While global tensions and antisemitism are on the rise, fueled by Hamas propaganda calling for the destruction of Israel, and with the unilateral recognition of a Palestinian state by the UN imminent,

a significant group of Hungarian Jewish intellectuals felt it important to make clear in a petition that they stand in solidarity with "both sides" of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict,

that is, with the Jewish victims of the October 7 attack and "the innocent victims who died in Gaza," as well as "the Jewish hostages and Gaza residents who are still suffering." The text makes no mention of Hamas or Islamist terrorism, but rather of the accusation of "deliberate starvation" widely spread by the terrorist organization.

Petition for common humanity

The petition entitled "For the common humanity of Palestinians and Jews," signed by hundreds of intellectuals who describe themselves as Atheists, Christians, and religious Jews, has generated considerable debate among Hungarian Jewry. Among other things, the text states: "We differ in many ways, but we agree on one thing: the current Israeli government and the influential Jewish organizations and opinion makers in Hungary do not represent our views with their one-sided, extreme statements." They go on to express their sympathy for the Israeli families who have been waiting for almost two years for the return of their loved ones who were taken hostage, and for the "hundreds of thousands" in Gaza who, "after months of brutal destruction, are now suffering from deliberate starvation."

They make it clear that

"there are people on both sides who want the same things: security, freedom, dignity."

They express concern that "demonstrations calling for a ceasefire and peace" — which in many Western countries lead to violent acts and the glorification of terrorist organizations — are not allowed in Hungary, and that the "independent Hungarian press," which often uses Hamas numbers and images, is attacked, and the professional opinion of international human rights organizations is "ignored." They believe that domestic public discourse only amplifies the most extreme voices and, through them, demonizes the “other” side, so

just as Netanyahu is not synonymous with Judaism, neither is Hamas synonymous with the Palestinian people.

They also point out—which is one of the favorite arguments of the antizionist side for why they are not antisemitic—that criticizing the actions of the current Israeli government is not equivalent to antisemitism, but rather a "democratic value and interest." However, they go even further when they emphasize that

"by conflating criticism of Israel with antisemitism, domestic opinion makers contribute to the growth of antisemitism."

They also criticize the government for welcoming Benjamin Netanyahu and withdrawing from the International Criminal Court.

They conclude their petition by saying that they want nuanced debates, solidarity, and humanity in public discourse, and they trust that anyone who believes that all lives are equally valuable will join the initiative by signing the petition.

The letter was first circulated among a small circle of intellectuals, scientists, artists, and religious leaders. After gathering more than 300 signatures, it was posted on the internet, and anyone—Jewish or non-Jewish—could join. Since then, more than 1,600 people have signed it.

Among the signatories are several well-known names: Zsuzsa Fritz, educator and former director of the Jewish Community Center in Budapest; Gábor Máté, a physician and world-renowned expert on trauma and addiction; Kriszta Székely, a director; Ádám Breier, a film director; Katalin Kelemen, Hungary's first female rabbi; Lajos Parti Nagy, a poet; László Karsai, a Holocaust historian; László Dés, a jazz musician; and Tamás Pajor, a poet and songwriter.

The petition caused a huge stir, and numerous Jewish public figures responded in detail to the statements contained therein, interpreting it as a moral assessment of a significant portion of the Jewish diaspora.

Longer responses appeared on Facebook, in Szombat, and in the columns of Múlt és Jövő.

Who owned the land first?

Biblical Zionism is inseparable from the land; it is not based on politics, but on God's eternal and unchangeable promises to His people, in which He declared: "I give you this land" (Deuteronomy 1:8).

According to the Bible, God's covenant with Abraham (Genesis 15 and 17) is eternal and unconditional, therefore the Jewish people have a divine right to the Holy Land.

Tamás Pajor addresses this issue in an article published in the columns of Múlt és Jelen (Past and Present), explaining the signing of the petition, when he refers to the question of “who owned the land first” as an “unsolvable political-moral-philosophical question.” He believes that

“on this basis, even the Canaanites could lay claim to the Holy Land, or the Avars to Hungary. This is why international law cannot resolve the problem."

He adds that he agrees with the statement that modern Israel would not have come into being without the trauma of the Holocaust. He gave the following reason for signing the petition:

"There was also a demonstrative reason why I signed the petition. My intention was to make it clear to my intellectual friends, most of whom disagree with me, that I do not differentiate between people on the basis of ethnicity."

"Total moral bankruptcy"

Journalist Péter Szegő responded by saying that he was very disappointed with the petition, which he described as "a textbook example of total moral bankruptcy."

He believes it is as if, in 1943, British intellectuals in opposition or Polish emigrants living in the United States had issued a petition in which they sought to maintain an equal distance between Churchill and Hitler, Roosevelt and Hitler, and the Anglo-Saxon powers and Germany at the time.

Szegő strongly refuted the assumption that people on both sides wanted the same thing.

