Uncategorized
Israel’s home demolitions after terrorist attacks, explained
(JTA) – Less than a hour after a terror attack in eastern Jerusalem on Friday killed three people, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu delivered a succinct message: Destroy the Palestinian attacker’s home.
“Prime Minister Netanyahu has decided to take immediate action to seal and demolish the home of the terrorist,” said the statement from Netanyahu’s office.
Home demolition orders have almost become a matter of course following Palestinian attacks. They don’t usually make headlines, nor do they tend to spark public outcry. For decades, Israel has used the tactic as a routine instrument of punishment, claiming that the effect of tearing down the homes of terrorists deters future attacks.
But critics question that claim, and say that home demolitions constitute collective punishment that violates international law. At a moment of deep political strife in Israel, the home demolition practice, like many others related to security, generates little political opposition. And while the Israeli Supreme Court, whose power Israel’s right-wing government hopes to limit, can delay home demolitions, it almost always ultimately permits them to go forward.
Here’s how the practice of Israeli home demolition began, how it’s viewed in Israel and abroad, and how it may be changing under Israel’s new government.
Why does Israel destroy the homes of terrorists?
Israel began demolishing homes of Palestinian attackers after it captured the West Bank and eastern Jerusalem, along with other territories, in the 1967 Six Day War. Since then, according to a 2019 assessment by the Israel Democracy Institute, Israel has demolished some 2,000 homes due to terrorism. The demolitions have taken place in the West Bank and eastern Jerusalem, not within Israel’s internationally recognized borders.
Israel claims that demolishing the homes of terrorists acts as a deterrent, a rationale cited last month in a bill introduced by lawmaker Eliahu Revivo, a member of Netanyahu’s Likud Party who also wants to deter attacks by deporting the families of terrorists.
“The national security establishment and the Israeli army have conducted research over the years into dozens of suicide attackers, and it emerged that the one deterrent for suicide attackers is what the consequences for their families will be after the attack,” the text of the bill said.
Home demolitions were largely suspended in 2005 after the Israel Defense Forces found that the practice had no discernible deterrent effect. The demolitions were sporadically reinstituted a few years later and fully brought back by Netanyahu in November 2014 during a wave of Palestinian attacks.
A 2010 research paper by political scientists at Northwestern University and Hebrew University suggested that home demolition works as a deterrent. The authors of the study based their findings on an examination of home demolitions in the five years prior to the army’s 2005 suspension, a period that coincided with the second intifada.
“We show that punitive house demolitions (those targeting Palestinian suicide terrorists and terror operatives) cause an immediate, significant decrease in the number of suicide attacks,” the paper said. “The effect dissipates over time and by geographic distance.”
This year, Netanyahu’s new government, the most right-wing in Israeli history, has indicated it will accelerate and expand the demolition of the homes of terrorists. It recently ordered the closing-off of an apartment belonging to the family of a 13-year-old who shot and wounded two Israelis near Jerusalem’s Old City. The move was unusual because Israel had previously reserved home demolition for attackers who killed people.
Does Israel demolish the homes of Jewish terrorists?
No. The Palestinian family of a boy murdered by a Jewish terrorist sued to have his killer’s home destroyed. The High Court in 2017 rejected the lawsuit, saying too much time had passed since the 2014 murder. The government argued that deterrence was not necessary in the case of Jewish terrorism, because, in the words of Judge Neal Hendel, Jewish terrorists are “a minority of a minority of a minority.” The Israeli government counted a total of 16 Jewish attacks of terrorism in 2015, according to the Jerusalem Post. Israeli Arab politicians, including Knesset member Ahmed Tibi, had called on the government to demolish the Jewish terrorist’s house as a matter of fair treatment.
Is demolishing terrorists’ homes legal?
Yes, according to Israel. No, according to experts in international law.
Israel bases its argument on a regulation from 1945, when Britain controlled what is now Israel, that was carried over into Israeli law when the state was established in 1948. It is known as “Defense regulation (emergency) 1945, regulation 119.”
