By Bill Simons

Never since the 1948 rebirth of Israel has U.S. public opinion been more critical of the Jewish state. American Jews are divided about how to respond both to canards and truths. We know what Nazi genocide looked like, insist on the right of self-defense and remain committed to the survival of the Jewish state, but refuse to blind ourselves to wonton murder in Gaza, Lebanon and the West Bank inflicted by an Israel led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. 
On Saturday, April 25, in Albany at the Delegate Assembly (DA), statewide deliberative body of United University Professions (UUP), a higher education union, I faced a conundrum. Nearing the 30-year mark as a UUP Oneonta officer, 16 of them as president, I remain committed to unionism. Although an omnibus resolution advocated the two-state solution that I espouse, I spoke and voted against the resolution because it contained language that failed to adequately distinguish Israeli offensive and defensive military measures: “Demand that all U.S. aid to Israel be conditioned upon an agreement that Israel stop its attacks and actions in Lebanon, Iran, Gaza and the West Bank.” After emotional debate, the resolution carried. Some Jewish colleagues voted for the resolution, strategizing that it would preclude adoption of a more anti-Israel declaration. 
Several readers of this column answered my request: “I am working on an article about how to respond when an organization, or simply a peer group, that you belong to and generally respect adopts an anti-Israel position. How should we as American Jews respond – agree with the group consensus, defend Israel loudly and without reservation, differentiate between the current government of Israel and the Jewish state of Israel, remain silent, disassociate yourself with the group, or take some other approach?” Their answers, several intense and emotional, spanned the spectrum as the following excerpts illustrate. 
Asking for anonymity, a prominent scholar asserted that Netanyahu “has made it almost impossible to defend Israel these days, especially among liberals and progressives. He’s the Israeli Trump, a racist, corrupt… I often say I’m pro-Israel but anti-Bibi and pro-Palestine but anti-Hamas.” Given today’s toxic polarization, he cautioned, “I’m not sure it is a good idea to write an article about this. Who will you persuade?”
My former student David Wendel, an attorney, also suggested reflective restraint, “I believe it’s important to differentiate between the actions of the current government of Israel and the broader concept of the Jewish state itself. That distinction can make for more thoughtful dialogue. If consensus seems impossible and opinions are completely at odds, sometimes remaining silent or even distancing yourself from the group might be the better route.”
Despite the heated rhetoric and maybe because of it, I decided to proceed. If we concede an inability to discuss this issue even amongst fellow Jews, there is little hope for constructive debate about Israel in the larger American polity. Thus, I heeded the counsel of my friend Richard Cohen, a retired MD: “I wonder if… your article might better focus on something that is more relatable to your readers – your feelings of disappointment over the conversation and any struggles you may personally have with this issue. As far as how to respond, rather than suggesting a specific response, you might want to list options…”  
Alan Levine, my Colby College classmate and facilitator in Boston’s Big Dig, cautioned, “We need to think about what kind of community we have created and what kind of community it is becoming over time… We cannot live a good life while turning a blind eye to what sins other Jews might be committing.”
My cousin Robert Benson took offense with my inquiry formulation: “If you do not take an anti-Zionist position in 2026, you are violating the basic rules of humanity you learned in your own Jewish home. … we could only ever be free by supporting the freedom for all peoples … I can’t comprehend your question ‘How should we as American Jews respond when confronted with an anti-Israel position?’… you disguise your own prejudices with the framing of that question. What if instead, you had asked, how should we as American Jews respond to a regime that uses genocide, starvation, bullets and bombs to secure the vision of its leaders?”
Retired orthopedic surgeon and former synagogue president Richard Sternberg wrote, “Defend Israel and point out that Israel didn’t start the fight in Gaza or hide its military behind civilians. Differentiate between the current government and the Jewish state and people of Israel…I don’t see why innocent Lebanese should be bearing the brunt on the attack in Lebanon. It was clear that the Lebanese government had no control whatsoever in southern Lebanon. The situation there is not equivalent to what happened on October 7.”
David Lonborg, formerly my student and subsequently a New York City social studies teacher, answered unequivocally: “[F]irst and foremost, make it clear that we remain pro-Israel, unapologetically.” He added, “You could even go so far as to point out the blatant hypocrisy of the pro-Palestinian side that is so quick to condemn Israel yet never have a word to say about other injustices, including those within the Arab world and their treatment of the Palestinians… [A] lot of the anti-Israel sentiment is based on misinformation, false equivalencies, social media, and the influence of Qatar in their dissemination of biased educational materials throughout the world.”
Challenging accusations of Israeli genocide, Susan Puretz, past SUNY and UUP colleague, shared her letter to the editor of Hudson Valley One. Puretz argued that “a nation hell bent on genocide does not warn the potential victims to leave the area … [Israel is] after the Palestinians who are either Iran’s Hamas or Hezbollah stoolies. Israel has consistently alerted the inhabitants of Gaza and Lebanon of a planned attack in their area.” Of “the signature phrase of [Palestinian proponents] …  ‘from the river to the sea,”’ Puretz asks, “And how do the Palestinians expect to do that? Genocide maybe?”
As global antisemitism escalates and Israel struggles to move beyond Netanayhu’s malevolence, consensus on direction eludes American Jews. We need to keep talking. Shaming, silencing and shouting each other down will only further fragment American Jewry. Defining elections await Israel and the U.S. Despite our differences, let’s repair the fractured commitment to compassion and justice at the core of authentic American and Jewish ideals.