Uncategorized
A 1990s Israeli play is the feminist production NY needs right now
(New York Jewish Week) — When Anat Gov’s play “HaChaverot Hachi Tovot” (“Best Friends”) premiered in 1999, it was an anomaly among Israeli works of theater. In fact, Gov wrote it with anomalous intentions: In an interview before it opened, she called the piece a form of “compensation for the fact that there are no good roles for women.”
To remedy this, Gov wrote a play with no male roles — a 100-minute romp down memory lane which calls into question the very nature of friendship and whether or not the love between BFFs can stand the test of time.
At the time, the play was a smash, winning the Israel National Theater Award for best comedy of the year, and playing over 700 times during its initial run at the acclaimed Cameri Theatre in Tel Aviv. “Best Friends” was then rewritten as a TV miniseries for HOT, a popular Israeli TV network, and re-staged in 2013, after Gov’s death the previous year.
Today, the play is enjoying a new imagining here in New York: Through April 2, it’s being performed at the Rattlestick Theater in Manhattan, in alternating performances in both Hebrew and English, by the team at the Israeli Artists Project, a non-profit that presents Israeli theater, music and art in the greater New York area.
“Best Friends” is ostensibly about friendship but touches on broad themes of jealousy, fertility struggles, betrayal and much more. And yet, intentionally or not, its deep dive into the force and fury of the female experience comes at a time when the cause of women’s rights is seeing setbacks in Israel and the United States.
“There are so many facets to our work,” says Yoni Venridger, founder and producing artistic director of IAP. “But to put it simply, we want to be a home where people of any affiliation can come together, enjoy our common culture, and put politics aside. In a way, everything we do is inherently political. We are, after all, representing a country. That said, we’re interested in doing Israeli things, being Israeli people, without automatically politicizing our events.”
The play, which is both hilarious and heartbreaking, centers on three women — Leli, Sophie and Tirtza — who are at a breaking point in their lifelong friendship. In the opening scene, Leli calls her two ex-besties to gather; it’s a matter of life or death, she says, refusing to say which one it is. Despite an extended period of silence between the three and heightened tensions between Sophie and Tirtza, in particular, they come together, and begin to unpack every single piece of emotional baggage they have.
As is the case in actual lifelong friendships, there’s a lot to unpack here: high school crushes, first loves, heartbreak, professional successes and woes, births, marriages — no stone is left unturned. Shouting ensues, and laughter, and some awkward silences.
“We need more plays that give central roles to women,” said Vendriger. “It’s not necessarily about writing plays without any male roles, either. What’s critical is writing more lead roles for women, more well-rounded, rich roles for women.”
“Best Friends” is an extreme version of this, of course, by omitting all men from the cast, and it easily passes the Bechdel Test — that is to say, it includes at least two named female characters who discuss something other than a man — with flying colors. Leli, Sophie and Tirtza certainly talk about men, love and heartbreak, but the primary focus is on how they’ve let themselves, and each other, down.
One of the most effective choices Gov made was to have the drama play out in two decades simultaneously. There are two casts: a young version of the women, in the 1960s, and a middle-aged version, in the 1990s. Beyond the illustrative power of showing friendship instead of telling about it, Gov creates a fascinating dynamic between the two sets of women. At times, the two casts interact, holding one another, reminding one another of their various strengths and shortcomings. Who among us hasn’t wished to warn or encourage our younger selves, or that our younger selves could remind us of who we once were?
This revisited version of Gov’s classic was slated to run in New York in May 2020 — but the pandemic, of course, made that impossible. Instead, it arrives in time for Women’s History Month 2023. “The timing kind of just worked out for us,” explained Vendriger.
From left, Maia Karo, Adi Kozlovsky and Karin Hershkovitz Kochavi play a trio of BFFs in “Best Friends.” (Courtesy)
In Israel, a right-wing government is under siege by rivers of enraged citizens — primarily because of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s proposed judicial overhaul, now on pause. But there is pushback among liberal Israelis for other reasons as well. Recently, Betzalel Smotrich, a far-right member of Knesset and the current minister of finance, made sure that Israel would not sign the UN’s International Violence Against Women Act. Prior to this, Smotrich had called himself a “proud homophobe;” he organized a “bestiality parade” as a counter-parade to the Jerusalem Pride march in 2006.