The regulation is broadly written, allowing a “A Military Commander” to destroy the home of “anyone who offended, or attempted an offense, or assisted offenders or abetted offenders after the fact,” as determined by a military court.
Multiple international law experts say that home demolition is illegal under international law because it is a form of collective punishment, which is banned by the Geneva Conventions. Israel has long argued that the Geneva Conventions do not apply to its presence in territories it has captured, because the land in question was not the internationally recognized territory of any state prior to 1967.
The Biden administration also considers home demolitions to be collective punishment. “We attach a good deal of priority to this, knowing that the home of an entire family shouldn’t be demolished for the action of one individual,” State Department spokesman Ned Price said in 2021.
Israeli human rights groups, including B’tselem and the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions, agree with international scholars that the practice violates international law. B’tselem cites both the Fourth Geneva Convention and a verse in Deuteronomy that reads, “Parents shall not be put to death for children, nor children be put to death for parents: they shall each be put to death only for their own crime.”
Who owns the land once a home is demolished?
Under the 1945 regulation, military authorities maintain control of the land, and it reverts to the original owners — if they are present — once military authorities leave.
How long does it take for a home demolition to take place? What happens to the family?
Generally, the military consults with Israel’s intelligence services before ordering a home demolition.In the case of high-profile attacks, however, the order may come down immediately, as it did on Friday. Families have 48 hours to appeal a demolition to the military commander or another relevant authority.
However, Israel’s Supreme Court has reserved the right to review demolition orders. This may delay demolition for months or years, but B’Tselem reports that in the majority of cases, the court ultimately upholds the demolition. In one notable case in 2018, the court stopped the demolition after the family presented evidence showing that the assailant suffered from a mental illness.
Homes may be demolished by bulldozers. Apartments or rooms are generally filled with cement, rendering them unlivable. Families sometimes split up among relatives, at least in the near term, according to a United Nations report.
According to the Jerusalem Post, the army commission that recommended ending the practice in 2005 reported that families of the terrorists often rebuild their homes with compensation funds from the Palestinian Authority and other sources. The Palestinian Authority pays monthly stipends to the families of Palestinians imprisoned by Israel or killed while committing violent attacks. Israel and its advocates decry the payments as an incentive for terrorism.
How many home demolitions have taken place? Are homes demolished for reasons other than deterrence?
According to the Israel Democracy Institute, more than 50 homes “have been either fully or partially demolished” between 2014 and 2019 as a deterrent to terrorism. Hamoked, an Israeli human rights group, placed the total since 2014 at 75, according to Haaretz.
Israel has demolished a far greater number of Palestinian buildings due to lack of a building permit. Palestinian groups and Israeli human rights organizations argue that Palestinians face discrimination in obtaining such permits. Israel also has a policy of demolishing Palestinian dwellings for being built in a closed military zone.
The same academic paper that concluded demolishing the homes of suicide attackers was an effective deterrent also found that home demolitions for other reasons — including as a preventative measure — spurred an increase in terror attacks.
—
The post Israel’s home demolitions after terrorist attacks, explained appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Georgia Gubernatorial Candidate Accuses Israel of ‘Genocide’ in Oct. 7 Anniversary Post
Georgia State Rep. Ruwa Romman speaks during a press conference on Day 4 of the Democratic National Convention (DNC) in Chicago, Illinois, US, Aug. 22, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Vincent Alban
Georgia state Rep. Ruwa Romman, who last week joined the state’s race for governor, on Tuesday marked the two-year anniversary of Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, invasion of and massacre across southern Israel with a statement condemning Israel’s military response in Gaza as a so-called “genocide” and calling for an end to US military support for the Jewish state.
In her statement, Romman described the past two years as “atrocities beyond human comprehension,” accusing Israel and the United States of “perpetuating more death, destruction, and horror in Gaza.” She cited Hamas-produced casualty figures of “at least 67,000 Palestinians” killed in Gaza, despite experts casting doubt on the reliability of such statistics from the enclave, and called for the US to “stop sending bombs in violation of our laws.”
