Truth, Lies and Genocide: How Netanyahu and Trump Pervert the Fight Against Antisemitism

Introduction

In recent years, the legitimate struggle against antisemitism has become increasingly entangled with political agendas that critics argue undermine its core purpose.

The relationship between Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and U.S. President Donald Trump exemplifies how the fight against anti-Jewish hatred can be weaponized for political gain. At the same time, alliances with far-right groups raise troubling contradictions.

As Israel’s military actions in Gaza face international scrutiny and accusations of genocide, the manipulation of antisemitism claims has taken on new dimensions, with profound implications for both Jewish safety and Palestinian rights.

Redefining Antisemitism for Political Purposes

Netanyahu and Trump have cultivated a relationship built on mutual political support, frequently invoking antisemitism in ways that critics argue serve their political agendas rather than protecting Jewish communities.

When Netanyahu faced potential war crimes charges from the International Criminal Court (ICC) in 2021, he responded by calling the investigation “pure antisemitism” and declaring that “the court established to prevent atrocities like the Nazi Holocaust against the Jewish people is now targeting the one state of the Jewish people.”

This rhetorical strategy frames any criticism of Israeli state policy as an attack on Jews themselves, a conflation that many scholars and Jewish organizations find deeply problematic.

Nick Cohen, writing in March 2025, observed that “to be against antisemitism, you must accept that the far-right parties of Europe are better friends to Jews than actual Jews who experience actual racism.” This represents a fundamental shift in how antisemitism is understood and combated.

Trump’s administration reinforced this approach through executive orders that critics say target legitimate criticism of Israel. In January 2025, Trump signed an executive order that promised to “marshal all Federal resources to combat the explosion of anti-Semitism on our campuses and in our streets since October 7, 2023”.

While presented as protection for Jewish Americans, Kenneth Stern—who drafted the antisemitism definition that Trump’s orders rely on—has warned that the administration’s approach “puts pro-Israel Jewish students in a situation where they may be seen as trying to suppress speech rather than answer it.”

The Weaponization of Jewish Fear

A significant component of this strategy involves the manipulation of legitimate fears within Jewish communities. Following the horrific attack at the Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh in 2018, Netanyahu thanked Trump for “unequivocally condemning this heinous crime and for pledging to fight those who seek to destroy the Jewish people.”

While combating such violence is essential, critics note that this framing often serves to cement political alliances rather than address the complex roots of antisemitism.

PBS programming examining the phenomenon of weaponizing fear noted that leaders like Netanyahu and Trump “continue to get away with casting themselves as the ‘protectors’ of Israel and the Jewish people” despite evidence that “military conflict won’t make Jews — or any of us — safer.”

This protection narrative becomes particularly potent when connected to existential threats, with Trump claiming in September 2025 that Israel faces “total annihilation” without his protection.

Far-Right Alliances and Contradictions

Perhaps the most troubling aspect of Netanyahu and Trump’s approach to antisemitism is their willingness to align with far-right movements and leaders whose histories include antisemitic elements.

In March 2025, Netanyahu hosted far-right European leaders at a conference in Jerusalem aimed at addressing antisemitism, which mainstream Jewish leaders boycotted due to the controversial attendees.

This gathering highlighted “a strengthening relationship between Israel—established in the aftermath of the Holocaust—and a European far-right that some critics argue still maintains connections to antisemitism and Nazi ideologies from World War II.”

The contradictions became even more apparent when Netanyahu met with Elon Musk, whom critics have accused of antisemitism, before meeting with evangelical Christian leaders, including John Hagee, who “once remarked that the Holocaust was part of God’s plan to drive the Jews to Israel.”

Trump’s own alliance with Christian Zionists introduces another layer of contradiction. As Ben Lorber, an analyst at Political Research Associates, explained: “Donald Trump occasionally makes overtures to the so-called isolationist wing of America First and claims to wanna dial down US involvement in overseas conflict.

But he’s in bed really to an unparalleled degree with the Israeli right and with Christian Zionists in the US who support the Israeli rights Maximalist agenda”. These Christian Zionists often embrace theological views that envision Jews either converting or perishing in an apocalyptic end-times scenario.

Hungary’s Jobbik Party: A Case Study

The uncomfortable relationship between Netanyahu’s government and far-right movements is exemplified by Hungary’s Jobbik party, which the BBC described as “regularly issuing anti-Semitic statements.” In 2014, the party provoked outrage by holding a rally in a former synagogue, with protesters calling it “a perversion.”

