RSS
Qatar’s Back Door to Higher Education
Doha, Qatar. Photo: StellarD via Wikimedia Commons.
JNS.org – In an earlier column, I debunked a recent study suggesting that foreign contributions to higher education were responsible for the rise in antisemitism. In my work, I have illustrated some cases where Arab donations have had a nefarious impact, but it’s difficult to do because universities don’t report what most of the money they receive is used for. Besides demanding greater transparency, the United States and the world need to expand our investigation to trace indirect funding to “independent” institutions.
Qatar is by far the largest donor to universities. Since 1986, it has contributed more than $5 billion (billions more are undocumented) contributions since 1986. The largest gifts were for the creation and operation of Weill Cornell Medical College-Qatar in Doha, which can’t be said to cause antisemitism at the Ivy League’s main campus in Ithaca, N.Y. Because of the U.S. Department of Education’s failure to require universities to publish how they spend the foreign donations, we don’t know if any is going to professors or departments because they are pro-Qatar, anti-Israel or antisemitic, or if they adopt those policies after receiving the money. We can only surmise that universities will not want to risk losing funding by publishing anything critical of the emirate.
Meanwhile, gone largely unnoticed is Qatar’s backdoor to universities, the Arab Center Washington DC (ACW), which is affiliated with the Arab Center for Research and Policy Studies in Doha.
The ACW describes itself as “a nonprofit, independent and nonpartisan research organization dedicated to furthering the political, economic and social understanding of the Arab world in the United States and to providing insight on U.S. policies and interests in the Middle East.”
It says it relies on tax-deductible contributions from “individual supporters, organizations, foundations and corporations.” However, according to its tax return, all but $900 of its $2,262,150 in donations came from the center in Qatar.
A hint of its orientation can be found in its two most recent events: “Gaza and the Crime of Genocide: Legal and Political Dimensions of Accountability” and “Repression of Palestine Activism Amid the War on Gaza.”
Khalil E. Jahshan, the executive director and a veteran of several Arab lobby groups, has said the “clearest political message” of Hamas’s attack on Israel was “the one addressed to the ‘Camp of Normalizers’—be they Israeli, Arab, Americans or Europeans—that their plans to forge a ‘New Middle East’ without Palestine shall not pass unopposed.”
He also tweeted: “Top #Biden adviser and confidant Brett #McGurk is obsessed with rewarding #Israel for its #genocidal war in #Gaza by furthering the #Trump-era cash-&-carry #normalization deal between #Saudi_Arabia & Israel at the expense of #Palestinian national rights.”
The center has 14 academic advisers, 13 of whom are professors from universities such as Georgetown, George Washington, Maryland and Princeton. It does not indicate whether any members are paid. Among the professors on the list are Columbia University professor Hamid Dabashi. He refers to ISIS as “murderous thugs” and says, “Their Israeli counterparts meanwhile conquered parts of Syria and declared it part of their Zionist settler colony.” Dabashi does see one difference, which suggests that he doesn’t read The New York Times, “ISIS does not have a platoon of clean shaven and well coiffured [sic] columnists at the New York Times propagating the cause of the terrorist outfit as the Zionists columnists do on a regular basis.”
While Dabashi wears his disdain for Israel on his sleeve, a more slippery example is the University of Maryland’s Shibley Telhami. An Israel critic, he is best known for producing widely quoted surveys related to Israel with questions consistently written to elicit negative responses towards the Jewish state.
Another adviser, Osama Abi-Mershed, an associate professor in the influential Walsh School of Foreign Service and Director of the Center for Contemporary Arab Studies (CCAS) at Georgetown University, is a supporter of the antisemitic Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement. He has pledged “not to collaborate on projects and events involving Israeli academic institutions.”
Abi-Mershed’s colleague, Marwa Daoudy, an assistant professor in International Relations at the Walsh School and CCAS, tweeted “Palestinians are denied the right to exist as human beings.” He also praised South Africa’s foreign minister for comparing Israeli policy to apartheid, and accused Israel of genocide and “cultural genocide.”
