This is a condensed version, to read the full document press here. 

Introduction

This report explores the dangers of the sociopolitical phenomenon known as the red-green alliance, the nexus between radical progressive groups and Islamist organizations that began in Europe and migrated to the US.

As identity politics become more prevalent in the United States, the collaboration between these two groups has created a powerful social and political axis with increasing influence on American Middle East policy as well as on the perceptions of both Israel and the Jewish community in the US.

This report discusses the following growing concerns: the radical shift in US policy towards its traditional allies in the Middle East; the decrease in momentum of the normalization process and the Abraham Accords; the hesitant American approach towards Iran; and the support of many in the progressive movement for Hamas’ struggle for Palestinian hegemony at the expense of the seemingly more moderate Palestinian Authority.

This report is a revised edition of Reut’s original report entitled, “The Red-Green Alliance is Coming to America” (December 2021).

Acknowledgment

This report is a revisited edition of Reut’s report titled “The Red-Green Alliance is Coming to America” (December 2021), which was supported by the Nagen Project. We wish to thank the Nagen project as well as to David Bernstein, Founder of the Jewish Institute for Liberal Values, for supporting and encouraging the Reut Institute to engage in this topic.

We wish to thank Reut USA, and Gidi Grinstein, Founder and President of Reut, for both the financial support and being part of the content development. We wish to acknowledge the following donors of Reut USA: Dana and Yossie Hollander, the Michael and Lisa Leffel Foundation, and the Adam and Gila Milstein Foundation.

The lead authors of this paper are Eran Shayshon, Barak Sella, Adi Levy and Abed Assli. We would like also to acknowledge the involvement of Alex Grinberg and Daphna Kaufman in creating this knowledge.

Executive Summary

The challenge

1. The deepening sociopolitical alliance between progressive organizations and groups that are identified with political Islam is becoming increasingly influential in Washington, creating new sets of challenges for Jewish communities and Israel.

2. Propelled by the strengthening of identity politics in the US, the influence of progressive streams on mainstream discourses is growing. The progressive discourse classifies social groups as either privileged or oppressed, usually based on socioeconomic status and/or skin color. But it is also based on a universalistic paradigm that rejects communal exceptionalism and particularism; the progressive discourse applies a uniform universal moral code on disputes and struggles in the world and often disregards any unique cultural, political, security, social or economic nuances.

3. Progressive groups categorize Jews as white and privileged, defining Jews as part of the current social power structure that the progressive movement is battling. The progressive discourse disregards the exceptional challenges, history, and experience of Jewish life in the US.

4. Reut describes this dynamic as “Jewish-Israeli erasure.” The erasure undermines the right of American Jews to define their own identity, values, narrative, and relationship with Israel. Categorizing Jews as privileged lessens their ability to confront discrimination and cope with antisemitism and other forms of hate. The erasure also dismisses their right to define themselves as a people (‘peoplehood’).

5. In contrast to "classic" antisemitism, progressive erasure is not necessarily derived from hatred. It is instead a side-effect of the disconnect between the characteristics of the discourse and Jewish history and experience in the US.

6. However, since the Ferguson demonstrations (2014), several anti-Israel organizations have increasingly leveraged erasure to promote their agenda. Anti-Israeli rhetoric has penetrated mainstream liberal organizations and even the Democratic Party. This trend has normalized certain aspects of antisemitism.

7. Jewish-Israeli erasure exacerbates the identity crisis among many American Jews, making it more difficult for them to create a cohesive and united front against the challenge. This undermines Jewish identity in the US and challenges community cohesion and Jewish political advocacy efforts.

8. The broad Jewish internalization of the progressive framework of Jews as white and privileged is also the consequence of a long failure by the Jewish community in the US to provide inclusive educational Jewish frameworks. This is while the prevalent progressive discourse seems to encourage Jews to challenge Jewish communal frameworks.

9. It is common for American Jews to view Israel as a burden on their political and social status in America. Hence, Israel is often blamed for the erosion of Jewish communal cohesion.

