Whose land? Whose truth?

For decades, Western governments have claimed to support peace, international law, and historical truth in the Middle East. Yet when it comes to Israel and Jerusalem, many of those same governments have abandoned consistency, rewarded rejectionism, and embraced narratives that erase Jewish history and legal rights.

The result is not peace. It is the normalization of a double standard that increasingly resembles a modern form of antisemitism. Antisemitism has morphed through the ages. Modern day anti-Zionism is antisemitism wrapped in a different guise.

The historical record is clear. In 1947, the United Nations proposed partitioning the territory of the British Mandate into Jewish and Arab states. Much of the middle east had already been divided up into Arab states. Despite the British White Paper carving up the original land committed to the Jews, the Jewish leadership accepted the proposal. The Arab states rejected it and launched a war to destroy the nascent Jewish state.

The refugee crisis that followed did not emerge from acceptance of partition, but from its violent rejection. It is worth noting that in launching the war of annihilation against Israel in 1948, the Arab leadership also advised its people to leave, supposedly temporarily, to make way for the invading armies to deal with the Jews. The plan was for them to return and reclaim their property, only things didn’t go to plan. Had the Arab leadership accepted the UN proposal, there would have been both a Jewish state and an Arab state in 1948. Ironically, there is never any mention of the similar number of Jews ethnically cleansed from Arab lands – from Yemen to Iraq and Egypt to Morocco.

The consequences of that war are often forgotten. Jordan occupied eastern Jerusalem and the Judea and Samaria, which Jordan referred to as the ‘West Bank’. During its occupation, Jewish residents were expelled, ancient synagogues were destroyed, and Jewish cemeteries were desecrated. Jerusalem’s Jewish Quarter was effectively made Judenrein. This was the only period in history where Jerusalem had no Jewish inhabitants. Yet these facts rarely feature in contemporary discussions about occupation, rights, and historical justice.

When Israel reunited Jerusalem in 1967 following a defensive war triggered by escalating Arab aggression, including Egypt’s closure of the Straits of Tiran and expulsion of UN peacekeepers, it did not destroy Islamic holy sites. In fact, it was enshrined in Israeli law. The Al-Aqsa Mosque and Islamic administration of the Temple Mount were preserved. The contrast with Jordan’s treatment of Jewish holy sites from 1948 to 1967 is striking.

Despite this history, many Western governments continue to treat Jewish claims to Jerusalem as uniquely illegitimate. Every sovereign nation has the right to determine its own capital. Yet for decades, many countries refused to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital even while acknowledging the capitals chosen by every other state on earth.
This exceptional treatment of the world’s only Jewish state demands explanation.
International law is also routinely misrepresented. UN General Assembly Resolution 181 recommended partition but was not legally binding. Resolution 242, adopted after the Six-Day War, did not require Israel to withdraw from all territories captured in 1967, nor did it require surrendering Jerusalem. Israel has in fact withdrawn from 95% of territory it had captured. Then Israeli Prime Minister, Levy Eshkol, offered the Arabs land in exchange for peace. The Arabs rejected the offer and swore to never accept the State of Israel. Yet political rhetoric frequently presents these disputed interpretations as settled law.

Similarly, terms such as “Palestinian territory” and “illegal occupation” are often repeated as unquestionable truths despite substantial legal debate. The territories captured by Jordan in 1948 were never internationally recognized as sovereign Palestinian territory. Palestine was never exclusively Arab, nor did Palestinian Arabs exercise sovereign control over the territory as an independent state. Jordan’s own annexation was recognized by very few countries. Afterall, given the land of Judah had been renamed to Palaestina to further humiliate the Jews following the destruction of the second temple in Jerusalem by the Romans is completely ignored. Jews and others were Palestinian.

The Oslo Accords, signed by Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization, established that the final status of disputed territories would be determined through negotiations. Yet today, many governments seek to recognize a Palestinian state unilaterally while bypassing the very framework both parties agreed to follow.

This rewards rejection rather than compromise. They seem too eager to reward terror and intifadas (violent uprisings). Afterall, these same governments have enabled the 1930s like blood libels, rhetoric, harassment, and violent attacks on Jews to happen on their streets. Their complicity is beyond shocking and shameful. Just look at cities across Australia, Britain and Canada to name a few.

Yet, Israel has entered negotiations and offered territorial concessions. Yet, Palestinian leaders have rejected proposals that would have required recognition of Jewish national rights and an end to conflict. The failures of Camp David and subsequent negotiations were not caused by a lack of diplomatic opportunities. They were caused, many argue, by a leadership that refused to abandon calls for Israel’s destruction and continued to deny Jewish national rights. Afterall, Palestinian Authority President, Mahmoud Abbas completed wrote his doctorate based on holocaust denial and distortion and has sworn to take Jerusalem and drive out the ‘filthy feet of Jews and Christians.’ This is who western leaders want to reward.

Meanwhile, when Israel erected a security barrier after waves of suicide bombings during the second Intifada that killed 1,137 and injured many more Israelis, critics denounced it as an “apartheid wall.” Yet the barrier dramatically reduced terrorist attacks and saved lives. Too often, international institutions discussed the barrier while minimizing terrorism that made it necessary. All this did was encourage and embolden terrorism. I call it complicity. They seemed shocked when terrorism landed in their own western countries.

Perhaps most disturbing is the growing effort to erase Jewish history itself. UNESCO resolutions and political statements have repeatedly ignored the ancient Jewish connection to Jerusalem despite overwhelming archaeological, biblical and historical evidence. They have in fact claimed there is no Jewish connection at all. The notion that Jerusalem has no meaningful Jewish history is not scholarship. It is political revisionism. The entire Balfour Declaration was built on the premise of the Jewish connection. Even to this day, archaeologists continue to find more and more evidence debunking UNESCO’s claims. More recent,  excavations have uncovered the ancient Pool of Siloam and the Pilgrimage Road that connected the Second Temple complex, further supporting the historical Jewish connection to Jerusalem from some 2,000 years ago.

No genuine peace can be built on historical falsehoods.

The Jewish connection to Jerusalem predates Christianity and Islam by centuries. Archaeology confirms it. History confirms it. Scripture confirms it. To deny that connection is not merely inaccurate; it is an attack on Jewish identity itself. I make no apology for describing such denial of Jewish  history as blatant antisemitism – Jew hatred.

Western governments should be deeply concerned when they find themselves endorsing narratives that would be recognized as prejudice if directed at any other people. A world that acknowledges the indigenous and historical claims of countless nations should not deny those same rights to Jews.

Peace requires compromise. But compromise begins with truth.

The path to peace is not paved by rewarding rejectionism, erasing history, or applying one set of standards to Israel and another to everyone else. It begins by recognizing that Jewish rights in Jerusalem are real, that history cannot be rewritten, and that international law must be applied consistently rather than selectively.

Truth is not an obstacle to peace.

Truth is what peace is built upon. So long as narratives are based on lies and falsehood, peace will remain unachievable.