Another adviser is retired USC professor Laurie Brand, former president of the Middle East Studies Association (MESA) and now chair of its Committee on Academic Freedom, which devotes much of its attention to criticism of Israel and defense of antisemitic speech, as in its post-Oct. 7 letter to universities denying that anti-Zionism is antisemitic. While expressing heartbreak over the loss of Israeli and Palestinian lives, the letter has nothing to say about the Hamas massacre that created the toxic campus environment. She is indignant over the supposed silencing of Israel’s detractors while defending the boycott of Israel.
George Washington University history professor Dina Khoury is another former MESA president who supports BDS and has condemned Israel in a prior Gaza conflict for its actions to defend its citizens. Another BDS’er is Amaney Jamal, the Edwards S. Sanford Professor of Politics at Princeton University.
Sheila Carapico, a professor of political science and international studies at the University of Richmond, is another BDS supporter and a consultant to Human Rights Watch. She wrote an article complaining about Saudi Arabia bullying Qatar.
‘The price we had to pay’
ACW also has 18 research fellows, including Dana El Kurd, an assistant professor at the University of Richmond who wrote an op-ed in The Washington Post assailing the normalization of relations between Israel and the Gulf states, claiming that rather than advancing peace, Israel is giving the Arab regimes tools to solidify their authoritarian rule. She claims the Palestinian issue is the “root cause of the Arab-Israeli conflict” and suggested that the Abraham Accords emboldened Israel to annex Palestinian territory, ignoring that Israel gave up a plan to exercise sovereignty to achieve the agreement with the Gulf states.
One member of the ACW board is Mohammed Abu Nimer, director of the Peacebuilding and Development Institute at American University. Hamas, he says, has “engaged in the fight against the Israeli occupation since 1987”; that is, two years after every Israeli was withdrawn. He also repeats the canard that Hamas changed its charter and no longer seeks Israel’s destruction. The man who received the 2023 Distinguished Scholar Award for his “groundbreaking work in interreligious dialogue and faith-based peacebuilding” refers to the situation in Gaza as “genocide.”
Another board member is Laurie King, an anthropology professor at Georgetown who was a co-founder of the virulently anti-Israel website Electronic Intifada. She has compared Israel to Afrikaner South Africa and called for it to be boycotted. She falsely accuses Israel of “ethnic cleansing.” Not surprisingly, she objects to antisemites being called out for antisemitism.
Predictably, I found no statements condemning Hamas for massacring 1,200 Israelis.
The creation of the ACW is not Qatar’s first effort to use a Washington think tank as part of its influence operation. In 2007, it convinced the Brookings Institution to open a center in Doha. A few years later, the emirate agreed to a $14.8 million, four-year donation to help fund the affiliate in Qatar and a project on United States relations with the Islamic world. Brookings closed the center in Doha and stopped taking money from the emirate in 2017. Previously, it listed Qatar as one of its top donors, giving more than $2 million. Brookings’s divorce came after its president, Gen. John R. Allen (Ret.), was investigated by the Justice Department for illegally lobbying for Qatar (no charges were brought).
A former visiting fellow at the Doha Center who went on to teach at the University of Queensland in Australia offered one clue to the impact of associating with Qatar. Saleem Ali told The New York Times, “If a member of Congress is using the Brookings reports, they should be aware—they are not getting the full story.” He said he had been warned during his job interview not to criticize Qatar in his published work. “There was a no-go zone when it came to criticizing the Qatari government,” said Ali. “It was unsettling for the academics there. But it was the price we had to pay.”
Qatar didn’t hide what it expected to get for its contributions. When Brookings renewed its agreement for the Doha center in 2012, the Times reported that the Qatar Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced, “the center will assume its role in reflecting the bright image of Qatar in the international media, especially the American ones.”
When Brookings finally dumped Qatar, the emirate lost the prestige of associating with a prominent think tank. Undeterred, the Qataris created their own to give an academic veneer to their influence campaign.
Evaluating the impact of Arab funding on higher education is often a chicken-and-egg proposition. Are professors on the advisory board spreading propaganda because they get paid or are they recruited by Qatar to its stable of apologists because they are anti-Israel (I’ll leave it to others to decide if they’re also antisemitic)? If there is no financial or professional benefit, why associate with Qatar?
