Twenty-five years ago today, Shimon Peres and Mahmoud Abbas signed the Oslo Accords in secret. The public ceremony on the White House lawn, with Yitzḥak Rabin and Yasir Arafat representing their respective peoples, took place three weeks later. Eyal Zisser takes stock of this “experiment,” which, in his mind, failed:

As could be expected, the Palestinian leadership found it difficult to meet the commitments it took upon itself—and quite possibly never even intended [to meet them]. The Palestinian Authority never tried to prepare the Palestinian public for the concessions that would be necessary in order to make peace. Worse still, it refused to abandon the use of violence and terrorism as a means to achieving its goals, leaving many Israelis skeptical of the plan.

An interview that Mohammed Dahlan, [still] seen by many as a possible successor to Abbas, gave at the height of the second intifada illustrates this point quite well. When asked whether the Oslo Accords had been a mistake, Dahlan replied that the agreement had laid the groundwork for the struggle against Israel. As proof, he said, . . . the number of Israelis killed in the second intifada, [which, unlike the first, took place after the signing of the accords] was “100-times higher” than the number of Israelis killed in the first. (In fact, it was about three-and-a-half times higher.)

This is all water under the bridge, but from Israel’s standpoint, the problem lies in the reality created by the accord; a reality that, while meant to be temporary in nature, has become permanent. The Palestinian Authority and the Hamas regime in Gaza have become faits accomplis—bones in Israel’s throat it can neither eject nor swallow. This is a problematic reality, which continues to present endless political and security challenges for Israel.

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.