Uncategorized
Eli Rosenbaum takes skills honed Nazi-hunting to investigating war crimes in Ukraine
WASHINGTON (JTA) –– During the 35 years Eli Rosenbaum spent hunting Nazis, he always looked up to his forebears in the profession. But it was only recently, as he ventured into Ukraine to track down Russian war criminals, that he felt a personal connection with the investigators who pursued Adolf Hitler’s henchmen in the years following World War II.
For the first time in his career, Rosenbaum was seeking evidence of crimes as soon as, or almost as soon as, they were committed.
“I’m accustomed to working on atrocity crimes when the conflict is over — World War II, Rwanda, Bosnia, Guatemala, et cetera,” he told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency recently. “But in this case, the atrocities are being committed every day.”
Rosenbaum said he has been working “if not 24/7, 20/7” since June, when Merrick Garland, the Jewish U.S. attorney-general, named him to lead the Justice Department’s War Crimes Accountability Team in Ukraine. Rosenbaum had previously spent the bulk of his career in the Justice Department’s Office of Special Investigations, which he directed from 1995 to 2010. The OSI tracked down and deported 70 Nazis hiding in the United States. In 2004, it expanded its purview to track down war criminals from other conflicts who had entered the United States.
Rosenbaum’s current team, he said in congressional testimony in September, “provides Ukrainian authorities with wide-ranging technical assistance, including operational assistance and advice regarding criminal prosecutions, evidence collection, forensics, and relevant legal analysis.”
Rosenbaum rattles off names and events in the evolution of war crimes prosecution in a way that sends a listener scrambling to a search engine. He’s been a war crimes geek since college, when he took a film course and a professor screened Leni Riefenstahl’s Nazi propaganda film, “Triumph of the Will.”
Rosenbaum told his parents about the movie. His father, Irving, a refugee from Nazi Germany who enlisted in the U.S. Army, had been tapped to interrogate Nazis and their enablers after the war because he spoke German.
“I mentioned to my dad that I was taking this course and we had just seen this film. And my father said, ‘Oh, Leni Riefenstahl. I questioned her after the war.’ I [said], ‘Oh, my God. Really?’”
Rosenbaum recalls his father responding, “Yeah, and I have the report on it. Might your professor want to see it?”
As a student at Harvard Law School, Rosenbaum interned in 1979 for the then-just-established OSI, where he spent the next three decades. Garland, in naming Rosenbaum, said that made him a natural fit for the Ukraine job, noting at the time Rosenbaum’s experience in coordinating among different U.S. government departments.
Describing his work to JTA, Rosenbaum repeatedly circled back to the pioneers of war crimes prosecution, among them, Aron Trainin, the Soviet Jewish scholar, and Robert Jackson, the U.S. Supreme Court justice who established the framework for prosecuting Nazis for the “crime of aggression” at the Nuremberg trials, a concept unknown until then.
The relevance of their theories persists, he said, because Russia is not a signatory to the agreement that established the International Criminal Court, making it difficult to prosecute Russians in that body. Instead, Ukraine wants to set up a special tribunal to try Russians, modeling it on the proceedings at Nuremberg.
“We look to Nuremberg routinely, it is the mother of all trials for international crimes,” Rosenbaum said. “It’s in many ways the origin of international criminal law.”
Rosenbaum feels the “crime of aggression” is particularly relevant in the Ukraine case because Russia’s invasion was unprovoked. He described how the “crime of aggression” became, with President Harry Truman’s blessing, part of the canon in international law enshrined in the principles framing the Nuremberg trial, and then in the United Nations charter.
Rosenbaum is awed by Jackson and his intellectual journey.
“There’s an amazing letter that he wrote to Harry Truman, which I just reread the other day, in the course of my Ukraine work, in which he explains to the president why … there’s no precedent for prosecuting aggression. In the old days, this was how nations behaved. They attacked one another and, under international law, they were considered to have equal standing,” Rosenbaum said. “So [Jackson] said that had to end, and he persuaded President Truman, and now we have that crime in international law.”
Rosenbaum says Ukraine proves Jackson’s prescience. He quoted Jackson’s opening statement at the Nuremberg trials: “What makes this inquest significant is that these prisoners represent sinister influences that will lurk in the world long after their bodies have returned to dust.”
Rosenbaum, like Jackson before him, is appealing to the U.S. government to expand its capacity to prosecute war crimes. In his congressional testimony, Rosenbaum described one area of frustration: Unlike crimes of genocide, war crimes must have a U.S. party (as perpetrator or victim) to be prosecutable in a U.S. court.
Eli Rosenbaum, director of the Human Rights Enforcement Strategy and Policy and counselor for War Crimes Accountability at the US Department of Justice, testifies about the war in Ukraine during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on “From Nuremberg to Ukraine: Accountability for War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity,” Sept. 28, 2022. (Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty Images)
“This means that if a war criminal from the current conflict in Ukraine were, for example, to come to the United States today and were subsequently identified, our war crimes statute would not apply, thus potentially allowing that war criminal and others to walk the streets of our country without fear of prosecution,” Rosenbaum said in his congressional testimony.