Whatever their reasons, they have affiliated themselves with the country that supports Hamas and Islamists.
The post Qatar’s Back Door to Higher Education first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
It’s Important That We Know the Truth About the Aid Situation in Gaza

Palestinians carry aid supplies which they received from the U.S.-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, in the central Gaza Strip, May 29, 2025. REUTERS/Ramadan Abed
Heads you win, tails I lose. That’s how it feels watching the world’s reaction to Israel and America’s new food aid model in Gaza.
For months, Israel was condemned for not letting enough aid in and for blockading aid until the hostages were released. Now that Israel is letting in food directly — but cutting the corrupt United Nations and the Hamas terrorists out of the picture — those same voices are howling even louder.
First, the accusation was: “You’re starving Gaza!” Now, it’s: “You’re weaponizing aid!” and “You’re manipulating Gaza’s hunger!” Heads you win, tails I lose. Damned if you do, damned if you don’t. It’s utterly grotesque.
The images from Gaza tell the real story. Thousands of hungry people, many of them openly and unabashedly critical of Hamas, lining up at distribution points — eager to accept boxes of food from the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, which is quietly, without fanfare, working with Israeli and American support.
Suddenly, we are witnessing a population that’s been exploited and abandoned by Hamas and used as political pawns by the UN finally ready — and finally able — to challenge their oppressors.
Yet instead of celebrating this breakthrough, the usual chorus of international do-gooders — all of them card-carrying haters of Israel and America — are up in arms.
The UN leadership is outraged at being usurped from its traditional role as the world’s perpetual busybody. Apparently, if the UN is to be taken at its word, delivering aid outside of Hamas’s control somehow violates humanitarian norms.
Even European diplomats are muttering darkly that this new scheme is some kind of Israeli conspiracy.
And it goes without saying that academics in distant universities are warning about “the instrumentalization of aid for war purposes.” Has anyone in all of history ever uttered something quite so ridiculous? In any event, try telling that to the Gazan father, who eagerly thanked “everyone who helped us” to a reporter on the scene.
The hypocrisy is breathtaking. Since the October 7th Hamas-perpetrated atrocity and the war against Hamas that followed, all these same voices have been deafeningly silent as Hamas turned food and medicine into tools of terror. Surely, that was “the instrumentalization of aid.”
But they said nothing while Hamas stole international donations in plain sight, extorted desperate families at military checkpoints, and funneled the profits into weapons and ever more violence. Now, as soon as Israel steps in to break that deadly cycle—taking real risks to ensure that Gazan civilians aren’t starved or blackmailed—these critics suddenly find their voices. But instead of using them to support real humanitarian work, they stridently protect the “principles” of an aid system that Hamas has been openly using as a cash cow.
It’s easy to stand in Geneva or New York and patronizingly tut-tut about “neutrality.” It’s much harder to look a starving child in the face and say: “Sorry, we can’t give you food unless your terrorist overlords sign off on it,” or “There’s food for you, but you can’t have it because it’s the Israelis giving it out.”
This is the greatest moral inversion of our times: Israel’s “sin” is that it’s doing what every serious humanitarian ought to do: stop the abuse of aid by criminals and ensure that food actually reaches the hungry.
Hamas is so eager to keep control, and its international enablers are so equally keen to keep Hamas from being ousted, that a shooting last week at a food collection point quickly became an international incident. The so-called mass casualty event occurred as hundreds of Gazans made their way to the only open distribution center in Rafah.
The Hamas-controlled “health ministry” claimed that 31 people were killed and nearly 200 wounded in the pre-dawn shooting near the site — and of course, inevitably, Israel was guilty of a deliberate massacre.
But even as news outlet after news outlet blindly reported the atrocity, the IDF denied responsibility and later published an audio recording featuring a local Gazan who insisted that it had been Hamas, not Israel, that opened fire. “They don’t want the people to receive aid,” he told an Israeli officer. “They want to foil the plan so that the aid will go to them, allowing them to steal it. They’ve gone completely bankrupt.”
