Jesús Daniel Romero from Miami Strategic Intelligence Institute for Poder & Dinero and FinGurú
Introduction
The assassination of Israeli diplomats on American soil marks an alarming escalation that cannot be dismissed as an isolated act of violence. What distinguishes this event from conflicts in the Middle East is not only the location but the ideological leap it represents. For the first time, we are witnessing how the Free Palestine movement in the United States is turning into violent extremism, with possible links to state actors or coordinated networks.
A Movement Crosses the Line
The Free Palestine movement in the U.S., primarily driven by student protests, social media activism, and organized marches, has long operated under the protection of the First Amendment. But there is a difference between protesting and waging proxy war. The question now is whether this assassination represents the first step towards a domestic transformation: from activism to insurgency.
Some foreign students linked to extremist factions had already been deported for national security reasons. But this time, the evidence points to a U.S.-born actor: Elias Rodríguez, a 31-year-old resident of Chicago. What makes this case a defining moment is not just the assassination but what Rodríguez said afterward.
According to preliminary reports, after killing two Israeli diplomats, Rodríguez declared: “Free Palestine!”
This is no longer protected free speech: this is terrorism.
Defining the Act: Elias Rodríguez and the Threshold of Domestic Terrorism
According to Title 18 of the U.S. Code, Section 2331, terrorism is defined as a violent act intended to intimidate or coerce civilians, influence governmental policies, or affect the conduct of a government. By attacking diplomats for political reasons and ideologically aligning with a foreign cause, Elias Rodríguez meets the definition of a domestic terrorist.
The attack occurred in front of the Lillian & Albert Small Jewish Museum in Washington, D.C., on May 21, 2025, when Israeli officials Yaron Lischinsky and Sarah Milgrim were leaving a reception organized by the American Jewish Committee. Rodríguez was detained at the scene after shouting: “Free Palestine!”
This was the first confirmed act of terrorism resulting in the deaths of Israeli diplomats on American soil. While there have been previous attacks, such as the 1973 assassination of air attaché Yosef Alon in Maryland, none had thus far resulted in a fatal act clearly linked to terrorism with an ideological motive.
The choice of venue—a prominent Jewish cultural institution near the Capitol—was not incidental. It was a calculated political statement designed to amplify the ideological impact of the attack. The symbolic setting, alongside the target and motive, makes it clear: this was an act of terrorism.
This was not merely a hate crime or a political protest: it was an ideological assassination executed on a symbolic stage, making it one of the most dangerous forms of domestic terrorism in recent U.S. history.
Implications for the American Jewish Community
Jewish communities in the United States are no strangers to anti-Semitic violence. But this attack—explicitly linked to an international cause and committed by an American citizen—raises the level of threat. It sends a clear message: the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is no longer a distant issue. It has arrived, violently, in our streets.
This calls for a serious response: from strengthening community security measures to opening federal investigations into radicalization channels within activist and academic environments.
The Challenge for Intelligence and Security Policy
For U.S. national security agencies, the threat landscape has changed. The FBI and DHS must now face a new hybrid threat: Americans ideologically radicalized by foreign causes and potentially willing to act violently.
This will also test the strategic clarity of the Trump administration and its security team as they confront the thin line between free speech and material support for terrorism. Universities, NGOs, and activist networks must be examined not for their ideas, but for signs of operational planning, incitement, or pre-radicalization.
Why Now? What Changed Between the Biden and Trump Administrations?
The emergence of an ideologically motivated assassination on U.S. soil during Trump’s second term, rather than during the Biden administration, is no coincidence. It reflects deeper changes:
1. The Political Climate Has Changed
During the Biden administration, while the U.S. maintained its diplomatic support for Israel, it adopted a softer stance toward certain Middle Eastern regimes and was complicit in allowing radical activism disguised as social justice. That administration empowered university movements and activist networks that blurred the line between political protest and ideological extremism.
With Trump’s return, the following policies were imposed:
● Stricter immigration policies,
● Explicit and renewed support for Israel, and
● Zero tolerance for extremist rhetoric.
This firmer stance reignited hostility between marginal actors who see the alliance with Israel as provocation.
