Uncategorized
Weinstein approached me ‘Jew to Jew’: Jodi Kantor opens up on the ‘She Said’ movie’s Jewish moments
(JTA) — When the New York Times journalist Jodi Kantor was reporting the 2017 Harvey Weinstein sexual assault story that earned her a Pulitzer prize, the powerful Hollywood producer and his team tried to influence her by using something they had in common: They are both Jewish.
“Weinstein put [Jewishness] on the table and seemed to expect that I was going to have some sort of tribal loyalty to him,” Kantor told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency on a video call from the New York Times newsroom. “And that was just not going to be the case.”
Now, that exchange has been immortalized in “She Said,” a new film adaptation of the nonfiction book of the same name by Kantor and her collaborator Megan Twohey that details their investigation into Weinstein’s conduct, which helped launch the #MeToo movement.
The film, directed by Maria Schrader with stars Zoe Kazan as Kantor and Carey Mulligan as Twohey, is an understated thriller that has drawn comparisons to “All the President’s Men” — and multiple subtle but powerful Jewish-themed subplots reveal the way Kantor’s Jewishness arose during and at times intersected with the investigation.
In one scene, the Kantor character notes that a Jewish member of Weinstein’s team tried to appeal to her “Jew to Jew.” In another, Kantor shares a moving moment with Weinstein’s longtime accountant, the child of Holocaust survivors, as they discuss the importance of speaking up about wrongdoing.
Kantor, 47, grew up between New York and New Jersey, the first grandchild of Holocaust survivors — born “almost 30 years to the day after my grandparents were liberated,” she notes. She calls her grandmother Hana Kantor, a 99-year-old Holocaust survivor, her “lodestar.” Kantor — who doesn’t often speak publicly about her personal life, including her Jewish background, which involved some education in Jewish schools — led a segment for CBS in May 2021 on her grandmother and their relationship. Before her journalism career, she spent a year in Israel on a Dorot Fellowship, working with Israeli and Palestinian organizations. She’s now a “proud member” of a Reform synagogue in Brooklyn.
Kantor spoke with JTA about the film’s Jewish threads, the portrayal of the New York Times newsroom and what Zoe Kazan’s performance captures about journalism.
This interview has been edited and condensed for clarity and length.
JTA: How did you feel having Zoe Kazan, who is not Jewish, play you? Kazan has played some notably Jewish characters before, for example in the HBO miniseries “The Plot Against America.”
JK: I feel Zoe’s performance is so sensitive and so layered. What I really appreciate about her performance is that she captures so many of the emotions I was feeling under the surface in the investigation. You know, when you’re a reporter and especially a reporter handling that sensitive a story, it’s your responsibility to present a really smooth professional exterior to the world. At the end of the investigation, I had the job of reading Harvey Weinstein some of the allegations and really confronting him. And in dealing with the victims, I wanted to be a rock for them and it was my job to get them to believe in the investigation. And so on the one hand, you have that smooth, professional exterior, but then below that, of course you’re feeling all the feelings. You’re feeling the power of the material, you’re feeling the urgency of getting the story, you’re feeling the fear that Weinstein could hurt somebody else. You’re feeling the loss that these women are expressing, including over their careers. And so I think Zoe’s performance just communicates that so beautifully.
What Zoe says about the character is that there are elements of me, there are elements of herself, and then there are elements of pure invention because she’s an artist, and that’s what she does.
I think the screenplay gets at a small but significant line of Jewish sub-drama that ran through the investigation. It went like this: Harvey Weinstein and his representatives were constantly trying to approach me as a Jew. And they’ve done this more recently, as well. There have been times when Harvey Weinstein was trying to approach me “Jew to Jew,” like almost in a tone of “you and I are the same, we understand each other.” We found dossiers later that they had compiled on me and it was clear that they knew that I was the grandchild of Holocaust survivors, and they tried to sort of deploy that. So speaking of keeping things under the surface, I privately thought that was offensive, that he was citing that. But your job as a reporter is to be completely professional. And I wasn’t looking to get into a fight with Weinstein. I just wanted to find out the truth and I actually wanted to be fair to the guy. Anyway, even as he was approaching me “Jew to Jew” in private, he was hiring Black Cube — sort of Israeli private intelligence agents — to try to dupe me. And they actually sent an agent to me, and she posed as a women’s rights advocate. And she was intimating that they were going to pay me a lot of money to appear at a conference in London. Luckily I shooed her away.