The Torah in Parshat Nasso teaches us about the Nazir, someone who vows to separate themselves from wine and other mundane aspects of ordinary life for a period of spiritual self-discipline. The Torah says, “for the crown of his God is upon his head” (Num. 6:7).
It’s a powerful image: by abstaining from doing what others do, the Nazir isn’t running away from the world. Instead, they’re being true to themselves — choosing to do the right thing, even if it means breaking from routine in order to achieve something positive. And for that, they are depicted as having the crown of God on their heads.
The commentators add that the Nazir’s vow of abstention is really about reclaiming control. Instead of being pulled in every direction by outside influences — whether it’s peer pressure, popular opinion, or the desire to fit in — the Nazir says: “Enough is enough. I will not be ruled by these forces. I will decide my own path.”
That’s precisely what Israel’s new aid model is doing. Israel has finally, and wisely, entered into the status of Nazir. For too long, everything about the “aid system” in Gaza has been governed by what everyone else thinks is right and what Israel should or should not be doing or allowing on their borders.
But Israel the Nazir has taken a vow of abstention. Instead of working with the UN, they’ve taken a stand. They’re saying: “Enough. We will not let terrorists decide who eats and who starves. We will take control of the situation and do what is right for us and for those who are most in need.”
And yes, it’s messy. The Torah itself acknowledges that the Nazir’s vow isn’t the norm — it’s a response to a world that the Nazir feels is no longer working for them. But when everything around you is distorted, you’ve no choice but to do something radical to restore balance.
So here we are: Israel, with America alongside it, is stepping in to provide real aid — no strings attached, no financial siphon for Hamas’ tunnels, no middlemen selling precious food that was meant to be free so they can fund terror. And just as every Nazir in history has been seen as odd or extreme, Israel is being seen as venturing outside accepted norms.
But the Torah says that when you stand apart from the mob and refuse to play by their twisted rules, you wear a crown of holiness: “The crown of his God is upon his head.”
No Nazir was ever perfect. That’s a given. Neither is Israel perfect, nor is this new system. But to those who can’t see past their own dogmas, who only find their voices when Israel acts to fix the mess they ignored –maybe it’s time to take a lesson from the Nazir. Be independent. Worry about your spiritual and moral responsibilities. And whether the rest of the world turns their noses up is unimportant.
Because when you do that, it’s heads I win, and tails you don’t lose.
The author is a writer in Beverly Hills, California.
The post It’s Important That We Know the Truth About the Aid Situation in Gaza first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
There Is Trouble on Campus as the 2024-2025 Academic Year Ends

Demonstrators take part in an “Emergency Rally: Stand With Palestinians Under Siege in Gaza,” amid the ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas, at Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts, US, Oct. 14, 2023. Photo: REUTERS/Brian Snyder
The Spring semester has ended with higher education in upheaval. The political and economic relationships with the Federal government are now rapidly changing, with billions of taxpayer funding frozen or and foreign student visas on hold.
Here are some recent incidents that have occurred on campus:
- Protestors briefly and violently occupied a library at Columbia University. Later reports indicated they were mostly Columbia students, Some 65 students were suspended by the university with many barred from campus. In court, the group’s lawyer described the action as a “teach-in”;
- At the University of Washington, pro-Hamas and Antifa protestors occupied a newly opened engineering building, setting fires and damaging equipment. Over 30 arrests were made, and damage to the building was estimated at $1.2 million. The state’s governor claimed those responsible would be held “accountable,” and a Federal investigation was launched;
- At Brooklyn College, protestors attempted to create an encampment, but were driven off campus by police. As protestors left, they stopped at the Hillel house where one individual gave a speech denouncing it as a “Zionist institution.” Altercations ensued, resulting in arrests;
- An encampment at Swarthmore College was removed by police, and nine individuals were arrested. The encampment was sparsely attended and Swarthmore activists reported frustration with “unambiguously ineffective” SJP tactics, hostility toward otherwise sympathetic supporters, and an “increasingly adversarial tone towards the general student body;”
- An encampment at Dartmouth College was dismantled after the administration agreed to provide subsidies to international students “in need” and to meet with protestors regarding divestment. Later in the month, protestors briefly occupied an area outside the university president’s office;
- At Rutgers University, a pro-Hamas demonstration was held outside the Hillel building, where Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) was holding a roundtable meeting. This resulted in four arrests. One police officer was assaulted;
A number of “Nakba Day” protests were held at universities including at Trinity College (Cambridge) and Tel Aviv University, and across major cities including New York and London.