2. Deteriorating International Conditions
In 2024–2025, the conflict between Israel and Hamas intensified, with brutal urban fighting in Gaza and interventions against Iranian-backed militias. This spurred a global rise in anti-Israel sentiment, exploited by propaganda machines like Iran, Hezbollah, and their digital proxies.
Under Trump:
● The U.S. reaffirmed its alliance with Israel,
● Cut aid to Palestinian entities, and
● Adopted a more aggressive stance against Iran and its allies.
This mobilized radical networks and lone supporters who now believe they must act within the U.S.
3. Clarity Invites Retaliation
Biden’s foreign policy was ambiguous or conciliatory. Trump’s is firm, clear, and direct. In terms of intelligence, strategic clarity invites a clear response from the enemy. And that is what we are seeing.
4. Change in Internal Security Operational Rules
During Biden's administration, the FBI and DHS operated under heavy political scrutiny, limiting their ability to intervene preventively.
The Biden administration was more open and tolerant—allowing violent discord to grow under the disguise of protected dissent. This enabled radical ideologies to thrive without oversight.
With Trump, agencies face fewer restrictions. But paradoxically, this approach may provoke so-called “accelerationists”—extremists who interpret repression as validation of their cause.
Elias Rodríguez could be one of them.
Conclusion: From Protest to Proxy War?
The assassination of Israeli diplomats under the Trump administration did not occur because the threat did not previously exist—but because the conditions changed. A bolder U.S. stance toward Israel, a more polarized society, a rising regional conflict, and a strengthened security apparatus have brought the threat to the surface.
The Biden administration normalized radical rhetoric.
The Trump administration faced it—and provoked a response.
Today, violent ideology is no longer hidden. It is acting. And it is here.
References
Reuters. (2025, May 22). Suspect charged with murder in Washington shooting that left two Israeli embassy employees dead. Reuters.https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/two-israeli-embassy-staffers-killed-washington-shooting-2025-05-22/
The Guardian. (2025, May 22). Two Israeli embassy employees killed outside the Jewish Museum in Washington DC. The Guardian.https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2025/may/22/washington-dc-shooting-israel-embassy-staff-capital-jewish-museum-live-updates
BBC News. (2025, May 22). Suspect charged with murder over deaths of two Israeli embassy workers in Washington DC. BBC News.https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c0mr8x9vjwgo
Wikipedia contributors. (2025). 2025 killing of Israeli Embassy in Washington, D.C. workers. Wikipedia.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2025_killing_of_Israeli_Embassy_in_Washington%2C_D.C._workers
PBS NewsHour. (2025, May 22). Israeli embassy worker killings investigated as hate crime and terrorism. PBS.https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/israeli-embassy-worker-killings-investigated-as-hate-crime-and-terrorism
Wikipedia contributors. (2025). Yosef Alon. Wikipedia.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yosef_Alon
Times of Israel. (2017, January 9). FBI reopens case of assassination of Israeli diplomat in 1973. The Times of Israel.https://www.timesofisrael.com/fbi-reopens-case-of-1973-assassination-of-israeli-diplomat/
Haaretz. (2017, January 9). FBI reopens case of assassination of Israeli military attaché, NYT reports. Haaretz.https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2017-01-09/ty-article-magazine/nyt-fbi-reopens-israeli-military-attach-assassination-case/0000017f-ef39-d4cd-af7f-ef79d9390000
Center for Israel Education. (n.d.). Assassination of Israeli military attaché in Maryland.https://israeled.org/israeli-military-attache-killed-in-maryland/
WJLA. (2009, July 1). Unknown assassins: book investigates assassination of Israeli diplomat in Chevy Chase in 1973.https://wjla.com/news/crime/assassins-unknown-new-book-explores-1973-chevy-chase-killing-of-israeli-official–61141
Jesús Daniel Romero is a Retired U.S. Naval Intelligence Commander. Co-founder and Senior Fellow at the Miami Strategic Intelligence Institute and author of the Amazon bestseller "Final Flight: The Queen of Air" and is currently writing a new trilogy on transnational crimes in Latin America.
He is a permanent consultant on his specialty topics in major media outlets in the State of Florida. He has also had a distinguished performance in diplomatic and military tasks, and has conducted investigations into drug trafficking in Central America.
Comments