Another parallel with World War II that has surprised Rosenbaum is that he is getting reports from survivors of Russian atrocities who are gathering evidence in real time. He mentioned two men he admires: Rudolf Vrba and Alfred Wetzler, Slovak Jews who fled Auschwitz and were the first to describe, in a detailed report, the mechanics of the Nazi genocide to the outside world.
“I got to meet Rudolf Vrba, who was a witness for [the OSI] in our very first case that was going to trial — eventually it didn’t go to trial, the defendant gave up — but it was an Auschwitz case in Chicago, and Rudolf came out there,” Rosenbaum said. “It’s just amazing that we have his analogs in people who are gathering evidence, people are escaping from Russian captivity.”
Another pair of Nuremberg trials-era researchers that Rosenbaum names as relevant again are Budd and Stuart Schulberg, Jewish brothers who worked for the OSS, the predecessor to the CIA under legendary Hollywood director John Ford. The brothers tracked down films of atrocities that the Nazis themselves had produced, which the Schulbergs then compiled for presentation at the trials. (Budd Schulberg went on to be a celebrated novelist and screenwriter.)
Rosenbaum is a contributing expert to a just-released hour-long documentary on the brothers, titled “Filmmakers for the Prosecution.”
“The Schulberg brothers really pioneered something that’s extremely important in the history of law enforcement and accountability in courts, [which] is something we take for granted here in the 21st century, and that is the presentation of full-motion film [and] video evidence in courts of law,” he said.
Such evidence-gathering is happening today in Ukraine as well, Rosenbaum said.
“The Ukrainian authorities with which we work very closely have a website onto which the public or to which the public can upload their own videos,” he said. “And now that everybody who has a cell phone, has a video camera…so much evidence of the aftermath of atrocities and even the perpetration of atrocities has been captured via moving images.,”
He says he has been rattled at times by researching war crimes as they happen, especially during his visits to Ukraine.
“It was an unforgettably moving experience to meet our colleagues in the middle of a war in Ukraine,” he said. “One of the senior prosecutors was actually in his military fatigues, because he had taken off briefly from his unit for this meeting, and then he went right back.”
—
The post Eli Rosenbaum takes skills honed Nazi-hunting to investigating war crimes in Ukraine appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Greta Thunberg Released From Custody After Arrest at UK Anti-Israel Protest
Swedish activist Greta Thunberg speaks to a police officer during a pro-Palestinian protest as she holds a sign that says she supports prisoners linked to Palestine Action, an organization which the British government has proscribed as a terrorist group, in London, Britain, Dec. 23, 2025. Photo: Prisoners for Palestine/Handout via REUTERS
Swedish activist Greta Thunberg was released from custody after being arrested on Tuesday in London at an anti-Israel protest, police said.
UK-based campaign group Prisoners for Palestine said Thunberg was earlier arrested under the Terrorism Act for holding a sign that said “I support the Palestine Action prisoners. I oppose genocide.” The British government has proscribed Palestine Action as a terrorist group.
City of London Police said Thunberg had been bailed until March.
Police said earlier two other people had been arrested for throwing red paint at a building. A spokesperson said 22-year-old woman later attended the scene and was arrested for displaying a placard in support of a proscribed organization.
Prisoners for Palestine, which supports some detained activists who have gone on hunger strike, said the building had been targeted because it was used by an insurance firm which they said provided services to the British arm of Israeli defense firm Elbit Systems.
The insurance company did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Thunberg, 22, became prominent after staging weekly climate protests in front of the Swedish parliament in 2018.
Last year, she was cleared of a public order offense in Britain as a judge ruled police had no power to arrest her and others at a protest in London the year before.
She was detained along with 478 people and expelled by Israel in October after joining an activist convoy of vessels, the Global Sumud Flotilla, that attempted to breach Israel’s blockade of Gaza. Israel has consistently denied genocide allegations, noting it has targeted Hamas terrorists with its military campaign and taken measures to try and avoid civilian casualties.
Uncategorized
When Famine Vanished: How the Media Repeated a Claim, and Never Reckoned With Its Collapse
Trucks carrying humanitarian aid and fuel line up at the crossing into the Gaza Strip at the Rafah border on the Egypt side, amid a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas in Gaza, in Rafah, Egypt, October 17, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Stringer
CNN delivered the update quietly and inaccurately, with much less gravity than it once used to amplify the warning.
“Gaza no longer in famine,” read a CNN post, citing a UN-backed hunger monitor.
Reuters and the Associated Press followed with similar headlines.
What is striking is not that the unreliable IPC, which has been criticized in the past for faulty methodology, revised its assessment.
What’s really upsetting is that much of the press treated the reversal as a weather update, not as a reckoning.
Only months earlier, these same institutions helped cement a very different narrative.
In late July 2025, UN agencies issued a high-profile warning that key indicators in Gaza exceeded famine thresholds, citing IPC data and describing hundreds of thousands facing famine-like conditions. The IPC alert itself stated that famine thresholds had been reached for food consumption in most of Gaza and for acute malnutrition in Gaza City.
