By inviting Tommy Robinson to Israel, the country’s Diaspora Minister Amichai Chikli has not only shown poor judgment but made a deeper strategic miscalculation. The optics are startling: a government ministry charged with combating international antisemitism is reaching out to a figure whose record is steeped in Islamophobia, conspiracy theories concerning “Jewish power”, and repeated convictions.

Robinson has leveraged his support for Israel to mask a broader agenda. He has used the Jewish state as a symbol of anti-jihadist resolve and of strong borders — a tactical weapon in his campaign against Islam in Europe and a shield against the progressive Left.

Robinson may style himself as a defender of Jews, but both the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) and Hope Not Hate have shown how the activist sometimes leans into antisemitic tropes, including claims of Jewish control over media, entertainment, and politics. One of his recurring themes, the Great Replacement conspiracy theory, also draws on antisemitic ideas, asserting that “globalists”, a common euphemism for a Jewish cabal, are orchestrating mass immigration to “replace” white Europeans.

Chikli’s defense of the invitation — calling Robinson a “true friend of Israel” and someone on the “front line against radical Islam” — reveal­s how the Israeli Right is willing, in times of strategic urgency, to embrace dubious allies. With Israel facing unprecedented global criticism over the war in Gaza, Chikli seems to be signaling that any ally is better than none, no matter how toxic. Part of this may stem from ignorance: Robinson’s antics are far better known within the UK than abroad. In Israel, few had heard of him until recently, and many see him only through the prism of his professed “support” for Israel. Still, this is no excuse.

Israel is right to be concerned about how Islamist movements have imported virulent antisemitic narratives into some European Muslim communities. But aligning with an extremist like Robinson, whose politics thrive on division and hatred, risks undoing years of bridge-building. In Britain, Jewish organizations have worked closely with Muslim leaders to combat antisemitism and hate together. That progress could collapse if Israel is seen to legitimize someone whose message is one of hostility.

This is precisely what some Jewish groups in the UK fear. The Board of Deputies of British Jews and the Jewish Leadership Council issued scathing responses, calling Robinson a “thug” representing “the very worst of Britain”, and lamenting that Chikli’s move undermined efforts at community cohesion and ignored the views of most British Jews. In their view, not all defenders of Israel are legitimate, especially when their broader worldview is deeply illiberal or discriminatory.

The Israeli government may see utility in aligning with voices that cast themselves as anti-Islamist “allies” abroad during a period of intense diplomatic pressure. But that alliance comes at the cost of moral authority and a breakdown in trust between the Israeli government and the British Jewish community. Although many British Jews remain deeply attached to Israel, frustration with Benjamin Netanyahu and his government is growing. Four in five adult British Jews now hold an unfavorable view of him, and many feel that the country is increasingly defined by its extreme fringes. Leading figures in this shift include Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich, both of whom are subject to UK sanctions.

By inviting Robinson, Chikli handed his critics a weapon — proof, they say, that Israel will tolerate extremists so long as they call themselves friends, even at the expense of the diaspora’s uphill struggle against antisemitism.

---

Dr Limor Simhony Philpott is a writer and researcher focusing on antisemitism, extremism and defence.

limorsimhony

---