’s nuclear program. Every operation must be leveraged to create a more favorable global reality.

Directive #2: Redefine the Threat – Antisemitism as a National Security Issue

Pro-Hamas antisemitism is a key component of the regional doctrine aimed at Israel’s destruction. For decades, Israel has treated antisemitism and delegitimization as “soft threats.” That ends now. Three moves:

1. National Security Classification: Officially define pro-Hamas antisemitism as a core national security threat.

2. Establish a Central Command: A dedicated executive authority is not established (see below), responsibility should be placed at the highest level – the Prime Minister’s Office, National Security Council, or Foreign Ministry – to unify strategy and execution.
   

Directive  #3: Establish a National Authority to Combat Antisemitism 

A challenge of this global scale requires a dedicated executive body with authority, budget, and operational independence to ensure continuity and long-term strategy. Instead of creating another ministry vulnerable to political shifts, we propose a statutory National Authority. In its initial incubation inside a ministry or as a semi-independent unit, its role would be to develop the operational concept, map actors and gaps, draft a multi-year plan, and coordinate early inter-ministerial and security efforts. Once feasibility and doctrine are proven, the unit would transition into an independent authority, functioning as the government’s executive arm.  Key Advantages:

1. Continuity and Stability: As a statutory body, it would be insulated from frequent political changes and ensure consistent long-term policy.

2. Professionalism and Focus: It would serve as a national knowledge hub, attracting experts and relying on research, intelligence, and data rather than media impulses.

3. Breaking Government “Silos”: The authority would coordinate ministries (Foreign Affairs, Diaspora, Justice, Economy, etc.) and security agencies under one national strategy, avoiding duplication and waste.

4. A Single Global Interface: It would provide a clear focal point for Jewish and pro-Israel organizations worldwide, leveraging Israel’s advantages in intelligence, technology, diplomacy, legal support, and resources efficiently and in sync.
   

c#4: The Catalyst Approach – Empower the Global Pro-Israel Network

The state should not attempt to act like an activist NGO. Its role is to enable and supercharge the global pro-Israel movement. Three moves:

1. Leverage State Authority: Use Israel’s unique status as the Jewish nation-state to unify, integrate, and professionalize the existing network of civil society actors.

2. Deploy the State Arsenal:

   • Intelligence & Information: Share actionable intelligence on hostile financing, organizational networks, and digital influence campaigns.

   • Strategic Diplomacy: Lead the global push to embed the IHRA definition of antisemitism as the standard for governments and institutions.

3. Operate as a Force Multiplier: Focus on providing the tools and resources only a state can offer, allowing allied organizations to act more effectively on the ground.
   

Directive  #5: Re-found the US Alliance on Interests — From Covenant to Contract

The shared-values “covenant” is failing; the alliance must be reframed around a “contract” of mutual interests. Three moves:

1. Reframe the relationship from unilateral “aid” to bilateral “joint investment” to position Israel as an innovative partner.

2. Emphasize tangible US benefits by showcasing Israel as a strategic asset that provides intelligence and co-develops vital technology.

3. Project a unified message that a strong, independent Israel is a net strategic gain for the United States, appealing to both the Right and the Left.

Introduction: The Humanitarian Crisis in Gaza as a Hamas Strategy

1. In the years before October 7th, Hamas and Iranian spokespersons used "open war" (حرب مفتوحة) to describe their plan to collapse Israel. Given Israel's military superiority, the 'Muqawama axis' seeks a long war of attrition to break Israeli society's spirit and erode Israel's legitimacy to defend itself.[i]

2. Hamas positioned Gaza's humanitarian crisis as a campaign target to pressure Israel to stop the war. The October 7 attack was planned knowing the Israeli response would harm Palestinian civilians. Hamas built terrorist infrastructure in civilian areas and exploited population vulnerabilities to portray Israel as violating international law and spread genocide accusations.[ii]

3. The wave of antisemitism and Israel's international isolation results not just from Gaza imagery, but from an organized network campaign undermining Israel's legitimacy, promoted by Western organizations with involvement and funding from bodies sympathetic to the Islamist Muqawama axis.
   

When Gaza Meets 'Wokeism'

4. Antisemitism comes in many different shapes and forms: Antisemitism is a single name for various social phenomena based on hatred toward Jews, but differing in perpetrators, characteristics, and expressions.
   

The Pro-Hamas Strain of Antisemitism

5. In the US and other Western democracies, 'pro-Hamas antisemitism' erupted during the war, categorizing Jews as white and privileged. Progressive discourse's binary division into oppressors (whites) and oppressed served as the ideological platform for massive antisemitism after October 7. Some characteristics include:

   • Jews are attributed original sin for Israel, must dissociate from Zionism;

   • Jews are perceived as responsible for institutional racism and oppression;

   • Identification with Hamas as a 'progressive' liberation movement;

   • Minimizing or justifying harm to Jews and Israel;

   • Denying Israel's legitimacy and Judaism's connection to the land;

   • Accusing Jews of dual loyalty.
     

Islamism, the Red-Green Alliance, Qatar and Antisemitism

6. American Islamist organizations lead efforts undermining Israel's legitimacy. The global Muslim Brotherhood seeks a global caliphate with an antisemitic, anti-Western agenda emphasizing Sharia law and Muslim empowerment in Western countries. [i]

7. Despite dogmatic agendas, Muslim Brotherhood organizations show pragmatism, connecting with the Western left in a more decentralized manner than previously. [ii] 

8. Islamist organizations underwent Americanization[iii] and progressivization, adopting progressive rhetoric to strengthen partnerships with the progressive movement and enable Muslim integration in the US. In the UK, Muslim Brotherhood organizations portrayed political Islam as addressing Salafi radicalism ('Lambertism doctrine'),[iv] generating increasing legitimacy for Muslim Brotherhood organizations across the West. [v]

9. Muslim Brotherhood movements succeed through adaptability,[vi] introducing agenda items into mainstream discourse,[vii] and becoming informal Muslim community representatives to Western authorities. [viii] 

10. To promote their doctrine, Islamist bodies in all Western democracies work to create alliances with the radical left (known as the Red-Green Alliance), connecting Islamist elements with anti-Western, anti-Zionist left-wing factors. [ix]

11. The Red-Green Alliance became important in Europe decades ago, migrated to the US, [x] and spearheads efforts to undermine Israel's legitimacy through strong cooperation despite ideological differences. [xi] 

12. Qatar supports the global Muslim Brotherhood and Red-Green Alliance, becoming the largest donor to American universities and penetrating elementary schools[xii] with antisemitic content, possibly connected to Critical Race Theory's influence. Qatar intensified US lobbying using Al Jazeera as its main soft power tool, promoting extreme ideology in Arabic and anti-Zionist content in English, despite ordered foreign agent registration. 

13. Qatar maintains immunity through its "Major Non-NATO Ally" status for hosting America's largest Middle East base, allowing continued Hamas support despite threats to American interests. Thus, despite the current administration's aggressive activity against ‘DEI culture’ and antisemitism on campus, its silence in the face of Qatar's involvement is deafening.
    

The Progressive Infrastructure for Pro-Hamas Antisemitism

14. The Change in the Western Left's Approach to Israel: From Kibbutz to Kibbush (Occupation). The Western left showed great sympathy for Israel until 1967, but gradually changed from viewing Israel as victim to executioner. [xiii] The radical left completely reversed its view 'from kibbutz to Kibbush', seeing Israel transform from a progressive socialist model to representing Western evils.

