Connect with us

Uncategorized

American Jews can’t agree about anything — except Iran

Jews around the world have set aside their deep differences and come together in support of the protests in Iran.

“This never happens,” Rachel Sumekh, an Iranian-American nonprofit consultant in Los Angeles, told me. “You never had a coalition this diverse, because people get so stuck in politics.”

It’s easy to see why the protests — which began in response to a plunge in the value of Iran’s currency, and have ballooned into a widespread outpouring of rage at the Iranian regime — have drawn together all parts of the Jewish world. For the left, it’s a human rights struggle; for the right, it’s a chance for the regional balance to reset in favor of Israel.

But it’s difficult to say with certainty that unity between left and right, Zionist and anti-Zionist, will survive the tough decisions the protests will demand.

‘Progressives should care about human rights’

Since the 1979 revolution that brought the religious Islamic mullahs into power, Iranians have seen their rights and freedoms stripped away.

Millions took to the streets in the 2009 Green Movement to dispute a rigged election. Regime forces killed at least 550 protesters during the 2022 “Women, Life, Freedom” marches for women’s rights.

The brutality of the new crackdown has been on full display during the new protests; thousands are feared dead, with accounts of many killed by direct shots to the head. Amid that environment of fear and violence, protesters “deserve the support of progressives,” wrote Peter Beinart, an outspoken anti-Zionist, in his Substack newsletter, “because progressives should care about human rights.”

Many on the left are leery of supporting a cause that may lead to U.S. military intervention — or one they see as covertly backing Israel’s interests.

That may explain the silence of many so-called human rights activists who have stayed mum. But Jews are bucking that trend. “I have anti-Zionist Jewish friends who are posting in support of Iran, even though they know the base doesn’t like it,” said Sumekh.

Beinart, who has written that he “no longer believes in a Jewish state,” reminded his hundreds of thousands of followers of something that, well, should be pretty obvious.

“It’s as wrong to give countries a pass when they brutally violate human rights because they’re anti-American,” he said in a posted video, “as it is to give them a pass when they brutally violate human rights, because they’re pro-American.”

Not ‘death to Israel,’ but ‘long live Iran’

For many Jews, any revolt against Iran’s theocratic government is personal. The majority of the 60,000-odd Jews who lived in Iran at the time of the 1979 revolution fled, settling mostly in Israel and the United States. In both countries, those exiles have become integral to the Jewish community.

Some have family still in Iran, where about 15,000 Jews remain. In sharing their culture, stories and concerns, they have made Iranian freedom a tangible and pressing Jewish cause.

Plus, an overthrow of the regime could be a reason for relief in the Jewish state. The Iranian opposition, said policy analyst Karim Sadjadpour  on the Call Me Back podcast, “is trying to replace, ‘Death to America’ and ‘Death to Israel’ with ‘Long Live Iran.”

The human rights issue matters to the right as well. But Israel’s staunchest supporters are also hoping for the downfall of a regime that has sworn to achieve Israel’s destruction.

Iran has funded the terror groups Hezbollah and Hamas and pursued a missile and nuclear weapons program that threatened and attacked Israel — even at the cost of crippling Iran’s own economy. The regime also funneled funds to Bashar al-Assad’s authoritarian government in Syria, which served as a conduit to supply weapons to Hezbollah.

Republican Jews are saying a successful regime overthrow would expiate the original sin made by Democratic President Jimmy Carter, whom they blame for not supporting the Shah of Iran during the 1979 revolution, which swept the mullahs into power.

President Donald Trump, to them, is the anti-Carter. Trump has publicly supported the protesters, and threatened to use American power to protect them. Trump has not ordered any military intervention, but on Tuesday he posted a message on his Truth Social platform, “KEEP PROTESTING! TAKE OVER YOUR INSTITUTIONS!”

As Elie Cohanim, Trump’s former deputy envoy to combat antisemitism, said on Fox News, Trump is the first president to threaten the Iranian regime that if they kill protesters, “we’re going to hit you hard and we’ll hit you where it hurts.”

‘We actually have the same enemy’

If the U.S. does intervene militarily, the Jewish response is likely to be less unified.

We have been bitterly divided over Iran policy in the past. Slightly more than 60% of American Jews supported the 2015 agreement then-President Barack Obama spearheaded to limit Iran’s nuclear development, but the opposition was organized and vocal, leading to deep fissures in the community.

