Hating Zionists, killing Jews

Sardaka, CC0, via Wikimedia Commons

Australian police have published a report into the antisemitic massacre that Naveed and Sajid Akram perpetrated at Bondi Beach on the first night of Chanukah. It shows the planning that went into it, with weapons training and the construction of different types of IEDs. It sets out their allegiance to Islamic State. And it describes how they made a video before the attack, in which they attempted to justify the mass slaughter of Jews on a beach in Sydney by condemning “the acts of ‘Zionists’”, according to the police report.

Sound familiar?

In June this year, 45 year old Egyptian national, Mohamed Sabry Soliman, used a makeshift flamethrower and Molotov cocktails to attack a hostage vigil in Boulder, Colorado. Twelve people were injured, one of whom, 82-year-old Karen Diamond, died from her injuries. He, too, said he was doing it to attack “Zionists”. According to the official account of his police interview:

Soliman stated, among other things, that he viewed “anyone supporting the exist [sic] of Israel on our land” to be “Zionist.” The defendant stated that he “decide[d] to take [his] revenge from these people” and “search[ed] the internet looking for any Zionist event.” Soliman stated that he learned of the Run for Their Lives group through internet searches for “Zionist” events and that he identified the “Zionist” group when he saw the flags and signs they carried at the courthouse.

In one video of the attack, Soliman can be seen shouting “How many children you killed” and “End Zionists”. And as he carried out the attack, he shouted “Free Palestine”.

The previous month, Elias Rodriguez shot dead Sarah Milgrim and Yaron Lischinsky, two Israeli Embassy staffers, who were leaving an American Jewish Committee event at the Jewish Museum at Washington D.C. The official police affidavit recounts that Rodriguez told officers “I did it for Palestine, I did it for Gaza”, and shouted “Free Palestine” as he was being led away. According to eye-witnesses, he also shouted “There is only one solution, Intifada Revolution” after committing the shooting.

When Jihad al-Shamie was trying to batter down the doors of Heaton Park Synagogue, having already killed Melvin Cravitz and injured others, he was heard to shout: “this is what you get for killing our children.”

Zionists, killing children, Intifada, Free Palestine. Four terror attacks, three different continents, but the same targets and, significantly, the same language. Navid Akram, Sajid Akram and Jihad al-Shamie were Islamist extremists who followed Islamic State; Elias Rodriguez was from the radical left; Mohamed Sabry Soliman seems motivated by hatred without declaring a particular ideology. But it’s remarkable how much their language, and apparent justifications for murder, are so similar to each other - and to what we have been hearing on our streets, and seeing online, ever since the 7 October attacks.

It’s an example of what has become known as “Stochastic terrorism,” which is when hatred is stirred up towards a particular target group to such an extent that an act of terrorism becomes probable, even if nobody can predict exactly where and when it will occur. It’s a way of explaining ‘lone actor’ terrorism, carried out by individuals who are not directed by an organisation in the traditional style, but are not really acting in isolation either, because they are the product of a whole body of hatred and dehumanisation towards their victims. Or to put it another way, it’s a fancy academic label for the idea of ‘this is where hateful rhetoric leads’. The incitement isn’t direct, so you can’t draw a direct line between the person who incites violence and the one who carries it out, but there’s an undeniable link nonetheless.

For example, after an arson attack on a mosque in Sussex in October, Baroness Warsi claimed it was “The consequences of the daily demonising, maligning, stereotyping and stigmatising of Muslims - from mainstream politicians to the far right, from sections of the media to extremism on social networks”. Amnesty International called it “the real-life consequences of outpourings of hatred” following “months of increasing hostility to racialised and migrant communities in the UK – boosted by anti-migrant rhetoric across the political spectrum and in the media.”

If this is how things work, then we are entitled to ask: what was the demonising, stereotyping and stigmatising, the increasing hostility and outpourings of hatred, that led terrorists in Australia, Britain and the United States to not only murder Jews, but to all justify it by reference to “Zionists” and child killers?

It’s impossible to separate this from the tidal wave of hatred directed towards “Zionists” from the anti-Israel movement on our streets and online. The cries of “Death to all Zionists”, the calls for Zionists to be driven from our campuses, and the chants of “Zionist scum, off our streets”. The claims that “Zionists” control the UK government and are genocidal baby killers. The comparisons of Zionism to Nazism. The repeated slogans of “Death to the IDF”, “Intifada” and “Resistance”. All of this hatred and dehumanisation, combined with calls for radical action, reached a pitch long ago where terrorism against Jews became entirely predictable.

When people point this out, they are accused of weaponising antisemitism (a particularly revolting phrase, given how often antisemites now use weapons to kill Jews); or distracting people to enable the slaughter of Palestinians; or being part of a coordinated PR campaign to protect Israel; or - most ridiculously - that nobody ever chants “globalise the Intifada” anyway. Ironically, this often comes from the same people who are quickest to point the finger at wider right wing rhetoric when trying to explain far right violence. It’s gaslighting, plain and simple.

Nor does it matter that this incitement is directed at “Zionists”, because we see now - if we ever doubted it - that hatred of Zionists lands on Jews. This operates on a spectrum, from the most murderous to the most fleeting. Last night I went to my local menorah lighting for the eighth night of Chanukah. It was dark and rainy, but a bigger crowd than usual, a sign of solidarity and togetherness after the awfulness of Bondi. The Chabad rabbi tried to inject some joy, as they always do. And a middle-aged woman, walking past, repeatedly shouted “Free Palestine” at the crowd, looking pleased with herself as she did so. I don’t think she is a potential killer. But in her sentiment, her irrepressible urge to harass Jews celebrating Chanukah, she was expressing the same underlying hatred as the Akrams, just in less violent form.

In theory, it should be possible to have a non-extremist movement that campaigns for Palestinian rights. In reality, though, the anti-Israel movement we actually have has provided a welcoming environment for extremists and antisemites. It wouldn’t be the first time that a legitimate cause had been distorted in this way: the far right do the same, hijacking legitimate concerns about immigration to incite hatred of foreigners. A similar thing has clearly happened here too: the Palestinian cause has been co-opted by extremists who use its language and slogans to incite, and act out, hatred of Jews.

It is true that even extremists have a right to protest, but the presence of hateful, violent rhetoric on anti-Israel marches is too visible to deny, and now that this same language is being used to justify the killing of Jews, the consequences are too lethal to ignore. In an ideal world the protest organisers would be proactively trying to help, but that seems unlikely. Instead, it must mean that these demonstrations are policed differently, and it is good to see that this is starting to happen. It should also trouble the MPs, trade unions and NGOs that back the marches or speak at them, that they are associated with this hatred. One way or another, things have to change. Bondi, Manchester, Boulder and Washington D.C.: the most dangerous form of anti-Jewish terrorism today looks, and sounds, like violent anti-Zionism.