15. Identity Politics and the Rise of Critical Race Theory: [xiv] Beginning mid-last decade, a theory assuming American liberalism is historically racist and institutional racism is common penetrated US minority struggles and identity politics discourse. 

16. One branch of Critical Race Theory is intersectionality, [xv] emphasizing overlap between discrimination forms rooted in white male racist establishment. This became an organizing idea creating minority coalitions against the 'white establishment', influencing mainstream discourse globally through oppressor-oppressed rankings based on socio-economic status and skin color.

17. Since the Ferguson riots during Operation Protective Edge (2014), anti-Israel organizations became integral to the intersectionality coalition. Some, especially among African-American and LGBTQ communities, support BDS by applying uniform moral codes globally and interpreting the Israeli-Palestinian conflict through American anti-racism concepts.

18. The categorization of Jews as white creates an 'erasure' of Israel and American Jewry in the public sphere. Progressive discourse labeling Jews as white attributes responsibility for white oppression to them, creating a mismatch between current progressive discourse and the Jewish experience of historical suffering in the US.

19. The categorization of Jews as white enables Western antisemitism and Israel's branding as colonial. When Jews are considered white and privileged, antisemitism becomes a 'problem of the rich' with no urgency, while Israel appears as a white colonial state. Unlike traditional antisemitism, this discrimination isn't always intentional or hatred-fueled, and propagators aren't necessarily antisemites.

20. Progressive discourse in its current form poses a challenge to Israel's national security by undermining Israel-US relations, Jewish standing in the American left, and Israel's bipartisan political support.
    

The Combination of 'Wokeism' and Islamism Poses a Challenge to America (and Liberal Democracies in the West)

21. Islamism currently hides behind progressive discourse. Islamist organizations spread ideology within US Muslim communities while externally adopting progressive discourse and joining intersectionality coalitions. This restrained strategy, called 'civilizational Jihad process',[i] uses progressive discourse as means to eliminate Western civilization from within.

22. As progressive groups' influence grows, their radical agenda challenges Western liberal democracies' fabric. Principles of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) transformed from tools compensating market failure to goals achieved at any cost, creating organizational cultures in workplaces, educational institutions, public organizations, and private companies, which undermine basic Western democratic values, for example:

    • Chronic anti-patriotism and undermining the social fabric: Dogmatic DEI content portrays the US as inherently racist,[ii] creating alienation between young Americans and their country, possibly explaining youth equanimity toward flag burnings after October 7. This creates cultural coercion forcing adoption of certain language at freedom's expense.

    • Undermining meritocracy in universities and private sector. DEI politicized institutions, with Israeli academics suffering silent boycotts regardless of achievements. The Islamism-progressive fusion pressures corporations to stop Israeli connections despite economic justification.

    • Promoting chaos and undermining social and governmental structure. Some progressive movements call for demolishing government institutions they perceive as fundamentally racist rather than reform, creating calls to Defund the Police without alternatives for maintaining public order.

    • Outright denial of basic scientific criteria. Professor Alan Sokal[iii] argues ideology threatens science, citing Nature magazine's decision to subject articles to ideological judgment, potentially rejecting scientifically correct research that might subjectively harm certain groups' dignity.

23. The Influence of the Red-Green Alliance on Internal Discourse and Foreign Policy: The Red-Green Alliance influences American foreign policy through Muslim Brotherhood lobbies, progressive congresspeople, Qatari and Turkish support, and Al Jazeera coverage, creating coordinated global pressure to undermine Israel's legitimacy.[iv]

24. Certain progressive groups join elements undermining American hegemony. These groups receive backing from China, Russia, and Iran's coalition challenging the post-WWII order. Progressive groups' motivation aligns with the global anti-American agenda, creating cooperation seeking to bring down America, exemplified by Iran's Supreme Leader praising anti-Israel campus protesters.[v]

25. The conclusion is that the current pro-Hamas antisemitism is a symptom of 'wokeism' threatening America and Western liberal democracies. Progressive discourse incorporates Islamist principles, undermines pluralistic education and democracy, promotes division, abolishes meritocracy, and joins anti-American states seeking to dismantle America.

    
    

The October 8th ‘Conceptsia’ of US Jewry

26. The Jewish world experienced fundamental surprise regarding pro-Hamas antisemitism's rapid outbreak. At the heart of American Jewish conception was underestimating the combination of Israel's delegitimization and identity politics. Information existed before October 7, but assessment was wrong, reflecting twenty years of trends maturing into complete helplessness.[i] 
    

Focus on Antisemitism from the Right

26. American Jews agree antisemitism is rising but are divided about primary sources. The main divide concerns whether the greater threat comes from extreme right (white supremacy) or extreme left (Red-Green Alliance), with views shaped by political affiliation and most liberal American Jews seeing right-wing threats as greatest. Since most American Jews are liberals, it is not surprising that a clear majority among mainstream American Jews perceived the threat from the right as the greatest threat.

27. The Jewish establishment adopted a 'conceptsia' seeing right-wing antisemitism as the real threat while viewing left-wing antisemitism as marginal nuisance. They didn't respond decisively to academic discrimination, Jewish exclusion due to white categorization, or developing 'soft' antisemitism in institutions.[ii]

28. The focus on right-wing antisemitism was reflected in Jewish organizations' agendas, media, and outreach activities. ADL CEO Jonathan Greenblatt stated "white supremacists remain the 'greatest threat',[iii].  and an AJC survey showed 91% of American Jews were more concerned about extreme right antisemitism versus 71% about radical left.[iv]

29. It was easier to confront 'traditional' antisemitism from the right, which is unacceptable in mainstream America. Mainstream media and institutions respond with condemnation and sanctions to traditional antisemitic incidents, as seen with congressional attacks on antisemitic posts in 2021 or Adidas terminating Kanye West's contract.[v] 

30. The vast majority of Jewish organizations did not condemn Jews' categorization as white in progressive discourse.[vi]  Mainstream American Jewish organizations downplayed Democratic Party antisemitism and didn't challenge DEI introduction into institutions. Even post-October 7, 30 Jewish organizations signed an open letter defending DEI in February 2025, including the Jewish Council for Public Affairs (JCPA) – which should be at the forefront of fighting antisemitism in all its forms.[vii]

31. Research shows[viii] antisemitic prejudices are more common among right-wing versus left-wing individuals. Studies indicate greater conservative identification correlates with agreement to negative Jewish stereotypes. This document doesn't deny these findings but notes two important points:

    • First, pro-Hamas antisemitism doesn't rely mostly on blatant Jewish stereotyping but on discrimination resulting from Jews' categorization as white in progressive discourse. There's a tendency to measure antisemitism by standards fitting the phenomenon primarily from the political right.

    • Second, left-wing antisemitism's characteristics make it more dangerous to the Jewish community collectively and Jewish life in America. While right-wing antisemitism threatens individual security, pro-Hamas antisemitism undermines Jewish community status, weakens the establishment, and threatens Jewish identity existentially.

32. The Jewish focus on right-wing antisemitism while neglecting pro-Hamas antisemitism from the left is key to the fundamental surprise experienced by the Jewish community.

