On Jul. 8, 2026 former White House chief of staff, once Chicago Mayor, and possible Democratic presidential candidate Rahm Emanuel聽聽at Tel Aviv University about U.S.-Israel relations. He did not hold back.

Emanuel begins by stating that he understands why Israelis might dismiss criticism from outside. Palestinian leaders, after all, have refused offer after offer of 鈥渟overeignty in exchange for your security,鈥� and each time, the offer was not only rejected, but also Israel was 鈥渁ttacked as a direct consequence.鈥�

Even so, Israel has become, not a start-up nation, but 鈥渁 modern-day Sparta鈥� (Netanyahu鈥檚 phrase) and even worse, 鈥渁 territorial pariah.鈥� While Emanuel does not excuse the Palestinians (more on that below), he blames Netanyahu and his government for leading Israel 鈥渋nto a dead-end.鈥� Unconditional American support, Emanuel says, has led Israelis to treat Palestinians in the West Bank abysmally and with impunity. Consequently, support for Israel 鈥渋s plummeting around the world,鈥� Israeli scientists 鈥渇ace exclusion from international research,鈥� and artists and writers,聽, face 鈥渞ising hostility and exclusion.鈥�

And Emanuel, unequivocally and forcefully, blames Netanyahu, who failed to turn Israel鈥檚 鈥渕ilitary wins into strategic advantages,鈥� and even worse, 鈥測our government is complicit in the horrors now being inflicted on innocent families in the West Bank.鈥� As a direct result of Netanyahu鈥檚 not just tolerating, but also encouraging, the worst aspects of Israeli politics, Israel has lost its legitimacy in the world鈥檚 eyes, and 鈥測ou cannot fight indefinitely against a world that has stopped believing you have the right to fight.鈥� By focusing exclusively on military solutions to security challenges, Israel is 鈥渕ore diplomatically isolated than ever. That is a choice this government has made.鈥�

To be sure, Emanuel does not give the Palestinians a pass. Those chanting 鈥渇rom the river to the sea鈥� are fanatics and 鈥渢hey will never have their way,鈥� just as those calling for a 鈥済reater Israel鈥� are fanatics who will never have their way. The Palestinian leadership聽, which is why 鈥淎rab leaders, not Israel, must hold the Palestinians responsible and accountable for their actions.鈥� Palestinians and Arab leaders must accept 鈥渢he historic 91传媒 connections to this land,鈥� and they must 鈥減ut an end to the heinous practice of financially rewarding terrorist who kills Jews. And they must stop teaching young children to hate Israelis.鈥�

But Emanuel devotes the majority of this speech to criticizing Netanyahu and his policies, which brings me to the IHRA definition and the false charge that the IHRA definition conflates criticism of Israel with antisemitism. There are endless examples, so let me give a representative one. In his recent book,聽鈥淚srael:聽What Went Wrong?,鈥� Omer Bartov asserts that the IHRA definition has 鈥渕orphed into an instrument for silencing criticism by law and duress鈥� by 鈥渄efining criticism of Israel as antisemitic.鈥�

But Bartov is wrong, as are the many others who claim the IHRA definition conflates criticism with antisemitism.

Here’s the relevant text part of the IHRA definition: 鈥溌爏imilar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic.鈥� It鈥檚 only when the Jews are blamed when 鈥渢hings go wrong鈥� or one applies 鈥渄ouble standards by requiring of [Israel] a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation鈥� that speech veers into antisemitism.

Whether or not you agree with Emanuel鈥檚 diagnosis and his solutions, you cannot say that he鈥檚 not harshly critical of Netanyahu and Israeli policies. He is about as clear as can be that Israel鈥檚 actions post-10/7 have been disastrous for Israel鈥檚 reputation, and while he does not say so explicitly, we can safely assume that he hopes Netanyahu loses the next election.

Whether or not you agree with Emanuel鈥檚 diagnosis and his solutions, you cannot say that he鈥檚 not harshly critical of Netanyahu and Israeli policies.

But it鈥檚 equally clear that his speech has not been silenced. He was invited to Tel Aviv University to give this speech, and surely, everyone involved knew what he was going to say. Nobody claimed that his speech was either antisemitic or aided and abetted antisemitism. And nobody said that Emanuel should not have been allowed to give this speech.

That鈥檚 because Emanuel criticizes Netanyahu in exactly the same way that Democrats criticize, say, Trump鈥檚 immigration policies. Or Republicans criticized Biden for聽丑颈蝉听immigration policies. What Emanuel does聽not聽do is state that Israel is聽, or that Israel does not have a right to exist. That would be, according to the IHRA, stepping over the line.

And make no mistake, there is an astonishing rise in antisemitism today. Egypt loses a soccer game, and Egyptian fans聽. Crowds at the聽聽unfurled, to massive cheers, a giant banner reading 鈥淒estroy Israel.鈥澛犅燿etailing 鈥渢he blatant hostility, discrimination, and hate that some 91传媒 and Israeli authors are facing,鈥� regardless of their views on the Gaza war. PEN America鈥檚 president, Dinaw Mengestu,聽聽because he regarded the report 鈥溌爐o the constitutional rights of those who advocate for shunning Israeli products.鈥� Even though PEN is against censorship and boycotts, when it comes to Jews, Mengestu is okay with 鈥溌燼ctually restrict or limit or suppress what is constitutionally protected speech.鈥�

These three examples (and believe me, there are more, lots more) are what the IHRA definition targets as antisemitic. But as Emanuel鈥檚 speech shows, criticism of Israeli policies, no matter how fervent, is perfectly within bounds.

Claiming that the IHRA definition silences Israel鈥檚 critics is simply wrong. The IHRA definition, instead, draws a bright line between what is and is not antisemitic. That鈥檚 why it鈥檚 essential today, more than ever.

Peter C. Herman is Emeritus Professor of English Literature at San Diego State University. His last publication with the 91传媒 Journal of Los Angeles is聽鈥�The Phoenix of Gaza Exhibit: Education or Indoctrination.”