To some degree I can’t explain why private Israeli intelligence agents were hired to try to dupe the Hebrew speaking, yeshiva-educated, granddaughter of Holocaust survivors. But it’s not my job to explain that! It’s their job to explain why they did that.
Then the theme reappeared with Irwin Reiter, Weinstein’s accountant of 30 years, who kind of became the Deep Throat of the investigation. I quickly figured out that Irwin and I were from the same small world. He was the child of survivors, and had also spent his summers at bungalow colonies in the Catskills just down the road from mine. I don’t bring up the Holocaust a lot. It’s a sacred matter for me, and I didn’t do it lightly. But once I discovered that we did in fact have this really powerful connection in our backgrounds, I did gently sound it with him – I felt that was sincere and real. Because he was making such a critical decision: Weinstein’s accountant of 30 years is still working for the guy by day and he’s meeting with me at night. And I felt like I did need to go to that place with him, saying, “Okay, Irwin, we both know that there are people who talk and there are people who don’t. And we both grew up around that mix of people and what do we think is the difference? And also if you know if you have the chance to act and intervene in a bad situation, are you going to take it?”
We didn’t talk a lot about it, because I raised it and he didn’t want to fully engage. But I always felt like that was under the surface of our conversations, and he made a very brave decision to help us.
That was a very powerful scene in the film, and it felt like a turning point in the movie that kind of got at the ethical core of what was motivating your character. Was that a scene that was important to you personally to include in the film?
What Megan and I want people to know overall is that a small number of brave sources can make an extraordinary difference. When you really look at the number of people who gave us the essential information about Weinstein, it’s a small conference room’s worth of people. Most of them are incredibly brave women, some of whom are depicted, I think, quite beautifully in the film. But there was also Irwin, Weinstein’s accountant of all these years, among them. It’s Megan and my job to build people’s confidence in telling the truth. And as we become custodians of this story for the long term, one of the things we really want people to know is that a tiny group of brave sources, sometimes one source, can make a massive difference. Look at the impact that these people had all around the world.
Did you feel the film captured the New York Times newsroom? There’s a kind of great reverence to the toughness and professionalism in the newspaper business that really came through.
Megan and I are so grateful for the sincerity and professionalism with which the journalism is displayed. There are a lot of on screen depictions of journalists in which we’re depicted as manipulative or doing things for the wrong reasons or sleeping with our sources!
We [as journalists] feel incredible drama in what we do every day. And we’re so grateful to the filmmakers for finding it and sharing it with people. And I know the New York Times can look intimidating or remote as an institution. I hope people really consider this an invitation into the building and into our meetings, and into our way of working and our value system.
And we’re also proud that it’s a vision of a really female New York Times, which was not traditionally the case at this institution for a long time. This is a book and a movie about women as narrators.
“Harvey Weinstein and his representatives were constantly trying to approach me as a Jew,” Kantor said. (The New York Times)
There have been comparisons made between this movie and “All the President’s Men.” One of the striking differences is that those journalists are two male bachelors running around D.C. And this film has scenes of motherhood, of the Shabbat table, of making lunches. What was it like seeing your personal lives reflected on screen?
It’s really true that the Weinstein investigation was kind of born in the crucible of motherhood and Megan and my attempt to combine work with parenting. On the one hand, it’s the most everyday thing in the world, but on the other hand, you don’t see it actually portrayed on screen that much. We’re really honored by the way that throughout the film you see motherhood and work mixing, I think in a way that is so natural despite our obviously pretty stressful circumstances.