    
    

The Price of Universalizing Jewish Identity and the K-12 Challenge

33. Since mid-last century, mainstream American Jews increasingly saw commitment to universal values as expressing Jewish values rather than deviating from tradition. This trend legitimized Jewish involvement in American movements and made "Tikkun Olam" the ultimate expression of Jewish identity for mainstream American Jewry.[ix]

34. Over time, Jewish community divisions deepened regarding prioritized values. Shmuel Rosner writes that American Jewry's two main goals - Israel and Tikkun Olam - often compete, with "'Tikkun Olam' becoming a competing value rather than complementary to Zionism."[x] It is possible that the search for the common purpose of the dispersed and diverse Jewish community was what brought to the surface the great Jewish diversity and contributed significantly to the expansion of divisions and polarization among them.

35. Moreover, universalism eroded identification with Israel and Jewish solidarity, alongside growing criticism of Israeli policy. This accelerated through demographic changes and weakening Jewish establishments, prompting calls like that of the director of the Palo Alto Community Center, Zack Bodner, for examining leadership's failure to instill resilient Jewish identity.[xi]

36. Identity politics places Jews in an awkward position, as many feel they must choose between community loyalty and liberal values. Many adopt binary perception seeing themselves as white and privileged, exacerbating Jewish identity crisis.

37. The Jewish community lacks shared understanding regarding left-wing antisemitism's universalist framework. Many Jews don't oppose boycotts due to ambivalent attitudes toward Israel and reject claims of anti-Zionism/antisemitism overlap.

38. Polarization around Israel damages community cohesion and undermines American Jewish community's ability to advance interests. As organizations struggle to define common commitments, creating unified fronts against Jewish hatred becomes impossible.

39. This institutional weakness is acutely felt in the K–12 education system. Most Jewish children in the US attend public schools or private non-Jewish day schools (estimates range between 7%-20%[i] attend Jewish day schools). When a child encounters antisemitism in a public school - whether it's harassment from peers or subtle bias in a lesson plan - their parents often feel isolated, helpless, and unsure of how to respond. Many parents cannot even identify an act as antisemitic, especially when it is disguised as "legitimate criticism" of Israel or universal progressive activism. Unlike on university campuses, the Jewish ecosystem in K–12 is less structured, with no obvious "Jewish address" for parents to turn to. This leaves them without the support or guidance needed to advocate effectively for their children's safety and well-being.
    

Communal Organizations: A Struggle for Relevance and Action

40. Mainstream Jewish organizations, in their current form, are often ill-equipped to support the kind of hands-on political and social activism required to meet contemporary challenges. While the American Jewish community is historically influential and affluent, its major institutions have become increasingly specialized in fundraising and fund distribution rather than leading social causes or grassroots movements. This has led to a leadership model often managed by professional bureaucrats focused on budgets, rather than charismatic leaders capable of mobilizing a groundswell of popular support.

41. This operational structure has contributed to a decline in the relevance of traditional Jewish communal organizations, especially for younger generations who, reflecting a broader societal trend, harbor mistrust toward centralized institutions. Jewish organizations have lost much of their "street cred" and the "on-the-ground" presence that once defined their role in pivotal social movements. In the past, the Jewish community relations field played a leading role in efforts like the civil rights movement and the campaign to free Soviet Jewry, building a powerful infrastructure of relationships and mobilizing the community for action.

42. However, as the community's socioeconomic status improved, these organizations seemed to lose their ability to be recognized as legitimate allies to other disempowered groups. This has created a vacuum in grassroots infrastructure, making it exceedingly difficult for the Jewish community - and particularly its community relations organizations - to effectively counter the current wave of anti-Israel sentiment and antisemitism at the local level. The very bodies designed to build bridges and mobilize against threats now find themselves challenged by internal fragmentation and a diminished capacity for broad, hands-on engagement.

    
    

Losing the street: Lack of 'Relevance' to the mainstream

43. The Jewish community mistakenly believes the pro-Israel network is at numerical disadvantage and can only achieve tactical successes. However, studies show Israel's hardcore support base is larger than the anti-Israel base, and Israel also enjoys a greater mainstream sympathy compared to the Palestinians.[ii] The conclusion is that the Red-Green Alliance is more effective in translating sympathy into activism.

44. In other words: The Jewish community fails to frame the fight against antisemitism and anti-Zionism in a way that would translate the broad sympathy for Israel in the American public into active support. The result is an illusion that sympathy for Israel represents a minority and the Jewish community is doomed to fight a hopeless rearguard battle because "the whole world is against us."

45. Thus, American Jewry and Israel are losing the battle for 'relevance' in the street to the swayable majority. Israel is losing support among audiences left of center, mostly liberal Democratic Party voters who don't have a solid position toward Israel. Israel loses support among liberal Democratic voters without solid positions. Despite the 'Tikkun Olam industry' and widespread Jewish activism, the Jewish community found itself relatively isolated fighting current antisemitism.

46. The conclusion: The Jewish community lost its "street cred" not because of abandoning activism, but due to failure creating an updated relevant narrative for Jewish life in America.

47. The Red-Green Alliance succeeded in becoming relevant to liberal audiences globally. Campus takeovers and academic boycotts evidence pro-Israel failure to win relevance battles. Their secret was correctly identifying social trends, taking over power centers, and updating narratives accordingly, particularly connecting anti-Israel agenda in the US to identity politics and Black anti-racism struggles. 

48. Interestingly, we note that the 'strategy for relevance' of the Red-Green Alliance differs in each Western country. For example,  In South Africa, the connection to the ruling ANC party and labor unions has made 'Israel' a flagship issue in South African politics; In Britain, anti-Israel forces identified academia and labor unions as platforms through which they could inject their agenda into the mainstream;[iii] In Canada, the combination of identity politics, takeover of trade unions, and institutionalization of Islamist organizations explains their success in advancing their agenda.

49. Most young campus protesters aren't motivated by primordial antisemitism or Palestinian solidarity, but perceive their actions as part of America's internal anti-racism struggle. Hamas appears to them as brown people fighting a white colonial state, demonstrating the Red-Green Alliance's success in making their struggle "relevant."

The Unfolding Crisis on Campus

50. American university campuses have become a significant stage for the display of anti-Zionism and antisemitism. Jewish students face a hostile environment, including verbal and physical assaults, vandalism, and widespread online harassment. This hostility is also present in academia, with some curricula and university policies being discriminatory. This atmosphere of exclusion often leads to the marginalization of Jewish students from campus groups. A year-long investigation by the House Committee on Education and the Workforce concluded that this surge in campus antisemitism resulted directly from the failures of university administrators.[iv]

51. Concurrently, the current administration has initiated a campaign against 'wokeism' in academia, issuing presidential orders to dismantle federal diversity and inclusion programs and ending affirmative action in federal contracts. A special task force was established to combat antisemitism in universities, leading to some institutions, like Harvard, adopting the IHRA's definition of antisemitism. The administration has also taken strong measures against universities like Harvard and Columbia, including threatening to revoke tax-exempt status, freezing federal funding, and restricting student admissions

52. These actions have sparked protests over concerns about freedom of expression and academic independence. Many in the Jewish community are wary that these measures, [v] while ostensibly for their protection, could position them as pawns in a larger political agenda, with some fearing it's a pretext to fundamentally alter American society.[vi]

53. However, the authors of this document believe that the "messenger" should not invalidate the strategy. The argument is that if framing antisemitism as a threat to fundamental American values is effective, then concerns about who is proffering this framing become secondary. To let such concerns hinder this approach risks repeating past mistakes where the Jewish community failed to address new and insidious forms of antisemitism.

