Need for Mainstreaming Pro-Palestinian Activity

With mounting political efforts to frame pro-Palestinian movements as radical in the United States, we face a critical moment that demands careful strategy. This potential delegitimization, linked to broader political agendas, risks sidelining genuine calls for justice and peace. Instead of playing into tactics designed to weaken our stance, there’s an urgent need to mainstream pro-Palestinian activism by moving toward a centrist, pragmatic framework. Doing so will ensure that we remain effective, protect ourselves from suppression, and sustain the possibility of meaningful progress, such as a peaceful two-state solution.

The Threat of Radicalization

The more radical a movement appears, the easier it becomes for policy-makers to justify actions aimed at containing or suppressing it. In the current climate, political forces are likely preparing to label pro-Palestinian activism as radical and, by extension, delegitimate. As documented, initiatives like Project 2025 align with efforts to stymie opposition by framing it as extremist. For those advocating pro-Palestinian perspectives, the impulse to escalate in response to continued U.S. policy inaction toward Israel is understandable but counterproductive.

The frustration with the U.S. administration’s lack of change regarding Israel-Palestine policy may push some activists toward more extreme positions, seeking to amplify their message. However, this shift will only provide ammunition to those looking to discredit our cause, reinforcing a narrative that pro-Palestinian groups are unreasonably radical and therefore justifiably suppressed.

The Case for Mainstreaming: A Pragmatic Approach

Rather than falling into this trap, we must consider a strategic pivot toward the center, adopting a stance that positions us firmly within mainstream discourse. The Zionism-Lite framework offers a balanced, realistic approach for the movement. By embracing principles that promote coexistence, mutual recognition, and a two-state solution, we can better advocate for Palestinian rights without crossing into territories that are easily labeled as extremist.

For instance, we can align with frameworks such as the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA), which asserts that legitimate criticism of Israel’s policies is not inherently antisemitic. By actively engaging within these boundaries, we can advocate for targeted pressure campaigns, sanctions on extremist Israeli settlers, and economic consequences for companies exploiting the West Bank. This approach takes the IHRA at its word, aligning our activism with its intent to allow legitimate, targeted criticism rather than sweeping condemnation.

Legitimacy, Focus, and the Power of the Center

The Zionism-Lite framework not only grounds our position in mainstream legitimacy but also sharpens our focus. While some may resist compromise, especially those who seek the dissolution of Israel in favor of a single Palestinian state, such aspirations lack realistic foundations. Moreover, these extremes often serve to delegitimize the movement by casting it as a radical faction that doesn’t seek peace but erasure.

We stand to lose public support and weaken our cause if we do not anchor our goals within pragmatic parameters that the broader public can support. Embracing the center empowers us to speak with authority, aligning ourselves with pragmatic Palestinian leadership and making our objectives clear: a peaceful, realistic two-state solution.

Risks of Ignoring This Path

Failing to adopt a mainstream stance could have far-reaching consequences. If the movement is viewed as radical and uncompromising, government action to suppress it will gain public acceptance. Public support, essential for sustained impact, will erode, and the hope for a two-state solution will become more remote. The narrative of a movement intent on peace and mutual recognition must replace that of radicalism, positioning us as credible advocates for change within a complex, politically charged environment.

Conclusion

We must be vigilant against the looming risk of being sidelined as radicals. By actively mainstreaming our approach and embracing frameworks like Zionism-Lite framework, we will remain resilient, credible, and effective in advocating for Palestinian rights. A strategic, pragmatic approach will not only protect us from political attacks but also lay a stronger foundation for lasting peace and justice in the region.