In the United States, women’s rights are also threatened — including by the dismantling of Roe v. Wade, ensuring their right to an abortion.
Against this backdrop, the 1990s of “Best Friends” look downright progressive. To Vendriger, however, this play is about the timeless nature of friendship.
“Gov managed to write in a way that makes her work continuously relevant, regardless of the passage of time,” he said. “It’s the humanity of it. There are connections, power struggles, interpersonal attractions — that stuff will never change. Despite the fact that it’s originally from the ’90s, the meditation on the power and fragility of friendship, on the fact that we need to maintain and work on friendships, it all feels immediate and very appropriate for the present day.”
In fact, the IAP team made no changes to the original text.
The play works today, in 2023, because it leans on universal, wide-reaching themes. At the same time, there is a palpable Israeliness to the whole thing, whether it’s the prickly slang or the fact that one character, whose son is serving in the first Lebanon War, is jealous that her friend’s son has asthma, and therefore gets to stay home.
“‘Best Friends’ integrates the complexity of humanity, friendship and Israeli society, and brings them into the realm of humor,” said director Hamutal Posklinsky-Shehory. “It’s funny, but it’s also dramatic and very witty. [In this iteration] the whole staff is female. All the actresses are — six onstage and two understudies — plus the assistant director, play manager, lighting designer, and costume designer. I feel this is very appropriate for the age that we’re living in and really underlines the space we need to give for female identifying artists.”
When Posklinsky-Shehory isn’t directing, she’s a drama therapist at NYC Peace of Mind, a group psychotherapy practice that brings together drama therapists to support and enrich one another’s creative treatment approaches. Her work, she said, informed her directorial choices. “The relationships presented between the three friends are not the healthiest ones,” she said, “and we went through a process, truly trying to figure out and understand the motivations and [emotional landscapes] of the characters.”
To this end, the cast used therapeutic techniques alongside theatrical practices in order to deepen their connections and understanding. “We incorporated some writing activities, with the actors writing to their characters. Another time, we sought connections and differences between our actors and the characters that they play, as a group. In this way, we developed trust and deepened our bond with one another,” she said.
This is, in a sense, the bottom line of the play: the bonds that tie, and how they can unravel under the strains of a lifetime. “As humans, we’re complex,” said Posklinsky-Shehory. “Even in a play that’s all fantastic and sweet and nostalgic, there’s still the complexity and darkness [of life]. I’d like people to leave with an understanding that what we feel is perfect and complex, and that’s OK. We need to accept those parts of ourselves and our society.”
—
The post A 1990s Israeli play is the feminist production NY needs right now appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Does Israel Hater Hasan Piker Have More Chutzpah Than American Jews?
Hasan Piker. Photo: Wikimedia Commons
Any article about Hasan Piker should start by explaining that he said “America deserved 9/11,” according to Congressman Ritchie Torres (D-NY). It should then say that Piker referred to Ultra-Orthodox Jews as “inbred.”
Piker is one of the most popular streamers on Twitch and just did a major interview with a Jewish outlet, speaking with the Jewish Telegraphic Agency’s Andrew Lapin.
Lapin’s article left it up to the reader to keep score, as good articles do. It’s worth a read.
Hasan Piker is a major force in pushing Democrats to turn against Israel. He is calculating. He knows that people care about status and charisma. They care about looking smart, not actually being intelligent.
Piker is physically attractive, and has been the subject of glowing articles in outlets like People and The New York Times.
So why did Piker pick this time to give an interview to a Jewish media outlet? Because he sees he has the backing of influential people to downplay his evil. He knows that politics is about power, and he has more chutzpah than many American Jews do — he’ll go to a Jewish outlet, and claim to support Jews.