54. The big of the American Jewish community, it’s the lack of relevance of its institution to the vulnerable Jewish students. According to a survey by ADL, Hillel International, and College Pulse, 83%[i] of ~350,000–420,000 Jewish students[ii] across North America have experienced or witnessed antisemitism since October 7th, but only 20% of them engage meaningfully[iii] with Jewish organizations on campus.

55. Activating the ‘long tail’ of Jewish students is key to changing the campus dynamic. The election of Maya Platek, an Israeli student involved with Students Supporting Israel (SSI), as the student body president of Columbia University amidst campus encampments is a powerful indication that a silent majority exists even in the most troubling of American academic arenas. [iv]

    
    

Strategic Inferiority on Social Media Bolsters the Illusion of Numerical Inferiority

56. Social networks have become the main arena for promoting pro-Hamas antisemitism. Hostile elements successfully spread systematic disinformation and hate content on social networks, and they benefit from algorithms that amplify extreme content. The messages of these elements are simple and catchy, and they do not encounter any coherent pro-Israel narrative in the digital space that challenges them.[v] 

57. Social networks are decentralized with multiple actors, including state involvement. Most antisemitism generators are unaffiliated individuals, but Red-Green Alliance organizations encourage activism, and states fund massive bot networks, including Iranian cyber groups and influence from Qatar, Turkey, Russia, China, and others.[vi] 

58. Pro-Israel activism fails to push back against the anti-Israel 'tsunami' online. Most activity mirrors anti-Israel efforts through training influencers, content development, and monitoring hate (the organization 'Fighting Online Antisemitism' leads in this front),[vii] with technological innovation from Israeli startups, but hasn't changed pro-Israel online inferiority. Pro-Israel activity features technological innovation with startup nation civil bodies making technologies accessible for the cause, but hasn't changed pro-Israel online inferiority.

59. 'Diplomatic' attempts by Jewish organizations to change social media policies yielded some results but haven't changed the overall picture. Examples include World Jewish Congress[viii] collaborating with UNESCO and Facebook for policy changes, and federation lobbying contributing to TikTok Act legislation.

60. The accepted definitions of antisemitism allow antisemitism from the left to flourish. There is a tendency to measure antisemitism in terms that suit the phenomenon from the political right, which relies on blatant stereotyping of Jews. Thus, even when a decrease in the volume of antisemitism online or the removal of antisemitic content is reported, they mostly do not relate to antisemitism that comes from the left. Even the IHRA definition doesn't address Jews' white framing underlying their discrimination.

61. The failure to deal with online antisemitism is embodied in numbers showing huge content gaps that validate "numerical inferiority conception." Northeastern University data shows nearly 5,000 daily anti-Israel TikTok posts versus 275 pro-Israel posts (18:1 ratio), with anti-Israel content receiving 6.5 million daily views versus 400,000 pro-Israel views. [ix]

62. Social networks accelerate 'collective illusions,' meaning clear data may not reflect majority opinion in Western countries. Professor Todd Rose[x] describes how networks give disproportionate voice to extremes, creating mistaken perceptions of broad support for minority positions. People publicly express positions they don't believe because they wrongly think others hold them, leading to moderate voice silencing.

63. Collective illusions were decisive in Jewish community's post-October 7 surprise. Social networks created false progressive youth consensus supporting Hamas. While public surveys showed 50-60% Generation Z support, privately only 10-11% supported Hamas, plummeting to 2% by mid-2024. This sharp decline indicates collective illusion explosion, where anti-Israel content promotion and algorithmic manipulation created false consensus appearances.[xi] 

64. Collective illusions may become self-fulfilling prophecies: believing peers support anti-Israel positions leads to self-censorship allowing these positions to percolate into consciousness. Persistent illusions may shape future private opinions as social lies become personal values. Data from the Harvard Harris Poll[xii] in May 2025 shows Hamas support jumping to 50% among youth. This is likely due to renewed Gaza fighting and Trump university actions creating false peer identification illusions.

    
    

The Less-Discussed Israeli ‘Conceptsia’

65. Israel's diplomatic isolation and pro-Hamas antisemitism wave largely result from fixation in non-security areas. While the IDF achieved impressive results, Israel's foreign affairs system operates chaotically without coordination, unified messaging, or integration across government ministries handling different diplomatic dimensions.

66. Israel is suffering complete defeat in the diplomatic-political field. Despite optimal public diplomacy conditions after October 7, Israel lost international sympathy within weeks, becoming effectively a 'pariah' with dramatic support drops in friendly countries and arms embargoes from Italy, Britain, Canada, and US delays.[i]

67. The diplomatic defeat derives from viewing politics as secondary to security considerations. Israel's conduct indicates underestimation of diplomatic importance and the Muqawama axis's implosion plan. Since late 2023, the war's center of gravity moved to diplomacy where Israel suffered repeated defeats, lacking a "diplomatic-political IDF" for complex moves.

68. 'Israeli mess' in the foreign affairs system. Multiple ministries manage semi-independent foreign relations with loose coordination and no integrating factor, including PMO, IDF Spokesperson, Tourism, Justice, Immigrant Absorption, and Economy. Even national institutions like Jewish Agency operate with only partial government coordination, with foreign affairs experts often absent from national security assessments.

69. Israel's diplomatic room for maneuver narrowed due to clear diplomatic failures during war, primarily unwillingness to set political goals[ii] (such as diplomatic pressure on Egypt to open its gates to refugees - see "Let Their People Go or Dissolving UNRWA") and limited actions preventing Gaza humanitarian crisis. [iii] Israel failed to prevent Biden administration conflicts and lead complex diplomatic moves, with Trump's entry reflecting luck rather than Israeli diplomatic wisdom.

70. The pro-Hamas antisemitism wave reflects Israeli diplomatic failure much greater than relevant government bodies' responsibility. Israel failed to address commitment erosion in the Democratic Party, where progressives introduced anti-Israel discourse, transforming Israel from bipartisan consensus to polarized issue. While senior Democratic leadership maintains traditional support, younger progressives push for policy changes including conditioning military aid, with polls showing growing Republican-Democrat gaps.

    
    

A Brief History of the Failed Governmental Response to the Delegitimization Campaign

71. From 1948-2009, the Foreign Ministry led the fight against antisemitism and anti-Zionism without formal designated authority. Since 2009 and 2010 (respectively), other headquarters-based government ministries are officially entrusted with leading the fight against antisemitism and the delegitimization of Israel. For the first time, the current government assigns both antisemitism and delegitimization to one ministry - Diaspora Affairs and Fight Against Antisemitism.

72. 2010 is considered the watershed year in government's approach to delegitimization as a distinct threat: 

    • The Goldstone Report on Operation Cast Lead and Gaza Flotilla gave impetus to Israel boycotts, accelerated diplomatic isolation threats, and served as wake-up calls regarding political and civil arena threats.

    • The Reut Institute was a pioneer in analyzing and understanding the unique characteristics of the delegitimization phenomenon, and many of its recommendations in a report published before the Herzliya Conference in 2009 were adopted by the government and Jewish organizations in the Diaspora.[iv]

73. Between 2010-2014, the pro-Israel network achieved significant achievements pushing back antisemitism and delegitimization waves. In every arena, Israel and Jewish communities prevented boycotts and sanctions, thwarted Gaza flotilla campaigns, and blocked legal attacks, including UN Palmer Report validation of Gaza blockade legality, reflecting effective global cooperation.[v]

74. However, the 'golden age' was very short (2010~2014). After relative success, government began underestimating the challenge, with relevant ministries working in silos outside national security conversations. Despite no formal decision, government conduct reflected growing underestimation, with increasing politicization damaging Israel's ability to work effectively with pro-Israel networks.

