In Israel, my family found liberty |
When it comes to the MENA region, there are plenty of myths that continue to be amplified without pause, such as: Israel is a Western colony; Mizrahim were duped into coming to Israel by Ashkenazim; Jews are not indigenous to the region; and Muslims and Jews lived in perfect harmony in the MENA region, until Israel was established. Each of these theories aims to distract from the oppression, inequality, and massacres that were part of Jewish life under more than 1,300 years of Islamic rule. Though there were periods of flourishing Jewish life and plenty of stories abound of Jews living in peace with neighbors and maintaining good relations, this should not draw focus away from the fact that the relationship was always marred by Islamic dominance. In other words, harmony conditioned by a carefully constructed hierarchy.
But, in November 2025, a new narrative was shared by UC Berkeley’s very own Hatem Bazian, a professor who specializes in Near Eastern Studies and Islamic law and theology. You learn something new every day.
Jews and Muslims are victims of nefarious Westerners
A clip shows Bazian passionately arguing at a convention organized by American Muslims for Palestine that the Shoah was created by the Western world, not Muslims. We all know that it originated there, but it was created by Nazi Germany, not the entire Western world. However, Bazian feels it is necessary to remind Jews of their own history. The reason for this becomes clear soon enough.
He then proceeds to argue that the two victims from the eighteenth century onwards were Jews through Western antisemitism and Muslims through Islamophobia. The solution follows, by Bazian calling for Jewish-Islamic solidarity against the Westerners who are responsible for a long history of Jewish genocide. Moreover, the liberation of Palestine will mean liberation for Jews, too. In fact, Bazian cannot wait to celebrate this with his Jewish “brothers and sisters.” In conclusion, the Western world will not save them, but the Global South will do it, as always.
Well, here are my thoughts.
Was it better for Jews under Islamic rule?
There is no question that Jewish life in Europe was subjected to discrimination, persecution, forced conversions, expulsions, and massacres and pogroms. It is why many argue that life for Mizrahi Jews was actually better in the Islamic world, by pointing to respect for the Ahl al-Kitab (People of the Book), which ensured protection for Jews and Christians. Moreover, there is evidence of Jews enjoying considerable social mobility and even forging important relationships with Islamic elites, as in the case of Maimonides. But, history is complex and some nuance should be applied.
For instance, historical research has shown that in the nineteenth century the status of Jews in parts of Western Europe improved considerably, caused by the rise of Enlightenment values. And in the United States antisemitism was less common, than it was in Europe. Furthermore, it was in this period that Jewish organizations based in France and the United Kingdom started reaching out to Jews in the MENA region, for instance by setting up schools in Iraq, Morocco or Algeria as was done by the Alliance Israélite Universelle. Moreover, as historian Georges Bensoussan argues in his book Jews in Arab Countries, these organizations were concerned with stimulating Jewish emancipation and not motivated by facilitating a return to the Jewish homeland. But why would they think that these Jews would be in need of emancipation? Well, because it was well documented that the rights of Jews were severely restricted – in some Muslim countries more than in others – and that most of them suffered from discrimination and poverty, as well as the endemic threat of and actual use of violence.
Here is another example: the Netherlands. The oldest Jewish community is Portuguese, taken in as refugees during the sixteenth century. This was not simply benevolence, as many Portuguese Jews brought their commercial expertise with them. But they were taken in and in Europe enjoyed relative tolerance, when compared to other countries. However, in the early modern era, many anti-Jewish restrictions were still in place, as explained by Jan Lucassen and Rinus Penninx in their book Newcomers. Moreover, Ashkenazi Jews were looked on less favorably, due to the fact that most of them were poor. Eventually, Lucassen and Penninx show that all anti-Jewish legislation disappeared in 1796, when Jews became emancipated. But, during the Nazi occupation anti-Jewish measures would be reintroduced once again. After close to four centuries of relative tolerance followed by emancipation, this was all shattered during five years of Nazi occupation and the largest percentage of Jews was annihilated, when compared to other countries.
