Global media and international institutions obsessively accuse Israel of serious human rights violations and in addition to these condemnations, Israel is also subject to sanctions and boycotts. At the same time, the view that the Jewish people have no right to self-determination or a state of their own is gaining ground. Hostility toward the Jewish state has many deep causes that reinforce one another.

First, Israel’s geopolitical reality is one of continual military conflict. Over the past three years, it has confronted aggression by terrorist armies along its northern and southern borders. Iran has launched missiles at Israeli population centers while explicitly declaring its intention to eliminate the Jewish state. As in any war, Israel’s defensive responses produce disturbing images that shape public opinion, as they have in Gaza. The use of military force remains unpopular in most of the world, despite growing threats from Russia and China and renewed rearmament that are changing the global security landscape. Moreover, outside observers also do not sufficiently understand the complexity and destructive consequences of modern warfare in densely built-up areas. Israel has thus been wrongly accused of deliberately starving Gaza and committing genocide. In fact, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) have made operational efforts unprecedented in the history of warfare to reduce collateral damage and allow large quantities of humanitarian aid to enter. Hamas has looted a substantial share of that aid.

Second, widespread hostility toward the Jewish state has deep religious roots. Christianity and Islam together account for more than half the world’s population. They are the two largest religions, and Islam is spreading the fastest. Both teach that the Jews rejected their path to salvation. These doctrines fostered intense antisemitism for centuries. Certainly, not all Christians and Muslims hold antisemitic views, and some are friends of Israel. Yet their cultural traditions remain steeped in historically-inherited negative narratives. Christian tradition accused the Jews of killing God and rejecting Jesus as their savior. Islamic tradition has likewise criticized the Jews for refusing to recognize Muhammad as God’s prophet. Although Jews were classified as “People of the Book” rather than heretics, their inferior legal status as dhimmis (protected persons) made them second-class citizens in Muslim-majority societies. Christian bodies have sought in recent times to change attitudes toward Jews, but the long-term effectiveness of these initiatives is unclear. By contrast, very few Islamic leaders have initiated a similar change. In addition, the resurgence of radical Islam has strengthened anti-Jewish sentiment among Muslim populations, and the establishment of a Jewish state in the Middle East is seen as sacrilege.

Third, Israel’s unique history draws resistance and skepticism from non-Jewish audiences. Zionism, the Jewish national movement, is historically exceptional: an ancient people expelled from its homeland returning after two thousand years of exile to make its home there again. When set against the Palestinian narrative, Zionist history often fails to persuade people around the world who lack a deep understanding of history. Supporters of Zionism must explain the region’s complex history, including the fact that a substantial share of the Arab population in the Land of Israel immigrated there only in the nineteenth century. Most of the global public is also unaware that the Arab-Palestinian leadership consistently rejected every proposal for territorial compromise and answered initiatives for coexistence with violence and hostility. A persuasive case for Israel’s legitimacy requires historical knowledge that the general public usually lacks.

Today, the Jewish state is caught in a tragic conflict with a deeply hostile population, most of whom did not repudiate the October 7 massacre. Many observers around the world see this population as indigenous victims of oppression. Post-colonial guilt, prevalent in parts of the West and redirected toward the Arab-Israeli conflict, compounds this problem. Viewed through a colonial lens, Israel was established when Western imperial powers deliberately implanted a Jewish entity in the Middle East to secure their own regional hegemony. This view has been widely adopted in the Muslim world, reinforcing existing religious hostility. It has also led many Arabs to see Israel as a temporary modern incarnation of the Crusader kingdoms, doomed to collapse.

Fourth, Western societies increasingly favor a post-national outlook that is critical of national particularism. This is especially evident among young Europeans, who prefer supranational identities and see themselves first as Europeans rather than citizens of a particular nation-state. Multicultural ideologies blur distinct national identities as they spread, reinforcing this supranational outlook. In sharp contrast to the trend in the West, Israel remains an unmistakably national enterprise. In progressive and left-wing intellectual circles, nationalism is increasingly losing legitimacy and is often portrayed as chauvinism and reactionary conservatism.

