Fighting violence selectively is like fighting pollution on only one side of a border; artificial distinctions cannot contain either – while both ultimately threaten you, too. That’s why we must go back to basics and proclaim zero tolerance for all terrorism.
Israel outlaws all political violence – whether committed by Palestinians or Jews, right-wingers or left-wingers, in the territories or in major cities. Shouting “there’s more of them” from that group, or “there’s so few of them” from my group, is ludicrous. It breeds lawlessness, arrogance, and chaos.
And in Israel, such hypocritical sifting violates Zionism’s great achievement in re-establishing Jewish sovereignty in our homeland after 2,000 years. Any government purposely failing to crush Israeli-initiated terrorism risks obscuring the chasm between Zionist morality and the barbaric addiction to violence woven into the heart of the Palestinian national movement – and its Progressive enablers.
America’s Department of Homeland Security defines terrorism “as a premeditated threat or act of violence, against persons, property, environmental, or economic targets, to induce fear or to intimidate, coerce or affect a government,” or “the civilian population … in furtherance of political, social, ideological, or religious objectives.”
The definition is politically, geographically, and religiously neutral. It bans the crime and the politicized motivation, regardless of the perpetrator’s partisan stance. It doesn’t ask on which side of the Green Line you live, whether you’re Palestinian or Jewish, or for whom you’re voting.
That Israel’s stalwart friend, American Ambassador Mike Huckabee, feels compelled to condemn “Israeli terrorists” should embarrass every Israeli. Clearly, our government has failed to solve the particular growing problem of certain settlers acting illegally – repeatedly.
The shame is compounded if Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s dismissive CNN comments are correct. He blamed “150 or so, what you call, juvenile delinquents … brought into the West Bank.” If so, doesn’t the surging phenomenon expose stunning governmental impotence?
The IDF and security establishment tracked 405 “nationalistic crimes” in Judea and Samaria in 2025’s first half, then 660 such attacks in 2026’s first six months, with the IDF estimating 300 repeat offenders at the core. Moreover, settler attacks on Israeli security personnel – defending us! – jumped to 45 assaults, with 140 Palestinians wounded and six killed.
Tolerating such thuggery hurts Israel, and not just our image. Vigilantism anywhere encourages vigilantism everywhere. It coarsens the collective soul while fraying the social fabric.
Political Science 101 teaches that, beyond individuals compelled to defend themselves, states must maintain their monopoly on violence, only trusting authorized police officers and soldiers to fight when necessary to maintain order and defend the country. Countries that lose control of their streets or indulge violent gangs become “failed states.”
Israel’s founding prime minister David Ben-Gurion understood that Jewish sovereignty – “mamlachtiyut” – required one army, one government, and one law.
Defining Jews’ adjustment challenge after millennia of powerlessness, he proclaimed: “We must learn to think like a state.” Similarly, even after Ben-Gurion’s forces shelled Menachem Begin’s men on the Altalena, Begin remained committed to “the national interest as a whole, which demands fighting unity of all soldiers.”
Israel needs a government committed to governing. That means stopping those settlers, those haredi (ultra-Orthodox) protesters, those left-wing demonstrators, those right-wing goons, those Bedouin and Arab racketeers, and those Palestinians threatening individuals, the public order, and the Zionist enterprise.
The word “those,” not “the,” targets violent outlaws, not entire groups.
Preventative steps
Administrative detention is not the answer – it threatens basic civil liberties. But Israel must be more creative – and aggressive – with travel bans, especially in Judea and Samaria, because so much of it is under military control. Travel bans should also punish haredim and other protesters who keep blocking traffic.
Two Australian states recently passed anti-disruption laws imposing heavy fines and up to two years’ imprisonment for protesters illegally blocking roads, ports, and bridges. Facial recognition software can catch repeat offenders.
Meanwhile, intelligently applied anti-conspiracy laws can break the manipulators planning constant, disruptive protests. In 2024, Great Britain imprisoned five climate activists for “conspiracy to cause a public nuisance” because of a planning call on Zoom, not the act of blocking the highway.
German authorities broke the “Last Generation” global warming protesters by dispersing autobahn blockades quickly, then invoked Polizeigebührenordnungen – police cost regulations. Protesters were charged the transactional costs of the police response, from towing charges to the officers’ hourly rates.
Courts modified it. But fees should be collected immediately, with interest compounding. Authorities should also fine the organizations conspiring to stop traffic, harass individuals, and destroy homes.
Paradoxically, policing political hooliganism aggressively is the best way to protect free speech. Such laws should be applied neutrally without ever indicting peaceful, law-abiding protesters – or maybe even first-time offenders, unless they’ve behaved violently.
But effective governments and healthy democracies accept passionate protected protest while punishing illegal actions that disrupt public order, especially when certain thugs keep repeating their crimes.
Similarly, democracies don’t judge partisan lawbreakers by their tribal affiliations or political inclinations. They’re punished for illegal actions, with extra penalties added if the motives are particularly heinous or socially threatening.
Many of us fear that this October’s election losers will respond violently – whomever they are. Thirty-nine percent of Israelis told INSS pollsters that internal violent conflict is one of Israel’s great threats – alongside a nuclear Iran.
President Isaac Herzog, fearing the “dangerous violence rearing its head,” keeps reminding “the people of Israel” that “elections are not a civil war. Disagreement and criticism are the lifeblood of our democracy, but our belonging to this place, and our responsibility for our shared future here... are the highest priority.”
Beyond failing miserably to contain political violence on many fronts, this government includes ministers fomenting some of it. Whatever our politics, we cannot let this situation deteriorate further, on any front.
The writer is an American presidential historian and a senior fellow in Zionist thought at the Jewish People Policy Institute (JPPI) in Jerusalem. He recently published, with David Suissa, 250 Reasons to Thank America, and with the JJPI, The Essential Guide to the US-Israel Partnership, the 250th Anniversary Edition. He is also a professor and Distinguished Scholar of North American History at McGill University.