75. However, these don't explain the de-professionalization and superficiality process in government ministries handling the challenge: from bodies designed to build professional pro-Israel networks, they became PR showcase operations focusing on superficial advocacy not targeting relevant audiences. Due to sensitivity, we won't elaborate in this public version.[vi]

76. Israel arrived at October 8 with foreign affairs apparatus irrelevant to the challenge. Even today, government ministries work without coordination, antisemitism focus is separated from diplomatic and security challenges, and government tools are limited.

    
    

The Government Response During the War: 'Fifty Shades of Hasbara'

77. Various Israeli foreign affairs units fought fiercely in rearguard battles. Facing unprecedented assault on diplomatic, legal, and media fronts, Israel consciously decided to present almost uncensored massacre documentation to shock world opinion and establish war legitimacy. A significant civilian public diplomacy system developed, led by global Jewish communities.

78. However, the bitter truth is that even all these actions were far from effective. Israel did not even succeed in preventing foreign media from relying on sources from the murderous terrorist organization Hamas over Israeli sources.

79. Even Israel's creative actions in this arena were not the product of a comprehensive strategy. The division of powers and lack of coordination between bodies responsible for different dimensions of Israel's foreign policy was reflected in a lack of coherence in messages and approaches. Coordination between the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Ministry of Diaspora Affairs, the IDF Spokesperson, the Prime Minister's Office, and other bodies was very loose at best, creating duplications and contradictions in Israeli conduct. A significant part of the challenge for the foreign apparatus was to deal with "fires" caused by slips of the tongue from 'undisciplined' ministers, spontaneous declarations, or uncoordinated actions by government bodies on foreign affairs issues.

80. Israel's main approach was based on what could be called the "Hasbara paradigm," which reflected a tendency to see the outbreak of antisemitism as a technical problem with a technical solution. However, the 'Hasbara' paradigm failed because attempts to explain the conflict through articulate spokespersons presenting historical facts do not connect to the value-conceptual framework through which the younger generation interprets reality.

81. The almost exclusive reliance on military spokespersons in uniforms to deal with political and humanitarian issues could not have succeeded. Although IDF spokespersons mostly did a good job under difficult conditions, they encountered natural suspicion when addressing political and humanitarian issues. Amateurish mistakes reflected a lack of understanding of the target audience, such as releasing the video of Sinwar's killing, which was supposed to be a message of victory but turned him into a mythical figure among Palestinians.

82. At the same time, the diversion of resources to developing technological solutions to the challenge was mostly unhelpful because these were operated without a rich conceptual framework. As the war continued, Israel began to make adjustments by increasing digital advocacy budgets and forming collaborations with influencers. However, the fundamental problems of lack of coherence, lack of coordination, and the gap between Israeli messages and the value framework of target audiences remained. Technology cannot alone bridge conceptual gaps, and Hamas often succeeded in "taking over the narrative" on social networks, gradually presenting Israel as a cruel aggressor rather than the victim.

    
    

The Playbook for Jewish and Pro-Israeli Leadership in North America

Play #1: Define the End Zone — Neutralize Normalization

83. The mission is not to eradicate antisemitism entirely—an unattainable goal. The single, unifying objective of this playbook is to aggressively halt and reverse the normalization of antisemitism in the mainstream. This strategic focus is critical. It transforms an endless fight into a winnable campaign with a defined, measurable, and achievable goal. Every subsequent play and tactic must be measured against this core objective: Are we making antisemitism less acceptable in public discourse and institutions? This clarity enables focused planning, resource allocation, and the ability to track concrete results.
    

Play #2: Reframe the Battlefield – A Threat to America, Not Just the Jews

84. To win, we must change the narrative. The old framing of antisemitism as a uniquely Jewish problem is a strategic dead end. The new approach is to position it as what it has become: a direct assault on American identity and Western democratic values.

85. This play has two key moves:

    • Shift the Focus: Frame the current wave of Jew-hatred as a symptom of progressive extremism that threatens all of America. When protesters burn American flags and call for the disruption of the American social order, they show their hand. The fight against Israel is a proxy war; their true target is the foundational principles of the West.

    • Abandon the "Canary": The "canary in the coal mine" metaphor, which treats antisemitism as an early warning of a future problem, is obsolete and ineffective. We must define pro-Hamas antisemitism as a clear and present challenge to American society today. It is one of many parallel threats—alongside attacks on meritocracy, pluralism, and free speech—that stem from the same radical source.
      

Play #3: Flip the Mindset — Act Like the Majority You Are

86. Our single greatest handicap is a psychological one. We operate with a "minority mindset" – the mistaken belief that we are fighting a rearguard battle against an overwhelmingly popular narrative. This is a delusion, born from loud opposition and social media's "collective illusions". Polling data consistently reveals that core support for Israel is significantly larger than the anti-Israel base.  To win, we must abandon the defensive crouch and adopt the confident, proactive strategy of a majority. This requires a two-pronged approach: a proud external posture and a decisive internal one.

87. The External Play: Project Confidence and Go on Offense – A majority doesn't apologize for its existence. We must stop fighting on our detractors' terms – constantly defending against bad-faith accusations of "privilege" and "colonialism". Instead, we must proactively assert a confident, vibrant, and particularistic Jewish identity. This means championing Zionism as a decolonization movement and framing the fight against pro-Hamas antisemitism not as a narrow Jewish problem, but as a defense of Western democratic values against an illiberal threat.

88. The Internal Play: Build Resilience and Define Red Lines – A majority has the confidence to maintain internal discipline. We must invest heavily in educational frameworks that build a proud Zionist identity, inoculating our youth against the corrosive identity politics that pits them against their own heritage. This also requires leadership to clearly define its red lines, refusing to allow the entire communal agenda to be held hostage by internal fringe voices who have adopted the opposition's arguments

89. Key Tactic: Activate the Silent Campus Majority – The myth of our numerical inferiority is shattered on campus. The mission is to activate the vast "long tail" of Jewish students – an estimated 70-80% of the more than 350,000 on campus – who face antisemitism but remain isolated and unengaged with traditional organizations. These students distrust the establishment's reactive responses.

90. Instead of funneling them into existing structures, we must empower them where they are. Provide clarity and strategic tools that enable them to act independently, choosing their own level of engagement. This will transform the silent majority into an active, visible force, decisively breaking the collective illusion that we are outnumbered.

    
    

Play #4: Shattering the Collective Illusion

91. A majority strategy requires dismantling the "collective illusion" that sustains the minority mindset. The apparent numerical inferiority of the pro-Israel voice, especially online, does not reflect public opinion. It is a product of social dynamics that amplify extreme voices, silence moderates, and create a distorted perception of consensus. Breaking this illusion must be a central goal of all communal activity A multi-dimensional attack is required to reclaim the public square from this distortion:

    • Move 1: Educate and Build Immunity: The first step is to recognize the "collective illusion" as a primary strategic threat. Leadership must educate community members, donors, and allies about how this phenomenon works, explaining that the online "tsunami" is not a reflection of reality but a manufactured consensus. This understanding transforms despair into resolve and empowers individuals to speak out, knowing they are not alone.

