Whenever proposals are made for the creation of a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza, it is inevitably assumed that any Jews who find themselves on the Palestinian side of a newly drawn border will have to be relocated to Israel. Hence the argument that the Jewish communities in the West Bank are “an obstacle to peace.” But, argue Rafael Castro and Efraim Karsh, the same assumption shows exactly why a two-state solution is unfeasible:

Israel is a Jewish state of nearly nine million citizens, two million of whom are non-Jews living in peace and security with their Jewish neighbors. There is no reason why a Palestinian Arab state should not host a sizable Jewish minority. It is certainly true that at present the prospects for a Jewish minority to live in peace and security in an independent Palestine are virtually nil. Yet it is precisely the huge chasm between the woeful situation in the present and the desirable outcome to be sought in the future that must be fully leveraged by Israel to advance its interests.

If Jewish communities in the West Bank were internationally recognized as kernels of a democratic and tolerant Palestine, they would no longer [be subjects of controversy]. Were Israel to advance the claim that these communities are essential for any future Palestinian state to be as tolerant and pluralistic as Israel, Mahmoud Abbas would eventually need to give up his plans to cleanse the West Bank of Jews. Once this happens, Israel could more effectively pressure the Palestinian leadership to demonstrate its seriousness and commitment to peace by teaching coexistence in Palestinian schools and abrogating Palestinian laws imposing the death penalty on Palestinians who sell land to Jews.

These demands are so fair and progressive that even Israel-bashing European social democrats would be hard-pressed to criticize them. . . . Without a case for Jewish residential rights in Judea and Samaria based on values that Western public opinion can identify with, the Jewish presence in the area will remain vulnerable to constant international criticism and condemnation. Israel must therefore adamantly defend this Jewish presence in the name of peace and coexistence between Jews and Palestinians, and then leave the ball in the Palestinian Authority’s court.

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.