I started out alone on the Weinstein investigation, and I called Megan because movie stars were telling me their secrets but they were very reluctant to go on the record. So I had gone some way in persuading and engaging them, but I was looking to make the absolute strongest case for them. So I called Megan. We had both done years of reporting on women and children. Mine involved the workplace more and hers involved sex crimes more, which is part of why everything melded together so well eventually. I wanted to talk to her about what she had said to female victims in the past. But when I reached her, I could hear that something was wrong. And she had just had a baby, and I had had postpartum depression myself. So we talked about it and I gave her the name of my doctor, who I had seen. Then she got treatment. And she not only gave very good advice on that [initial] phone call, but she joined me in the investigation.
I think the theme is responsibility. Our relationship was forged in a sense of shared responsibility, primarily for the work – once we began to understand the truths about Weinstein, we couldn’t allow ourselves to fail. But also Megan was learning to shoulder the responsibility of being a parent, and I had two kids. And so we started this joint dialogue that was mostly about work, but also about motherhood. And I think throughout the film and throughout the real investigation, we felt those themes melding. It’s totally true that my daughter Tali was asking me about what I was doing. It’s very hard to keep secrets from your kid in a New York City apartment, even though I didn’t tell her everything. And Megan and I would go from discussing really critical matters with the investigation to talking about her daughter’s evolving nap schedule. It really felt like we had to get the story and get home to the kids.
And also, we were reporting on our own cohort. A lot of Weinstein victims were and are women in their 40s. And so even though we were very professional with this and we tried to be very professional with the sources, there was an aspect of looking in the mirror. For example, with Laura Madden, who was so brave about going on the record, it was conversations with her own teenage daughters that helped her make her decision.
We didn’t write about this in our book because it was hard to mix the motherhood stuff with this sort of serious reporter-detective story and all the important facts. And we didn’t want to talk about ourselves too much in the book. But the filmmakers captured something that I think is very true. It feels particular to us but also universal. When Zoe [Kazan] is pushing a stroller and taking a phone call at the same time, I suspect lots of people will identify with that. And what I also really like is the grace and dignity with which that’s portrayed.
It must have been surreal, seeing a Hollywood movie about your investigation of Hollywood.
I think part of the power of the film is that it returns the Weinstein investigation to the producer’s medium, but on vastly different terms, with the women in charge. Megan and I are particularly moved by the portrayals of Zelda Perkins, Laura Madden and Rowena Chiu — these former Weinstein assistants are in many ways at the core of the story. They’re everyday people who made the incredibly brave decision to help us, in spite of everything from breast cancer to legal barriers.
Working with the filmmakers was really interesting. They were really committed to the integrity of the story, and they asked a ton of questions, both large and small. Ranging from the really big things about the investigation to these tiny details. Like in the scene where we go to Gwyneth Paltrow’s house and Megan and I discover we’re practically wearing the same dress — those were the actual white dresses that we wore that day. We had to send them in an envelope to the costume department, and they copied the dresses in Zoe and Carey’s sizes and that’s what they’re wearing. There was a strand of extreme fidelity, but they needed some artistic license because it’s a movie. And the movie plays out in the key of emotion.
—
The post Weinstein approached me ‘Jew to Jew’: Jodi Kantor opens up on the ‘She Said’ movie’s Jewish moments appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
University of Toronto Jewish Studies Department Targeted With Anti-Israel Posters
Students walk outside one of the exam buildings on the campus of the University of Toronto in Toronto, Canada, on Dec. 13, 2025. Photo: Mike Campbell via Reuters Connect
Agitators at the University of Toronto kicked off the new academic year by tacking posters promoting anti-Israel propaganda near the Jewish Studies Department, continuing to fuel concerns of a hostile environment for Jews and Israelis.
The posters accused Israel of being a “colonial settler state” and claimed that Israeli officials have uttered the falsehood themselves. According to The J.CA, an online Jewish media outlet, the posters also came with QR codes linked to a website containing atrocity propaganda regarding Israel’s conduct in the war with Hamas in Gaza.