    • Move 2: Wage Strategic Diplomacy with Big Tech: We must move beyond ad-hoc requests and engage in sustained, strategic diplomacy with technology giants. This includes leveraging our communal and coalition influence to demand greater algorithmic transparency, the active disruption of hostile bot networks that create false amplification, and the consistent enforcement of policies against hate that address the unique characteristics of pro-Hamas antisemitism.

    • Move 3: Build a Superior Tech Arsenal: The community must leverage its resources and the innovative power of the "startup nation" to develop and deploy counter-tools. This means investing in AI-driven solutions to identify and counter coordinated disinformation campaigns, map the flow of hostile narratives, and empower the pro-Israel network with superior data and digital capabilities.

Play #5: Go on Offense – Dismantle the Red-Green Alliance

92. A defensive posture is a losing one. To win, we must actively dismantle the alliance that fuels the ideological assault against us. This requires executing four simultaneous offensive moves designed to break their connections, expose their contradictions, create consequences, and build our own alliances.

    • Move 1: Capture the High Ground – We must systematically influence the social and political power centers that the opposition has co-opted. This requires building long-term programs to promote allies to university boards of trustees, cultivate the next generation of newspaper editors, support friendly labor unions, and build influence within the political system, the judiciary, and corporate America.

    • Move 2: Drive the Wedge – Exploit the glaring ideological contradictions within the Red-Green alliance. We must aggressively highlight the chasm between the liberal left's stated values – such as women's rights, LGBTQ rights, and religious freedom – and the conservative, oppressive positions of their Islamist partners. Exposing these contradictions is a powerful leverage point that will undermine their coalition and weaken their joint power.

    • Move 3: Create a "Price Tag" – We will impose real-world consequences for antisemitic activity. This comprehensive strategy will expose the operational and financial links between Islamist organizations in the West and terrorist groups or their state sponsors, like Qatar. Action must be taken to sever foreign funding, expose their true anti-democratic agenda, and create a clear social, economic, and legal price tag for the perpetrators of antisemitism.

    • Move 4: Empower New Allies - It must be assumed that most Muslims in America do not identify with the Muslim Brotherhood's radical agenda. Therefore, we will identify and strengthen anti-Islamist forces within Western Muslim communities, such as the Clarity Coalition. Empowering these diverse voices helps build a powerful counter-narrative from within the very communities our opponents claim to represent

      
      

Play #6: Build the 'Big Tent' Coalition

93. An offensive strategy is impossible without allies. We must move beyond our own echo chambers and build a broad, powerful coalition of partners who share our core interest in defending American democratic values. This play is built on four pillars.

    • Pillar 1: Rebuild Our Diplomatic Corps - We must immediately strengthen the community relations apparatus – the de facto "foreign ministry" of the Jewish community. This crucial function, responsible for building relationships outside our community, has atrophied significantly since the 1990s and must be revitalized to professionalize our outreach at both local and national levels.

    • Pillar 2: Forge a Coalition of the Targeted - There is a unique opportunity to unite various groups who are also discriminated against by the rigid framework of progressive discourse. The Jewish community, being the most significantly harmed by a focused campaign, has a unique and critical role to play in leading these diverse coalitions and partnerships with other minority groups.

    • Pillar 3: Activate the Sympathetic Majority - Our strategy must shift its focus from the small, already-committed pro-Israel camp to the much larger camp of non-Jews who show sympathy for Israel. These are people who perceive the current wave of antisemitism and extremism as a direct threat to their own way of life and values. This is where we find the numbers to win.

    • Pillar 4: Make Pluralism the Rallying Cry - The common ground for this "Big Tent" coalition is the preservation of American pluralism. The Jewish community must serve as a voice of reason. While fighting antisemitism on the left, we must simultaneously work to preserve and promote the pluralistic society that has enabled the unprecedented prosperity and security of all minority groups, including our own.
      

Play #7: Particularistic Response: Focus on Jewish Serving Elite

93. An effective external strategy requires a strong, resilient, and coherent community. We must turn inward to fortify our foundations, transforming the current chaotic response into an effective decentralized one. This play is guided by a core strategic reversal.

94. The Core Strategy: The Great Reversal – For too long, many have adopted universal values while framing antisemitism as a particular Jewish problem. This is a losing formula. The playbook calls for a complete reversal. Internally: We must emphasize particular Jewish values and a proud identity; Externally: We must universalize the fight against antisemitism, framing it as a threat to all (See Play #2).

    • Move 1: Champion Proud Particularism – We will shift focus from universalism to a proud and active Zionist Judaism. This means investing in an educational approach that elevates the core values of Jewish mutual responsibility and Hebrew studies.

    • Move 2: Immediate emphasis should be on ensuring Jewish serving elite, professionals and lay, adopt a more particular Jewish approach.

    • Move 3: Re-engineer Jewish Education – The fact that many young Jews have internalized narratives that label them "white" and "privileged" is evidence of a failure in our educational frameworks. Jewish schools and institutions, both formal and informal, must be re-engineered to build confident identities immune to this corrosive discourse.

    • Move 4: Deepen the Israel Connection – The tragedy of October 7th creates a powerful opportunity to forge an updated, emotional bond between American Jews and Israel, reversing years of a widening gap. For many, the connection to the Jewish state has become inescapable. The most effective tool for strengthening this tie is exposing American Jews to the diverse, human faces of Israeli society.

      
      

Play #8: Expose and Disarm the Weaponization of Language: 

95. Antisemitic activists deploy “dual-use terminology” to troll, confuse, and divide Jewish communities. These ambiguous phrases derail debate, erode safe spaces, and infiltrate school environments. Five moves:

    • Identify and Catalog: Map the most common weaponized terms and phrases.

    • Train Jewish Serving Elite for Counterplay: Equip leaders, educators, and students with language tools to flip the script and expose the tactic in real time.

    • Set Institutional Boundaries: Push schools, universities, and workplaces to recognize and act against the misuse of such language as harassment.

    • Apply a ‘Jewish standard’ in Jewish public spaces to ‘dual-use’ terminology, which often aims at challenge the Jewish lived experience.

    • Recruit Allies from the Jewish Left – The left's support for Hamas has created a moment of profound cognitive dissonance for many progressive Jews who now feel betrayed. This creates a strategic opening leverage their discomfort to acknowledge their recognition of the double standards and dual use terminology within progressive circles to recruit them.

State-Level Playbook

96. This section outlines the necessary paradigm shift for the Government of Israel, moving from a fragmented response to a unified national security strategy. Today it is clear that pro-Hamas antisemitism is an integral part of the destruction doctrine of Israel's enemies in the region, and therefore it should be defined as a national security issue. This framing requires serious and coordinated governmental treatment of the phenomenon.

Directive #1: Redefine Victory

97. The national security paradigm must shift from defining victory solely by battlefield results to defining it by the strategic political trends that emerge from it. Since the enemy's primary goal is to make Israel a pariah, true victory should also be measured by achieving a stronger strategic and diplomatic position after a conflict.

98. Israel must adopt a new national security paradigm where its international standing is a core strategic principle. This means high level of ‘legitimacy’ and diplomatic outcomes are no longer a secondary effect of military action, but a primary consideration that shapes military goals from the outset.

99. True victory is not just winning on the battlefield but defeating the enemy's central strategy of turning Israel into a pariah. Therefore, military and political moves must be fully integrated to leverage tactical success into strategic gains, such as building a new regional architecture that solidifies Israel's legitimacy and power.

