The weaponisation of anti-Semitism: how a fight against hate became a tool of oppression
Demonstrators marched through downtown Boston and rallied outside the Israeli consulate to protest Israel’s bombing of the Gaza Strip. (Tess Scheflan / ActiveStills). (Photo inserted)
by Nasim Ahmed
Nasimbythedocks
March 24, 2025
America is sinking into a moral abyss, laid bare by the ruthless manner in which the administration of President Donald Trump is seeking to silence opposition to one of the worst atrocities of our time. In the Orwellian world that’s being constructed in front of our eyes, opposition to the genocide in Gaza is treated as an _expression_ of hate and violence, while those cheering on Israel’s mass slaughter are granted permission to parade their support with impunity.
Day by day, the authoritarianism and violence that has kept Palestinians subjugated for decades is being transported across the globe. In Israel’s ever-expanding sense of freedom from accountability, the first line of defence is no longer the besieged population of Gaza, or the three million Palestinians subjected to an apartheid regime in the occupied West Bank. Israel’s front line has been transported to Washington, New York, Berlin, London and capitals across the western world.
With growing awareness of Israel’s crimes and an increasing number of people who refuse to stay silent, the authoritarianism that has long crushed Palestinian lives is no longer confined to the illegally-occupied Gaza Strip and West Bank.
Eroding the very principles of freedom and justice upon which these societies claim to be built, this is all under the pretext of combating anti-Semitism. The first casualties of this transformation are already emerging. Mahmoud Khalil and others like him may be among the first victims of America’s turn towards authoritarianism in the service of Israel.
“Being Palestinian transcends borders,” said Khalil, the Palestinian graduate from Columbia University writing from a detention facility in Louisiana where he described himself as a “political prisoner.” Recounting how Department of Homeland Security agents arrested him without a warrant, in front of his wife, and forced him into an unmarked car, he says that he was held without due process, denied a blanket, had to sleep on the floor and was left in the dark about the reason for his detention. His arrest, wrote Khalil, was a direct consequence of exercising his right to protest against the genocide in Gaza. “I see in my circumstances similarities to Israel’s use of administrative detention — imprisonment without trial or charge — to strip Palestinians of their rights,” he reflected.
“My unjust detention is indicative of the anti-Palestinian racism that both the Biden and Trump administrations have demonstrated over the past 16 months as the US has continued to supply Israel with weapons to kill Palestinians and prevented international intervention,” Khalil explained. “For decades, anti-Palestinian racism has driven efforts to expand US laws and practices that are used to violently repress Palestinians, Arab Americans, and other communities. That is precisely why I am being targeted.”
Khalil’s detention, as he pointed out so powerfully, is not an aberration or a one-off case. It is part of a much larger pattern in which western institutions are bending under pressure to prioritise Israel’s ever-expanding impunity over the democratic rights of their own citizens. One of the clearest examples of this trend is the Trump administration’s letter to Columbia University. The federal government threatened to cancel $400 million in funding unless the university complied with a series of demands, including the adoption of the controversial International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of anti-Semitism. Israel’s preferred definition of ant-Jewish racism conflates legitimate criticism of the apartheid state with anti-Semitism, thereby criminalising its critics.
Academic freedom, protest rights and freedom of speech are being undermined under the guise of fighting anti-Semitism. Rather than protecting Jewish communities from real threats, governments and institutions are increasingly using the charge of anti-Semitism as a tool to stifle political opposition to Israeli policy. This is not only dishonest, but also profoundly dangerous.
Across the West, we are witnessing a coordinated campaign to redefine anti-Semitism in ways that protect Israel from accountability. The louder that the outcry against Israel’s genocide in Gaza grows, the more eagerly that allied Western governments reach for the tools of authoritarianism to criminalise dissent. At the centre of this effort is the IHRA definition, which labels various criticisms of Israel and Zionism as anti-Semitic. Its adoption by institutions and governments has created a chilling effect on free speech, making it easier to punish those who speak up for Palestinian rights.
Just as the Trump administration seeks to crack down on free speech through its weaponisation of anti-Semitism, in Israel we see how the effort to combat anti-Jewish racism is collapsing under the weight of its own contradictions. Just last week, a high-profile anti-Semitism conference organised by Israel’s Diaspora Affairs Ministry was boycotted by several prominent Jewish leaders, including the UK’s Chief Rabbi Ephraim Mirvis, Germany’s anti-Semitism czar Felix Klein and French philosopher Bernard-Henri Lévy. Their reason? The conference organisers invited far-right figures with well-documented histories of anti-Jewish rhetoric. The very event meant to combat anti-Semitism gave a platform to those who have perpetuated it.
Those who vocally support Israeli policies are embraced, even if their records on Jewish issues are questionable at best, and outright racist at worst. Meanwhile, those who advocate for Palestinian rights — many of whom are Jewish themselves — are denounced as anti-Semites.
The fallout from the conference led to an attempted compromise by Israel’s President Isaac Herzog: a separate meeting for Jewish leaders, excluding the far-right figures. However, this only served to highlight the extent of the problem. It confirmed that the inclusion of these figures was not an oversight, but part of a broader strategy to normalise alliances between Israel and the global far-right.
Warning about this development in a recent article, British Israeli writer Rachel Shabi pointed out how the far right’s “pretend fight” against anti-Semitism has become a key strategy to fracture progressive movements while simultaneously bolstering authoritarianism. Shabi noted how the Trump administration has weaponised anti-Semitism to suppress dissent, particularly among pro-Palestinian activists.
Far-right leaders across Europe and the US have found that embracing Israel while feigning concern for Jewish communities offers them a powerful shield against accusations of racism. This strategy has been used by figures such as Marine Le Pen in France and Hungary’s Viktor Orbán, who have built political capital by positioning themselves as defenders of Jews against an alleged left-wing or Muslim-driven anti-Semitism. In doing so, they simultaneously deflect from their own histories of anti-Semitic rhetoric while cementing alliances with Israel’s hard-right government.
When authoritarian leaders claim to be “fighting anti-Semitism” while employing repression and censorship, it sadly, but almost inevitably, fosters resentment against Jews. By associating crackdowns on free speech and human rights abuses with Jewish interests, right-wing actors risk stoking the very anti-Semitic sentiments that they claim to oppose.
The chilling White House social media post announcing the detention of Mahmoud Khalil with the Hebrew phrase “Shalom, Mahmoud” exemplifies this dangerous trend. By framing authoritarianism as a defence of Jewish interests, right-wing leaders are constructing a narrative in which Jews will ultimately be blamed for the erosion of everyone else’s civil liberties.
In a world where the far-right continues to gain ground, the fight against anti-Semitism must be reclaimed from those who wield it as a tool of oppression directed against their political opponents. Only by doing so can we ensure that the struggle against bigotry remains rooted in justice rather than political expediency. As Khalil himself put it, “I have always believed that my duty is not only to liberate myself from the oppressor, but also to liberate my oppressors from their hatred and fear.”