“Some claims reference the destruction of universities and the deaths of academics and students, without attribution to independent or verifiable sources,” the outlet said. “Several QR codes direct viewers to advocacy materials calling for political action against Israel.”
Speaking to The J.CA, a local Jewish organization said, “Posting highly charged political material outside Jewish Studies is not neutral. It sends a message to Jewish students that their academic spaces are contested and that their identity is inseparable from geopolitical accusations.”
The Algemeiner reached out to the University of Toronto for comment and is waiting to hear back.
The school previously faced antisemitic incidents and came under fire for refusing, in response, to adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) definition of antisemitism, which is widely used by governments, corporations, and nonprofits around the world.
According to the definition, antisemitism “is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.” It provides 11 specific, contemporary examples of antisemitism in public life, the media, schools, the workplace, and in the religious sphere. Beyond classic antisemitic behavior associated with the likes of the medieval period and Nazi Germany, the examples include denial of the Holocaust and newer forms of antisemitism targeting Israel such as demonizing the Jewish state, denying its right to exist, and holding it to standards not expected of any other democratic state.
In 2022, the university said it believes that IHRA’s definition “is both insufficiently responsive to many of the most troubling instances of antisemitism in the university context and in tension with the university as a place where difficult and controversial questions are addressed.” It added that “protecting these freedoms is essential to our university’s mandate and mission of discovery, research and education, which can only thrive in an environment of free expression and critical inquiry.”
Critics have argued the IHRA definition unfairly categorizes criticism of Israel as antisemitic. Proponents counter that the definition makes a clear distinction between legitimate criticism of the Israeli government and efforts to demonize and delegitimize the world’s only Jewish state. According to research and civil rights groups, anti-Israel animus has motivated an increasingly significant percentage of antisemitic incidents, especially following Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, massacre across southern Israel.
The University of Toronto has witnessed multiple examples of such outrages in recent years.
In 2021, for example, a student union at the Scarborough Campus passed a resolution which called for sourcing kosher food from providers that do not support Israel, a measure which would have effectively banned kosher food on campus, while a second motion was stripped of language proposed to protect Jewish students. The measure also endorsed the boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) campaign — and, in another provision that would have marginalized Jews, pledged to “refrain from engaging with organizations, services, or participating in events that further normalize Israeli apartheid.”
Earlier that year, the University of Toronto Students’ Union (UTSU) voted to sign an open letter accusing Israel of “genocide and demanding the cancellation of trips to Israel. Then in February 2022, it endorsed a motion linked to the BDS campaign against Israel.
Campus antisemitism continues to affect Jewish faculty, students, and staff at colleges across Canada.
In November, a pro-Hamas mob spilled blood and caused the hospitalization of at least one Jewish student at Toronto Metropolitan University after forcibly breaching a venue in which the advocacy group Students Supporting Israel had convened for an event featuring veterans of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF).
The former soldiers agreed to meet Students Supporting Israel (SSI) to discuss their experiences at a “private space” on campus which had to be reserved because TMU denied the group a room reservation and, therefore, security personnel that would have been afforded to it. However, someone leaked the event location, leading to one of the most violent incidents of campus antisemitism since Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, massacre across southern Israel sparked a surge of anti-Jewish hostility in higher education.
Six suspects, including Qabil Ibrahim, 26, were ultimately arrested on suspicion of being involved in the incident and appeared in court this month.
Canadian Jews have been hit by a wave of antisemitic incidents, with at least 32 reported across five provinces in just the past week alone, according to data collected by the Jewish advocacy group B’nai Brith.
“Antisemitism in Canada is now accelerating at an increasing rate, spreading across provinces, platforms, and public spaces. That is a warning signal, and it demands more than piecemeal reactions” the group wrote on Wednesday in a letter urging Prime Minister Mark Carney to create a Royal Commission that would explore the problem and draft policy proposals for solving it.
According to the group’s latest audit of antisemitism in Canada released last year, antisemitic incidents in 2024 rose 7.4 percent from 2023, with 6,219 adding up to the highest total recorded since it began tracking such data in 1982. Seventeen incidents occurred on average every day, while online antisemitism exploded a harrowing 161 percent since 2022. As standalone provinces, Quebec and Alberta saw the largest percentage increases, by 215 percent and 160 percent, respectively.
According to the report, incidents included someone firing a gun at a Jewish school for girls in Toronto, Ontario; a man trying to burn down the Tzedeck Synagogue in Vancouver, British Columbia; and a newspaper in Quebec depicting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as the vampire Nosferatu, a Nazi-era trope.
“We cannot permit this to become normalized,” B’nai Brith Canada research and advocacy director Richard Robertson said in a statement. “Antisemitism is not only a threat to Jews — it represents a total repudiation of Canadian values. Those who foment hate against any marginalized group stand in direct opposition to our multicultural, diverse national identity.”
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.
Uncategorized
Iranian Regime Crackdown Went Beyond Protesters, Hitting Bystanders Too, Witnesses Say
People attend the funeral of the security forces who were killed in the protests that erupted over the collapse of the currency’s value in Tehran, Iran, Jan. 14, 2026. Photo: Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via REUTERS
Art student Arash was walking home through the streets of Tehran when a shotgun blast ended his life. He had not shouted slogans, joined protesters, or raised a fist.
A friend, speaking by telephone from the Iranian capital, described the moment in a voice cracking with grief: Arash fell instantly, lifeless on the pavement. He was 22.
The friend, who spoke on condition of anonymity due to fear for his security, said they had paused on the sidewalk to watch a protest in nearby Vanak Square when security forces in black uniforms arrived and began firing randomly toward the demonstrators.
Arash’s death on Jan. 8 is an example of what witnesses say has been a reality of the country’s latest anti-government protests — bystanders uninvolved in the unrest caught in gunfire, or killed as they tried to flee the chaos.
Reuters was unable to independently verify this account or similar witness reports of deaths during the state’s crackdown on the unrest, and could not determine how many of the thousands killed were bystanders or people merely near the protests when they were shot.
But accounts from families and witnesses suggest that indiscriminate force used by security forces to crush the unrest killed many civilians who were not participating, leaving relatives to scour hospitals, morgues, and detention centers for answers.
UNLAWFUL LETHAL FORCE USED IN IRAN, AMNESTY REPORTS
Officials in Iran could not be reached for comment about the deaths described in this story as authorities began blocking telephone lines and internet connections from Jan. 8, when protests spread nationwide. From Jan. 13, Iranians have been able to make outgoing international phone calls, while calls into the country remain blocked.
There was no immediate response to requests for comment sent to the Iranian UN missions in Geneva and New York.
Authorities have blamed the unrest and deaths on “terrorists and rioters” backed by exiled opponents and foreign adversaries, the United States and Israel. State TV aired footage of burned police and government buildings, mosques and smashed banks it said had been attacked by “terrorists and rioters.”
The US-based HRANA rights group said it has so far verified 4,519 unrest-linked deaths, including 4,251 protesters, 197 security personnel, 35 people aged under 18 and 38 bystanders who it says were neither protesters nor security personnel.
HRANA has 9,049 additional deaths under review. An Iranian official told Reuters the confirmed death toll until Sunday was more than 5,000, including 500 members of the security forces.
The protests began on Dec. 28 as modest demonstrations in Tehran’s Grand Bazaar over economic hardship and quickly spread nationwide.
INDISCRIMINATE FIRE REPORTED BY WITNESSES
Within days crowds in cities and towns were calling for an end to clerical rule, and state TV showed footage of what it called “rioters” burning images of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
Amnesty International said in a report it had documented security forces positioned on streets, rooftops — including those of residential buildings, mosques, and police stations — repeatedly firing rifles and shotguns loaded with metal pellets, often aiming at unarmed individuals’ heads and torsos.
It said the evidence points to a coordinated nationwide escalation in the security forces’ unlawful use of lethal force against mostly peaceful protesters and bystanders since the evening of Jan. 8.
