On Wednesday, the Swedish government hosted an “international forum on Holocaust remembrance and combating anti-Semitism” in the city of Malmo, which has in recent years been the site of numerous anti-Semitic attacks and incidents. While Stockholm—along with other European governments that took part in the conference—should be applauded for shining a spotlight on hatred of Jews, writes Gerald Steinberg, it ought to combine its well-meaning statements with action. That means, above all, ceasing to fund anti-Semitism.

[M]any of the participating governments, including the Swedish hosts, are complicit in systematic efforts to demonize Israel, . . . . which is the main component of 21st-century anti-Semitism. [These] campaigns are led by powerful non-governmental organizations (NGOs) claiming to promote agendas based on human rights and international law. . . . European governments, together, allocate on the order of 100 million euros annually to [NGOs who focus] year after year on demonizing one country—Israel.

With such large budgets and almost no oversight, NGOs are easy vehicles for political manipulation. They also have direct access to media platforms and government officials who either sympathize with their ideological agendas or see them as unbiased sources of expertise. The publications and statements that demonize Israel are quoted and echoed without fact-checking by ministers, members of parliament, and journalists, greatly amplifying their influence.

Sweden is among the most active supporters of the NGO purveyors of hate and anti-Zionist invective. Some groups supported by the Swedish International Development Agency (SIDA) are members of a network closely linked to the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, which is included in the lists of terror organizations by Israel, the U.S., Canada, and the European Union.

Even if the agreement with Hamas to secure the release of some, and possibly all, of the remaining hostages—and the bodies of those no longer alive—is a prudent decision for Israel, it comes at a very high price: potentially leaving Hamas in control of Gaza and the release of vast numbers of Palestinian prisoners, many with blood on their hands. Nadav Shragai reminds us of the history of such agreements:

We cannot forget that the terrorists released in the Jibril deal during the summer of 1985 became the backbone of the first intifada, resulting in the murder of 165 Israelis. Approximately half of the terrorists released following the Oslo Accords joined Palestinian terror groups, with many participating in the second intifada that claimed 1,178 Israeli lives. Those freed in [exchange for Gilad Shalit in 2011] constructed Gaza, the world’s largest terror city, and brought about the October 7 massacre. We must ask ourselves: where will those released in the 2025 hostage deal lead us?

Taking these painful concessions into account Michael Oren argues that they might nonetheless be necessary:

From day one—October 7, 2023—Israel’s twin goals in Gaza were fundamentally irreconcilable. Israel could not, as its leaders pledged, simultaneously destroy Hamas and secure all of the hostages’ release. The terrorists who regarded the hostages as the key to their survival would hardly give them up for less than an Israeli commitment to end—and therefore lose—the war. Israelis, for their part, were torn between those who felt that they could not send their children to the army so long as hostages remained in captivity and those who held that, if Hamas wins, Israel will not have an army at all.

While 33 hostages will be released in the first stage, dozens—alive and dead—will remain in Gaza, prolonging their families’ suffering. The relatives of those killed by the Palestinian terrorists now going free will also be shattered. So, too, will the Israelis who still see soldiers dying in Gaza almost daily while Hamas rocket fire continues. What were all of Israel’s sacrifices for, they will ask. . . .

Perhaps this outcome was unavoidable from the beginning. Perhaps the deal is the only way of reconciling Israel’s mutually exclusive goals of annihilating Hamas and repatriating the hostages. Perhaps, despite Israel’s subsequent military triumph, this is the price for the failures of October 7.