Those cracks may reappear if America intervenes militarily.

“When the United States gives itself the right to intervene militarily in the internal affairs of another country,” Beinart cautioned, “that emboldens other powers, China and Russia in particular, to do exactly the same thing.”

Yet many liberal American Jews backed Trump’s decision to strike Iranian nuclear facilities in June 2025. Those strikes made “Israel, the Jewish people and the world safer, ”Rabbi Rick Jacobs, the president of the Union for Reform Judaism, told the Forward at the time.

What will decide the extent to which Jews agree on the wisdom of intervention? Probably the duration of any operation; a long-term involvement in Iran would likely be much more controversial than any quick, one-time strike.

A worse outcome, said Sumekh, would be for Trump to attempt to negotiate with the regime, ultimately leaving it in place. The mullahs would likely use negotiations as a way to buy time and reassert control, making waste of the rare opportunity for real change.

It is too early to tell if the courageous Iranians facing bullets and batons will bring down their repressive regime. And should that happy day come to pass, we will surely find ways to argue over who should get credit, who should get blame, and how we can best help a free Iran repair its economy and find stability.

But for now, Jews know that overthrowing the regime is the most important goal. Iranians deserve liberation, and that freedom will be beneficial for the entire Middle East, if not the world.

“Through what’s happening right now, people can finally understand and see the connection between the Iranian people and the Jewish people and the people of Israel,” Natalie Sanandaji, an Iranian-Israeli survivor of the Nova massacre, said in a video posted to X, “They can see that not only are we not enemies, but we actually have the same enemy, the Islamic regime of Iran.”

The post American Jews can’t agree about anything — except Iran appeared first on The Forward.

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Trump’s new Gaza plan marks a radical break from Israeli policy — can it succeed?

The United States has in effect broken with Israeli policy, cleverly engineering the Palestinian Authority’s return to Gaza.

President Donald Trump’s plan for the second stage of the Gaza ceasefire, the launch of which was announced Wednesday, involves the creation of a transitional Palestinian technocratic authority with strong ties to the PA. This collapses fictions Israel has sustained for years: that Gaza can be stabilized without the PA, which was ousted from the territory by Hamas in 2007; that the PA is no better than Hamas; and even that Palestinian governance itself is illegitimate, a belief held by the most extreme Israeli nationalists.

Reality has finally prevailed, and that reality is that the PA, flawed though it is, remains the only Palestinian political body capable of replacing Hamas in Gaza.

The logic expressed by those, like Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who aim to keep the PA out of Gaza, has brought Israel to the brink. Splitting Palestinian governance between Hamas and the PA, long Netanyahu’s strategy, led to unmitigated disaster, and public anger is at a boil.

Which means that the PA must return to Gaza not only for the sake of Palestinians, but also for Israelis. The Zionist project must be steered away from permanent war, international isolation and internal decay. That means finding a way to work toward a sustainable future with the Palestinians — which almost certainly means, in turn, accepting the PA as their legitimate government.

Decades of misleading rhetoric

Since the establishment of a ceasefire, brokered by Trump’s administration, in September, Hamas has reasserted control over large parts of Gaza. Militarily weakened, it survived politically — because Israel still refused to empower any viable Palestinian alternative.

That return to the status quo in many ways serves Netanyahu’s agenda. Keeping Hamas in power allows for a state of permanent emergency and despair about the chances for peace — the very forces that Netanyahu has, for decades, successfully turned into political capital. “There is no difference between the PA and Hamas” became a mantra — as if a political bureaucracy and a theocratic militia that massacres civilians and rejects coexistence on principle could be legitimately compared.

Now, as long as Hamas rules Gaza, its very presence constitutes an emergency narrative that Netanyahu can use to delay the accountability over his responsibility for Oct. 7: Wartime is no time for politics.

The Palestinian Authority, by contrast, has been treated as dangerous because it represents a measure of pragmatism.

The PA, ineffective as it has been, could be the basis of a functional political framework that would force Israel to confront the need for separation from the Palestinians, real borders, and eventual Palestinian statehood. That’s especially true because there’s the potential for actual peace with a Palestine run by the PA, which already coordinates with Israel at enormous political cost in the West Bank, where its security forces arrest militants and dismantle extremist cells.

