There are times when writing is not a choice, but almost a reaction.
What happened in Sydney on the occasion of Hanukkah is one such moment.

During a religious celebration, a holiday that for the Jewish world is a symbol of light, of resistance, of identity, an attack struck innocent civilians. Families. Elderly people. A little girl. The victims reportedly included a Holocaust survivor who shielded his wife. It is difficult to add more without sounding rhetorical. But it is impossible to pretend otherwise.

Sydney’s is not just a terrorist act

It is a sign of something deeper, which also concerns us Europeans, even those who think that certain phenomena are ‘distant’ or confined to other continents. They are not.

In recent years, and even more so in 2024 and 2025, we are witnessing a transformation of anti-Semitism . It does not disappear, it changes form. Today it is often presented as anti-Zionism, a word that is used as if it were neutral, rational, even progressive. But in practice, very often, it becomes something else.

Criticising Israel is legitimate. Criticising a government is normal, it happens in all democracies. The problem arises when Israel is no longer treated as one state among others, but as the state to be delegitimised. When its right to exist is questioned, not its policies. When Zionism, that is the right of a people to have a safe home after centuries of persecution, is described as aninherently evil ideology.

At that point, the boundary is crossed.

International Politics and the Ambiguities of the Western Left

In this climate there are also a number of political choices made by Western governments, mostly from the progressive area, which have decided to unilaterally recognise the Palestinian state. The declared motivation is almost always the same: ‘to favour peace’. It is an intention that, on paper, may seem noble. But politics does not live by intentions, it lives by consequences.

A state, to be such, must have certain minimum requirements: defined borders, an authority that actually exercises power, and control over the territory. Today, the Palestinian reality is deeply fragmented. Gaza is ruled by Hamas, a terrorist organisation that does not recognise Israel and systematically uses violence against civilians. The West Bank lacks real and unified sovereignty. Recognising a state under these conditions does not resolve the conflict, and indeed risks legitimising those who have no interest in peace.

The point is not to deny the rights of the Palestinians, which exist and must be protected. The point is to understand whether certain choices, also made for reasons of domestic politics or electoral consensus, do not end up feeding a toxic narrative: the one according to which Israel is the problem in itself. And when this narrative takes hold, the effect does not remain abstract. It is reflected in the public squares, in universities, on social media. And, in the worst cases, in violence.

Because it concerns us all

Defending Jewish communities today is not a ‘partisan’ issue. It is not to be pro-Israel, nor is it to be blind to the complexities of the Middle East. It is a question of the very identity of the West.

Our democracies are founded on values that have deep roots in the Judeo-Christian tradition: the value of the individual, freedom of worship, the limit on power, individual responsibility. When anti-Semitism resurfaces, even in new, more acceptable forms, it is always a sign that something is cracking.

European history should have taught us that hatred against Jews never remains confined. It starts with words, with cultural delegitimisation, with ‘yes, though’. It ends with attacks, with bombings, with broken lives. It has already happened. More than once.

TheSydney attack, which occurred during Hanukkah, is not just an Australian tragedy. It is a wake-up call for all of us. If the West truly wants to remain the home of democracy, tolerance and freedom, it must be able to unambiguously defend its Jewish citizens, and recognise when hatred resurfaces under new masks.

Not to do so today would be a grave fault. And tomorrow, perhaps, unforgivable.