The unrest has posed one of the gravest threats to Iran’s clerical establishment in years, with US President Donald Trump repeatedly threatening to intervene if protesters continued to be killed on the streets or were executed.
Iran‘s judiciary has indicated that execution of those detained during protests may go ahead.
Numerous accounts from inside Iran, including from people who have since left the country, said security forces fired live ammunition indiscriminately, turning streets — particularly on Ja. 8 and 9 — into what witnesses likened to war zones.
Among the victims was Fariba, a 16-year-old girl described by her mother, Manijeh, as curious and full of life.
On a night when she went with her mother to a nearby square simply to observe, security forces on motorcycles attacked the protesters.
‘THEY KILLED MY CHILD,’ SAYS MOTHER OF 16-YEAR-OLD
Manijeh clutched her daughter’s hand and sought shelter behind a parked car amid the gunfire. In the ensuing panic, she lost her grip and mother and daughter became separated.
“I searched street after street, screaming her name,” Manijeh recounted, sobbing over the phone. “She was gone.”
That night, the family scoured police stations and hospitals. They found Fariba two days later in a black body bag inside the Kahrizak Forensic Medical Center in south Tehran, shot in the heart, her body cold.
Officials told the family that “terrorists” had killed her.
“No,” her mother said. “I was there that night. The security forces opened fire on people. They killed my child.”
Videos on social media showed footage of families searching for their relatives among hundreds of body bags in morgues and the Kahrizak Center. Reuters verified the location of the videos as Kahrizak Center, although the identity of the people and the date when the videos were filmed could not be verified.
A physician who left Iran on Jan. 14 said hospitals were overwhelmed with gunshot victims. In Karaj, west of Tehran, a resident described security forces deploying automatic rifles against protesters and bystanders on Jan. 8.
Similar accounts emerged from the western city of Kermanshah, where Revolutionary Guards used armored vehicles and tanks to contain demonstrations.
‘THEY SMASHED DOORS, CURSING,’ SAYS BROTHER OF MISSING WOMAN
In Isfahan, the brother of a 43-year-old man recounted holding his sibling’s blood-soaked body after security forces shot him. “His only act was sheltering teenage protesters fleeing into his shop,” said Masoud, 38, by telephone.
Like other Iranians interviewed for this story, Masoud asked for his full name to be withheld for fear of reprisals.
In another case, the family of Nastaran, a 28-year-old elementary school teacher in Tehran, spent days searching for her after she visited a cousin on Jan. 9 and never returned.
They found her body in a warehouse near Tehran. She had been shot by security forces, said Nastaran’s father.
Authorities allowed retrieval only on condition of burial in the family’s hometown in central Iran and pressured them to blame “terrorists” — a claim the relatives rejected, he said.
Another family in the northern city of Rasht said security forces stormed their apartment after spotting their 33-year-old daughter, Sepideh, watching protests from a window.
“They smashed doors, cursing and yelling. They detained her. We don’t know where she is,” said Morteza, her brother.
“My sister’s two young children cry for her; her husband has been warned of arrest if he keeps searching for her.”
Uncategorized
Trump Warns Hamas: Give Up Weapons or Be ‘Blown Away’
Palestinian Hamas terrorists stand guard at a site as Hamas says it continues to search for the bodies of deceased hostages, in Beit Lahiya in the northern Gaza Strip, Dec. 3, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Stringer
US President Donald Trump on Wednesday warned Hamas will be “blown away” if the Palestinian terrorist group doesn’t agree to disarm in accordance with his 20-point peace plan to end the war in Gaza.
It should be clear within three weeks whether Hamas will agree to give up its weapons, Trump added.
“That’s what they agreed to. They’ve got to do it. And we’re going to know … over the next two or three days — certainly over the next three weeks — whether or not they’re going to do it,” he said in a question-and-answer session following his speech at the World Economic Forum in Davos.
“If they don’t do it, they’ll be blown away very quickly. They’ll be blown away, Trump added.
