Features
The Dark Side of Albert: Einstein and Mileva Marić, his First Wife
By DAVID TOPPER Albert Einstein was the most photographed scientist of the 20th century. The scope of emotions depicted range from the serious to the silly: from looking like a secular saint with hands folded and deep in contemplation of supposedly solemn thoughts, to the image hanging in front of me on the bulletin board over my computer table, showing him sticking out his tongue at the cameraman. Living during the heyday of the development of the film camera, he and the press surely took advantage of it. The positive persona of the genius was formed out of these visual images. This visual disposition was supplemented with endless quotations on not only science and the universe, but also with homilies on life and how to live it, with much of that which you will find quoted, being things he never said. Overall, the general image of him and his personality has him coming out seemingly squeaky-clean.
Nonetheless, those of us who have looked into the man in more detail are aware of episodes of less than saintly behavior by Albert – the famous scientific idol. If, for example, you read any of the half-dozen or so lengthy biographies about him, you will find scattered therein stories of him speaking inappropriately or behaving, one might say, as a jerk. Having read all those books, and others – and even written three books on him myself – I knew this. So when I started reading a recent long biography of his first wife, Mileva Marić, I had no reason to think I’d be shocked, since I had already read a lot about her, including a book of letters to and from her best friend, which also contained a brief biography. But to my surprise, I was staggered in reading over 400 pages of his nasty behavior concentrated around this one woman – a woman whom he fell in love with as a university student, and who was the only mother of his children.
Here is the sad – and probably surprising to most readers – story of Mileva and Albert.
Mileva Marić was born on December 19, 1875, into a Christian Orthodox Serbian family. With a dislocated left hip, she walked with a limp throughout her life. (Her sister, Zorka, had the same congenital condition.) Forced to wear an orthopedic shoe, she was teased and mocked in school. Nonetheless, this very bright girl filled her lonely childhood with her studies (she was especially good at math) and piano lessons. Encouraged by a very loving father, she excelled in school, and was the first girl to attend high school physics courses in the Austro-Hungarian Empire. After graduating in 1896, she applied to the prestigious Zurich Polytechnic, since in Switzerland women were admitted to all classes. She passed the entrance exam and majored in mathematics. It was a small freshman class of about two-dozen students, she being the only woman. That’s where she met, in the even smaller physics course, fellow student, Albert Einstein.
One of the earliest pictures we have of Mileva is dated 1897. In this portrait, I see a very serious, confident, determined woman with large penetrating eyes, a full crop of dark wavy hair and full lips. I would call her plain but attractive. I say this, because I was shocked at several instances when someone, upon first meeting Mileva, is quoted as describing her as “ugly.”
As a fellow student, Albert Einstein was attracted to her, and they quickly became a couple. He probably was the first male to take a romantic interest in her, overlooking her “handicap.” I suspect he was attracted to her gutsy attitude and her smartness. Plus, being Serbian, Mileva exuded an exotic “otherness” to the “German” in Albert. They spent most of their free time together, studying and falling in love. She did well in her courses, initially passing all of them, as Albert did too (of course). That is, until she was pregnant – a fact she tried to hide until she could not. And so she went home to her parents to inform them of this, and eventfully to have the baby.
Her parents were very supportive, which was unusual for the times. A girl was born early in 1902; they named her Lieserl (probably a Yiddish diminutive of Liese, a shortened Elizabeth). Albert stayed in Zurich and never saw his daughter; she was raised by Mileva’s parents, as Mileva returned to Zurich to continue her studies. No one knows what ultimately happened to Lieserl; she has seemingly vanished from all records. She may have died from Scarlet Fever as a child; or, she may have been adopted and grew up. One thing I do know: Mileva never forgot her. I believe that the loss of Lieserl is the major reason for Mileva’s depression and lingering melancholia throughout her life – as will be seen. As a result, she didn’t take care of her grooming and was a bit overweight – as seen in photos of her later in life. This, I suspect, may be a source of her “ugliness.”
Back to Zurich in the late 1890s and her studies: she passed all her courses over the first three years, and in her fourth year she started her thesis, hoping for a diploma and further work toward a PhD. But in 1900 she failed her final exams, while the other male students all passed. In July 1901 she repeated her final exams and flunked them again. I find it hard to believe that this sudden change in her performance was due to the tests being too tough for this woman, in light of all we know of her up to this time. Look at the last date above: she was pregnant with her child. I’m convinced that she just couldn’t concentrate on her studies. Albert passed, graduated, and started looking for a job – as well as working toward his PhD.