10. However, it seems that there is a more pronounced connection between the prevalent Jewish self-view as white and privileged and the framing of the Jewish State as a European white colonial enterprise. International issues in the current progressive discourse are examined through an American lens. This dynamic generates misperceptions of the unique circumstances and challenges around the establishment and existence of the State of Israel.

11. Erasure is being leveraged by a coalition of radical progressive groups and Islamists. The Muslim Brotherhood, the most important Islamist organization, has a conservative agenda driven by a vision of establishing an Islamic Caliphate. Despite its radical vision, the movement displays considerable tactical pragmatism, which allows them to engage with seemingly counterintuitive groups like progressive movements.

12. Since they began to consolidate in the early 1960s, US organizations affiliated ideologically with the global Muslim Brotherhood have become the most organized Islamic power in the country. Many have gained informal status as representatives of the Muslim community in the eyes of political and law enforcement authorities. Nevertheless, most Muslims in America do not identify with the movement's agenda.

13. Muslim Brotherhood organizations in the US are at the peak of their power. The September 11, 2001 attacks had serious consequences for Muslims in America, including a spike in anti-Muslim hate crimes and strict domestic policy. Some of these organizations have even contended with unsuccessful legislative attempts to classify them as terrorist organizations. Many of them consider the term of President Trump a low point and see the election of a Democratic administration in 2020 as a historic opportunity.

14. The high-level organizational and strategic skills employed by groups identified with the Muslim Brotherhood allow them to increasingly influence US foreign policy and promote an anti-Israel agenda. Members of the progressive wing of the Democratic Party, for example, participate frequently in anti-Israel events organized by Muslim Brotherhood organizations. These organizations benefit from diplomatic platforms financed by Qatar, as well as media platforms and social networks.

15. Despite the differences and conflicting values between these movements, the cooperation between "reds" (progressive organizations) and "greens" (Islamist organizations) is anchored in deep intellectual and philosophical roots that underlie the effort to legitimize their shared values. The red-green alliance’s agenda in Europe includes clear anti-Western, anti-American, and anti-Zionist elements. In the US, this cooperation has accelerated with the increasing acceptance of intersectionality as a framework.

16. The red-green alliance’s agenda has expanded as Muslim Brotherhood organizations in the US adopt elements of the progressive platform. These organizations increasingly employ the rhetoric and goals of the progressive movement's agenda, including demanding prison reform and raising the minimum wage.

17. The Islamophobia trap enables the existence of crude antisemitism.  Blunt antisemitism by leaders of organizations identified with the Muslim Brotherhood has not always been strongly condemned, because they are protected by what critics of the progressive discourse term ‘racism of low expectations – that is, holding racial groups to different standards of behavior, usually grounded in cultural relativism. Accusations of Islamophobia are used as a sword to attack opponents and as a shield to protect Islamist organizations from scrutiny.

18. Red-green organizations are increasingly promoting their ideological framework for American foreign policy with respect to the Middle East. This framework rests on the traditional American commitment to liberal democratic values and human rights and takes power from growing domestic support for limiting American military involvement around the world.

19. This foreign policy framework is a product of the intersection of the progressives’ interpretation of the Middle East through the lens of identity politics, and the Muslim Brotherhood’s agenda in the Middle East. The red-green alliance in the US focuses its criticism almost exclusively on the pro-Western axis of countries, which are the ideological enemies of the Muslim Brotherhood axis of countries led by Qatar and Turkey. It sees in Israel a white European country that fights against native brown people.

20. The red-green foreign policy approach is not the dominant approach of the current administration. Moreover, it is unable to exert substantial influence on the special relationship between the US and Israel.

21. However, its impact is starting to influence decision-making in Washington in a way that compromises Israel’s national security:

a. This influence manifests in the cold shoulder the current administration is giving to America's traditional pro-Western allies and in the slowing normalization momentum of the Abraham Accords;

b. The current American drawdown in the region, in conjunction with its changing relationships with moderate Arab states, weakens the joint struggle of Israel and the pro-Western axis of countries against Iran.

