Founded by the five sons of John D. Rockefeller, Jr., the philanthropy known as RBF has some $842 million at its disposal. It funds a broad array of philanthropic activities, including several anti-Israel organizations; it also played both direct and indirect roles in advocating the nuclear deal with Iran. Armin Rosen reports:

Since 2013, at least $880,000 in RBF funding has . . . gone to groups working to advance a boycott of the world’s only Jewish state. Supporters of the boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel see the RBF funding as validation of their approach to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. . . . RBF’s support for Jewish Voice for Peace and other pro-boycott groups, which is virtually unique among major American institutional funders, is either a sign that the movement is inching toward mainstream status on the American left—or evidence of a revealing drift within one of the most respected family foundations in America. . . .

It seems unlikely that RBF is funding pro-boycott groups from a place of ignorance, or because of lapses in oversight. Charities have a history of paying attention. . . . RBF is demonstrably [not] oblivious [of its support to BDS]. . . .The Fund hasn’t altered its practices, despite repeated public and private criticism, including a May 2016 op-ed in the New York Daily News. . . .

Starting in 2001, shortly after [the fund’s current president, Stephen] Heintz took over, RBF [also] began exploring how it could help repair the relationship between Iran and the United States. This was partly as a response to the September 11 attacks. . . . For the past sixteen years, the Fund has organized dialogues between prominent American and Iranian figures. These types of closed-door meetings, called “track-two diplomacy” in foreign- policy parlance, allow private citizens from different countries to discuss issues of mutual importance with a frankness and freedom that would be impossible for government officials. . . .

RBF’s efforts in this vein brought it into close contact with Javad Zarif, now Iran’s foreign minister and the chief negotiator of the nuclear deal; the foundation has also given generous donations to the National Iranian American Council and the Ploughshares Fund—two of the most prominent organizations that stumped for the Iran deal.

Two extraordinary events demonstrate something important about Israel’s most fervent adversaries. One was a speech given at something called The People’s Forum (funded generously by Goldman Sachs), which stated, “When the state of Israel is finally destroyed and erased from history, that will be the single most important blow we can give to destroying capitalism and imperialism.”

The suggestion that this tiny state is the linchpin of a global, centuries-old phenomenon like capitalism goes well beyond anything resembling rational criticism. Even if Israel were guilty of genocide, apartheid, and oppression—which of course it is not—it would not follow that its destruction would help end capitalism or imperialism.

The other was an anti-Israel protest that took place in front of New York City’s Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, deemed “complicit” in Israel’s evils. At organizers’ urging, participants shouted their slogans at kids in the cancer ward, who were watching from the windows. Given Hamas’s indifference toward the lives of Gazan children, such callousness toward non-Palestinian children from Hamas’s Western allies shouldn’t be surprising. The protest—like the abovementioned speech—deliberately conveyed the message that Israel is the ultimate evil and its destruction the ultimate good, cancer patients be damned.

The fact that Israel’s adversaries are almost comically perverse does not mean that they can be dismissed. If its allies fail to understand the obsessive and irrational hatred that it faces, they cannot effectively help it defend itself.