"The majority of people in Gaza do not want security, freedom, and dignity, but rather the destruction of Israel.

It is true that there are people in Gaza who genuinely want security, freedom, and dignity. The Israeli hostages who are still alive (dead) certainly do."

Who is responsible for the situation in Gaza?

Analyst Dániel Nemes also responded to the divisive petition in an outspoken post, saying that its authors and signatories were trying to show "how morally superior they are to those who dominate public discourse."

He called it telling that the signatures of "the Palestinian masses fighting for peace and dialogue" were conspicuously absent from the end of the statement. Nemes believes that the wording of the text, with its "great division between one side and the other," shows sympathy for Palestinian terrorists.

Nemes also criticized the petition's authors for echoing Hamas propaganda about starvation, even though the UN and IPC's own data show otherwise.

"Apart from genetically ill children and a few adults emaciated by terminal cancer, there are no starving people to be seen in the pictures and videos." He asks the question: under the heading "all lives are equally valuable," is it possible to simultaneously support an open, inclusive, modernist, knowledge-centered society and a fanatical Islamist society that brutally oppresses and destroys all kinds of minorities, in which "none of the signatories would remain alive"?

"Why do they consider the life of Kfir Bibas, who was kidnapped at eight months old and then strangled with bare hands a month later, to be equally valuable to that of his murderers?"

- he continued his series of rhetorical questions.

According to Nemes, the petition serves no purpose other than to divide society and drive a wedge between people, and its signatories have no desire to learn about the real intentions of the Palestinians, as evidenced by surveys, research, and their own statements, because doing so would shatter their worldview built around an “imaginary Palestine.”

"Admission to the role of the good Jew"

Philosopher György Gábor devoted two outspoken articles to the petition in the columns of Szombat, referring to it as a "letter of hypocrisy" and "a recipe for the disintegration of Jewry."

He points out that many people who excel in their professions speak several languages, and are worldly people, become uncertain, sometimes even “semi-illiterate” when it comes to questions of religion and civilization, and do not understand that this is not merely a territorial dispute, but a serious and decisive religious conflict. Where one side defines the other not as a partner but as an enemy to be destroyed, there can be no lasting coexistence between states, nor can there be any path to mutual understanding, he asserts.

György Gábor sees the petition as the product of "self-appointed humane Jews" with a single real goal: "to clear their consciences by distancing themselves from the community to which they supposedly belong... while

trying to buy their way into the role of the good Jew, whom the surrounding world is finally willing to love because he willingly accepts the narratives of his environment."

He believes that the petition gives the impression that the Jewish community is incapable of standing up for itself and Israel's most fundamental right to security and self-defense, relativizes attacks intended to commit genocide,

blurs the distinction between victim and aggressor, "and this is not solidarity, but self-abandonment."

According to György Gábor, all this is "a cowardly escape from the responsibility of saying that Israel, which fights for its existence every single day, has the right to live and the right to defend itself. To remain silent about this is not humanism, but collaboration with those who want to shed Jewish blood."

Cognitive dissonance

In his Facebook post, journalist Tamás Vajda describes the petition as a socio-psychological drama, the explanation for which can be found in the cognitive dissonance of the Jewish intellectual authors who signed it.

“Somewhere deep down, they feel that perhaps it was embarrassing to remain silent for months while their Jewish brothers and sisters mourned and an entire nation tried to survive...

They sign this little statement, and suddenly, in their own eyes and, of course, in the eyes of the equally ignorant public, they are standing on the podium of the moral Olympics.”

Vajda emphasizes that the murderer and the victim are never equal parties, and that peace cannot be made with hardened murderers. However, in order to recognize this, the signatories would have to feel "affected" and actually follow the events, which most of them do not do because "it is more comfortable not to know, not to see, not to feel." In the absence of these, however, only self-deception and "meaningless moral statements" remain.

Can I empathize with my mortal enemy?

Publicist and political commentator András Bruck also addressed the petition on the Múlt és Jövő (Past and Future) website, posing the question: can we empathize with our mortal enemy in war? "Those who answer yes, especially as Jews, should also say how they would fight an uncompromising, mortal enemy," he continues.

Bruck reminded readers that the Palestinians, who are the subject of the petition, made their intentions clearer than ever before on October 7:

they want everything that belongs to the Jews, their past, their memories, their history, so that they can rewrite them and replace the Jews with themselves.

He adds that, contrary to the beliefs of those who signed the petition, he does not see a clear dividing line between Hamas and the Palestinian civilian population. He reminds us that "Hamas's blood-soaked, apocalyptic, prophetic ideology promoting a cult of death" is embraced by the vast majority of Palestinians, some of whom participated in the massacres in the kibbutzim behaved inhumanely toward the hostages taken to Gaza, and unlike during the Nazi era, even a substantial reward of $5,000 was not enough to persuade even one Gazan to "save Jews" in the area out of humanity.