On January 6, 1903, they were married in a small civil ceremony. Mileva became a housewife; no more thinking of going any further in her studies. She then became the mother of two boys: Hans Albert (born in 1904) and Eduard (nicknamed Tete; in 1910).
All that promise came to nothing, not even a university degree. If she had not met Albert, who knows what she would have achieved? But that was not the path taken, and since she married what became the most famous scientist of the 20th century – if not the most famous person, as Time Magazine said at the end of the millennium – that’s why there is a plethora of documentation about her life, terribly sad as it was.
Now briefly fast forward a century or so, to around 1987, and the publication of the early love letters between Albert and Mileva, which had only been known by a few, and purposely suppressed. For example, Hans Albert, who had the letters much earlier, had wanted to publish them. But he was thwarted by Helen Dukas and Otto Nathan, who threatened litigation. Dukas was Albert’s lifelong secretary and Nathan was an economist and close friend, who eventually was the executor of Einstein’s will. And so, the letters never surfaced until Dukas and Nathan were both dead.
Even today, writing about these letters is an ideological minefield. Here’s why. The letters date from 1899 to 1903, when a new theory of physics was brewing in Albert’s mind. The result, in the so-called miracle year of 1905, was the publication of five papers that changed physics forever: two on what became his Theory of Relativity; one on a particle theory (much later called a photon) of light, as part of the emerging Quantum Theory; and two supporting the reality of atoms, which were still only hypothetical entities at this time. Knowing this, how much can we read into the love letters when Albert, in talking about his scientific ideas, uses “we” and “our work”? Well, it seems, a lot; for the initial response from primarily feminist quarters was that Mileva should at least be seen as a co-author of the famous papers, since it seemed that they conceived of the theory together. Given, as we will see, Albert’s shabby treatment of her later in life, then all the more sympathy was directed toward Mileva and her plight by history. Indeed, some went so far (you will still find websites saying this) that Albert stole the theory of relativity from Mileva. Nonetheless, after that initial flurry of debate, the consensus has moved away from this viewpoint, so that today the select scholars looking over the Einstein Papers Project in Pasadena, California assert unabashedly that Mileva made no input to Albert’s theory.
Nonetheless, I am one of the few “Einstein scholars” (if I may call myself such), who gives Mileva some credit in the 1905 marvel. She was good at mathematics, she had patience in her life and work, and she was a thorough researcher – all qualities severely lacking in Albert. Let me put it this way: over his life as a physicist, Einstein hired a series of companions (whom he called “calculators”) to do the tedious and complicated mathematics required for his theory, especially as it developed over the later years with the use of tensor calculus in his General Theory of Relativity. All were men; except, famously, his last calculator was the Israeli-American woman, Buria Kaufmann – about whom you will read in the literature as his “first female calculator.” (Incidentally, there is a website giving her credit for Einstein’s later theory, which is complete fiction.) I, however, would assert that Buria was the second woman; for Mileva was Albert’s first “calculator.” She was also his researcher and proofreader. Since she knew the physics, as we know from the letters, she also was his sounding-board – Albert bouncing ideas off of Mileva, as they say.
So, what about Albert speaking of “we” and “our work”? Let me put this into context by quoting from some of the letters in chronological order. In a letter Mileva wrote to Helene Savić (née Kaufler), her closest and longest friend throughout her life (they roomed together in a boarding house in Zurich when they were students), she speaks of a paper “written” by Albert that will be published soon that is “very significant.” She then says that “we” sent it to an important physicist – revealing how much she was involved with Albert’s work. Later in a letter from Albert to Mileva, let me quote from the opening lines to give you a trace of their intimacy: “Thank you very much for your little letter and all the true love that’s in it. I kiss and hug you for it from all my heart, exactly the way you would want it & are entitled to, love.” He then goes into a discussion of other people, followed by his going back to how much they love each other, and ending with this key sentence. “How happy and proud I will be when the two of us together will have brought our work on the relative motion to a victorious conclusion.” I put in italics the famous (or is it infamous?) phrase: our work. But there’s nothing more on this, although a bit later in the letter he goes on to talk about another physics problem he is working on: specific heats. He discusses the physics problem in detail, with equations and his proposed solution, and he ends the topic with this: “Don’t forget to look up to what extent glass obeys the law of Dulong and Petit.” My guess is that it was this sort of task that was part of their work together. The letter ends where it began. “Tender greetings and kisses, my dear little dumpling, from your … Albert.”
I’ll leave the topic there, nonetheless aware of the possibility that Mileva did help Albert in even more significant ways, and that hence she’s been slighted by history.