Before the Shoah antisemitism was not an anomaly in the Netherlands, it had always existed. But, again, compared to other Western European countries and the Russian Empire, for instance – known for its pogroms and the Pale of Settlement – life for Jews was relatively benign. Moreover, the historical record shows no pogroms in the Low Lands, before Nazi occupation. Conversely, anti-Jewish pogroms took place in the MENA region throughout the era of Islamic rule. In Morocco, for instance, pogroms took place in Marrakech, in 1146 and 1232; in Fez, in 1035, 1146, 1275, 1465, and 1912; in Meknes, in 1247; Tétouan, in 1790; Settat, in 1903; and in Casablanca, in 1907.
Once again, there were differences between Muslim countries. So, in the nineteenth century groups of Maghrebi Jews moved to Egypt, because the social climate was more favorable. But, considering that Muslims like Bazian love to argue that life was always better in the MENA region for Jews, I would like to counter: Jewish life in the MENA region was far from perfect and due to the Enlightenment, Jewish life in Western Europe had started to improve significantly, when compared to life under Islamic rule.
When commenting on the Shoah, Bazian conspicuously seems to gloss over the fact that Haj Amin al-Husaini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, forged exceptionally strong ties with Nazi Germany. There is footage of al-Husaini inspecting the troops of the Muslim SS Handzhar division. And the mufti was involved in the Farhud, one of the most horrifying pogroms carried out in Baghdad in June 1941, orchestrated by him, the Nazi Fritz Grobba, and the Iraqi ultranationalists who were part of the so-called Golden Square.
Of course, wherever the Nazis went, they could always count on support to varying degrees from segments of the local populace. Reasons could vary, but antisemitism was the prominent reason in most cases for locals to support the Nazis.
The Shoah was certainly not created by Muslims and individual heroism deserves praise and recognition. An example would be Selahattin Ülkümen, the Turkish consul-general of Rhodes who saved close to 50 Jews; or Dr. Mohamed Helmy, who risked his life and helped his Jewish friends. Perhaps, more examples will be shared in the decades to come of Arabs and Muslims helping to save Jews from annihilation. But, simultaneously, the Nazi presence in North Africa and the acts of its allies, such as Vichy France, did not lead to mass resistance from the local populace against antisemitic measures. For example, when Vichy France pushed Jews back into the cramped mellahs, many Moroccans were pleased.
And today? It is well known that Mein Kampf has been widely distributed throughout the MENA region. Bensoussan refers to the fact that it is not uncommon for Hitler to be praised in Algerian classrooms. So, while Muslims certainly are not responsible for the Shoah, there are examples of accomplices and Nazi ideology found fertile ground in the MENA region and still continues to be an influence – copies of Mein Kampf have been found in Hamas strongholds in Gaza.
Another interesting comment was that the Global South would save the Jews, as they had done in the past. It is unclear why Bazian would use such a broad concept as the Global South, but if he is referring to the countries of the MENA region, the argument does not become stronger either.
I do not remember Jews asking Muslims to “save” them, either historically or in the present. In addition, this assumption that Jews need this is patronizing. What exactly does Bazian consider to be rescue? The recurrent waves of forced conversion to Islam that occurred in Yemen and Iran? Or is the story of Solica, a Jewish girl who refused to convert to Islam and was thus executed in 1834, an example of a Jew being rescued – coincidentally, both Jews and Muslims now revere Solica as a martyr. Were Jews saved by being forced to pay the jizya and kharraj taxes? Moreover, in the twentieth century Arab nationalism excluded Jews, while the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood did not save them either. Indeed, in Egypt the Muslim Brotherhood continuously demanded that Jews show their loyalty, by opposing Zionism.
It is incomprehensible why Bazian would claim that the Global South and thus Muslims have always saved Jews. Ironically, Jews even received more rights under European colonial rule – at least, initially, whether in Morocco, Algeria, Egypt or Iraq – something that the Muslim majority held against them after gaining independence. Again, this seems to ignore the nature of the relationship between Muslims and Jews under Islamic rule, which was characterized by the latter submitting to the former, instead of the myth of harmonious coexistence. Furthermore, local initiatives for Jewish emancipation, such as the Ottoman Tanzimat reforms, were met with hostility in the corners of the Empire and in some cases even ignored. And a common justification for an anti-Jewish pogrom was that the Jews were becoming “arrogant” – meaning that they needed to know their place in society.