In August 2025, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) announced that famine was confirmed for the first time in Gaza, again anchored to IPC assessments.
Those claims ricocheted through global media coverage with little visible skepticism about methodology, access constraints, or incentives baked into a wartime information environment.
The result was a widely accepted narrative that Israel was causing famine, a narrative that shaped diplomatic pressure and public outrage long before the data could be stress tested.
Now the IPC’s latest assessment says no area has ever been in famine, attributing improvements to increased humanitarian and commercial food deliveries after the ceasefire, while warning that the situation remains fragile and could deteriorate again if access is disrupted or fighting resumes.
IPC’s latest fraudulent Gaza report implies 1,700+ starvation deaths this December 2025—even TODAY we should see 57 such deaths! But even Hamas reports only 475 total starvation deaths for the ENTIRE WAR. The math exposes how detached from reality all these models are. 1/ pic.twitter.com/wOvIohWTt2
— Aizenberg (@Aizenberg55) December 19, 2025
The AP at least gestured to the whiplash, noting that months earlier, the IPC said famine was occurring in Gaza City and was likely to spread without a ceasefire and an end to restrictions.
Reuters likewise framed the change as a shift from earlier IPC findings, while stressing continued emergency-level needs. But what was largely missing was the one ingredient journalism owes the public when an apocalyptic claim collapses or is materially revised: responsibility.
No media outlet interrogated the underlying assumptions when famine warnings were treated as settled fact. None explained what changed in the inputs and thresholds. None revisited the earlier certainty with the same prominence as the original alarm.
This matters because narratives do not stay on paper.
In the United States, the ADL has reported that anger at Israel during the war has been a driving force behind antisemitism, underscoring how the information ecosystem around Gaza can translate into real-world hostility toward Jews. When famine claims are amplified uncritically, they do not just inform. They inflame.
The new UN-backed update does not erase Gaza’s suffering, and it does not vindicate anyone’s politics. It does, however, expose a core media failure: outsourcing verification to a single authoritative label, and then moving on when the label changes.
If famine was once a front-page certainty, the correction cannot be a footnote.
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.
Uncategorized
US Heritage Foundation Think Tank Staff Quit Amid Antisemitism Controversy
The Heritage Foundation’s logo is displayed during the 2025 Joseph Story Distinguished Lecture in Washington, DC, US, Oct. 22, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Kylie Cooper
Over a dozen employees have left jobs at the Heritage Foundation or were fired in recent days, according to the influential right-wing US think tank, as it grapples with allegations from former supporters that it has aligned itself with those accused of antisemitism.
In a statement about the resignations and firings on Monday, Heritage Foundation chief advancement officer Andy Olivastro said a handful of staff had chosen “disruption” and “disloyalty.”
He said the think tank “has always welcomed debate, but alignment on mission and loyalty to the institution are non-negotiable.”
The foundation has been caught in a firestorm of accusations and counter-accusations that began when former Fox News host Tucker Carlson interviewed Nick Fuentes, a self-described Christian nationalist, in October. The interview focused on their mutual opposition to US support of Israel, a view at odds with that of many conservatives.
Some supporters of the foundation have said it should distance itself from Carlson, characterizing the journalist’s views as antisemitic. But Kevin Roberts, the foundation president, has continued to personally back Carlson, who he says is a friend. Carlson strongly rejects accusations of antisemitism.
One of those who resigned this week was Josh Blackman, a law professor who contributed to Project 2025, a right-wing policy initiative overseen by the Heritage Foundation. In a letter posted online, he blamed Roberts for making Heritage‘s brand “toxic.”
“You aligned the Heritage Foundation with the rising tide of antisemitism on the right,” said Blackman, who edited the group’s Guide to the Constitution publication.
In an Oct. 30 video defending Carlson, Roberts said a “venomous coalition” was attacking the prominent podcaster over his interview with Fuentes. Roberts said conservatives should feel no obligation to support any foreign government no matter how great the pressure from “the globalist class.”
He later apologized for his use of the term “venomous coalition,” which he said Jewish colleagues understood to be an antisemitic trope.
Speaking at a November staff townhall meeting, Roberts said his intention was not to endorse Fuentes, who he called “an evil person,” but to “convert” some of his audience of several million people.
Advancing American Freedom said on Monday the three former leaders of Heritage‘s legal, economic, and data teams had joined the conservative advocacy group, along with 10 of their staff. The group led by former Vice President Mike Pence is critical of US President Donald Trump’s MAGA movement.
Three Heritage Foundation board trustees have also resigned since November.
Chief US Circuit Judge William Pryor, a conservative jurist who contributed to Heritage‘s 800-page Guide to the Constitution, said in an interview he did not attend a promotional event for the book due to Roberts’ “totally inappropriate” language in the Oct. 30 video.
For some remaining Heritage employees, recent staff departures were driven by Republican Party jockeying rather than antisemitism or Israel.
“These resignations have a lot more to do with 2028 than it does with anything else,” Heritage fellow Robby Starbuck posted online. “One group wants a return to the Pence/Ryan GOP and the rest want to MAGA with @KevinRobertsTX.”