Back to Zurich in 1903. Initially, their life together was harmonious, a reflection of the camaraderie in the love letters, as she kept house and raised her boys. But by around 1909, when Albert was being seen as an important physicist, there clearly was a severe strain on the marriage. For example, in a letter that year to Helene, she says that Albert “lives only for his work” and the family is “unimportant to him.” By 1914, when they moved to Berlin for Albert’s prestigious position at the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute of Physics, their marriage entered a new phase. In fact, Albert had been having relations with a divorced cousin, Elsa Löwenthal, who lived in Berlin. Moreover, Albert made it clear to Mileva that their previous relationship was over. He went so far as to give her a list of demands: that she do the laundry, prepare him three meals a day, and keep his office clean – all without any personal relations. No intimacy in the house, and no being together in public. It was degradingly cruel: Mileva’s role was reduced to being a maid and cook. She tried to accept it, but quickly found that she couldn’t endure the humiliation; and so she took her two boys back to Zurich, where she remained for the rest of her life.
They officially divorced in 1919, and Albert immediately married Elsa – all in the same year that he became the world-famous scientist, because of the solar eclipse experiment that proved that light from a star is bent around the sun, as predicted by his theory. He got the Nobel Prize for Physics in 1921 and transferred the money to a bank in Zurich for the support of their boys, where Mileva had access to the interest in the account.
What happened after all that infatuation seen in the love letters and in their early life together? In retrospect, Mileva surely realized that she had ignored or overlooked what we might call the dark side of Albert. As a student he was overly sarcastic, often mocking and even degrading people whom he saw as inadequate or not too smart. He even teased her in ways that revealed an underlying hostility. When she pointed this out, he would laugh it off – and she’d forgive him. In a letter to Helena in 1900 she writes of Albert’s “wicked words with deeds! What an insolent boy he is, and yet I love him so much!” Telling words. Even after the acrimonious divorce, she still, as will be seen, was under Albert’s spell. I believe that she never got over that initial infatuation when they were students. It became a pattern: she was always trying to get on his good side.
Overall, Albert was very much a 19th century male chauvinist in his attitude and communications with women. Here are some of his words about women that reveal his overt misogyny: they are “passive, insecure, needy, and wanting to be dominated.” I knew that he liked to flirt with women throughout his life. But seeing him do so with other wives, with Mileva present, made it less frivolous and more malicious. In short, he was a cad and a rake, rolled into one.
The turnaround in their relationship seemed to bring out the worst in him. He was petty and vindictive, and especially very cruel towards her. There is no direct evidence of any real physical abuse. However, there was an incident in the spring of 1913 when a friend reported seeing Mileva with a badly swollen face, which was attributed to a “toothache” – and hence she and Albert missed some social events. Possibly the swollen face was a sign of something more malevolent, but we will never know the truth. Nonetheless, pondering this, I wish to quote something Albert wrote in a letter in 1925: “Not only children need a bit of thrashing, but also grownups and especially women.” And I’ll leave it there.
After the divorce, he accused her of poisoning his relationship with the boys – a common trope between divorcing couples. But it got more vicious as her financial situation became grave, and she asked for more money. She made some extra money tutoring students in math and giving piano lessons. But it wasn’t enough. Albert’s letters to her contain nasty personal attacks: saying she is “abnormal,” a “nonentity,” and that her pleading is “rubbish.” I can only imagine how Mileva felt being called this. At the time, she was in severe physical pain with chronic back problems, often forcing her into bed for long periods, even stays in hospital, when she was trying to raise two boys alone. Moreover, all this was exacerbated by problems in her Serbian family. Her sister Zorka was diagnosed as schizophrenic and was in and out of asylums; her only living brother disappeared into Russia after World War I; and her parents had serious financial problems.
Could it get any worse? It could. And it did. Tete became a handful. He was very bright and creative; he had musical talent on the piano, and he wrote promising poems and stories. But he was also prone to falling into depressive episodes, for apparently no reason – anger fits, throwing things, being out of control. I suppose Mileva saw this coming: Tete, like her sister, eventually was diagnosed as schizophrenic.
Albert, of course, knew all this, but being in Berlin, he didn’t have to deal with it. He did make occasional visits and took summer trips with the boys (giving Mileva short breaks), all while he was still living in Europe. But when he moved to Princeton, N.J., in 1933, with Hitler in power in Germany and Einstein’s name being high on a hit list, their meetings were over; until 1938, when Hans Albert (now with a wife and two children) moved to the USA. The last meeting between Albert and Tete is recorded in a 1933 photograph that bears a close look. Both are seated in a room, with Tete looking over a large, open portfolio – perhaps reading it. Albert is facing in a different direction (about 90-degrees away), holding a violin and bow, and staring off into space. It may be that Tete is reading to him, but more likely they are inhabiting two different worlds.