Fifth, the Jewish claim to self-determination on the same terms as other nations is not an obvious one. Throughout history, the political entities in which Jewish communities lived generally classified them as religious minorities. Jews adopted the same view and did not seek national rights. In the modern era, some described themselves as English or French people of the Mosaic faith and denied the national dimension of their identity. After Israel was established, some even feared that supporting it would be interpreted as “dual loyalty.” The overlap between religious and national identity in Jewish life is difficult to understand; very few religions in the world are national religions. This makes it easier to challenge Israel’s legitimacy. Indeed, the Palestinian national movement refuses to recognize Israel as the state of the Jewish people.

Sixth, the radical left, with its longstanding ideological hostility to Zionism, has gained considerable political influence worldwide. Europe’s socialist and social democratic parties show this ideological shift clearly. Britain’s Labour Party, for example, has adopted distinctly anti-Israel positions. The Green Party in the UK denies Israel’s right to exist. In the United States, President Barack Obama’s administration heralded the rise of the Democratic Party’s progressive wing, whose attacks on Israel have grown increasingly fierce. Growing domestic political polarization in Western countries has strengthened the extremes on both sides, each with its own form of hostility toward the Jewish state.

Seventh, the “red-green” alliance between the left and Islamist actors has become a significant political force, especially in Western Europe, where growing Muslim minorities wield increasing influence. Die Linke’s victory in the Berlin elections is one example. Anti-Americanism is a central bond between these partners. They oppose the projection of American power and values around the world, so their hostility naturally extends to Israel, which they rightly identify as a faithful ally of the United States. Widespread international aversion to political figures such as President Donald Trump has further weakened Israel’s image because of its ties to the United States.

Eighth, the Holocaust is gradually fading from memory as times passes. Guilt over Jewish suffering and sympathy for Jewish suffering are far weaker today than in the post-war years, and the public remains vulnerable to deep-rooted anti-Jewish prejudice. Unfortunately, that historical sympathy is often replaced by perverse rhetoric that portrays Palestinians as victims of Israeli actions and compares those actions to Nazi atrocities. Palestinians have successfully used systematic public diplomacy campaigns to cement a narrative of victimhood. Arab states heavily subsidize this effort, with Qatar its leading sponsor through the Gulf State’s media powerhouse, Al Jazeera. Enormous sums have been invested around the world to cultivate suspicions about Israel.

Ninth, the actions and statements of Jewish and Israeli figures and organizations enable some of the world’s hostility toward Israel. Opponents of Israeli policy often cite criticism from within Israel, such as that of the filmmakers behind NAZA, to lend legitimacy to their arguments. Diaspora organizations such as Jews for Justice for Palestinians and the American lobbying group J Street also join in political activity against Israel. At the other end of the ideological spectrum, the rhetoric and policy positions of extreme right-wing factions represented in Israel’s current government give foreign critics good grounds to attack the state’s legitimacy.

Tenth, Israel’s detractors show a hint of envy of the Jewish state’s success and magnificent achievements in many fields. The Jews of all people, once scattered across the world, oppressed and despised, succeeded in building a strong, prosperous state. Such feelings are difficult to measure but, of course, have unmistakably antisemitic roots.

In conclusion, hostility toward Israel is widespread around the world and reflects the historical persistence of animosity toward Jews. There is therefore a limit to how much changes in Israeli policy can improve a given geopolitical situation. Jews have never been the world’s favorites. Still, in many countries, it is interests and not only public sentiment that determine policy. Fortunately, Israel has much to offer in its bilateral dealings with other states. As Israel contends with an extremely difficult diplomatic environment, its public diplomacy must remain committed to presenting the country as a rational, moral actor amid the geopolitical instability affecting parts of the Middle East and the West. Ultimately, Israel’s strategic messages must consistently emphasize that its existential struggle serves to defend Western civilization and its values against enemies from within and without.