22. Hostility towards Israel is only a partial explanation of the progressives’ non-activism against Iran. The red-green alliance shows no affinity for Iran, but its agenda strengthens Iran. The strengthening of Iran is accepted with indifference among red-green alliance organizations because Iran is not perceived by progressives as a threat to US national security. In the view of the Muslim Brotherhood, the struggle against pro-Western Sunni Muslim states supersedes the struggle against Iran. The threat to Israel from the spread of Iranian proxy forces in the region and the creation of a kinetic "ring of fire" against Israel is deliberately denied or ignored.

23. Due to a lack of communal cohesion and consensus, there is no broad systematic Jewish attempt to challenge either Jewish-Israeli erasure in the progressive discourse or the red-green alliance.

Principles of Response

24. Mobilize a ‘critical mass’ (see glossary) of organizations against erasure and the red-green alliance - Reut’s ultimate goal in the current effort against the Jewish-Israeli erasure is the emergence of loose cooperation and coordination between a few dozen Jewish and pro-Israel organizations, which would engage non-Jewish groups and publicly challenge Jewish-Israeli erasure in a way that would meet the necessary threshold to change it. We believe that a successful mobilization to effectively challenge erasure and the red-green alliance should be based on the following principles.

Community Relations: Coalition of the Erased, counter intersectionality, and the opportunity to leverage the Abraham Accords

25. Forming a “Coalition of the Erased” consisting of diverse partnerships with other groups and minorities is Reut’s suggested strategy to counter the practice of both Jewish-Israel erasure in the current progressive discourse and white supremacism. The Coalition is based on the conceptual framework of counter-intersectionality.

26. Counter-intersectionality emphasizes the many similarities between different kinds of prejudice against certain groups and minorities, the fact of which has been neglected by the current progressive discourse which fails to capture their lived experience. The progressive discourse binarily categorizes social groups as oppressors and oppressed based on criteria of skin color and socioeconomic status, and rejects communal exceptionalism and particularism in favor of a universalistic paradigm.

27. The binary progressive categorization guides how social groups are viewed, and often fails to capture their lived experience and narratives. Importantly, moderate Muslims feel threatened by the universalistic outlook of the progressive discourse.

28. In this regard, the Abraham Accords present an opportunity to generate a new form of grassroots activism and alliances led by moderate Muslims and pro-Israel groups against the red-green alliance. Initial cooperation among pro-Israel activists, organizations affiliated with the parties to the Abraham Accords, and more moderate streams of Islam is already apparent.

29. This effort could be pursued by coordinating with local Muslim organizations and the existing lobbying activity of Abraham Accords countries to re-motivate the normalization drive in the Middle East. This can “recharge” the Israeli-Jewish “legitimacy battery” through joint tikun olam projects with Abraham Accords nations.

Communal Cohesion and identity: Rebuild the center

30. The bitter truth is the difficulty to address the challenge of erasure is largely the result of internal Jewish polarization, which evidences a complex Jewish identity challenge driven in part by an increasingly complex relationship with Israel.

31. Against this backdrop, The Jewish struggle against erasure requires rebooting Jewish politics and focusing on building a political and social center. This can generate a Jewish renewal and strengthen internal community cohesion based on a vision of peoplehood. The current war in Ukraine may strengthen this opportunity in that it has been regenerating a sense of Jewish solidarity (Arvut Hadadit).

32. It is necessary to integrate emerging communities in the effort. This includes the Israeli community, which in recent years has been increasing its political capital. There is also the emergence of a Russian-speaking Jewish community in the US. This community has a new class of young philanthropists, activists, and intellectuals who usually have a strong pro-Israel agenda. They see parallels between Jewish-Israeli erasure and attempts to erase Jewish identity in the Soviet Union.

The Battle of Ideas: Focusing on the Jewish erasure & reexamining Jewish separatism against antisemitism

33. It is recommended to focus on Jewish-Israeli erasure and not launch a war against the entire progressive movement – targeted activity against Jewish-Israeli erasure speaks the language of identity politics, and maybe a good basis to establish broad coalitions that will include both liberal non-establishment organizations and the Jewish establishment.

34. New thinking must be given to the attitude of Jewish separatism – a prevalent Jewish approach that rejects looking at antisemitism as a mere piece of the wider phenomenon of xenophobia – which makes it difficult for Jews to find allies to help fight antisemitism. A new approach is needed, the core of which is cooperation with diverse groups, empathy, sharing the experience and historic lessons of the struggle against antisemitism, and a foundation in the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) definition of antisemitism.

PRINCIPLES TO COUNTER THE ISRAELI-JEWISH ERASURE AND THE RED-GREEN ALLIANCE

The Goal: A critical mass to challenge the discourse

35. One should not foster vain expectations about the Jewish community's openness to challenging Jewish-Israeli erasure in the progressive discourse. The contemporary Jewish community is politically, socially, and organizationally polarized. There is a proliferation of non-establishment organizations. The degree to which the Jewish establishment represents the community has diminished. The Jewish community does not speak in one voice and therefore cannot effectively mobilize and recruit in favor of common objectives – to the extent they exist. The Jewish community cannot muster widespread support as it has in the past, such as the mobilization for the release of Prisoners of Zion in the Soviet Union in the 1970s.

36. The key to effectively challenging Jewish erasure in the current progressive discourse lies in recruiting a critical mass of organizations and leaders to implement a common understanding of the challenges and put forth a unifying vision to drive change in Jewish communities. Critical mass does not mean total recruitment; it is possible to motivate various organizations of different kinds to reach the threshold needed to create the necessary momentum.

37. The Reut Institute proposes that this critical mass should comprise 1) the Jewish establishment; 2) community relations organizations; 3) non-establishment center and left organizations; 4) emerging communities (beginning with the Israeli, Russian, and Jews of Color communities); and 5) Jewish philanthropy. The following recommendations are directed to these bodies.

Create a ‘Coalition of the Erased’ based on Counter-Intersectionality

38. Coalition of the Erased is Reut’s suggested strategy to counter the practice of both Jewish-Israel erasure in the current progressive discourse and white supremacist practices, based on diverse partnerships with other groups and minorities. The coalition of the erased is based on the conceptual framework of counter-intersectionality.

39. Counter-intersectionality emphasizes the large similarity and overlap among different kinds of bias and prejudice, which is the result of the current progressive discourse’s failure to capture the lived experience of vulnerable minority groups.

The binary nature of progressive discourse categorizes social groups exclusively based on skin color and socioeconomic status while rejecting communal exceptionalism and particularism in favor of a universalistic paradigm.

The progressive categorization guides how societal groups are viewed, and often fails to capture the lived experience and narratives of, e.g, Asian-Pacific Islanders and moderate Muslims. Exploiting the opportunities created by the Abraham Accords and engaging with moderate Muslims is particularly important.

Leverage the Abraham Accords vs. the Red-Green Alliance

40. Israel's peace agreements with the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, and Morocco could potentially impact the ability of the Jewish community to deal with the growing impact of organizations identified with the Muslim Brotherhood. Even though Israel's normalization momentum in the region has slowed since the Biden Administration took office, Israel's standing in the Middle East has been irreversibly upgraded to the point of being a member of the bloc of moderate Arab states. These agreements, coupled with the deep relations Israel has with moderate Muslim countries including Azerbaijan and Kosovo, undermine the branding of Israel in the progressive discourse as a foreign seed or colonial enterprise in the Middle East.

41. Parties to the Abraham Accords and pro-Israel organizations share a common interest in containing the influence of the red-green alliance in Washington. Preventing the alliance from promoting its Middle East agenda is particularly important.

42. Thus, the Abraham Accords present an opportunity to generate a new form of grassroots activism and alliances led by moderate Muslims and pro-Israel groups against the red-green alliance – initial cooperation between pro-Israel activists and organizations affiliated with the Abraham Accords states and more moderate streams of Islam are already apparent and are working to turn diplomatic achievement into people-to-people connections. [1]

43. Whether it is possible to coordinate with the Abraham Accords states’ lobbying and public relations efforts is important to ascertain. This can reignite the normalization momentum in the Middle East and strengthen moderate Arab states against extremist groups in the region. The United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia all openly employ lobbying and public relations firms in Washington. However, there is no joint activity with Jewish communities on renewing Israel's normalization momentum in the region.