100. Align Military and Political Action. The lack of this alignment was a central failure in the war, reducing Israel's military maneuvering space and inflaming global antisemitism as a direct result of political, diplomatic, and humanitarian failures.

101. The Mission: We must plan to defeat Qatar at Harvard with the same strategic rigor we use to defeat Iran in Fordow. Every military operation must be designed and leveraged to create a more favorable political reality.

Directive #2: Redefine the Threat as a National Security Issue

102. The State’s approach to fighting antisemitism and delegitimization must be fundamentally reframed.

103. The Core Directive: Frame Antisemitism as a National Security Threat. For too long, antisemitism and delegitimization have been treated as "soft threats". This is a critical error. Pro-Hamas antisemitism is an integral component of the destruction doctrine of Israel's enemies and must be officially defined as a national security issue. This framing mandates a serious, coordinated governmental response.

104. Establish a Central Command. The national security designation requires an integrating factor at the highest level – the Prime Minister's Office, the National Security Council, or the Foreign Ministry. The current model, where responsibility lies with ministries that only handle marginal dimensions of the phenomenon, is obsolete.

     
     

Directive #3: Establishing a National Authority

105. A national statutory authority dedicated to combating antisemitism is urgently needed. The complexity and scope of the threat require a professional, empowered executive body with clear authority, budget, and operational independence – one that can ensure continuity and long-term strategic planning.

106. This authority could be modeled after successful initiatives that began as “incubation units” within existing ministries and later evolved into independent agencies - such as the Government ICT Authority or the National Emergency Authority. During its initial incubation phase, this task force would be responsible for shaping a national strategy, mapping stakeholders and gaps, developing a multi-year work plan, and coordinating early-stage operations across government ministries and security bodies. Once viability is demonstrated and an effective operational doctrine is developed, the unit would transition into a fully independent authority, functioning as the government's dedicated executive arm in this domain.

107. This national authority would serve as a central coordinating body, applying the “Catalyst Approach” described in the next recommendation. It would not replace the Foreign Ministry or civil society actors, but rather centralize and amplify their efforts. Key advantages of such an authority include:

     • Continuity and Stability – As a statutory body, it would be more insulated from frequent political turnover, ensuring consistent, long-term policy – unlike ministries tied to specific political appointments.

     • Professionalism and Focus – The authority would act as a national knowledge center, allowing for specialization, institutional memory, and a data-driven approach rooted in research and intelligence—not reactive media cycles.

     • Breaking Government Silos – It would act as an empowered integrator, compelling all relevant ministries (Foreign Affairs, Diaspora Affairs, Justice, Economy, etc.) and security agencies to coordinate under a unified national strategy, reducing duplication and waste.

     • A Single Address for the Global Network – It would serve as a clear, centralized point of contact for Jewish and pro-Israel organizations worldwide, enabling the state to efficiently share intelligence, tech tools, diplomatic and legal support, and other resources in a synchronized way.

       
       

Directive #4: The Catalyst Approach – Empower the Network

108. The state's central role is not to directly lead every fight like an activist, but to act as a catalyst and "enabler" for the global pro-Israel network.

109. The Premise: Leverage Unique State Positioning. The Israeli government possesses a unique and irreproducible advantage: its formal "state capabilities" and its informal authority as the nation-state of the Jewish people. This strategic asset must be fully leveraged to empower, integrate, and professionalize the diverse civil society organizations already on the ground.

110. The State's Unique Arsenal: The government will focus on providing unique, high-level capabilities that civil society cannot access alone. The primary contributions are:

     • Intelligence & Information: State systems will provide the network with critical intelligence on hostile financing, organizational links, and coordinated digital campaigns.

     • Strategic Diplomacy: The government will lead the diplomatic effort to embed the IHRA definition of antisemitism as a global standard.

       
       

Directive #5: Shared-Values Approach is Declining, Re-found the US Alliance on Interests

111. The old foundation of the US-Israel relationship – a shared "covenant" of values – is crumbling. This narrative is actively alienating the growing isolationist "America First" right and the progressive left. Continuing to use this language is now a strategic liability. The alliance must be urgently re-founded on a clear-eyed, sober discourse of mutual strategic interests.

112. Proactively work to shift the relationship from unilateral "aid" to bilateral "joint investment". This reframes the entire dynamic, positioning Israel as an innovative partner in defense, technology, and intelligence – an asset to be partnered with, not a problem to be managed.

113. Focus on American benefit. Frame Israel as a powerful, self-reliant strategic asset that: Serves as a crucial check on state sponsors of terror; Provides unique intelligence and battlefield innovations; Co-develops vital military technology that keeps America safer.

114. Project power and partnership: The core message to all Americans must be that a strong, independent Israel is a net strategic gain for the United States. This single, interest-based argument simultaneously appeals to the Right’s desire for powerful allies and undermines the Left’s dependency narrative.

Summary

115. The fight against antisemitism in North America requires a fundamental paradigm shift – from a defensive approach to an offensive approach, from a Jewish particularistic framing to a broad American framing, and from focusing on the committed audience to expanding to broader audiences. The success of the strategy depends on the ability to connect the strengthening of particularistic Jewish identity with the building of broad alliances for America's democratic and pluralistic values.

116. These challenges require a sophisticated and multi-dimensional state approach. We hope that the recommendations in this document will contribute to the development of effective national policy, while recognizing the complexity of the threat and the need for coordinated and innovative action.

Endnotes 

1. المركز الفلسطيني للإعلام.‎ (2024, أكتوبر 22). طوفان الأقصى.. المقدّمات والمآلات.‎

2. Humanitarian Challenge in Gaza: It’s time to Feed the Elephant in the Room, Atchalta, July 7^th 2024.

3. One of its prominent leaders, Sayyid Qutb, even published a book titled "Our War with the Jews." Bassam Tibi, From Sayid Qutb to Hamas: The Middle East Conflict and the Islamization of Antisemitism, The Yale Initiative for the Interdisciplinary Study of Antisemitism, Working Papers Series, 2010.

4. For example, a survey published in Newsweek reveals that Muslim millennials in the US support acceptance of LGBTQ in society at significantly higher rates. See the video attached to the article: Steve Friess, Since 9/11, US Muslims Have Gained Unprecedented Political, Cultural Influence, Newsweek Magazine, 1/9/2021

5. Fraternal Islamists: Getting to Know the Muslim Brotherhood, FDD Foreign Policy, with Clifford May, Jonathan Schanzer and Samuel Tadros, 1/7/2019

6. The Lambertism doctrine is a British security concept where authorities maintained contact with Muslim Brotherhood groups, believing they might restrain al-Qaeda extremism, leading to Hamas's public legitimization in London. See: The Reut Institute, The Assault on Israel's Legitimacy: London as a case study, November 2010.

7. The Global Muslim Brotherhood Daily Watch, (hereinafter, GMBWatch), 24/9/20

8. None of the organizations identified with the Muslim Brotherhood outside Egypt, including those in the US referred to in this document, has formally claimed direct affiliation with the movement. However, there are deep ideological connections, influence, and a shared platform of ideas that creates affinity and belonging to a social movement. Steven Brooke, The Muslim Brotherhood Between Party and Movement, The University of Louisville

9. The first 100 days: Biden Harris Administration, CAIR

10. Lorenzo Vidino, Muslim Brotherhood Organizations in America, E-Notes , Foreign Policy Research Institute, December 2011.