His comments came one week after US special envoy Steve Witkoff announced the launch of phase two of Trump’s plan to end the conflict in Gaza, describing the process as “moving from ceasefire to demilitarization, technocratic governance, and reconstruction.”
Witkoff also warned Hamas, the Palestinian terrorist group that ruled Gaza before the war and still controls nearly half the enclave’s territory, to remain committed to the terms of the agreement.
“Phase Two establishes a transitional technocratic Palestinian administration in Gaza, the National Committee for the Administration of Gaza (NCAG), and begins the full demilitarization and reconstruction of Gaza, primarily the disarmament of all unauthorized personnel,” Witkoff posted on social media. “The US expects Hamas to comply fully with its obligations, including the immediate return of the final deceased hostage. Failure to do so will bring serious consequences.”
Under phase one of Trump’s peace plan, a ceasefire took effect and Hamas was required to release all remaining hostages, both living and deceased, who were kidnapped by Hamas-led Palestinian terrorists during the group’s invasion of and massacre across southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023.
Everyone was released except for Master Sgt. Ran Gvili, the last remaining slain hostage in Gaza. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reportedly spoke last week with Gvili’s parents, who have adamantly opposed moving to the second phase of Trump’s plan until their son’s body is returned.
Gvili’s return “is at the top of Israel’s priorities,” Netanyahu’s office said in a statement, according to the Times of Israel. “Hamas is required to comply with the terms of the agreement and make a 100% effort to return all fallen hostages, until the very last one — Ran Gvili, a hero of Israel.”
In exchange for Hamas’s releasing nearly all the hostages, Israel freed thousands of Palestinian prisoners, including many serving life sentences for terrorism, and partially withdrew its military forces in Gaza to a newly drawn “Yellow Line,” roughly dividing the enclave between east and west.
Currently, the Israeli military controls 58 percent of Gaza’s territory, and Hamas has moved to reestablish control over the rest of the enclave. However, most of the Gazan population is located in the Hamas-controlled portion, where the Islamist group has been imposing a brutal crackdown.
The second stage of the US-backed peace plan is supposed to establish an interim administrative authority, a so-called “technocratic government,” deploy an International Stabilization Force (ISF) to oversee security in Gaza, and begin the demilitarization of Hamas.
However, Hamas has repeatedly refused to disarm, despite the plan’s call for the terrorist group to do so and relinquish any governing role in Gaza. Further Israeli military withdrawals are tied to Hamas’s disarmament.
Still, the peace plan is moving forward with a transitional technocratic Palestinian administration in Gaza. The newly established 15-member body is led by Ali Shaath, a former deputy minister in the Palestinian Authority.
The Palestinian technocratic body will be overseen by an international Board of Peace to govern Gaza for a transitional period. Nickolay Mladenov, a former UN Middle East envoy, will represent the board on the ground. Other members tapped by Mladenov include people from the private sector and NGOs.
It’s unclear how many total members will be on the Board of Peace. Trump has invited dozens of world leaders to join the US-led initiative, which he would chair and would initially seek to end the conflict in Gaza but then tackle wars elsewhere.
Since the start of the Israel-Hamas ceasefire in October, both sides have repeatedly accused each other of violations. Israel has carried out several operations targeting terrorist operatives as the Palestinian group ramps up efforts to reassert control over the war-torn enclave.
Efforts to advance the ceasefire deal have stalled, with no agreement on crucial next steps, including the start of reconstruction in the enclave and the deployment of the ISF.
The international force is supposed to oversee the Gaza ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, train local security forces, secure Gaza’s borders with Israel and Egypt, and protect civilians while maintaining humanitarian corridors.
Turkey, a longtime backer of Hamas, has been trying to expand its role in Gaza’s post-war reconstruction efforts, which experts warn could potentially strengthen Hamas’s terrorist infrastructure.
While Turkey insists on participating in the ISF, Israeli officials have repeatedly rejected any Turkish involvement in post-war Gaza.
Turkey will have a representative on the Board of Peace.