Security precautions for Jewish communities and institutions were heightened after the Washington, D.C. murders. Even prior to this, Birmingham University’s Hillel house announced it would apply for permission construct a large fence around its property as protection from antisemitic protests and attacks.
In an especially disturbing development, a local Michigan judge considered ordering the state’s gay and Jewish Attorney General, Dana Nessel, to recuse herself from prosecuting pro-Hamas trespassers at the University of Michigan because of allegations that she is biased against Arabs and Muslims that were made in a separate case.
The Trump administration continues to target leading institutions, above all Harvard and Columbia, with funding cuts and other restrictions over their refusal to rapidly address new mandates regarding the eradication of DEI politics and campus antisemitism.
Other leading institutions including Vanderbilt University and Dartmouth College, which have explicitly adopted positions defending free speech as well as maintained campus safety and civility, have not been the focus of the Trump administration.
Administration efforts to remove foreign students who support Hamas and advocate for revolution against the US have been stymied by court orders. Most key individuals targeted by an early wave of deportation orders have been freed by courts — even though they openly supported a US-designated terror group on the streets of America.
The higher education industrial complex continues to complain about Federal cuts and pressure. A recent poll, however, indicates that significant numbers of Americans hold negative views of Ivy League institutions, suggesting that the elite sector of the industry has little social capital. But concerns remain that continued administration emphasis on antisemitism, along with DEI and resulting discrimination policies, will generate resentment and antisemitism as Jews are blamed for what is happening.
As the immense confrontation between the Trump administration and the higher education industrial complex unfolds, faculty find themselves trapped. The majority of faculty who are not pro-Palestinian — much less overt Hamas — supporters have been tarred by their ideologically committed colleagues, as have scientists who have found their funding and student staffing destroyed.
Professional organizations such as the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) have been built as left wing pressure groups, which now give credence to far left factions explicitly in support of Hamas. Other professional organizations, such as the American Psychological Association, are suffused with antisemitism and anti-Israel bias to the point where they have now attracted political attention.
Faculty groups continue to provide largely anonymous support for pro-Hamas protestors and anti-Israel policies:
- The University of Washington chapter of Faculty for Justice in Palestine strongly condemned the university for taking action against protestors who caused over $1 million in damage to an engineering building and for accepting donations from Boeing;
- Columbia University’s American Association of University Professors condemned the institution’s handling of the library takeover and for plans to revise “shared governance” structures;
- The George Washington University Faculty and Staff for Justice in Palestine condemned the university’s response to a student commencement speaker who had excoriated Israel. She was later barred from campus;
- The University of Toronto Faculty Association also narrowly voted to divest from Israel and demanded the university follow suit.
Largely in contrast to university administrations, faculty-led groups have also rewarded student protestors. In one example, two Harvard Law School students who had assaulted a Jewish student were awarded fellowships while other anti-Israel students were recommended for Rhodes and Truman scholarships. Also at Harvard, an honorary degree was awarded to Berkeley faculty member and BDS supporter Elaine Kim.
In parallel, reports continue to appear regarding the pervasiveness of anti-Israel bias in British university classrooms, and the systematic purging of Jewish adjuncts from the City University of New York’s accounting department. These and other incidents indicate that disparate faculty members have continued or even intensified both anti-Israel and antisemitic efforts in spire of media and Federal scrutiny.
Students continued to protest against Israel with particular emphasis on the anniversaries of 2024 encampments and “Nakba Day.” One protest strategy that has reemerged are hunger strikes by students and faculty, including at Stanford University, Yale University, Occidental College, Cal State Long Beach, and San Francisco State University.
