There is a real existential danger in the political rise and potential election of Zohran Mamdani as mayor of New York, and it is not limited to his personal hostility toward Israel. The danger lies in the sophisticated political model he has refined — a precise and troubling playbook that can be replicated in any Western capital, aimed at neutralizing and dismantling Jewish communal power from within.
The Mamdani model operates on a simple and venomous principle: it identifies, amplifies and legitimizes the most radical and anti-Zionist Jewish voices, and uses them as a human shield against any charge of antisemitism.
This tactic paralyzes the mainstream, fractures communal consensus, and ultimately paves the way for extreme anti-Israel agendas to reach the core of power. This is not just a New York problem. It is a strategic warning for Jewish communities worldwide, revealing a new form of political warfare.
The first stage of the model is building a so-called Jewish protective wall. Mamdani systematically surrounds himself with the backing of groups such as Jewish Voice for Peace. He does not merely accept their support silently. He puts them on the front line, gives them platforms and turns them into the legitimate face of his campaign. As a result, any criticism of his positions is instantly reframed not as an attack on him but as an attack on other Jews.
The implied and brutally effective argument is: how can you call me antisemitic if there are Jews who agree with me word for word? In an age of identity politics, where the lived experience of minorities carries decisive weight, the voice of a single anti-Zionist Jew can be elevated above that of the broader community and can neutralize factual criticism.
The immediate effect is near-total paralysis of mainstream Jewish organizations. Community leaders who should be the first line of defense find themselves trapped in a rhetorical bind. They are forced to walk on eggshells: if they attack Mamdani harshly, they will be accused of trying to silence pluralism, of pinkwashing or of paternalistically policing Jewish identity. If they remain quiet, they allow the radical narrative to become the consensus. This is a form of political jiu-jitsu, where Mamdani uses his opponents' liberal principles against them. That hesitation creates a dangerous vacuum that pulls in extreme voices and turns them into the dominant narrative in the media.
But the model does not stop at defensive use. Its advanced stage involves actively cultivating an alternative to Zionist Jewish identity.
Mamdani understands the conflict many young Jews feel, torn between progressive values and traditional support for Israel. He offers them an easy, attractive solution: a reformed Judaism that disavows Israel and treats it as a colonial project to be ashamed of. He provides a way to remain Jewish while being fully accepted in the progressive camp without paying the price of grappling with Israel's complexity.
In essence, he makes opposition to Israel not only into a legitimate stance, but also a moral, and even Jewish act.
Here lies the global danger. Mamdani's success in New York would turn his model into an operating manual for radical politicians in London, Paris or Toronto. They will learn that the most effective way to neutralize the Jewish lobby is not a frontal confrontation but internal division.
His victory would be more than a local political win. It would be a destructive proof of concept that the foundation of global Jewish solidarity — the bond with the State of Israel — can be dismantled.
The struggle is not only against one man but against an entire strategy that threatens to turn Jewish communities into battlegrounds, and thereby weaken the Jewish people as a whole in the face of tomorrow's challenges.