44. There is currently no attempt to challenge the Turkish and Qatari diplomatic platforms that leverage organizations in the US identified with the Muslim Brotherhood. Building such a political center (see above) may bypass the Muslim Brotherhood and allow direct communication with the Muslim silent majority. Muslim Brotherhood organizations represent Muslims in the eyes of many authorities, even though most American Muslims do not identify with the movement. This population tends to be more conservative and has reservations about the red-green alliance’s agenda, and could be part of the new center.

45. Charging the legitimacy battery and creating common Tikkun Olam projects. The Abraham Accords have created an opportunity to generate joint projects on college campuses, on social platforms of the Arab Abraham Accords states and Israel, or within local Jewish communities. Tikkun Olam projects help create responses to global challenges, including those at the top of the agenda of current progressive movements.

The Battle of Ideas

46. The key to addressing the erasure and the red-green alliance is anchored in the ability of Jewish leadership to create a shared comprehension of the challenge.

Focus on the Jewish erasure in the progressive discourse, not on the progressive movement

47. The entire Jewish establishment and Jewish community organizations must vigorously and broadly organize against Jewish-Israeli erasure in the progressive discourse.  Many Jewish communal organizations are confused by the threat’s nebulous definition. They sometimes consciously choose to ignore it and focus exclusively only on challenges around which there is broad consensus, such as the struggle against traditional antisemitism.

48. It is necessary to reassess the practice that requires building consensus as a condition for acting on core community issues. Support for Israel and Jewish-Israeli erasure in the progressive discourse are two subjects for which no broad consensus can exist as it has in the past, but reality demands the Jewish establishment act on these issues. This includes lobby groups, communal organizations, and community relations organizations which can act only on issues for which there is a very broad consensus.

49. The Jewish establishment can and must focus its struggle against Jewish-Israeli erasure in the progressive discourse and not against the entire progressive movement. There is a link between patterns of activity and the progressive discourse as a whole and the Jewish-Israeli erasure. But the differences in defining the challenge have significant consequences on the chances of success and of harnessing the Jewish community as a whole.

50. Going against the progressive movement is politically fraught and bitterly divisive in the Jewish community. Conversely, going against Jewish-Israeli erasure only speaks the political language of identity politics and can be an issue around which broad coalitions can be built, including progressive Jewish bodies.

Reexamine Jewish separatism against antisemitism

51. The separatist approach against antisemitism. The traditional approach of the US Jewish establishment and of Israel held that:

a. Antisemitism is a unique kind of hate and racism

b. Antisemitism has an unprecedented historic price as reflected in the Holocaust

c. The Holocaust requires separate treatment as if it were a unique phenomenon that is unrelated to other atrocities in human history

d. Any comparisons of the Holocaust to other acts of horror cheapens the Holocaust and turns the Holocaust into one event among many, thus rendering its unique atrocity far less unusual.

When Israeli Foreign Minister Yair Lapid described antisemitism as a kind of racism during the Global Forum for Combatting Antisemitism and US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken linked the Holocaust with other expressions of hatred (racism, sexism, homophobia, and xenophobia),[2] they were sharply criticized for daring to undermine the isolationist approach to antisemitism.[3]

52. The separatist approach makes it difficult for Jews to find the allies they need to combat antisemitism. While other disadvantaged populations have managed to make common cause around their struggles, the isolationist approach excludes the Jewish community from the coalition of minorities. Jewish separatism provides at least a partial explanation of why Jewish communities have “lost the American street” and their place in the American left. This exclusion explains why Jews have almost lost the “right” to talk about antisemitism in the American left. Moreover, Jewish separatism limits the discourse on antisemitism and the Holocaust to the Jewish community, thereby greatly limiting its exposure to other discriminated populations. What’s more, Jewish separatism is sometimes perceived as privileged arrogance by progressive groups.