In the years during World War II, living in Zurich, Switzerland (a country surrounded by a Nazi-occupied Europe), Mileva was terrified that the Nazis would swoop up this last free space. Moreover, she knew that they were rounding up Jews by the trainloads and moving them to Concentration Camps. She was somewhat safe as an Orthodox Christian, but Tete was “Jewish,” being a child of Einstein. She wrote pleading letters to Albert, asking him to take Tete to the USA. She even contacted the Red Cross, and they agreed that the best bet was to get Albert to sponsor him. “Bring us to safety,” she wrote. But being Mileva – ever still the dutiful wife, even though they had been divorced for two decades – she added (and I assert that she was not being sarcastic in saying this), “[I am] not intending to disturb your peace and freedom.” Petrified that “Tete is in danger because he is your son,” she concluded: “you can’t just leave him in the lurch.”
In fact, Einstein, Dukas, and Nathan were diligently rescuing Jews from Europe by using Einstein’s name to get emigration papers and such. Albert once spoke of this, saying that they were running a little refugee office over his cluttered “lawyer’s desk.” And they did save lives. Relevant here is a 1939 letter from Albert to Helena on this very topic. Helena’s father was Jewish, and she had numerous relatives whose lives were in peril, and so apparently, she was asking Albert for help. He wrote in response. “How gladly would I help! But I am desperately trying to at least get younger people out. Relocation of old people must under present horrible conditions be set aside.” In the end, we know of two aunts of Helena who died in gas chambers. Interestingly, in this same letter, Albert mentions that Hans is now in America, but that Tete is with Mileva in Zurich, saying that Tete is “incurably mentally ill.”
So, what about Tete? And Mileva’s pleading letters? As far as we know, these pleading requests were never answered. Albert, it seems, did leave his son “in the lurch.” My guess is that he just couldn’t fathom the chaos in his life of dealing with someone with such a severe mental illness. Listen to what he later wrote to Hans about Tete after learning of Mileva’s death. “If I had been fully informed [apparently referring here to what he saw as a genetic mental illness in Mileva’s family], he [Tete] would never have come into the world.” I can only imagine how Hans must have felt after reading these appalling words from his father about his beloved brother. Sometimes Albert’s behavior is plainly pathetic. Fortunately, the Nazis never invaded Switzerland.
Much of Mileva’s adult life was centred on Tete, as she watched him descend into the depths of mental illness. Overweight and chain-smoking, he was in and out of mental institutions. For Mileva, he was a full-time job. She, being the caring mother, was obsessed with making sure he would be safe after she died. And she succeeded; for seven years after his mother died, he lived in the renowned Burghölzli psychiatric clinic in Zurich. He was 55 when he died.
I believe Mileva never got over two things: the loss of Lieserl and her infatuation with Albert. We don’t know what happened to Lieserl; but Mileva surely did, and it haunted her all of her life; as seen, she flunked her final chance for a university degree because of it. Lieserl was a source of her constant despondent behaviour and possibly her so-called “ugliness.” In a letter to Helena in 1925 she wrote of “my unfulfilled desire for a daughter”– another telling phrase, since she had a daughter, but was forced to abandon her.
Regarding Albert, no matter how abusive he was, Mileva still was open to forgiveness. She once asked herself this question: “When has a man ever listened to reason, when a woman is involved?” She should have listened to her own words.
Mileva Marić died on August 4, 1948, at the age of 72.
This story of Albert falling in and out of love with Mileva was not the first such episode in his life. It was previewed by and even overlapped with his first sweetheart: Marie Winteler.
In 1895 he spent a year enrolled in the cantonal school in the town of Aarau, near Zurich. He had taken the rigorous entrance exams for the Polytechnic (which Mileva later passed) and had flunked the non-science and non-math parts. But since he did so well on the science and math parts, it was recommended that he do a year of make-up in Aarau; plus, he was applying at age 16, a year early. He boarded with the family of Jost Winteler, a teacher at the school. Jost and Pauline had three daughters, the prettiest being Marie, two years older than Albert. Albert quickly fell for her, and she for him. She was an accomplished pianist, and so their love interests were supplemented with piano and violin duets. After that year, and after passing the entrance requirement at the Polytechnic, Albert moved to Zurich – where he met Mileva, and then broke off with Marie. In short, he jilted her, as he would later do with Mileva.
