The Western left’s ideological blind spot on the Middle East

The Middle East looms over the Western left’s ideological discourse, particularly in the U.S., where Arab American voters are courted for their potential to help swing elections. 

At the forefront of the left’s political pitch is the Palestinian cause, opposition to Washington’s policies in the Middle East, and hostility toward Israel. 

The Western left’s contradictions are exposed when asked to clarify its positions on Hezbollah, Hamas, or Iran. While activists may condemn some of the more nefarious actions of the Islamic Republic and its proxies, the left quickly conflates populations with the regimes and armed groups that rule over them. In this worldview, Palestinians are simplistically reduced to Hamas, Lebanese to Hezbollah, and Iranians to the mullahs’ regime in Tehran. 

As a result, military operations against Iran and its network of terror groups are misportrayed as attacks on the populations themselves. 

The left’s rhetoric about defending these populations thus becomes a convenient pretext for opposing efforts to dismantle the very groups tyrannizing the people of Gaza, Lebanon, and Iran.

This conflation is neither innocent nor accidental. The European and American left cannot openly defend Hezbollah, Hamas, or the Iranian regime. 

After all, the so-called “Axis of Resistance” embodies values fundamentally incompatible with the liberal values that Western activists claim to uphold. Instead, the left insists it is defending populations subject to Israeli “aggression” or U.S. “imperialism.”

In this sense, the “Axis of Resistance” has become a fellow traveler in the Western left’s ideological struggle against the political right. The yardstick by which this left judges issues around the world, particularly in the Middle East, is not respect for freedoms, human rights, or other liberal social values. Instead, it is where actors stand in relation to Washington and Jerusalem. 

Thus, when Iranian-led groups openly call for Israel’s destruction while chanting “Death to America,” the leftists see in them an objective ally. 

When applying these selective standards, the Western left has turned a blind eye to corruption when those accused are adversaries of Washington. 

This was evident in the left’s public rejoicing over the recent re-election of Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva. Less visibly, the same double standard came through in the left’s silence over Hezbollah- and Iran-linked organized crime and money-laundering networks operating under deposed Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro. 

Under the left’s cynical logic, what matters is not the nature of a regime or group, but whether it advances the Western activists’ ideological agendas. Where were these activists when Hamas was repressing Palestinians, killing its opponents in Gaza and silencing anyone who dared challenge its authoritarianism? 

Where was the Western left when Hezbollah terrorized the Lebanese with political assassinations to impose its will? Why did European and American university campuses and city streets not fill with protests in solidarity with the Iranian demonstrators gunned down by the mullahs’ killing machine? 

The suffering of people at the hands of Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Iranian regime never became causes for mass mobilization and moral outrage for the Western left. Among these activists, the core liberal values of freedom and human rights have become conditional on whether they serve their ideological whims and political interests. 

They expect the people of the Middle East to live under the backward rule of regimes and groups that impose political and social models rooted in the Middle Ages. 

The irony is that these leftists preach from the safety of Western societies that enshrine the rights to freedom and dissent while providing economic, social, and security benefits unavailable to millions in the Middle East. They enjoy the benefits of the West while expecting the people of our region to pay the price for their ideological luxury.

Does the Western left realize which option Arab citizens of Israel would choose if given a choice between living in Israel or in Gaza, Lebanon, or Iran? Of course, these leftists themselves refuse to relocate from their Western countries to live under Hamas, Hezbollah, or the Islamic Republic. 

There is a psychological encumbrance influencing activists’ behavior, what might be called “white man’s guilt.” Part of the Western left carries the burden of European colonialism and the West’s historical responsibility for exploiting countries across the developing world. As such, these leftists now seek atonement by opposing American foreign policy, especially in the Middle East, and confronting Israel, Washington’s main ally in the region. 

But this desire to settle historical accounts has led to a profound failure of judgment, blurring the distinction between peoples who suffered under colonialism and those now subjugated by the “Axis of Resistance.” In this way, solidarity with the victims of the past becomes an excuse for turning a blind eye to the victims of the present.

The Western left is under no obligation to abandon its right to pursue its political and ideological battles. What is unacceptable, however, is for this left to claim moral superiority and champion the downtrodden while turning its back on the victims of the “Axis of Resistance” to indulge its own ideological games. 

We will not accept being used as fuel for the Western left’s struggle against right-wing parties. Nor will we pay for its ideological complexes with our freedoms, our security, or our right to live with dignity. 

Our blood is not a footnote, and our tragedies are not ammunition for scoring political points in Western political contests.