TORONTO – Since Hamas’ terrorist attacks and Israel’s ensuing response, world leaders and political figures have weighed in on the conflict, including some whose statements have offered strong support to Israel at a time when antisemitism and attacks on Jewish people and businesses are on the rise. These expressions of political support stand in contrast with the scenes of protests and rallies around the world. Here are five tweets that demonstrate support for Israel’s cause from global leaders across the political spectrum.

Pierre Poilievre, leader of the federal Conservative Party, has been a consistent voice in support of Israel and against antisemitism, including a November 4th statement that condemned antisemitic demonstrations such as the display of a swastika on Parliament Hill.

Former U.S. Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton expressed strong support for Israel during an appearance on the popular television show, The View. The eight-and-a-half-minute clip that draws on her experience as a former secretary of state has been widely shared on social media.

Democratic Senator John Fetterman from Pennsylvania has similarly been a staunch supporter of Israel. Foreign policy wasn’t a major factor behind his election in 2022 and he’s had various issues and challenges since he joined the senate, but he’s emerged as a major senatorial voice in response to the Israel-Hamas war.

Democratic Senator Bernie Sanders has also been a stalwart supporter of Israel including objecting to calls for a ceasefire. This has distinguished him from other progressive voices who have expressed support for Palestine and criticism of Israel.

One of the most strident messages in support of Israel comes from Germany’s vice chancellor, Robert Habeck, which draws on his country’s complicated history to make a principled case in favour of supporting Israel and condemning antisemitism.

Habeck’s remarks have been characterized by political scientist (and former Hub Dialogues guest) Ian Bremmer as well as others as a voice of leadership.

If you enjoy Hub podcasts (including bi-weekly episodes with David Frum and Amanda Lang), be sure to check out more insightful commentary on The Hub’s YouTube page:

At first blush it can seem like an oxymoron, but some of liberalism’s biggest defenders are conservatives. This is because, as Washington Post columnist George Will helpfully explains in a recent Hub Dialogue, conservatism is contextual, and North American conservatives are in fact conserving the classical liberal ideals and principles that have undergirded the systems and successes of our countries since their foundings.

The Hub‘s editor-at-large Sean Speer spoke with George Will prior to his appearance at the Munk Debates on November 3rd where he defended the notion that liberalism gets the big things right. The two discussed the nature of North American conservatism and the current state of the Republican Party in America. Below are three key insights from their conversation.

1. North American conservatives are….liberals

“European conservatism was born in defence of stasis and hierarchy, blood and soil, throne and altar, in the stained-glass minds of conservatives. In North America, it’s very different. Americans welcomed the churning that dissolves natural hierarchies. They welcomed the fluidity of life and the uncertainty, the lack of tidiness and control; certainly the lack of ranks, the lack of all natural hierarchies. Classical liberalism wants a hierarchy—but a hierarchy of meritocracy. One that determines that careers are open to talents, and talents evenly distributed through society. North American conservatives—I know our terminological confusion, it’s too late. That ship has sailed. But conservatives are classic liberals.”

2. Oppressor-oppressed ideology leads to extremism and violence 

“Clearly, it seems to me illiberal ideas have given rise to astonishing sympathy, among people who should know better, for the predatory sadism of Hamas. The idea is this: that we should all look at society not as composed of individuals but of groups. The groups are either oppressive oppressors or the oppressed. Once you reduce the world to this simple binary, you’re on the way to extremism, because that gives people the ability to say, ‘Ah, okay, well, the Palestinians are oppressed. The Israelis are the oppressors. Therefore, the oppressed can do no wrong, and certainly no wrong to the oppressors.'”

3. When it comes to politics, boring is better

“A lot of people—and particularly young people—are drawn away from liberalism because liberalism is boring. Liberalism is pedestrian. Liberalism doesn’t claim to be on the right side of history. Liberalism indeed says history doesn’t have a side and it doesn’t take sides. Liberalism isn’t exciting. The way you would refute that is give them a course on the history of the 20th century. It was a blood-soaked century precisely because we had exciting politics. We were going to produce a new Soviet man, a new German man, all kinds of glittering things. When in the 20th century, in the 1930s particularly, when Stalin was imposing terror on his country, a lot of his Western apologists said, ‘Well, you can’t make an omelet without breaking eggs,’ to which Orwell’s withering reply was, ‘Where’s the omelet?’ The omelet is always tomorrow, and tomorrow is always a day away.” 

Listen to George Will’s full interview with The Hub’s editor-at-large Sean Speer on the audio player below or on your favourite podcast app. 

If you enjoy Hub Dialogues, be sure to check out more insightful commentary on The Hub’s YouTube page: