The West Bank is an anti-Israel prop for Western politicians.
In their versions of the West Bank, not a single Palestinian makes a choice. They are only shown as victims, there to be pitied and filmed. And no Israeli is shown as a real person.
Please consider supporting our mission to help everyone better understand and become smarter about the Jewish world. A gift of any amount helps keep our platform free of advertising and accessible to all.
This is a guest essay by Eli Kowaz, a Middle East analyst and writer focused on Israeli politics, U.S.-Israel relations, and the fractures inside the Jewish world.
You can also listen to the podcast version of this essay on Apple Podcasts, YouTube Music, YouTube, and Spotify.
In recent days, U.S. Congressman Ro Khanna of California was stopped on a West Bank road by armed Israeli settlers.
Men with American rifles blocked his van near Khirbet Zanuta, a Palestinian village whose residents settlers had already expelled, and held his group for over an hour.
When soldiers arrived, according to Khanna, they sided with the settlers and kept his group blocked; the IDF says its troops dispersed the settlers and reopened the road, denies detaining anyone, and notes Khanna never coordinated the visit.
Only after police arrived was the road cleared.
Khanna is considering a U.S. presidential run. He came on a tour organized by Palestinians, returned to California, and released a video. That video is why I am writing. Almost everything in it is true, which is exactly why it demands attention and anger, though not for the reason he wants.
Nothing Khanna filmed is invented. The impunity behind it is real. The settlers around Khirbet Zanuta include Yinon Levi, who shot and killed Awdah Hathaleen, a Palestinian activist, in a nearby village last year — a killing Hathaleen filmed as it happened. Levi was released within days.
What Khanna invented was himself. “Not as a politician,” he says to the camera, “just as a person.” But this is a man who returned from a campaign trip his campaign paid for, more resolved to run, and booked to tell it all to Far-Left podcaster Hasan Piker on Monday.
Khanna arrived without announcing himself, told the U.S. Embassy the trip was private, did not coordinate with Israeli officials, and only appeared publicly once he was back home with the footage.
Someone truly moved by what they saw would not turn it into a communications strategy.
Palestinian organizers planned the trip to show him a specific perspective, and they succeeded. What they left off the schedule is revealing. According to the Israeli organizers, he was offered a meeting with freed Israeli hostages and declined. He was also offered a visit to the Druze of the Golan and a briefing on how aid gets into Gaza, and he declined both.
That shows what he really came for.
He did not have to stage being detained. The West Bank gives that story to anyone who looks for it. But searching for the truth is not the same as collecting a story. The real difference is in what someone chooses not to see. In Khanna’s version, every Israeli is a villain: a settler, four soldiers, more settlers, the IDF.
No Israeli is shown as a real person. A real person would have made the story more complicated and less convenient.
The Palestinians do not come off any better, even though Khanna’s video tries to show sympathy. In his version of the West Bank, not a single Palestinian makes a choice. They are only shown as victims, there to be pitied and filmed. A people with their own politics, decisions, and debates over decades are reduced to objects, only there to suffer. He erases them just as much as he erases the settlers, only in the opposite way.
Neither group is shown as real people. Both are just props in his story.
There are Israelis that Khanna could have shown but chose not to. For example, the mother who has spent almost two years not knowing which of her child’s bones are in a Gaza tunnel, or the reservist who stands up to settlers and is called a traitor by his own government for it, or the Israeli protestors who have been in the streets against Israel’s current governing coalition.
Khanna built a trip to make sure he was never in a room with any of them. Then he claimed ideology had nothing to do with what he saw. The itinerary was built to show him one side, and he left with exactly the story he came for.
Then Khanna flew back to California. Leaving was always an option for him, but not for anyone else in his video. He could come, get his footage, and leave when he wanted. The father he mentions in his video keeps his dead son’s room and cannot leave Huwara; he is already home. Khanna passed through, filmed him, and left.
That same afternoon, a two-hour drive north, Rahm Emanuel (White House chief of staff from 2009 to 2010 under President Barack Obama and mayor of Chicago from 2011 to 2019) stood at Tel Aviv University and said tougher things than anything on Khanna’s video, and he said them to the people who could actually respond.
He said a true friend is someone who tells the truth “even when it’s painful,” and he called out extremists on both sides — the Greater Israel dream and the river-to-the-sea chant — right to the faces of those involved.
Emanuel is also considering a 2028 run. He made his case in front of the people he was criticizing. Khanna made sure those people were far away before he said anything. Emanuel’s father ran guns for the Irgun (a Zionist paramilitary organization that operated in British Mandatory Palestine from 1931 to 1948).
At least Emanuel criticizes Israel as someone who means to remain bound to it. Khanna criticizes it as someone who made sure he would be gone before anyone could answer.
I have spent years doing what Emanuel did from that stage from within Israel: Trying to tell this country hard truths, in its own language, because I live here and want it to survive. I have to face what those years have achieved.
The hard truth from someone who stays may be the easiest for a government to ignore, because it comes with the promise that I am not leaving, and I am not. That’s the possibility which Khanna’s coldness makes me face. Criticism that costs the critic nothing is easy to dismiss. Criticism that costs everything is easy to wait out. Neither is the answer. I only know mine hasn’t worked yet.
Two Americans, one Wednesday, one country. This is the choice facing the Democratic Party, and it’s clear on the ground. Emanuel stands for the operator wing — those who stay close to Israel and speak hard truths because they want the alliance to last. Khanna stands for the movement wing, which is younger, louder, and speaks to people who question the alliance itself.
These recent episodes made the choice obvious. I’m not neutral. My position depends on Khanna’s side losing, and I’d rather say that openly than pretend to be detached, as he does.
Someone is missing from Khanna’s video, and increasingly from his party: the Jew who belongs to this land. Khanna’s frame erases that Jew just as much as it erases the decent Israeli, for the same reason. He makes the story more complicated. He does not fit into a planned itinerary or a simple narrative.
No one in Khanna’s West Bank is fully real to him. Not the settlers he needs as villains, not the Palestinians he needs as victims, not the ordinary Israelis who would have made the story more complex.
Everyone is just a tool.
And the tour didn’t end at the airport. He flew home in time for Sunday’s “Meet the Press” television show, where he went on opposite Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and called the IDF liars, booked Hasan Piker for the next day and, of course, sent out a fundraising email. What looks like emotion is really arrangement, and it all points back to him.
Welcome to Ro Khanna’s West Bank Theater.
Good article, and I think you're 100% right.
Too often, politicians don't go there to discover the truth—they go there to reinforce the conclusions they've already reached. The itinerary simply becomes a way of validating the narrative they intended to tell before they even arrived.
One other thought. I understand why the Palestinian side and much of the international media call it the "West Bank." But why are we doing the same? Why aren't we consistently referring to it as Judea and Samaria, the historical names? These things matter. Language shapes perception, and perception shapes public opinion.
Sometimes I think our side loses as much in messaging as it does anywhere else. We need to become far more disciplined and strategic in how we present our own history.
These kind of trouble makers should not have been allowed to enter the State of Israel in the first place.