Follow us on social

49456368773_fe7094c233_o

Trump Vilifies Palestinians for Using the Same Violence That Birthed Israel

Trump's 'Deal of the Century' speech condemned Palestinians for terrorism and praised Israel for peace — all while ignoring Israel's own violent history.

Analysis | Middle East

President Trump has hardly attempted to hide his contempt for the Palestinian people. His unveiling of the “Deal of the Century” on Tuesday revealed in the clearest way possible what he thinks of the millions of Palestinians — in the occupied territories, inside Israel, and in the diaspora — who would be affected by his “peace deal.”

Trump’s remarks dripped with classic racist imagery. For one, he used the words “terrorism” and “terror” nine times when referring to Palestinians in his speech. This is in contrast to the praise he showered upon Israel, which the president described as an island of democracy and prosperity. In the president’s eyes, Palestinians are “trapped in a cycle of terrorism, poverty, and violence,” and must renounce terrorism as a condition for establishing their own state.

The president’s caricature of Palestinians as terrorists is also familiar. From Israel’s very founding, Palestinians were portrayed as violent revolutionaries whose sole purpose in life was to annihilate the Jewish state and Jews writ large. That view was fostered at the very top of the Israeli political establishment — including Prime Minister David Ben Gurion, who ordered Israeli soldiers to implement a “free fire policy” along the country’s borders. That mean they could shoot and kill Palestinian “infiltrators,” many of whom were refugees trying to return to their land.

What is peculiar about these mantras of Arabs as “violent savages” is that they elide Zionism’s own history of terrorism, which played a central role in Israel’s establishment. This amnesia, particularly among the Israeli public, is what cultural studies scholar Marita Sturken terms “strategic forgetting,” in which nations choose what histories to overlook while favoring more positive national or cultural memories.

For example, Israelis prefer to forget that before they were prime ministers, Menachem Begin and Yitzhak Shamir were zealous militants who orchestrated brutal acts of terror against Palestinian civilians, attacked British soldiers and high-ranking officials, and even assassinated foreign dignitaries.

Begin’s 1951 book “The Revolt” — which not only became canonical among the Israeli right but also inspired the likes of Nelson Mandela — lays out in detail, and with great bravado, the ways in which Zionist militants from the Etzel and Lehi paramilitary groups blew up Arab markets and fought a bloody guerrilla war against British forces, which Begin referred to as “The Occupation Army.”

The celebration of Zionist terrorism goes beyond these memoirs. All around Tel Aviv, one can find metallic bronze plaques celebrating the victories and defeats of the pre-state Zionist militias. A plaque in the south of the city commemorates a tunnel dug by Etzel militants leading to a British military installation, which they intended to blow up. Another nearby plaque marks the spot in which two Lehi fighters, posing as telephone repairmen, drove a car bomb into a British communications center, killing several policemen.

There are dozens of these markers scattered across the city. Some commemorate Etzel weapons factories, some where Lehi printed its leaflets, and some where the Haganah — the largest and most prominent Zionist paramilitary group, which carried out the majority of the expulsions during the 1948 war and formed the backbone of the nascent Israeli army — ran secret induction and training centers. All these plaques not only carry the insignias of the Zionist militias, but also feature the official seal of the Tel Aviv-Jaffa Municipality.

The city is also home to four museums dedicated to the memory of the paramilitary groups. Walking south along the Tel Aviv promenade, you will come upon an old Palestinian building. This the last remnant of the neighborhood once known as Manshiyyeh, which today serves as the Etzel Museum in honor of the group that “liberated” Jaffa during the 1948 war. A stone sign near the building’s entrance lists the names of the Etzel members killed in the operation.

That “liberation” entailed the expulsion of some 95,000 Palestinians from the Greater Jaffa area, many of whom were forced into in refugee camps in the West Bank and Gaza. Thousands of other Palestinians, many of them fleeing from neighboring villages to Jaffa, were concentrated into a small section of the city surrounded by barbed wires, which the Israeli authorities casually referred to as “The Ghetto.”

The Zionist militias’ expulsions, massacres, weapons caches, and tunnels extended far beyond the confines of the Tel Aviv-Jaffa area. They were part of a nationwide war effort, without which the State of Israel may not have come into being. As I wrote several years ago when the Israeli army uncovered Hamas tunnels from Gaza into Israel’s territory: “Had the State of Israel of today faced off with the pre-state Zionist movements, it surely would have condemned their human rights violations and bombed them into oblivion.”

Such a violent history is by no means unique to Israel, but it does serve a profound lesson for the conflict. Given their history, Israelis should be the first to understand why some who struggle against a foreign occupier for liberation and self-determination will turn to violence. Trump, of course, will not be the one waking Israel up to their past, or even daring to make comparisons between Palestinian and Jewish political violence. But somewhere down the line there may come a U.S. president who will.

This article has been republished with permission from +972 Magazine.


Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and U.S. President Donald Trump (White House photo via Flickr)
Analysis | Middle East
Lyndon Johnson
Top image credit: National Archives and Records Administration

Church of War: Our faith that lethality has the power to heal

Military Industrial Complex

Since inauguration day, the Trump White House has routinely evoked a deep-rooted Cold War framework for expressing America’s relationship with war. This framing sits at odds with the president’s inaugural address in which Mr. Trump, conjuring Richard Nixon, argued that his “proudest legacy will be that of a peacemaker and unifier.”

From January 2025 on, the administration has instead engaged in a steady drumbeat of aggressive militaristic taunting, threatening real and perceived enemies, foreign and domestic alike. From ordering 1,500 active-duty troops to assist with border patrolling and deportation missions, to the secretary of defense censuring the nation’s armed forces for not focusing enough on “lethality,” the Trump administration is reviving a decades-long trend within an increasingly militarized U.S. foreign policy — a faith in and fear of war and its consequences.

keep readingShow less
Ted Cruz Tucker Carlson
Top image credit: Lev Radin, Maxim Elramsisy via shutterstock.com

Ted Cruz thinks you're stupid

Washington Politics

Rightwing pundit Tucker Carlson recently made Ted Cruz look like a buffoon.

Cruz said during their interview in June, “I was taught from the Bible, those who bless Israel will be blessed, and those who curse Israel will be cursed. And from my perspective, I want to be on the blessing side of things.”

keep readingShow less
'Security guarantees' dominate talks but remain undefined
Top photo credit: Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy speaks during a meeting with U.S. President Donald Trump, French President Emmanuel Macron, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, and Finland's President Alexander Stubb amid negotiations to end the Russian war in Ukraine, at the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S., August 18, 2025. REUTERS/Al Drago

'Security guarantees' dominate talks but remain undefined

Europe

President Donald Trump met with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and a host of European leaders in the White House Monday to discuss a framework for a deal to end the war. The big takeaway: that all parties appear to agree that the U.S. and Europe would provide some sort of postwar security guarantees to deter another Russian invasion.

What that might look like is still undefined. Trump also suggested an agreement would require “possible exchanges of territory” and consider the “war lines” between Ukraine and Russia, though this issue did not appear to take center stage Monday. Furthermore, Trump said there could be a future “trilateral” meeting set for the leaders of the U.S., Ukraine, and Russia, and reportedly interrupted the afternoon meeting with the European leaders to speak with Russian President Vladimir Putin on the phone.

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.