Greta Thunberg, Ben & Jerry and the Climate Movement’s Anti-Israel Turn

Embed from Getty Images

In the wake of Hamas’s October 7 terrorist attack on Israel and the ensuing war in Gaza, prominent figures and organizations in the climate movement—including Greta Thunberg, Ben & Jerry (the individuals themselves as well as the company and the foundation they cofounded), and groups like the Climate Justice Alliance (CJA)—have increasingly aligned their environmental advocacy with anti-Israel activism. Some time ago Ethan Brown covered this in The Hill. However, it’s gotten worse, and this shift has not only politicized the climate agenda but also diverted crucial time, talent, and resources away from addressing the existential threat of climate change.

From Climate Advocacy to Political Activism

Greta Thunberg, once celebrated for her unwavering focus on climate issues, has recently participated in initiatives aimed at challenging Israel’s policies in Gaza. Notably, she has joined the Freedom Flotilla Coalition’s effort to break the blockade of Gaza, a move that, while highlighting humanitarian concerns, also aligns her climate advocacy with a specific political agenda.

Similarly, Ben & Jerry, known for their anti-Israel stances, have labeled Israel’s actions in Gaza as “genocide,” intensifying its longstanding tensions with parent company Unilever. Like Ben Cohen’s recent protest on Gaza that distracted from the disability movement’s lifesaving defense of Medicaid, their declarations polarize public opinion and detract from the broader climate discourse.

These actions have sparked internal divisions within the climate movement. For instance, Fridays for Future, the youth-led climate organization co-founded by Thunberg, has experienced rifts over its stance on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Some national chapters have distanced themselves from the organization’s position, leading to fragmentation and a dilution of its core mission.

To be clear, people within the climate movement care about a range of issues. I myself care deeply about middle east peace, a return of the hostages and opportunities for people with disabilities. But when a climate organization or spokesperson becomes a lightning rod on other issues — especially when they push lies as if they are facts — it undermines scientific, factual and serious climate work.

I also want to point out that it’s a GOOD thing to care about innocent Palestinians. I was in Gaza when Israel withdrew all their soldiers and settlers from there in 2005. I met with Israeli and Palestinian leaders and worked on peace for many years. Today, I support peace and numerous groups trying to help people on the ground in Gaza have access to clean water. But there is a factual and nuanced way to understand these issues. The ADL offers some helpful resources including these:

The difference between antisemitism, anti-Zionism, and anti-Israel bias:
https://www.adl.org/resources/tools-and-strategies/what-antisemitism-anti-zionism-anti-israel-bias

Why “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” is antisemitic:
https://www.adl.org/resources/backgrounder/slogan-river-sea-palestine-will-be-free

Allegation of Israel as a Settler Colonialist
https://www.adl.org/resources/backgrounder/allegation-israel-settler-colonialist-enterprise

White Supremacy and Jews
https://www.adl.org/resources/news/white-supremacist-terrorist-acts-conspiracies-and-plots-against-jews

Anti-Israel and Anti-Zionist Campaigns
https://www.adl.org/about/adl-and-israel/anti-israel-and-anti-zionist-campaigns

Federal Funding Controversies and Their Fallout

The politicization of climate advocacy has also led to tangible consequences in terms of federal funding. The Climate Justice Alliance (CJA), a coalition of grassroots environmental groups, was selected by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to distribute $50 million in grants under the Inflation Reduction Act. However, the CJA’s public statements linking climate justice to Palestinian liberation and its calls for a ceasefire in Gaza drew criticism from lawmakers.

Senator Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) highlighted the group’s statements, accusing it of promoting anti-Israel sentiments. In response to the backlash, the EPA withheld the grant, making CJA the only selected grantmaker not to receive funding. This decision not only disrupted the CJA’s planned initiatives but also signaled a broader hesitancy in supporting climate groups perceived as politically contentious, potentially hindering environmental progress.

To be clear, there are other reasons, including a dangerous fealty to big oil and gas, that the Trump Administration canceled grants on climate. That harm will be catastrophic. But the dog whistles of antisemitism coming out of the climate movement did not help.

The Cost of Diverting Focus

The intertwining of climate advocacy with geopolitical conflicts has diverted attention and resources from the pressing need to combat climate change. Resources—be it time, funding, or public attention—that could be directed towards environmental initiatives are instead consumed by political debates. This diversion is particularly concerning given the accelerating impacts of climate change worldwide.

Moreover, the politicization of the climate movement risks alienating potential allies and supporters. By aligning with contentious political positions, climate advocates may inadvertently create divisions, undermining the inclusivity and unity necessary for effective environmental action. In the case of being anti-Israel and/or anti-Semitic, the climate movement also loses the ability to work with Jewish climate activists and Israeli startups and nonprofits that are on the front lines of climate solutions. It also, tragically, could have helped inspire the murderer who killed climate activist Sarah Milgrim and her boyfriend Yaron when they left the Jewish museum in Washington.

Reaffirming the Climate Agenda

To preserve the integrity and effectiveness of the climate movement, it’s imperative to:

• Prioritize Environmental Goals: Ensure that climate activism remains centered on combating climate change, rather than becoming entangled in unrelated political conflicts.

• Promote Inclusive Dialogue: Foster discussions that welcome diverse perspectives, avoiding alienation of individuals based on their political or religious affiliations.

• Allocate Resources Wisely: Direct funding and efforts towards initiatives that have a tangible impact on environmental conservation and climate mitigation.

By maintaining a focused and inclusive approach, the climate movement can effectively address the environmental challenges that threaten communities worldwide, ensuring that advocacy efforts lead to meaningful and lasting change.

Note = a few words were added to this column after publication.