Romman’s remarks came as Israelis marked two years since Hamas-led Palestinian terrorists carried out the deadliest single-day massacre of Jews since the Holocaust, murdering 1,200 people, most of them civilians, while kidnapping 251 hostages and perpetrating widespread sexual violence.
Israel responded with a military campaign aimed at freeing the hostages and dismantling Hamas’s military capabilities and political rule in neighboring Gaza.
Romman referenced the “families desperate to be reunited with those taken hostage” and the “more than 1,100 Israelis” killed during the Oct. 7 atrocities in her statement but did not mention Hamas at all, including the terrorist group’s role in starting the war and continued refusal for two years to disarm and release the hostages. She also reaffirmed calls for a “lasting peace agreement.”
The Georgia Democrat also appeared to compare Israeli hostages who were abducted from their homes to Palestinian terrorist operatives who have been detained and imprisoned by Israel, demanding “for the release of Israeli and Palestinian hostages.”
Romman, 32, the first Muslim woman elected to Georgia’s legislature, has been an outspoken anti-Israel activist and critic of US foreign policy in the Middle East. Her comments underscore a widening divide within the Democratic Party over Israel, as progressives push to restrict US aid to the Jewish state while most lawmakers continue to back Washington’s alliance with Jerusalem. Romman criticized then- US Vice President Kamala Harris after her campaign rejected her request to speak at the Democratic National Convention (DNC) last year.
Last Monday, Romman announced her 2026 bid to become Georgia’s next governor.
Fellow state Rep. Esther Panitch, a Democrat and the legislature’s only Jewish member, said Monday that Romman “has no path to victory but is once again sabotaging the Democratic Party with her Mamdani-like, socialist platform,” referring to New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani. The Associated Press reported that Panitch also argued that Romman’s advocacy at the DNC “helped Donald Trump win,” potentially previewing a key attack against Romman by other Democrats.
Uncategorized
MIT’s Jewish president rejects Trump’s offer of ‘priority’ funding in exchange for policy changes
The Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Jewish president, Sally Kornbluth, became the first university leader to reject the Trump administration’s offer to adopt a policy deal in exchange for funding benefits.
The administration extended its proposal, titled the “Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education,” to nine universities this month that it said were “good actors.” The deal would require the schools to cap international student enrollment, limit employees’ political speech, and make other changes in line with the administration’s policies — including “transforming or abolishing institutional units that purposefully punish, belittle, and even spark violence against conservative ideas.”
In exchange, the schools would gain “priority” federal funding – a potentially potent carrot at a time when the Trump administration is more often slashing schools’ funding in an effort to retaliate against them and force changes.
One school, the public University of Texas system, said it was honored to be considered without yet accepting. Kornbluth’s rejection makes MIT the first of the schools to reject the deal.
“In our view, America’s leadership in science and innovation depends on independent thinking and open competition for excellence,” she wrote in a letter to U.S. Education Secretary Linda McMahon Friday. “Therefore, with respect, we cannot support the proposed approach to addressing the issues facing higher education.”
The rejection could make Kornbluth a target of conservative ire nearly two years after she dodged criticism in the immediate aftermath of Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, attack on Israel. After she and two other university leaders appeared before Congress in December 2023 to answer questions about their schools’ handling of campus antisemitism, the other two were widely maligned for their responses and soon resigned.
But Kornbluth, who had built strong ties with Jewish leaders at MIT and her previous university, Duke, retained the support of her community, despite concerns about responses to pro-Palestinian student protesters.
Now, Kornbluth could reignite right-wing anger — while shoring up support among those on her campus who might see her as resisting an inappropriate intrusion into the university’s governance.
In the letter, Kornbluth added that the “compact” included principles that would “restrict freedom of expression and our independence as an institution.”