Marie, however, thought the relationship was to be forever, and wrote pleading letters when he stopped writing to her. After all, he was still mailing her his dirty laundry to wash and send back. (I am not making this up.) Being deeply hurt, she fell into a depression that (may have) plagued her throughout her life. She became a schoolteacher (whose records show that she missed a lot of classes due to sickness); in 1911 she married a man whose first name was Albert. They had two boys, but divorced in 1927. We also know that she tried to reach the first Albert in the 1940s about emigrating to the USA, but there is no record of his having received her letters. (Albert’s secretary was known to censor his mail.) She died in a mental institution in 1957, two years after Einstein died.
I mention this for two reasons. One, the obvious – this being a preview to the story of Albert’s shabby treatment of Mileva and the parallel terrible consequences. The other reason is the dirty laundry. This, also obviously, needs to be explained.
In 2019 I published an historical novel on Einstein’s life, called A Solitary Smile. In it, Marie is one of the characters, especially near the end and in a dream sequence that has Einstein recalling their time together, where he realizes how he hurt her. In recalling this part of my book, while writing this story of Mileva, and now Marie again – I suddenly realized that I didn’t include the dirty laundry bit. Why? I knew it then, as I do now. So why not mention it? Ruminating on this, I can only surmise that I was subconsciously protecting Albert from more scorn. Why dig up all the dirt (seemingly, literally in this case). How interesting this is. Me, being part of the problem. Protecting Albert’s image.
Well, I caught myself. And here I acknowledge my error – to supplement my saga on the dark side of Albert Einstein.
* * *
Readings: Mileva Marić Einstein: Life with Albert Einstein, by Radmila Milentijević (United World Press, 2010). In Albert’s Shadow: The Life and Letters of Mileva Marić: Einstein’s First Wife, edited by Milan Popović (The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2003). A Solitary Smile: A Novel on Einstein, by David R. Topper (Bee Line Press, 2019).
Features
With Gaza War Ending, Where Does Jordan Stand?
By HENRY SREBRNIK Today’s “two-state solution” for the pre-1948 Palestine Mandate governed by the United Kingdom is an offshoot of the older idea of partition: the division of the land into Jewish and Arab countries. Transjordan, as it was then called, had been cut from the original Mandate in 1921 and became, first, a separate British mandate under an emir, and in 1946, as Britain was on the verge of leaving Palestine, the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. It was always a fragile creation, yet it has lasted to this day, often defying predictions of its imminent demise by friends and foes alike.
Some analysts are currently floating another old idea. Given the basic instability and unsustainability of any Palestinian state in the West Bank (with or without Gaza), a Jordanian-Palestinian confederation comprising the Hashemite Kingdom and the West Bank might, in their eyes, be a better idea.
They view a Jordanian security presence in the West Bank as reliable, more so, certainly, than a Palestinian one. The late King Hussein proposed such a confederation in 1972: a united kingdom consisting of two districts, with full West Bank autonomy except for Jordan’s control of military and security matters and foreign affairs. In 1977, U.S. President Jimmy Carter raised it with Prime Minister Menachem Begin; at various times, President Anwar Sadat of Egypt and U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger espoused the idea.
Indeed, Hussein and PLO president Yasir Arafat agreed to such a confederation in 1985. The king defended this as a “a matter of shared history, experience, culture, economy, and social structure.” Jordan is Arab and Muslim, and already a majority of Jordanian citizens are themselves Palestinian in origin. He believed that the Palestinians would be better served by linking their destiny with Jordan, “a sovereign state which enjoys credible international standing.”
Yet only three years later Jordan renounced the plan, and following the 1993 Oslo Accords, which created a PLO entity in the West Bank, that idea has faded away. Yet it still has some currency, with Palestinian support at times fairly robust. Many Israelis maintain that it would be desirable if the Palestinians became citizens of existing Arab states, Jordan in particular.
But why would Jordan acquiesce to this today? It is true that Jordan controlled the West Bank between 1948 and 1967. But Palestinian national identity back was not as pronounced as it is today. The current extreme forms of nationalism and Islamism don’t fit a traditional hereditary monarchy. Conservatives in Jordan fear that Jordan’s already large Palestinian population would come to dominate domestic affairs.
During the 1960s and 1970s, Palestinian armed factions seriously endangered the Jordanian regime, culminating in the Black September civil war between 1970–1971, and for that reason Palestinian political influence is still suppressed in today’s Jordan.