New governance for Gaza

The technocratic committee put forward to govern Gaza under Trump’s second phase plan is formally nonpartisan, but its personnel and legitimacy are largely drawn from the ranks of the PA, with Ali Shaath, a former PA deputy minister, set to lead the effort. Others come from the same institutional ecosystem, because there is simply no other reservoir of Palestinian administrative experience. The PA has publicly endorsed the framework. Israel must now also meet its own obligations under the Trump plan — no matter how distasteful its leaders might find the plan’s endorsement of the PA to be.

That means, chiefly, that Israel must declare clearly that once Gaza is stabilized by the technocratic committee, it is prepared to enter negotiations toward a Palestinian state, with final borders to be determined later. Israel can openly state its intention to retain major settlement blocs in the West Bank and seek long-term security arrangements in the Jordan Valley. But it should also affirm in principle its readiness to recognize a Palestinian state and guarantee access arrangements in Jerusalem.

These statements would not resolve the conflict, by any means. But they would go some way toward restoring credibility.

To get there, Hamas must surrender its weapons in Gaza, with an international stabilization force present to keep the peace. The best chance for disarmament is if the weapons are handed to Palestinians. By default, the PA security forces will be the best candidates for the job, as the new technocratic government lacks a security arm. Hamas’s senior leadership should probably be allowed to exit into exile.

To build a Palestinian consensus in this direction, regional powers — Qatar, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Turkey — must make reconstruction conditional on disarmament. The choice must be unmistakable: real recovery without any trace of a Hamas militia – or years in tent cities.

If all this is achieved, the real work begins. Areas under the new authority must visibly improve. Adequate housing, electricity, water, education, employment, and free movement must return in ways Palestinians can measure. The comparison with Hamas rule must be obvious.

Reformations in the PA — and Israel

Such a process with the PA should also be made conditional.

As existing U.S. proposals suggest, the PA must be required to undertake concrete reforms, including by overhauling educational materials that appear to condone violence against Israelis and ending payments to the families of imprisoned militants.

Senior PA officials have already signaled willingness to move on both fronts. These are achievable changes,

The payoff would be immense, potentially including normalization with Saudi Arabia, broader reconciliation of Israel the Arab and Muslim worlds, the gradual erosion of the global delegitimization campaign against Israel, and renewed international cooperation — especially in confronting Iran’s nuclear program, ballistic missiles, and regional militias. In time, Zionism would once again be seen as a serious national project capable of difficult, mature decisions.

The catch: Little of this is likely to happen under the current Israeli government.

That is the central truth of 2026, an election year: a change of leadership in Israel is not optional for anyone who wants a better future. The disaster of the Oct. 7, 2023 attack was the culmination of years of strategic failure, ideological paralysis, and the reckless empowerment of Hamas. This is what happens when complacent societies repeatedly elevate unfit leadership in the face of existential danger.

So Israelis must decide: will they support a government that thrives on permanent conflict, or endorse the possibility of peace?

The post Trump’s new Gaza plan marks a radical break from Israeli policy — can it succeed? appeared first on The Forward.

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

California’s Gavin Newsom Proposes Budget Increase for State Universities Amid Federal Funding Threats

California Gov. Gavin Newsom in Sacramento, California, US, on Aug. 8, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Carlos Barria

California Gov. Gavin Newsom, a rumored potential candidate for US president in 2028, has proposed hundreds of millions of dollars in new funds for state universities amid the Trump administration’s policy of canceling federal grants and contracts held by institutions which it accuses of failing to combat campus antisemitism.

Newsom previously sought to cut funding to the University of California (UC) and California State University (CSU) by 8 percent during the 2025-2025 fiscal year (FY), before dropping that figure to 3 percent. Then on Friday, the governor proposed a new budget which would increase next year’s appropriation by $350.6 million for UC and $365.7 million for CSU, raising the state’s general fund for the schools to $5.3 billion and $5.6 billion, respectively.

“The budget introduced today by Gov. Newsom continues to provide critical support for the university and our students,” UC president James B. Milliken said in a statement responding to the news. “State support is more important than ever, as we face tremendous financial pressures stemming from rising costs and unprecedented federal actions. UC campuses rely on funding stability to serve students and maintain the academic and research excellence that has made UC the world’s greatest research university.”

He added, “An investment in UC is an investment in California’s future. I look forward to our ongoing partnership with Gov. Newsom and the legislature to ensure that our students have what they need to succeed at UC and beyond.”