My family: no need for liberation
Finally, Bazian’s wish to celebrate the liberation of Palestine with his Jewish brothers and sisters is surprising, too. The comment is astonishing considering the fact that he believes that Israelis would be willing to celebrate with him the erasure of their state – because that is the prerequisite. Yet, when it comes to liberation, my family does not need it, nor request it. Here is why.
My paternal grandparents were Iraqi Jews, who arrived in Israel in the early 1950s, through Operation Ezra and Nehemiah. They were refugees, who arrived in Israel with a suitcase and the clothes on their backs. That was it. The Iraqi government had denationalized them, thus stripping them of their rights as citizens; they were not allowed to take all of their belongings with them; and they spent their first year in Israel in a ma’abara, a refugee camp where people lived in ramshackle tin huts. After a year, they moved to a development town.
Historical research shows that the overwhelming majority of Iraqi Jews wanted to leave for Israel, after 1948. An important reason was Zionism, obviously, but this community had been traumatized by the Farhud and its deteriorating status in Iraqi society as well. Moreover, strong antisemitic sentiment had started to grow in Iraq as early as the 1920s; after the Farhud, that mood only became more severe and especially after the establishment of the State of Israel. Thus, most members of the community came to the conclusion that their time in Iraq had ended; push factors were very important.
Edwin Black argues in his book The Farhud that Israel was not ready to absorb an Iraqi Jewish community of 120,000 strong, instantly. The country was still recovering from the War of Independence and had gone through an economic recession as well. But the Iraqi government was eager to offload its Jews, especially after its astonishment that many more Jews opted to leave, than they had expected. They increased pressure by pauperizing their Jews, stripping them of their rights and assets and threatening popular violence. In the end, Israel absorbed nearly the entire community.
Of course, there was discrimination against Mizrahim in the 1950s, especially, sources show that this existed. But I would like to add that Israel did take them all in, and provided for them in combination with aid pouring in through donations and support from the Jewish diaspora in the West. There was no equivalent of UNRWA for my grandparents. But in Israel my paternal family members found liberty at last.
In Israel, they could live their lives freely as Jews in their ancestral homeland; in Israel, they had children and my cousins, the children of my aunt, by now have families of their own. They are Israeli and in no need of liberation. That does not mean that Iraq did not call on Iraqi Jews to return. Apparently, one person answered the call in 1971, yet he vanished soon afterwards. The fact that Iraqi Jews ignored the call says enough, as not even those who settled outside of Israel – for instance, in the UK or US – decided to move to Iraq. Because they knew that this would not bring liberty.
Thanks, but no thanks
In short, my family has no desire to “celebrate” with Bazian, as he and his colleagues try to “liberate” them from their own country. Though the AMP seems to hold no position on a one-state or two-state solution, the speech given by Bazian is rather clear about his vision for the future. He opened the speech by recalling the catastrophe, as he called it, of the UN Partition Plan; he ended, by calling for the liberation of Palestine. That shows that he alludes to Israel being replaced by a Palestinian state.
However, my family is not in need of liberation. They are Israelis and doing well in life. In turn, I have no need for anyone trying to “liberate” me from my Israeli nationality. Furthermore, Bazian exhibits how little he knows about Jewish history, yet believes that he can condescendingly tell Jews what is good for them. To be blunt, this is the twenty-first century and we are not dhimmi anymore. As for liberation, we saw what that meant on October 7, 2023. And, again, on that day Arab Israelis were slaughtered and wounded as well.
Now, it is nice to read examples that offer hope. For instance, several Jews and Israelis have shared positive experiences of visiting Morocco, recently. In addition, I still hope that negotiations will resume in the future to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict; and I believe that the two-state solution still holds merit, in some shape or form. But I categorically reject Bazian’s dream of dismantling Israel and then expecting us to join him in celebration. To the overwhelming majority of Mizrahi Jews, Israel brought liberty. Though organizations such as Jewish Voice for Peace and Neturei Karta might support Bazian’s views, he should not expect that they represent all of us.