53. Traditional Jewish separatism has turned antisemitism into a sacred cow worthy of slaughter in the eyes of radical progressive groups. In recent years, there has been a deliberate generalization of antisemitism as a kind of xenophobia by progressive groups. This defies and diminishes the discourse on the unique characteristics of antisemitism. Such attempts to redefine antisemitism expropriate the concept of antisemitism from the Jewish community. One of the great absurdities in this context is the attempt to legitimize school curricula that focus on "counter perspectives" of the Holocaust.[4]

54. A new proactive approach is needed, one that places at its center a partnership with other groups in society that are dealing with xenophobia, discrimination, hate, and racism. Such engagement would help promote Jewish identity, empathy, and the experiences and historic lessons of the struggle against antisemitism as the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) defines it. Paradoxically, this approach may better convey the uniqueness of the Holocaust and racism against Jews, which in turn may facilitate recognition by liberal and progressive groups. It is possible that such an approach will also establish a basis for cooperation with moderate Muslim communities in the US, which may be a counterweight to Muslim Brotherhood organizations in the US.

Communal Cohesion & Identity

Rebuild a cohesive center based on peoplehood

55. The Jewish struggle against the Jewish-Israeli erasure requires rebooting Jewish politics and focusing on building a political and social center.[5] The distress which Jews feel between the hammer of right-wing antisemitism and the anvil of left-wing antisemitism gives them an opportunity to lead the rebuilding of the discourse at the center of the political and cultural map.

56. The framework of Peoplehood should be leveraged as part of a broader effort to turn the crisis into an opportunity for Jewish renewal. The identity challenge that the Jewish-Israeli erasure in the progressive discourse creates is also an opportunity to promote a reexamination of the collective Jewish identity. It can strengthen the perception that Jews in Israel and the US are a people.

57. Even though the "peoplehood paradigm" is not intuitive for many Israeli and American Jews, it has real potential for effectively building the political-social center and strengthening Jewish identity. It may be that the war in Ukraine has been regenerating a sense of Jewish solidarity (Arvut Hadadit) as millions of dollars are raised for humanitarian aid[6].

58. Targeted activity against Jewish-Israeli erasure speaks the language of identity politics and undermines the framing of Jews as whites and privileged.

59. Rebuilding the center could serve as a platform to reach many young Jews who are alienated from Israel. A platform of this kind could help create coalitions that constructively debate disputed issues. In the current reality, there is almost a complete disconnect between the Jewish right and left, and between many young Jews and the Jewish establishment. Such platforms are critical for Jewish political and cultural activity.

Integrating reserves: Engage emerging communities

60. There are several distinct communities whose structures are not connected to the Jewish establishment. Their attitudes towards Israel are based on and influenced by unique experiences. Among others, these groups include:

· Israeli Americans, who in recent years have undergone social, political and organizational processes that increased their involvement and political capital.[7]

· Russian-speaking Jews have seen a rise of a new and young echelon of activists, intellectuals, and philanthropists. This community usually has a strong pro-Israel agenda.[8] This rise in the Russian-speaking Jewish community is likely a result of a common perception within this constituency that the Jewish-Israeli erasure stemming from the progressive discourse is similar to attempts to eliminate Jewish identity by the Bolsheviks in the Soviet Union.

· Jews of color - This emerging category of identification could play an important role in an era where the Jewish experience is also shaped by the racial paradigm in America. The Jewish community needs to acknowledge its diversity and reflect it in its institutions and leadership. This could help the Jewish community to build coalitions with non-Jewish communities and facilitate robust and nuanced conversation, internally and externally.

61. These communities exhibit growth potential for becoming political, economic, social and cultural assets. Jewish communities acknowledge that these communities could strengthen Jewish “peoplehood” and contribute to strengthening Jewish identity in the Diaspora.