The move, even as it defers $129.7 million for UC and $143.8 million for CSU to a later date, gives the schools breathing room as they fear the Trump’s administration’s confiscation of funds. Last year, for example, the administration impounded $250 million from the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA).

US President Donald Trump ordered the money canceled in August after determining that the school exposed Jewish students to discrimination by refusing to intervene when civil rights violations transpired or failing to correct a hostile environment after the fact. He ordered the move even after UCLA agreed to donate $2.33 million to a consortium of Jewish civil rights organizations to resolve an antisemitism complaint filed by three students and an employee.

UCLA was sued and excoriated by the public over its handling of a “Gaza Solidarity Encampment” that an anti-Zionist student group established on campus in the final weeks of the 2024 spring semester. Witnesses said that it was a source of antisemitism from the moment it became active, and according to the lawsuits, students there chanted “death to the Jews,” set up illegal checkpoints through which no one could pass unless they denounced Israel, and ordered campus security assigned there by the university to ensure that no Jews entered it.

Many antisemitic incidents occurred at UCLA before the institution was ultimately sued and placed it in the crosshairs of the Trump administration.

Just five days after Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, massacre across southern Israel, as previously reported by The Algemeiner, anti-Zionist protesters chanted “Itbah El Yahud” at Bruin Plaza, which means “slaughter the Jews” in Arabic. Other incidents included someone’s tearing a chapter page out of Philip Roth’s 2004 novel The Plot Against America, titled “Loudmouth Jew,” and leaving it outside the home of a UCLA faculty member, as well as Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) staging a disturbing demonstration in which its members cudgeled a piñata, to which a picture of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s face was glued, while shouting “beat the Jew.”

On the same day that UCLA settled the suit, the US Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division ruled that UCLA’s response to antisemitic incidents constituted violations of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the US Constitution and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act.

“Our investigation into the University of California system has found concerning evidence of systemic antisemitism at UCLA that demands severe accountability from the institution,” Attorney General Pamela Bondi said in a statement at the time. “This disgusting breach of civil rights against students will not stand: the [Department of Justice] will force UCLA to pay a heavy price for putting Jewish Americans at risk and continue our ongoing investigations into other campuses in the UC system.”

Newsom has positioned himself as an ally of higher education throughout its clash with Trump. In August, he demanded that Harvard University president Alan Garber resign rather than reach a deal with the Trump administration that would restore federal funding to Harvard in exchange for the school’s agreeing to conservative demands for addressing campus antisemitism and shuttering diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs.

“You don’t work with Donald Trump — only FOR Donald Trump,” Newsom protested, writing on the X social media platform. “Looks like Harvard has chosen to surrender. Alan Garber must resign. An absolute failure of leadership that will have demonstrable impacts to higher education across our country. He should be ashamed.”

He added, “California will never bend the knee.”

Newsom had days earlier criticized Trump’s effort to combat antisemitism and reform higher education, denouncing it as “disgusting political extortion.”

Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Ex-Yale Law School Professor Dismisses Iran Protests Over ‘Zionist’ Backing, Justifies Regime Oppression

Protesters march in downtown Tehran, Iran, Dec. 29, 2025. Photo: Screenshot

A former Yale University professor who was fired over her connection to a fundraising front for the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, a US-designated terrorist organization, has drawn scrutiny again for dismissing anti-regime protests in Iran due to “Zionist endorsement,” defending Tehran’s crackdown on dissent, and castigating US law enforcement.

“In the imperial countries, the police function as the domestic arm of the empire,” Helyeh Doutaghi wrote in an essay published by the far-left Progressive International on Jan. 6. “They suppress dissent, criminalize resistance, and enforce accumulation through violence particularly against Black, Indigenous, and other Peoples of Color.”

Doutaghi then claimed that law enforcement in New Haven, Connecticut, the location of Yale, is “trained by the Israeli military” and that “policing is inseparable from imperial colonial violence.”

In contrast, she argued, Iran’s “Law Enforcement Command,” notorious for atrocities such as killing a young woman who was in custody for not wearing a head covering in accordance with the country’s Islamic dress code, “exists within a radically difference context,” having faced “sustained attempts at regime change operations and color revolution tactics.”