Despite such incidents, Netanyahu has cultivated close ties with Hungary’s government, which has been criticized for antisemitic rhetoric.

Silencing Palestinian Rights and Criticism of Israel

The broadened definition of antisemitism has had significant consequences for Palestinians and their advocates. Palestinian and Arab intellectuals have expressed concern that “the Israeli government and its supporters are instrumentalizing the fight against antisemitism to delegitimize and silence defenders of Palestinian rights.”

They argue that genuine efforts to combat antisemitism should be compatible with advocating for Palestinian rights.

Trump’s February 2025 statements about Gaza have intensified these concerns. During Netanyahu’s visit to the White House, Trump suggested that Palestinians would be “settled” elsewhere and that Gaza would become “the Riviera of the Middle East” for “the world’s people.”

Jewish Voice for Peace characterized this as Trump wanting “all Palestinians out of Gaza” and noted his reference to 15 months of genocide as “bad luck.”

Wikipedia entries on the weaponization of antisemitism note that scholars have identified a pattern where “allegations of antisemitism have been weaponized against pro-Palestinian protesters.”

According to Raz Segal, “the blanket assertion of ‘rampant antisemitism’ at protests by pro-Israel advocates is intended as a political cudgel: weaponizing antisemitism to shield Israel from criticism of its attack on Gaza.”

The BDS Movement and Anti-Zionism

Accusations of antisemitism have particularly targeted the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement. In response, BDS advocates argue that it is “quite ironic that the Trump Administration, prompted by Israel’s apartheid regime, continues to enable and normalize white supremacy and antisemitism in the US and worldwide while simultaneously smearing BDS, a leading Palestinian-led human rights movement and its millions of supporters worldwide, as ‘antisemitic’”.

This conflation of antisemitism with anti-Zionism has been criticized by experts including David Feldman, who noted in December 2023 that while “some anti-Zionism takes an antisemitic form,” there is “a long history of Israel and its supporters portraying anti-Zionism and other criticisms of Israel as antisemitic” to delegitimize them.

Impact on Genuine Efforts to Combat Antisemitism

The exploitation of antisemitism for political purposes threatens to undermine genuine efforts to combat anti-Jewish hatred, which remains a serious concern globally.

As Jonathan Sarna of Brandeis University noted when analyzing antisemitic symbols present at the January 6, 2021 Capitol riot, “Calls to exterminate Jews are common in far-right and white nationalist circles”. This real threat requires serious attention.

Critics argue that when antisemitism is weaponized to shield Israel from criticism, it diverts attention from actual antisemitism. According to Atalia Omer of the University of Notre Dame, “weaponization of antisemitism is bad for all involved, including Israel and the broader Jewish community”.

When every criticism of Israeli policy is labeled antisemitic, it becomes harder to identify and combat genuine instances of anti-Jewish hatred.

Kenneth Stern, whose work on defining antisemitism has been central to this debate, warned that the Trump administration’s approach is counterproductive: “It puts pro-Israel Jewish students in a situation where they may be seen as trying to suppress speech rather than answer it”.

This undermines campus dialogue and potentially increases tensions rather than reducing them.

Conclusion

The Path Forward

The perversion of antisemitism as a political weapon represents a significant challenge for those committed to both combating hatred against Jews and supporting human rights for all people.

Netanyahu and Trump’s approach conflates criticism of Israeli state policies with hatred of Jews, silences Palestinian voices, and forges troubling alliances with far-right movements—all while real antisemitism continues to threaten Jewish communities worldwide.

Moving forward requires reclaiming the fight against antisemitism from those who would weaponize it. This means recognizing that opposing antisemitism and supporting Palestinian rights are not mutually exclusive positions.

It means holding leaders accountable when they invoke antisemitism selectively or ally with groups that promote other forms of bigotry.

Most importantly, it means returning to a principled stance where combating hatred against Jews is part of a broader commitment to human dignity and rights for all peoples.

As Benjamin Netanyahu and Donald Trump continue to deploy antisemitism accusations to shield policies and silence critics, the challenge remains to maintain focus on genuine threats to Jewish safety while refusing to allow antisemitism to be weaponized against other vulnerable groups.

The perversion of this fight damages both the struggle against antisemitism and the broader pursuit of justice and human rights.