Uncategorized
‘Dialogue’ isn’t enough to fix what ails campuses. Jewish students like us need more.
The past two years have been particularly challenging for Jewish college students. Our campuses, which should be places of curiosity and critical exchange, have too often become arenas of polarization. As upperclassmen, Ari at Harvard and Maya at McGill, we have watched peers feel trapped between two extremes: to take a strident side on nuanced conflicts, or to stay silent and withdraw from the conversation all together. Charlie Kirk’s recent assassination has further intensified the polarizing atmosphere. Frighteningly, some have seen his death as proof that civil discourse and free speech are impossible to achieve.
For students like us who care deeply about pluralism, this climate has felt especially isolating.
Even before Kirk’s assassination a number of university administrators were calling for pluralism and increasing investments in dialogue training. In fact, Barnard College President Laura Ann Rosenbury recently wrote an op-ed in the New York Times describing her college’s efforts to offer “courses and programs on civil discourse and dialogue.” While we’re heartened by this trend, we also recognize this isn’t the norm across universities and we’ve also come to see its limits. A mandatory workshop on “how to speak to one another” may help students avoid pitfalls but skills alone are not enough to solve the problem of polarization.
What’s missing on campuses across the country are sustained spaces where students learn to hold disagreement within a community. Over the past year, both of us have found great comfort in Jewish learning, through which we are reminded that intellectual and communal life can be most rich and vibrant when practicing the ethic of pluralism.
Jewish life has always included debate, diversity, and dialogue. The Talmud preserves arguments not for their resolution, but because the disagreements themselves are valuable. As our sages put it, a dispute for the sake of heaven is one that sustains community even when consensus is impossible. Disagreement can be a bond, not a rupture.
What Jewish wisdom has helped us recognize is that the key to pluralism is prioritizing relationships over the need to be right. We find ourselves concerned that this message is getting lost in the rhetoric on campus and in Jewish spaces when, all too often, the response to disagreement is to throw more “facts” at the other side, to win the debate.
Last school year, we each attempted the Sisyphean task of getting those who disagree on campus into one room to no avail. It was exhausting. No matter how close we got to encouraging open conversations, at the last moment, a social media post, national or international news event or protest would dissuade participants that such a conversation was desirable or even worthwhile. The trauma and upheaval of the Israel-Hamas war further enhanced a sense of fear, grief, alienation and anger among and between our Jewish peers.
What renewed our spirits and resolve was jointly participating in a program created for Jewish college students called Campus Commons. The experience of being in a mixed group of Jewish students from across North America — politically and religiously — was inspiring and enlivening, creating a trusting community with peers who, back on our college campuses, circulate in different spheres from ours. It meant that when tensions naturally surfaced – not through force or as an illustrative exercise — they were met with care rather than defensiveness.
Being in a pluralistic Jewish community and studying Jewish texts together gave us the courage and self-awareness to examine our own personal barriers in conversation. For the first time in a long time, we felt able to express pain without being dismissed or misunderstood.
College campuses have the potential to, once again, become spaces where students can cultivate meaningful relationships before diving into debate. This is especially true of Jewish spaces on campus which are in desperate need of a relationship reset. More resources should be given to trusted campus professionals and peer leaders who can serve as relationship-builders on campus and are best positioned to foster pluralism in these environments. This includes Jewish professionals and Jewish student leaders, who are uniquely situated to cultivate pluralistic environments and initiatives, both within the Jewish community and beyond it.
At Harvard Hillel, Ari started the “Oy-ntology Club,” a Friday-morning bagels-and-texts group on Jewish ethics. The series opened with thorny but relatable topics — how to hold close friends accountable without becoming responsible for them — and, after a few months of steady meetings and goodwill, turned to the morality of the Israel-Hamas war. This format worked and was rooted in two practices gleaned from the Campus Commons experience: 1) chevruta, or paired Jewish study, lets students meet through a shared text, giving a common entry point and slowing reactive takes; 2) beginning on common ground and, as trust builds, easing into harder questions. Regardless of the format, technology-free and off-the-record spaces do make a difference. When students can try on views without fearing they’ll be broadcast online, diversity in perspective and the potential to become friends is much easier to come by.
We hope university administrators and community leaders will go beyond “dialogue skills,” giving students opportunities to deepen relationships and build community. Our participation in a Jewish program that prioritizes pluralism and exposed us to Jewish learning related to the values of pluralism, restored our hope that things can be different; we can act together without needing to think alike.
—
The post ‘Dialogue’ isn’t enough to fix what ails campuses. Jewish students like us need more. appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Herzog Says Wellbeing of Israelis His Only Concern in Deal With Netanyahu’s ‘Extraordinary’ Pardon Request
Israeli President Isaac Herzog speaks during a press conference with Latvian President Edgars Rinkevics in Riga, Latvia, Aug. 5, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Ints Kalnins
i24 News – In an interview with Politico published on Saturday, Israeli President Isaac Herzog remained tight-lipped on whether he intended to grant Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s “extraordinary” pardon request, saying that his decision will be motivated by what’s best for Israel.
“There is a process which goes through the Justice Ministry and my legal adviser and so on. This is certainly an extraordinary request and above all when dealing with it I will consider what is the best interest of the Israeli people,” Herzog said. “The well-being of the Israeli people is my first, second and third priority.”
Asked specifically about President Donald Trump’s request, Herzog said “I respect President Trump’s friendship and his opinion,” adding, “Israel, naturally, is a sovereign country.”