Doutaghi appears to see Jewish maneuvering behind the Iranian people’s efforts to resist their government’s theocratic, authoritarian rule. She argued that the “Woman, Life, Freedom” protests of 2022, which erupted in the wake of the regime’s killing of 22-year-old Mahsa Amini, were commandeered by “Zionist endorsement, coordinated diasporic networks, and sustained media warfare” to achieve “regime change.”

The article came out as the Iranian regime began cracking down on a new round of anti-government protests with an unprecedented scale of violence, reportedly killing thousands of demonstrators over the past two weeks.

In a viral post, Paul Mason, contributing editor for The New World, said Doutaghi’s essay represents the “logic of decolonization’ theory,” in which, he added, “Western cops bad; Iranian cops good. Woman rights good — but not if it leads to revolution in Iran.”

Yale Law School (YLS) fired Doutaghi in March after independently verifying a report by Jewish Onliner which exposed her membership in Samidoun, which identifies itself as a “Palestinian prisoner solidarity network.”

Founded in 2011 in the Canadian province of British Columbia, Samidoun is a “front group” for the PFLP — which gained infamy in the 20th century for perpetrating a series of airplane hijackings — according to the US and Canadian governments. The US and Canada each imposed sanctions on Samidoun in October 2024, labeling the organization a “sham charity” and accusing it of fundraising for designated terrorist groups such as PFLP.

Samidoun also described the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, invasion of and massacre across southern Israel as “a brave and heroic operation.”

Yale noted that Doutaghi was publicly listed on Samidoun’s website as a member.

Doutaghi denounced the inculpatory facts uncovered by the university as “fabricated claims” and lodged counteraccusations which blamed her being outed on Zionists.

“Yale has engaged in bad faith throughout this ‘process,” she wrote in a statement posted on X after being placed on leave. “YLS’s singular concern with maintaining the approval of the Zionist backers who bankroll their complicity in genocide led the organization to pressure me into an interrogation that I had every reason to believe was designed not to uncover the truth, but to justify a predetermined outcome.”

She continued, “What is clear is that YLS actions constitute a blatant act of retaliation against Palestinian solidarity — a violation of my constitutional rights, free speech, academic freedom, and fundamental due process rights. I am being targeted for one reason alone: for speaking the truth about the genocide of the Palestinian people that Yale University is complicit in.”

Doutaghi is another example of the higher education establishment’s embrace of scholars who promote anti-Israel animus, an issue that is driving the campus antisemitism crisis, according to a recent survey conducted by the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) and the Academic Engagement Network (AEN).

Fifty percent of survey respondents said that anti-Zionist faculty have established de facto, or “shadow,” boycotts of Israel on campus even in the absence of formal declaration or recognition of one by the administration. Among those who reported the presence of such a boycott, 55 percent noted that departments avoid co-sponsoring events with Jewish or pro-Israel groups and 29.5 percent said this policy is also subtly enacted by sabotaging negotiations for partnerships with Israeli institutions. All the while, such faculty fostered an environment in which Jewish professors were “maligned, professionally isolated, and in severe cases, doxxed or harassed” as they assumed the right to determine for their Jewish colleagues what constitutes antisemitism.

Meanwhile, the faculty’s activism provided an academic pretext for the relentless wave of antisemitic incidents of discrimination and harassment which pro-Hamas activists perpetrated against Jewish and Israeli members of campus communities following the Hamas-led Oct. 7, 2023, massacre across southern Israel, the groups said.

Another faculty source of campus antisemitism is the Faculty and Staff for Justice (FSJP) group.

FSJP is a spinoff of Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP), a group with links to Islamist terrorist organizations. FSJP chapters have been cropping up at colleges since the Oct. 7 atrocities, and throughout the 2023-2024 academic year, its members, which include faculty employed by the most elite US colleges, fostered campus unrest, circulated antisemitic cartoons, and advocated severing ties with Israeli companies and institutions of higher education.

In September 2024, AMCHA Initiative, a higher education watchdog, published a study offering evidence that FSJP inspired antisemitic hate crimes, anti-Israel divestment measures, and the collapse of discipline and order on college campuses. Using data analysis, AMCHA found a correlation between a school’s hosting an FSJP chapter and anti-Zionist and antisemitic activity. For example, the researchers found that the presence of FSJP on college campuses increased by seven times “the likelihood of physical assaults and Jewish students” and increased by three times the chance that a Jewish student would be subject to threats of violence and death.

Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.

Continue Reading

Copyright © 2017 - 2023 Jewish Post & News