Is It Possible to Talk Honestly About This War Without Feeding Antisemitism?

Responsibility begins in the Oval Office - with Donald Trump - but the conversation cannot end there.

Before I dig in, let me state two things clearly.

First, responsibility for this disastrous war with Iran rests with the President of the United States – and no one else. Donald Trump chose to take the country into war, and he alone decided, unconstitutionally, how it began and how to conduct it.

No foreign leader, no lobby, no ally, no adviser forced his hand. The buck stops where it always has – in the Oval Office.

Second, antisemitism is real, powerful, and deeply embedded in politics and culture across the world, including here in the United States.

It has existed for millennia, and it is once again visible on both the far right and far left, in the form of conspiracy theories about Jewish power, Jewish loyalty, or Jewish control over media, governments, and wars.

Those two truths have to be stated. But they cannot be the end of a conversation about this war, why we are in it, and how we are going to get out of it.

Because we cannot set the right course going forward if we declare, from the outset, that it is out of bounds to examine the role that Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli right, or some pro-Israel advocacy organizations have played in shaping the environment that made this war more likely.

These are sensitive subjects. They can be – and have to be – discussed in ways that avoid sliding into antisemitism.

Refusing to discuss them at all – or labeling the discussion itself antisemitic – isn’t the answer. It prevents accountability, distorts our understanding of how key decisions have been made, and ultimately makes it harder to understand – and to take responsibility for – the role our own leaders and institutions have played.

This is a narrow space to operate in, but I’m going to try.

---

For more than three decades, Benjamin Netanyahu has been warning about Iran, predicting it was weeks or months away from a nuclear weapon, and arguing that military confrontation was the only answer.

Other Israeli leaders – even moderate ones – largely echoed his lines, including opening the door to the possible use of force. Public debate in Israel for decades has been shaped by the Prime Minister’s hawkish outlook, while dissenting voices struggled to gain a hearing.

Here in the U.S., when confronted with Netanyahu’s hardline positions, presidents of both parties generally chose diplomacy, containment, or delay – recognizing that while none of those options were perfect, they carried far fewer risks than war.

American Jewish organizations, over the decades, have often echoed Israeli government positions, reinforcing increasingly hardline views inside the American political system.

Over time, support for a tougher stance on Iran became a litmus test in Washington. Members of Congress learned that repeating certain talking points – the demand for zero enrichment, the weakness of diplomacy, and the need to keep the military option on the table – was expected if they wanted to be seen as strong supporters of Israel.

Those expectations did not arise on their own. They were cultivated, reinforced, and rewarded through organized advocacy, just as happens on every major issue in American politics.

Acknowledging that reality is not antisemitic. Every community lobbies. Every cause organizes. The pro-Israel community is no different.

Saying that Netanyahu, AIPAC, or other advocacy groups helped shape the environment that led to this war is an analytical statement of fact, not an antisemitic conspiracy theory.

It is also not a cover story to be used to absolve Donald Trump of responsibility.

Claiming the United States was “dragged” into this war requires ignoring the President’s full ownership of this decision.

But insisting that the conversation itself cannot take place has consequences of its own. If we say it is illegitimate to ask how some of our own leaders, our own institutions, and our own advocacy contributed to this moment, then we give up the ability to learn from it – and to change course.

The stakes couldn’t be higher. If we’re going to get out of this war, we need to understand why we’re in it. As important, if we dismiss every attempt to examine the causes of the war as antisemitic, the conversation will not disappear – it will move to places where nuance disappears and conspiracy theories thrive.

Precisely because Netanyahu and his American allies did play a role in setting the table for Trump’s decision, those looking for a scapegoat for failure will have an easy target.

That leads me to the most important point: why it is so vital that Jewish American voices – and our community’s leaders – speak out far more loudly against this war.

I‘ve written before that there are moments when Jewish Americans who care about Israel will disagree not only with its government, but even with the overwhelming majority of its people.

Precisely at a moment like this – with stakes as high as they are – we need Jewish voices to be heard saying that this war was not inevitable, that it was not in our interest, and that it was not pursued in our name.

If the policies that led to this war are allowed to be seen as expressing the will of the American Jewish community as a whole, the consequences will be felt by Jews everywhere.

It is vitally important to make clear the extent of dissent in the American Jewish community from this far-right Israeli government and the path they have chosen - vital to ensure it’s understood that you can be part of the pro-Israel community, as J Street is, without supporting this war.

Nothing good will come from silencing debate or dissent within the pro-Israel tent or pretending there is unanimity where none exists.

A moment as challenging as this demands an honest reckoning and open discussion – even when it is uncomfortable, and even when it forces us to look at our own role in how we got here.

---

If you appreciate the work J Street does, I hope you’ll consider making a grassroots contribution to ensure our voice is heard.