He can go to Yale and other colleges like he is someone to be admired and get applause. According to Congressman Torres, in addition to supporting terrorist groups like Hezbollah and championing “resistance” against Israel, “Piker has even gone as far as to incite violence, telling his followers to ‘kill’ and ‘murder’ people ‘in the streets’ and ‘let the streets soak in their red-capitalist blood.’”
In an Opinion article for The Forward, Emily Tamkin writes: “If pushing back against antisemitism is the top priority for our community, I suspect that writing Piker off as an antisemite with whom engagement simply can’t be countenanced will do more harm than good.”
She says that his statements and attitudes are different than Nick Fuentes, and that “this distinction matters. Fuentes’ antisemitism is so extreme and all-encompassing that his fans and followers will never be allies to American Jews. There is little evidence to believe the same is true for Piker. To successfully fight antisemitism, American Jews need a broad base of allies. In that context, Piker’s audience — including nearly 3 million followers on the streaming platform Twitch — is one that it would be a mistake for us to wholly write off.”
While I don’t know if it’s a good use of time to worry if Fuentes or Piker is worse, it is important to note that Fuentes will not be joining any major candidates on the political stage, while Piker will. I also would not be surprised if Piker eventually decides to run for office himself.
Many Democrats like Torres and Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) realize how dangerous and extreme Piker is. But many more Democrats are ready to embrace him.
Piker is anti-American — and also obviously hates Israel.
A failure to protest the normalization of Piker into mainstream politics signifies that Jews are not only okay with being America’s punching bag, but we prefer the bully sit next to us at the table, so we can tell ourselves we are cool. Ezra Klein is a disgrace to try to give Piker a positive profile — as are many other progressives of all stripes (Jewish and non-Jewish alike). We are way past mental gymnastics. We are at the point where fools have broken the balance beam.
Piker has calculated that many Jews are stupid, afraid, or don’t have the chutzpah to protest him, because so many are like Thomas Friedman and will do anything to stay relevant. The sad thing is that Piker may be right.
The author is a writer based in New York.
Uncategorized
What Has the War Against Iran Revealed About the Status of Countries Around the World?
United Kingdom’s Ambassador to the United Nations Barbara Woodward, accompanied by other E3 members German Ambassador Ricklef Beutin and Deputy French Ambassador Jay Dharmadhikari, speaks to members of the press about Iran and nuclear weapons outside the UN Security Council chamber at UN Headquarters in New York City, US, Aug. 29, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Angelina Katsanis
The Epic Fury/Roaring Lion War cast a spotlight on the power index of many countries and the global and regional balance of power. For the purposes of this paper, a country’s power is defined as its security and economic posture. A country may have additional supporting strengths (once called “soft”), such as diplomacy, influence, and internal resilience. For the weaker player, such strengths provide power, but their effectiveness is limited. Ultimately, they are embodied in two main ones: strategic-security posture and economic dominance.
There is a gap between a country’s self-perception and its actual power, as Russia learned after its decision to invade Ukraine. This paper assesses “objective” power rather than a country’s self-perception.
One country in the world today is considerably more powerful than all others: the United States. There are weak countries in the world. In fact, out of about 200 countries, a significant portion of them are either weak or have small yet sufficient power relative to their surroundings. A new member of the latter club is Spain, which was once a global empire but which is now weak in terms of both security and economy.
The other countries rest on a continuum. They can be divided into two types: those that strive for power and those that flee from weakness. The Epic Fury War held up a mirror to the global and regional arena, allowing for a recalibration of the position of various countries on the continuum.
There are several reasons why Epic Fury is a better indicator of countries’ strength than the war in Ukraine or the situation in the China Sea:
- It is the first global war crisis during the presidency of Donald Trump, who has placed the issue of power at the center of his strategy;
- it transformed from a regional crisis into a global one due to the energy issue and the supply chain challenges, which have intensified in recent years, especially since the Covid-19 pandemic; and
- it puts key geostrategic arenas to the test, such as Russia-Europe, India-Pakistan, and, in the Pacific, from China to Australia.
Estimating change in the power index of key countries
The description below is intended to provide initial directions for the professional and academic discourse on the issue.
