In the American and American Jewish press, the presence of two prominent evangelical pastors at the dedication of the new Jerusalem embassy provoked handwringing over the strengthening alliance between Israel and Christian Zionists. Responding to the oft-repeated proposition that Israel pays a price for accepting evangelical support, Shmuel Rosner writes:

The price is the identification of Israel with the Christian right in America. That is to say, what Israel gains on the right it loses on the left. And why did Israel decide to pay the price? Two reasons: 1) because the Christian right supports the policies of Israel and the left would only support the policies of another Israel, not the real one, and 2) because the Christian right is supporting it already, while on the left it is not even clear if support is available for grabbing. . . .

[Critics inevitably raise] the risk of turning off American Jews [by accepting evangelical support]. But why is there such risk? Is it because the [Israeli] government would not accept the support of both Jews and evangelicals? Of course not. Is it because the evangelicals would not extend their support if Jews also support Israel? Again, wrong answer. If there is a risk, it stems not from Israel shunning the Jews or from evangelicals shunning the Jews; it stems from Jews shunning the evangelicals, and possibly shunning an Israel supported by evangelicals.

In other words, it is not the choice of Israel, or of evangelical supporters of Israel, to turn off American Jews. It is the choice of American Jews to be turned off. It is their choice to see the support of evangelicals as a reason, or excuse, to be turned off (and, of course, we do not talk in Israel about all American Jews, we only talk about those Jews who are “turned off”).

In many ways, the story of [Jewish] turning off because of evangelicals is not much different from the story of turning off because of other reasons—the Western Wall [mixed-sex-prayer] compromise, Netanyahu [speaking against the Iran deal] in Congress, the Orthodox, the occupation, Gaza shooting, you name it. Israel does what it does, not always wisely, not always perfectly. Still, the choice to be turned off is made by the turned off. And evangelical support is a lame excuse for being turned off, as there is no mandatory either-or situation when it comes to supporting Israel. Jews can support Israel. Evangelicals can support Israel. One does not negate the other—unless you want it to.

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.