Nor might this really benefit Israel. What if in such a confederation a resurgent Hamas, Islamic Jihad, or other terrorist group succeeded at overthrowing the Hashemites? The consequences would be far graver than if the same thing happened in a fully independent, PLO-led Palestinian state on the 1949 armistice lines.
The kingdom is also one of the world’s largest recipients of U.S. economic and military assistance, with one of the best-trained armies in the Middle East and advanced American weaponry. If this arsenal were to fall into the hands of Islamists, Jordan would be far more dangerous than a would-be Palestinian state.
Shortly after the Gaza war started, the kingdom saw massive demonstrations against Israel, spurred by the resurgence of the Muslim Brotherhood, who support Hamas and leveraged the public outcry over Israel’s military operations, with aid from Iran, which has stepped up its efforts to destabilize the kingdom by reactivating Islamist groups within the country. Protests organized by the group have been dominated by Hamas flags and pro-Hamas slogans.
The group’s political arm, the Islamic Action Front, is the largest opposition group in Jordan’s parliament since its gains in last year’s parliamentary election, the first following a series of reforms introduced by King Abdullah II aimed at promoting greater democratization.
Jordan’s security services on April 15 arrested 16 people suspected of plotting attacks inside the country involving rockets and drones. The hand of Iran was suspected. Jordan accused the Muslim Brotherhood of planning the attacks and introduced a blanket ban against the group April 23.
The relationship between Israel and Jordan has had its ups and downs, though since a 1994 treaty they are formally at peace. The second intifada, 2000-2005, and Israel’s 2008-2009 military operation in Gaza, were challenging periods. In 2017, an Israeli security guard at the Israeli embassy in Amman killed an assailant and an innocent Jordanian national, shuttering the embassy for six months. The Gaza war has, naturally, put increased strain between the two nations, and in the last several years, it’s been mainly a peace upheld by security coordination.
King Abdullah has of late been particularly critical of Israel. The king joined 56 other countries at the September 15 joint meeting of the Arab League and Organization of Islamic States, following Israel’s September 9 attack on Hamas leaders in Doha, Qatar, in calling for tougher measures against the Jewish state. He also contended that the attack was “proof that the Israeli threat has no limits,” and advocated for a “clear, decisive, and deterrent” response. He urged a “review all our tools of joint action to confront the threat of this extremist Israeli government.”
During his September 23 speech before the UN General Assembly, King Abdullah again centred his remarks on Israel. He criticized Israel for attacking Iran, Syria, and Lebanon, though all three have had Iranian proxies that posed direct threats to Jordan. He accused Israel of complicity in the desecration of Muslim and Christian holy sites in Jerusalem. He even stated that Israel was a threat to the Al Aqsa Mosque. (Jordan maintains administrative control of the Temple Mount because Israel granted that in 1967 following the Six Day War. But in return, no other religion other than Islam is permitted to pray anywhere on the of the Temple Mount.)
On November 1, 2023, Jordan pulled its ambassador from Tel Aviv. Amman also encouraged the European Union and the United Nations to sanction and embargo arms transfers to Israel. The Allenby Bridge, also known as the King Hussein Bridge, which crosses the Jordan River, was shut on September 19, after two Israelis were murdered at the crossing by a Jordanian truck driver. It was the second incident of its kind in a year, following the killing of three Israelis in September 2024. The bridge reopened four days later.
Israel and Jordan share a critical and lengthy border, secured by the peace agreement. The boundary is 482 kilometres long and stretches from the Golan Heights through the West Bank and the Dead Sea to its terminus at the Gulf of Aqaba. Jordan also provides Israel with strategic depth and early warning vis-à-vis Iran. In April and October 2024, as well as during the June 15-23 twelve-day war, bilateral defense cooperation was critical to helping to counter Iranian missile and drone attacks against Israel. A weakened Jordan would place Israel in a far more dire situation.
Henry Srebrnik is a professor of political science at the University of Prince Edward Island.
Features
Green Remodeling Gains Momentum in the Wenatchee Valley
Homes in Wenatchee Valley face intense seasonal shifts. These drastic changes cause temperature fluctuations with a direct financial impact. Summer sun drives cooling needs through the roof. Winter cold demands constant heating. These translate to high energy bills. On top of that, it harms the environment.
Green remodeling is a powerful response. It blends innovative techniques with sustainable practices. Home upgrades now extend beyond mere aesthetics. It also considers environmental impact. It reflects an eco-conscious movement prioritizing the greater good. What are the driving forces behind these changes?