As has been the norm in previous years, commencements were the scene of pro-Hamas protests. Columbia students drowned out president Claire Shipman’s remarks, including favorable comments regarding detained student Mahmoud Khalil, which produced angry jeers from the crowd. Later several students burned their diplomas. Two students were arrested. Barnard College president Laura Rosenbury was jeered by graduates who shouted “shame.” Graduates at many institutions waved Palestinian flags and jeered, including at Brooklyn College.
In another notable case at New York University’s Gallatin School of Individualized Study, the student commencement speaker deviated from the speech he had originally submitted and excoriated the US and Israel saying, “I want to say that the genocide currently occurring is supported politically and militarily by the United States, is paid for by our tax dollars, and has been live streamed to our phones for the past 18 months.” Students applauded the speech and the university stated the student “lied about the speech he was going to deliver and violated the commitment he made to comply with our rules.” It then withheld his diploma.
Other students deviated from approved remarks and called for divestment and accused Israel of “genocide” and their schools of complicity in their commencement speeches, such as at MIT and George Washington University. Disruptions were reported at City University of New York, Columbia University and Rutgers University. Faculty members dressed in keffiyehs at New York University.
Another commencement related incident saw Salman Rushdie, who was almost murdered by a Muslim protestor in 2022, withdraw as commencement speaker at Claremont McKenna College after complaints by the local CAIR branch and threats to protest by the school’s Muslim Student Association.
K-12
Anti-Israel bias and overt antisemitism continues to be integrated into K-12 education through teachers’ unions and “ethnic studies.” The continued promotion of “anti-Palestinian racism” as the pinnacle of intersectionalism is an especially ominous development. The concept, which sacralizes Palestinian narratives regarding “nakba” and Israeli evil, and makes factual counter-narratives and potentially Jewish expressions of identity and belief illegal on the basis of hurt feelings, is now official policy in Toronto public schools.
A variety of reports have shown how radical teachers in Philadelphia public schools have systematically dominated teacher training and curriculum development in the name of “racial justice,” and against Israel and Jews.
The role of teachers’ unions in promoting “Palestine” as a core principle is most developed in Britain. There, the National Education Union has been at the forefront of anti-Israel organizing with “days of action,” workshops to “advocate for Palestine in our schools,” celebrating Nakba Day, and circulating BDS petitions, all ostensibly aimed at teachers rather than students. In reality, reports continue to document how teacher routinely indoctrinate students against Israel and Jews both inside and outside classrooms, employing crude and vicious terms such as “ZioNazis.”
In the US, local teachers’ unions such as the Beaverton Education Association and internal affinity groups such as “NY Educators for Palestine” and “Teaching While Muslim” continue to push indoctrination efforts such as “Teach Palestine Week.” At the national level, the Democratic Socialists of America is currently running several candidates for the leadership of the United Federation of Teachers.
Local pushback against teachers’ unions, such as in Massachusetts, has had limited impact, since unions operate with impunity. Control of oversight institutions such as school boards has become critical, since these too are routinely taken over by BDS supporters. In an unusual outcome, in the New Rochelle, NY, school board vote a progressive candidate endorsed by former Congressman Jamaal Bowman (D) lost resoundingly to both another Black candidate and Jewish candidates. She then blamed anti-Blackness and her support for “Gaza.” Jewish and centrist voters had mobilized vigorously against her on the basis of Bowman’s endorsement.
The author is a contributor to SPME, where a completely different version of this article was published.
The post There Is Trouble on Campus as the 2024-2025 Academic Year Ends first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Sailing to Gaza: Greta Thunberg’s Latest Anti-Israel Publicity Stunt

Police officers detain Swedish climate campaigner Greta Thunberg, during an Oily Money Out and Fossil Free London protest in London, Britain, October 17, 2023. Photo: Reuters/Toby Melville
Greta Thunberg is on her way to save the people of Gaza.
The 22-year-old Swedish climate crusader is one of 12 anti-Israel activists sailing to the Gaza Strip on the vessel Madleen, allegedly to bring aid to the embattled enclave and to challenge Israel’s naval blockade.
Even though the boat is still days away from reaching the coast, it is already making news due to the high-profile status of some of those onboard. Along with Thunberg are Game of Thrones actor Liam Cunningham, French politician Rima Hassan, and Al Jazeera journalist Omar Faiad.