11. See also a comprehensive review of the connections between the radical left and political Islam: Sir John Jenkins, Islamism and the left, Policy Exchange, 2021

12. Strategies to Counter the Red-Green Alliance in the US (Version B), The Reut Group , 28/2/2022.

13. See for example: أي دور للماركسية في عصر الشعبوية والإسلام السياسي, العرب, 2018/05/05; الإسلاميون والماركسيون.. فرقهم الفكر وجمعتهم السياسة, عربي 21, 2020/06/23; ما الذي قد يجمع بين الماركسي والسلفي؟, CNN, 2014/02/27; Pierre-Andres Taguiyeff, Aux sources de l'«islamo-gauchisme», Liberacion, 2020/10/26.

14. Foreign Influence and Anti-Israel Bias in K-12 Classroomsv, ISGAP, 2025

15. Stephen H. Norwood, Antisemitism in the American Left: Past and Present, The Institute for National Security Studies, October 2021

16. Gordon, Lewis R.. A Short History of the 'Critical' in Critical Race Theory. American Philosophy Association Newsletter (Spring 1999)

17. The term intersectionality was coined in 1989 by theorist Kimberlé Crenshaw in the context of the feminist struggle for gender equality and to emphasize the great similarity and overlap between different types of oppression toward weakened groups and minorities

18. Mohamed Akram, a Muslim Brotherhood board member and Hamas leader, wrote a 1991 memorandum detailing Muslim Brotherhood goals, methods, and US infrastructure. محمد أكرم، "المذكرة التفسيرية: للهدف الإستراتيجي العام للجماعة في أمريكا الشمالية"، ٢٢/٥/١٩٩١.

19. The New York Times' 1619 Project (2019) presents the Black experience emphasizing their foundational role and anti-Black racism struggle. Criticism concerns ideological historical distortion, negative educational impact, and encouraging racial division. See:  https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/08/14/magazine/1619-america-slavery.html 

20. Alan D. Sokal, Beyond the hoax: science, philosophy and culture, New York: Oxford University Press (2008)  

21. The Reut Group, Strategies to Counter the Red-Green Alliance in the US (Version B), 28/8/2022. Full Disclosure: One of the authors of this document led the writing of the Reut Institute document.

22. Times of Israel, May 30, 2024

23. Dr. Tzvi Lanir writes about fundamental surprise, in his book "Thinking like a Fox," occurring when gaps exist between information and proper assessment. Everyone has an "interpretive conceptual system" for understanding the world. Unlike information lack focusing on technical failures, fundamental surprise indicates deep reality changes beyond organizational fixes.

24. David Bernstein, the Jewish Journal, October 5^th 2024

25. For example, from Jonathan Greenblatt's remarks at ADL's Virtual National Leadership Summit, May 1, 2021.

26. See the October 2021 survey New AJC Survey: Rise in Fear Among American Jews

27. Ron Kampeas, JTA, January 29 2025

28. As far as we know, the Anti-Defamation League was the first organization to come out against woke culture. In this context, the Reut Institute's work was pioneering and brought about a certain change in discourse, though not enough.

29. See report by Ben Sales, Times of Israel, February 8, 2025.

30. Ben Sales, Times of Israel, April 23, 2021

31. Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik's essay "Kol Dodi Dofek," profoundly influenced mainstream American Jewry, beyond the boundaries of the Orthodoxy to which he belonged. In his essay, Soloveitchik distinguished between the covenant of fate of the Jewish people (a passive connection based on shared experiences) and the covenant of destiny, which is an active covenant, where Jews unite around a common purpose, values, and religious commitments. See Eran Shayshon, Destiny divided: How Rav Soloveitchik’s vision shaped - and splintered - American Jewry, EJP, May 6, 2025.

32. Shmuel Rosner, Shtetl, Bagel, Baseball, Keter, 2011, p. 210. (In Hebrew)

33. Zack Bodner, It’s time for a post-Oct. 7 reckoning among American Jewry, The Jerusalem Post, 31/8/2024

34. A Year of War, Annual Assessment of the Jewish Peoplev, 2024, JPPI

35. Surveys clearly show that the level of sympathy for Israel continues to be positive, although it is declining. An absolute majority of Americans (between 74%-84%) supports Israel more than Hamas (although among young people aged 18-24, the picture is balanced). See: https://harvardharrispoll.com/

36. Eran Shayshon, Glenn Taubman, “Antisemitism and Trade Unions: A Global and American Historical Perspective”, Red State, March 6^th, 2025.

37. See here a press release of the the House Committee on Education and the Workforce., October 31, 2024.

38. David Goodman, Trump’s Fight Against Antisemitism Has Become Fraught for Many Jews, the New York Times, April 2nd

39. Barak Sella, a fellow at the Middle East Initiative of the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard, writes about Harvard's "courage" to stand up for the rights of freedom of expression and academic research, which was not revealed during the two years in which Jewish students were exposed to antisemitic attacks in the establishment. Barak Sella, The Hill, 23 April, 2025.

40. See the reportv from January 30, 20

41. We began with a total of 328,230 Jewish undergraduates across the top 60 public, private, and high-percentage Jewish schools, based on Hillel Magazine (2024). Accounting for overlap - 50,000 between public and “%” schools, 30,000 between private and “%” schools, and 1,500 between public and private - we estimate 246,730 unique students. As this only includes the top 60 in each category, we conservatively estimate 350,000–420,000 Jewish undergraduates in North America.

42. A Year of Campus Conflict and Growth,” a 64-page report  conducted by Tufts University political scientist Eitan Hersh, in partnership with survey research company College Pulse, and funded by the Jim Joseph Foundation argues that 34% of Jewish undergraduates attend Jewish campus programs at least once.

43. The Jerusalem Post, April 28, 2024.

44. For example, read the reports of the Cyb

45. For example, read about a Microsoft report and another report by Google on Iran's cyber operations in support of Hamas, and on bot farms in Asia read here in The Media Line.

46. https://foantisemitism.org

47. WJC, May 7th, 2021

48. Cyrus Moulton, NorthEastern Global News, May 10, 2024.

49. Todd Rose, Collective Illusions, Grand Central Publishing, 2022. Data indicates that 80% of content on social networks like Twitter (now X) is created by just 10% of users representing the most extreme voices in public discourse.

50. From an interview of author Todd Rose with the Jewish Funders Network in early January, 2025.

51. Harvard Harris Poll, April 2025.

52. See Times of Israel, December 13, 2024

53. Israel didn't use post-October 7 sympathy to advance its agenda, refused revitalized Palestinian Authority without presenting alternatives, then faced unilateral Palestinian state recognition and American pressure.

54. Absence of humanitarian aid infrastructure became the main anchor damaging Israel's international status while preserving Hamas control, lacking declared political goals to structure humanitarian infrastructure.

55. The Reut Institute, Building a Political Firewall against Israel’s delegitimization, March, 2010. The report had a huge effect on the field. Strategic Affairs Ministry led global pro-Israel network creation, while delegitimization was framed as national security leading to Prime Minister declarations and dedicated intelligence arrays. In the Jewish world, 2010 events led to renewed organization against delegitimization and antisemitism with new bodies, updated concepts, coalitions, and increased cooperation.

56. On these successes, one can read in the Reut Institute report 2011: The Year We Punched Back on the Assault on Israel's legitimacy, November 2011.

57. Due to the sensitivity of the issue, we will not provide examples in the public part of the document, but we have included several examples in dedicated outputs for the government.