The Drivers Behind the Trend
Green remodeling is gaining popularity around the valley for practical reasons. But there’s a deeper motivation that goes beyond money talks. More residents are now thoughtful about how their choices affect the planet.
Soaring Energy Bills
The cost of electricity in Washington state is rising. Authorities have been pushing for clean energy. Despite this, the demand from data centers is growing. The residential electricity’s average retail price increased from 12.4 cents in May 2024 to 13.67 cents in May 2025. This is a 12.6% difference, higher than the 6.5% national average. It’s expected that there will be a 3 to 4% increase by June 2026.
The One Big Beautiful Bill is also contributing to the increase. Residents are at risk of losing clean energy credits. Those who installed solar panels and heat pumps were eligible for a 30% tax credit. But that is about to end. It threatens the residential clean energy market. This can force homeowners to look for other ways to cut costs, and that includes green remodeling beyond clean energy use.
Threat of Climate Change
Wenatchee Valley, like other parts of Washington, is experiencing the impact of climate change. From rising sea levels to dangerous heat indexes, several problems confront residents. It also hurts snowpacks and streamflows, calling for more thoughtful approaches to remodeling to conserve water and other resources.
Competitive Housing Market
The real estate market in the Wenatchee Valley faces intense competition. In July 2025, 48.5% of the houses sold were under the stated list price. That puts pressure on sellers to meet the demands of buyers without losing profits. To keep the numbers up, homeowners consider investing in significant green upgrades that can elevate property values.
Accessibility of Green Technologies
Modern materials are removing barriers that once limited green remodeling. The market is filled with options for low-VOC paint and high-performance insulation. You can easily find affordable recycled wood and bamboo. Pre-fabricated and sustainable components are widely available. That makes it easy to incorporate sustainability in every stage of the remodel.
Skilled services from experienced contractors are also accessible. You can easily find a quality custom cabinetry provider if you’re looking for one. These professionals tailor their products to your exact specifications. They use environment-friendly materials that can withstand the test of time, eliminating the need for frequent replacements.
What Green Remodeling Looks Like
Green remodeling requires visible updates with real impact. It’s more than just a concept or a trend. Rather, it’s a principle that governs home improvements.
Selecting the Right Materials
What you build with is an essential consideration. Conscious material selection goes beyond costs. Prioritize sustainable resources. Durability is a crucial factor. Some materials are cheap, but they tend to break easily. That means it won’t take long before they must be replaced. Reduce waste over the lifetime of your home.
Intelligent Layout and Design
The best materials are useless if you do not pay attention to how they are designed or laid out in a room. Space and energy flow are heavy influences. Open floor plans invite natural light and passive ventilation. Position windows to capture southern light. This helps keep your home warm in the winter. Strategic placement of trees in your yard provides cooling in the summer. Let the design work with the local climate, not against it.
A Localized Supply Chain
Where materials come from also matters. Local is your best bet. Search the Wenatchee Valley for potential suppliers. The closer they are to home, the better. This means you’re cutting carbon emissions. Doing so also supports the local economy. A local focus builds a smaller and more resilient supply chain.
Efficient Energy Systems
Advanced systems work in the background to slash energy consumption. High-efficiency heat pumps use up to 61% less energy compared to their traditional counterparts. Smart thermostats learn from daily routines to optimize temperature regulation. Solar panels harness abundant sunshine. Incorporating these upgrades into a home remodel yields significant long-term benefits.
Effective Water Management
Water conservation requires more than the installation of low-flow showerheads or faucets. It involves a holistic approach to water use. Greywater systems recycle water from showers to irrigate drought-tolerant landscaping. Rainwater harvesting collects run-off for garden use. These alternatives treat water as a precious regional resource.
Overcoming Barriers and Risks
The idea of a green remodel is exciting. It’s also overwhelming. Homeowners may worry about the expenses and expertise necessary for successfully pulling off a project.
Navigating Upfront Costs
Financial resources are the first hurdle to address. Yes, green remodeling can be expensive. It requires investing in advanced technologies and durable materials. A change in perspective is necessary. Think long-term. Consider the energy savings that you can enjoy over the years.
Finding the Right Experts
Green remodeling isn’t one job to complete yourself. You need people with knowledge and skills. That translates to additional cost, but this is another investment that pays off. Practice due diligence in evaluating suppliers and contractors.
Regulatory Obstacles
Rules and regulations in the Wenatchee Valley are ever-changing. Look for the latest information that governs home remodeling. Some works may require permits and licenses. There are potential limits on what can be done.