Eradicate Ignorance: Every Kid Deserves a Jewish Education

62. The broad Jewish internalization of the progressive framework of Jews as whites and privileged is the result of ignorance and stemming from the long failure of the American Jewish community to provide inclusive Jewish frameworks - Jewish educational frameworks have become the central vehicle for building Jewish identity amongst world Jewry. However, the reality is that many young Jews do not receive Jewish education they find it too expensive or unattractive. Moreover, because there is no standardization within Jewish education it is no panacea.

63. The Jewish community must find ways to bolster knowledge about who the Jewish people are, by encouraging debate and teaching about the diversity of the Jewish people. Jewish education should not center on progressive lenses that define diversity almost exclusively by skin color and socioeconomic status.

Harnessing liberal progressive groups in the struggle against the Jewish erasure

64. Many progressive organizations perceive criticism of Jewish-Israeli erasure as an attack on the progressive movement as a whole – a movement to which they proudly belong. Therefore, the willingness of progressive Jewish organizations to go against Jewish-Israeli erasure within the progressive discourse has been negligible and usually local.

65. At the same time, liberal and progressive voices in the Jewish community are in the best position to challenge Jewish-Israeli erasure in the progressive discourse. There is a need to embrace the paradox that the credibility of liberal and progressive voices against erasure often stems from criticism of Israel’s policies or of mainstream Jewish organizations. Despite the challenges of doing so, the potential return on investment makes the effort to engage liberal and progressive circles against the erasure an effort worthwhile. There is a golden opportunity to leverage Jewish social and political involvement as many Jews have directly experienced left-wing antisemitism for the first time recently.

Harnessing progressive Jewish organizations to confront Jewish erasure is challenging because of their perception that by speaking up they become complicit in helping Israel evade discussion about its policies toward the Palestinians.[9] For too many, criticism of Israel is largely the reason for their professional-organizational existence.

[1]  The diplomatic relations yield strong economic ties, while think tanks and research institutes from the Gulf, such as Derasat from the Kingdom of Bahrain and Trends from the UAE, are creating powerful connections with Israeli institutions. Grassroots organizations such as Sharaka, (A peace-startup founded by young leaders from Israel and the Arab States that are side to the Abraham Accords, that works to translate the accords on a people-to-people level. Sharaka organizes joint initiatives, projects, delegations, and dialogues. See in: https://sharakango.com/about-us/ [Accessed 2 February 2022); Israel-is (A Non-profit that connects young Israelis with “the world” including in Bahrain, UAE and Morocco. See in: https://www.israel-is.org/en/[Accessed 2 February 2022].); and Association Mimouna (A Moroccan association that strives to preserve and promote the history of Morocco's ancient Jewish community. See in https://mimouna.org/ [Accessed 2 February 2022]. )

[2]  The remarks appear in a message sent by US Secretary of State Antony Blinken to Department of State employees on 27/7/2021.

[3]  See these arguments in an article in response to a speech by Israeli Foreign Minister Yair Lapid, Yehuda Bauer,  Haaretz , 16/9/2021

[4]  Independent, October 15th , 2021

[5]  David Bernstein, A Strategic Reset for Jewish Community Relation and Avocacy, eJP, 18/10/2021; and Steven Windmueller interviewed by David Bernstein, Episode 30, of Speeachcast.

[6]  See for example how Jewish New Yorkers united to Raise Millions for Ukraine. Liam Stack, New York Times, 4/3/2022

[7]  The Israeli American Council (IAC), which was established just a few years ago as a local organization in Los Angeles, has rapidly become a national organization. In addition to this organization, the Israeli diaspora has undergone an unprecedented process of establishment and organization both in the US and around the world. . On the Israeli ex-pat community see The Reut Institute, Engaing the Israeli Diaspora: Toronto as a Case Study, May 2013.

[8]  Izabella Tabarovsky, Russian Lessons for American Jews, Sapir, Volume three, Automn 2021.

[9]  For example, David Bernstein, founder, The Jewish Institute for Liberal Values, argues that the attempt to harness progressives has failed and that the Jewish community should focus on building the center. Bernstein, Ibid.