While MIT has gone largely unscathed by the Trump administration’s campaign against antisemitism on college campuses, the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law filed a lawsuit against the school alleging that it had “allowed an anti-Semitic climate to persist.”
The other seven colleges offered the deal were the University of Arizona, Brown University, Dartmouth College, the University of Pennsylvania, the University of Southern California, Vanderbilt University and the University of Virginia. Other than the University of Texas, the other schools have not yet commented. It was not clear how the White House selected them.
—
The post MIT’s Jewish president rejects Trump’s offer of ‘priority’ funding in exchange for policy changes appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Ro Khanna distances himself after posting documentary clip featuring antisemitic influencer
California Democratic Rep. Ro Khanna came under fire Thursday after he shared a documentary clip featuring comments by antisemitic influencer Ian Carroll.
The documentary, titled “Investigating Israeli Influence on US Politics” and made by the popular YouTuber Tommy G, takes aim at AIPAC and what it says is Israel’s influence over American policy. Khanna appears in the documentary as an example of a Democratic lawmaker who rejects the pro-Israel lobby.
The documentary features a wide range of voices, including Republican lawmakers and an IDF reservist who offer a pro-Israel perspective; a doctor who volunteered in Gaza; and Medea Benjamin, the founder of the anti-war group Code Pink.
It has also drawn criticism for favorably citing Carroll, a conspiracy theorist who claims that a “modern Jewish mafia” controls America, that Israel was behind 9/11 and that Israel conspired to kill conservative influencer Charlie Kirk. Speaking to podcaster Joe Rogan earlier this year, Carroll said Israel was founded by the “the Jewish mob” and that sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein was “a Jewish organization of Jewish people working on behalf of Israel and other groups.”
“Ian Carroll is one of the internet’s top conspiracy analysts,” Tommy G says in the documentary. “His critics label him an antisemite spreading false information about Israel, but to others, he is a fearless journalist that speaks on what some perceive as an extremely strong Zionist pressure on our government.”
Khanna posted a clip of the documentary on Thursday to make the point that he has not accepted money from AIPAC, the pro-Israel lobby. In the clip, Carroll claims that “93 out of 100 U.S. senators were taking money from a group that represents a foreign government and foreign interests in order to operate our government on behalf of someone else,” referring to AIPAC and Israel.
In the clip, Khanna later says that has not accepted any PAC or lobbyist contributions since entering Congress, adding that AIPAC’s stance was that “whatever Netanyahu does is right” and warning that those who disagree risk having the group “come after you.”
“I don’t take a dime from any PAC or lobbyist, including AIPAC,” wrote Khanna in the post on X. “I am proud to be one of the handful of Democrats standing up against Big Money.” He linked to an account of an organization called Track AIPAC that monitors the lobby’s donations.
Khanna soon drew criticism for appearing in the same production as Carroll and amplifying him. And hours later, he replied to his own post to distance himself from the conspiracy theorist.
“This was a documentary made by Tommy G who interviewed me. I did not speak to or meet Ian Carrol. I stand by my words and should be judged by them,” wrote Khanna.
Criticism resounded in the replies to Khanna’s post, with many commenters accusing the lawmaker of elevating Carroll’s antisemitic rhetoric on his platform.
“Stand by your words all you want. No one made you post a video where a Nazi talks favorably about you,” wrote one user on X. “In saner times, this would have [been] a career ending move. You are such a clown to defend it.”
Khanna, whose parents were from India and who was first elected in 2016, has long been one of Israel’s fiercest critics in Congress, including over its operations in Gaza. He led an effort last month to push President Donald Trump to recognize Palestinian statehood at the UN General Assembly.
“Who says we’re going to starve the people so much that they suffer that we’re going to force the surrender? It’s sick,” said Khanna later in the documentary interview. “And your tax dollars, my tax dollars are funding them because both Biden and Trump gave Netanyahu a blank check.”
—
The post Ro Khanna distances himself after posting documentary clip featuring antisemitic influencer appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.