Herzog addressed a wide range of topics in the interview, including the US-Israel ties and the shifts in public opinion on Israel.
“One has to remember that the fountains of America, of American life, are based on biblical values, just like ours. And therefore, I believe that the underlying fountain that we all drink from is the same,” he said. “However, I am following very closely the trends that I see in the American public eye and the attitude, especially of young people, on Israel.”
“It comes from TikTok,” he said of the torrent of hostility toward Israel that has engulf swathes of U.S. opinion since the October 7 massacre and the subsequent Gaza war, “from a very shallow discourse of the current situation, pictures or viewpoints, and doesn’t judge from the big picture, which is, is Israel a strategic ally? Yes. Is Israel contributing to American national interests, security interests? Absolutely yes. Is Israel a beacon of democracy in the Middle East? Absolutely yes.”
Uncategorized
Syria’s Sharaa Charges Israel ‘Exports Its Crises to Other Countries’
FILE PHOTO: Syria’s President Ahmed al-Sharaa addresses the 80th United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) at the U.N. headquarters in New York, U.S., September 24, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Shannon Stapleton/File Photo
i24 News – Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa on Saturday escalated his messaging against Israel at the Doha forum.
“Israel is working to export its own crises to other countries and escape accountability for the massacres it committed in the Gaza Strip, justifying everything with security concerns,” he said.
“Meanwhile, Syria, since its liberation, has sent positive messages aimed at establishing the foundations of regional stability.
“Israel has responded to Syria with extreme violence, launching over 1,000 airstrikes and carrying out 400 incursions into its territory. The latest of these attacks was the massacre it perpetrated in the town of Beit Jinn in the Damascus countryside, which claimed dozens of lives.
“We are working with influential countries worldwide to pressure Israel to withdraw from the territories it occupied after December 8, 2014, and all countries support this demand.
“Syria insists on Israel’s adherence to the 1974 Disengagement Agreement. The demand for a demilitarized zone raises many questions. Who will protect this zone if there is no Syrian army presence?
“Any agreement must guarantee Syria’s interests, as it is Syria that is subjected to Israeli attacks. So, who should be demanding a buffer zone and withdrawal?”
Uncategorized
Turkey’s Fidan: Gaza Governance Must Precede Hamas Disarmament in Ceasefire Deal
Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan attends a press conference following a meeting with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov in Moscow, Russia, May 27, 2025. Photo: Pavel Bednyakov/Pool via REUTERS
Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan told Reuters on Saturday that not advancing the US-backed Gaza ceasefire plan to its next stage would be a “huge failure” for the world and Washington, noting that President Donald Trump had personally led the push.
In an interview on the sidelines of the Doha Forum, Fidan said a credible Palestinian civil administration and a vetted, trained police force needed to be in place to allow Hamas to disarm, and that the group was prepared to hand over control of the enclave.
“First of all, we need to see that the Palestinian committee of technical people are taking over the administration of Gaza, then we need to see that the police force is being formed to police Gaza – again, by the Palestinians, not Hamas.”
NATO member Turkey has been one of the most vocal critics of Israel’s assault on Gaza. It played a key role in brokering the ceasefire deal, signing the agreement as a guarantor. It has repeatedly expressed its willingness to join efforts to monitor the accord’s implementation, a move Israel strongly opposes.
Talks to advance the next phase of President Trump’s plan to end the two-year conflict in Gaza are continuing.
The plan envisages an interim technocratic Palestinian administration in the enclave, overseen by an international “board of peace” and supported by a multinational security force. Negotiations over the composition and mandate of that force have proven particularly difficult.
Fidan said the Gaza police force would be backed by the international stabilisation force. He added that Washington was pressing Israel over Turkey’s bid to join the force, to which it has voiced readiness to deploy troops if needed.
FIDAN SAYS KURDISH SDF IN SYRIA NOT WILLING TO INTEGRATE
Asked about a landmark deal in March in which the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces and Damascus agreed that the SDF would be integrated into Syria’s state structures, Fidan said signals from the SDF showed it had “no intention” of honouring the accord, and was instead seeking to sidestep it.
Ankara, which considers the SDF a terrorist organisation, has threatened military action if it does not comply, setting a deadline of the end of the year.
“I think they (SDF) should understand that the command and control should come from one place,” Fidan added. “There can be no two armies in any given country. So there can only be one army, one command structure … But in local administration, they can reach a different settlement and different understandings.”
Almost a year after the fall of president Bashar al-Assad, Fidan said some issues of minority rights were unresolved, insisting that Turkey’s backing of the new Syrian government was not a “blank cheque” to oppress any groups.
He said Damascus was taking steps toward national unity, but that Israeli “destabilisation policies” were the chief obstacle.
Israel has frequently struck southwestern Syria this year, citing threats from militant groups and the need to protect the Druze community near the frontier. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Tuesday he expected Syria to establish a demilitarised buffer zone from Damascus to the border.
TURKEY: U.S. COULD REMOVE SANCTIONS ‘VERY SOON’
Fidan also said Washington’s initial 28-point plan to end the Russia-Ukraine war was just a “starting point,” and that it was now evolving in a new format. He said mediation by US officials was “on the right path.”
“I just hope that nobody leaves the table and the Americans are not frustrated, because sometimes the mediators can be frustrated if they don’t see enough encouragement from both sides.”
Asked about efforts to lift US sanctions imposed in 2020 over Ankara’s purchase of Russian S-400 air defense systems, he said both sides were working on it, adding: “I believe we’ll soon find a way to remove that obstacle.”