As social media becomes inundated with images of the activists galivanting on the high seas and mainstream media outlets like the Associated Press, ABC Australia, and CBS News are beginning to report on the vessel’s “humanitarian mission,” it is important that news consumers understand why there is a blockade of the Gaza Strip and are aware of the sordid history of past attempts to break the blockade.
Greta Thunberg’s so-called “freedom flotilla” encapsulates the delusion and hypocrisy surrounding the Israel-Gaza war.
This isn’t a humanitarian mission—it’s a Mediterranean leisure cruise. Participants are smiling, swimming, and filming TikTok videos. This is self-serving… pic.twitter.com/eUzhsXW54r
— Maccabee Task Force (@MacTaskForce) June 3, 2025
The Blockade of Gaza: A Brief History
Following Hamas’ violent takeover of the Gaza Strip in 2007, both Israel and Egypt restricted maritime traffic off the coast of Gaza to curb weapons smuggling by Hamas.
In 2008, Israel declared the Mediterranean Sea adjacent to Gaza a war zone, and reserved the right to inspect ships entering that area. Then, in 2009, Israel implemented a total naval blockade of the Gaza Strip.
Since the imposition of the naval blockade in 2009, there have been several incidents of the Israeli military intercepting ships carrying weapons bound for Hamas and other Gaza-based terror groups.
This includes the Victoria, which was intercepted in 2011 carrying 50 tons of Iranian weapons, the Klos-C, an Iranian arms ship that was seized in 2014, and a weapons-smuggling vessel disguised as a fishing boat that was intercepted in 2016.
Along with the naval blockade of the Gaza Strip, there are also restrictions on the importing of goods through the land crossings between the Gaza Strip and both Israel and Egypt that are also meant to contain Hamas’ ability to bring in weapons and other goods intended for its terror infrastructure.
While the Israeli-Egyptian land and maritime blockade of Gaza might appear to be harsh, it is a legal necessity that provides basic necessities for the people of Gaza while also serving as a deterrent to Hamas’ terror campaign.
It should also be noted that, contrary to its depiction as such by some activists and journalists, the blockade of Gaza is not a “siege.” Aside from a brief two-month period (March-May 2025) during the ongoing Israel-Hamas war, there have never been extended periods of time when food and other necessities were entirely barred from entering the Gaza Strip.
Attempts to Break the Blockade
For almost as long as the Gaza Strip blockade has existed, activists have attempted to break it, placing greater emphasis on public attention than actually bringing aid to the people of Gaza. Even in this current case of the Madleen, organizers have admitted that the limited amount of aid on the ship is “symbolic.”
The most famous attempt to break the blockade was in 2010, when Israeli forces intercepted a naval flotilla (led by the ship Mavi Marmara) as it attempted to reach the Gazan coast. After Israeli naval commandos boarded the lead ship, a violent confrontation broke out between the “peace activists” and the soldiers, resulting in the deaths of 10 Turkish activists and the wounding of several Israeli soldiers.
The Turkish organization that organized this flotilla, the Foundation for Human Rights and Freedoms and Humanitarian Relief (IHH), reportedly has ties to Hamas and was more focused on confronting the Israeli blockade than providing aid to the people of Gaza. The aid, which was offloaded in Israel, was later refused by the Hamas authorities in Gaza.
Now, 15 years later, the IHH continues to be involved with the Freedom Flotilla Coalition, which is sponsoring the latest blockade-breaking attempt by the Madleen.
As the publicity campaign around Greta Thunberg and the Madleen continues to gather steam, will the media provide their audience with a proper context for understanding Israel’s blockade of Gaza, or will this latest stunt merely serve as a lightning rod for false narratives and misleading information about Israel’s war against Hamas?
The author is a contributor to HonestReporting, a Jerusalem-based media watchdog with a focus on antisemitism and anti-Israel bias — where a version of this article first appeared.
The post Sailing to Gaza: Greta Thunberg’s Latest Anti-Israel Publicity Stunt first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
You must be logged in to post a comment Login