Two recent letters from prominent Diaspora Jewish voices have reignited a familiar yet urgent debate. The first, initiated by The London Initiative and signed by thousands, and the second, from Orthodox rabbis and clergy, both expressed deep concern about the current trajectory of Israeli government policies.
Predictably, both have been met with sharp rebukes: What right do those who live safely abroad have to criticize policies when they and their children will never bear the direct consequences?
A related criticism cuts even deeper: Such public expressions of Jewish dissent amount to washing dirty laundry in public, providing ammunition to Israel’s enemies and those seeking excuses to hate Jews. Why, the argument goes, hand antisemites and hostile governments ready-made talking points? Why not keep family disagreements within the family?
These criticisms, while emotionally resonant, fundamentally misunderstand both the historical reality of Jewish peoplehood and the contemporary stakes of Israel’s choices for global Jewry.
Diaspora Jewry is a partner in the State of Israel. It is affected by its decisions and is part of the global Jewish community. It has an obligation to speak out and to find a way to navigate the complex dilemma with sincerity, humility, and sensitivity.
Partners from the beginning
The relationship between Diaspora Jews and the Zionist project – and later the State of Israel – has never been that of distant observers. From the earliest days of modern Zionism, Diaspora communities were integral partners. This wasn’t charity; it was partnership in a shared Jewish dream.
Even after 1948, this partnership deepened, rather than diminished. Diaspora Jews served as Israel’s diplomatic foot soldiers, lobbying governments, countering hostile narratives, and building bridges in their home countries, often at the risk of the accusation of dual loyalty to their home country. In return, they maintained a voice in debates across Israel’s political spectrum.
Geographic distance must not disqualify moral engagement. “All of Israel is responsible for one another” is not a principle limited to physical borders.
When Israel defines Judaism
But today’s dilemma runs deeper than historical precedent. As Israeli author Yossi Shain argues in The Israeli Century, Israel has become not just a Jewish state but the primary definer of what Judaism means in the modern world. For the first time in two millennia, the largest, most dynamic Jewish community possesses sovereign power. Israel’s actions, values, and self-presentation increasingly shape global perceptions of Jews and Judaism itself.
For centuries, Judaism was defined by Diaspora communities adapting ancient traditions to local contexts. Today, Israel’s version of Jewish identity – its symbols, narratives, and moral choices – carries unprecedented weight in defining Jewish identity worldwide. Israeli politics dominate Jewish community conversations from Buenos Aires to Berlin. Diaspora Jews find their Jewish identity increasingly filtered through an Israeli lens.
The antisemitism connection
This reality has profound consequences that extend far beyond Jewish institutional life. When Israel acts, all Jews feel the reverberations. The spike in antisemitic incidents following military operations in Gaza, the targeting of Jewish students on campuses during periods of Israeli-Palestinian tension, the defacement of synagogues in response to Israeli policies – these are not coincidences.
This is emphatically not to blame Jews for antisemitism, which is an ancient hatred that would exist regardless of any particular policy. However, acknowledging this reality means recognizing that Israel’s actions occur within a global context where all Jews are affected by the consequences.
A Diaspora Jew facing harassment in Paris or Pittsburgh did not vote for Israeli policies, does not shape Israeli military doctrine, and may even oppose specific government actions. Yet they bear the social and sometimes physical costs of decisions made in Jerusalem. This creates both a moral claim and a practical necessity for Diaspora engagement.
The “dirty laundry” argument – that public criticism provides ammunition to antisemites – reaches the wrong conclusion. Antisemites don’t need Jewish critics to fuel their hatred; they manufacture their own pretexts. More importantly, the absence of principled Jewish voices simply cedes the narrative space entirely to those with malicious intent.
Moreover, this argument misidentifies what constitutes the “dirty laundry.” The real damage comes not from those calling out problematic behavior but from the problematic behavior itself.
In the words of The London Initiative co-founder Mike Prashker, “It is the extreme actions and even more extreme words of the government soiling the laundry that spread a bad smell far across the globe. We are doing the dirty work of gathering it up and washing it.”
When Jewish voices publicly maintain moral standards, they demonstrate that the Jewish community is guided by principles rather than blind loyalty, actually strengthening the Jewish position in global discourse. It causes discomfort, but the truth sometimes does.
Antisemitism is an effect we see and feel. The future of Judaism, dominated by Israel’s reality, is more ephemeral but may face a deeper crisis with more lasting consequences.
The path forward
The challenge for Diaspora Jews is navigating this engagement with conviction and humility. Finding ways to influence Israel’s direction without patronizing those who have chosen to build their lives on “the pitch” rather than in “the stands.” This requires supporting Israel’s security while questioning specific policies, acknowledging the unique pressures facing Israelis while highlighting universal and Jewish moral standards, and respecting Israeli democratic sovereignty while recognizing the global stakes of Israeli choices.
Any protest must acknowledge key truths: the brutality of the October 7 attacks, Israel’s existential need to respond with force, and the ultra-complex combat reality of Gaza – Hamas’s responsibility and Israel’s problem.
Most importantly, it means rejecting the false choice between unconditional support and total disengagement. The current government’s trajectory, toward a vision promoted by figures like Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich, threatens not just Israeli democracy but the way Judaism will develop. Diaspora Jews have every right, and perhaps an obligation, to resist this trajectory.
Jewish sovereignty is the historic achievement of modern Zionism. Diaspora Jews who live as a minority have a unique perspective to add. Their collective memory is different from that of Israeli Jews and must be used to enhance the future of Israel and Judaism.
A shared future
The letters from Jewish leaders that sparked this debate represent neither disloyalty nor presumption but the voice of partners expressing legitimate concern. The underlying position is loving and patriotic, from leaders who place supporting Zionism and Israel as a core tenet of their identity.
The Jewish future is being written in real time, largely shaped by Israel’s choices. Those who will be affected by this future have both the right and responsibility to help shape it, even from afar, even with humility, even amid the profound complexities of loving something they cannot fully control.
The Diaspora dilemma is real. Yet silence is not the answer. Partnership demands conversation, even when, especially when, the stakes are highest.
The writer is founding partner of Goldrock Capital and founder of The Institute for Jewish and Zionist Research. He chairs a number of NGOs, including Leshem, ICAR, and ReHome, and is a former chair of Gesher and World Bnei Akiva.