Complex Maintenance
Some green home upgrades may be demanding in terms of long-term maintenance. Choose components from reputable suppliers that offer reliable support. Ask for warranties and upgrade paths.
Final Thoughts
Climate change effects are apparent. They manifest in extreme temperature changes and rising energy costs. Competition in the housing market also intensifies. That makes it more important for homes to stand out. One that can help is green remodeling, and it’s currently gaining momentum. Homeowners are welcoming ways to upgrade their residences in a way that benefits them and the environment.
Features
Shayla Mindell: long-gone from Winnipeg, yet still feeling a strong connection to this city
By GERRY POSNER Recently a group of ex-Winnipeggers came together – in Montreal this time, in the form of a reunion of four women – long time pals originally from Winnipeg, now all living elsewhere. They were: the former Marcia Billinkoff Schnoor, now of Toronto; Shayla Mindell, now of Ottawa; Toby Morantz, now of Montreal; and Ruth Bellan Cooperstock, formerly of Victoria, and now of Montreal. I heard about this particular reunion from Marcia. Since it had been a long time since I’d been in touch with Shayla Mindell, recently I decided to contact her. The story on the reunion of the four women will be the subject of a different story at another time.
For those readers who go back a distance in Winnipeg, they will know the Mindell name from Shayla’s parents, Joe and Rose Mindell of blessed memory. Some might even recall the maternal grandparents as in Sam and Faiga Malamed, long time Winnipeg residents. There were several stories on Sam Malamed and they all are contained in the Jewish Post newspaper archives located at the Jewish Heritage Centre of Western Canada – available to anyone who wants to read them. Or you could just enter the Jewish Foundation of Manitoba ’s Endowment’s Book of Life and there you will find compelling accounts of members of the Malamed Mindell Mishpachah. Shayla Mindell is a granddaughter of the Malameds.
Shayla is a product of the north end of Winnipeg, having grown up at 530 Enniskillen Avenue in West Kildonan. She is also a sister to Sheldon Mindell, a name familiar to many Winnipeggers (for his longtime work in raising funds for such organizations as the Jewish Foundation and Riverview Health Centre, also his involvement in owning Rumors Comedy Club).
Shayla attended Edmund Partridge School and later West Kildonan Collegiate. Not long after her graduation from high school, Shayla set foot on the University of Manitoba grounds and it was there that she obtained her B.A. in 1963.
Shayla went on to get a degree in Library Science in 1964 from the University of British Columbia. After her marriage to Mark Doctoroff, also a former Winnipegger, she did a lot of travelling – owing to Mark’s studies and later, his work with the Canadian government – in the USA, Brazil and then, in Australia. From 1972 to 1980, during a time when she was back living in Canada, Shayla worked part time at the Algonquin College Library in Ottawa, where she was employed for eight years. Along the way, that is, during her stay in Australia, her children, both daughters, Fern and Jill Doctoroff, were born. In 1980, she and Mark separated.
Shayla had a long and rewarding career with the federal government as the head of a library and records management department in Ottawa. It was in 2003 that she retired and she now spends her time taking courses of various kinds, studying Spanish, volunteering ( wonder where that gene came from – hello Sam Malamed) and savouring her time with her two grandchildren, Hailey and Oliver, now 16, who live in Ottawa nearby. In short, she is busier in retirement than she was even when she worked full time.
Now, what Shayla did recently was to get her family to join her in Winnipeg for her brother Sheldon and his wife Tannis Mindell’s 50th wedding anniversary. In doing that, she went, as they say, ”the whole nine yards.” Aside from taking everyone around to see the sights of Winnipeg – via a guided tour, she also included a visit to the cemetery to see the graves of her grandparents, Sam and Faiga Malamed; her parents, Joe and Rose Mindell; and her aunt and uncle, Lily and Max Leibl. The grandkids were exposed to some serious Winnipeg Jewish history. They even placed stones on the graves of their great-great grandparents.
Lastly, she took the group to her former residence on Enniskillen. (Doesn’t everyone want to do this? I, for sure, do.) Then, she went the extra step and knocked on the door of what had been her childhood home and asked for an invitation to enter. Seek and ye shall find it is said and, for Shayla that phrase worked. Shayla said to me, ”What a great experience.” The house was much the same, though naturally enough, there were renovations, such as to the bathroom and kitchen. I suspect that the chance to see your parent or grandparent’s childhood home with your parent showing you around would be a moving experience for many.
Shayla falls into a club of ex-Winnipeggers (a large club indeed) who, though removed from the city for a long time, still live in the city in their hearts. She learned well from her parents and grandparents.