Iran: The Islamic Republic has returned to fleeing from weakness. In the first two decades of its existence, the regime fled from weakness, with the trauma of the Iran-Iraq War playing a central role. However, in the last two decades, it changed course and moved toward striving for power. The Iranians decided that security power was more important than economic, and were willing to pay the painful price of sanctions in exchange for it. The main milestones of this shift seem to have been the regime’s success in suppressing the “Green Movement” protest in 2009; the absence of restrictions on its behavior in the missile field and in the regional arena in the JCPOA in 2015; its ability to supply advanced missile capabilities to proxies; and the victories of its axis in aiding the Assad regime in Syria and in the Houthis’ fight against the Saudis and the UAE. Unlike Qassem Soleimani, who strove for regional power in a calculated manner while managing risk, his successors were less rigorous, as evidenced by their inability to control Hamas on October 7. The current war, even if the Islamic regime does not yet fully understand it as such, is a severe blow to its striving after power. During the process of internalizing the results of the war, the regime will likely grasp that it has to return to the approach of fleeing from weakness.
United States: The US has strengthened its pursuit of power. Epic Fury was a purposeful display of the Americans’ absolute military superiority, especially as it was supported by an ally who is a “running horse,” not a “lazy donkey.” It experienced a slight backlash in the area of economic power, because it is still internally sensitive to energy price fluctuations, but this negative is insignificant relative to its achievements.
China and the Pacific: The Chinese have come out ahead in their pursuit of power. On the one hand, an ostensible ally of Beijing has been severely damaged and isolated. But on the economic level, through the strength it has built in recent years in the field of supply chains, China has demonstrated clear superiority over its Japanese, South Korean and Australian neighbors. On the military side, what happened in the Persian Gulf hardly whet the world’s appetite for further conflict in the China Sea, which strengthens China’s bargaining power.
Russia and Europe: The Russian balance sheet for the pursuit of power, especially vis-à-vis Europe, is positive. In economic terms, the war boosted its ability to profit from energy sales and balance the economic difficulties resulting from the long war and sanctions. In the security sphere, Europe’s weakness strengthens Russian power. Like Russia, Ukraine – a country that is by definition fleeing from weakness, especially in the current war – also managed to strengthen its position in the form of security and economic gains. On the other hand, Europe, fleeing from weakness, suffered another blow to its security power: the practical disintegration of the NATO alliance and the distancing from Europe of the United States, NATO’s critical component.
India and Pakistan: India’s quest for power has been negatively affected. Pakistan succeeded – in a process that has been going on for more than a year – in positioning itself as an asset to the United States, but was exposed for its weakness as a military partner of Saudi Arabia. However, this development should be analyzed more in the context of India, since the rapprochement between the United States and Pakistan is an American challenge to the independent strategy that India is pursuing, among other areas, in the Russian context. In addition, the war revealed weaknesses in the Indian supply chain. These developments reflect the fact that India still faces significant challenges in its quest for global power.
Germany, Great Britain and France: Here we see a reversal of roles. Germany is the one striving after power, while Britain and France, which, in recent decades, have exercised security power in various arenas, have been revealed as unable to exert power, mainly for internal reasons. They are now deep along the continuum among those fleeing from weakness, while Germany appears to have passed through another stage in its complex return to being a security power.
Saudi Arabia and the Gulf: Epic Fury posed a challenge to the Saudi approach of striving for power and fleeing from the weakness of the other Gulf countries. For decades, Saudi Arabia positioned itself as the key regional player striving for power through its enormous economic capabilities. The current de facto ruler, Muhammad bin Salman, attempted to regulate this effort through Vision 2030. In this pursuit, Saudi Arabia prioritized economic power over security power, and this resulted in painful military losses to the Houthis over the past decade. The Iranian decision to militarily attack the Gulf states and oil exports as a central strategic approach (albeit with no choice) represented a security challenge to the Gulf states’ economic power. Saudi Arabia will now have to reexamine whether it can continue to strive for power or must shift to the more realistic approach of fleeing from weakness.
In the other Gulf states, the UAE, Qatar, Bahrain, Oman, and Kuwait, the situation is even clearer. Their basic strategy is to flee from weakness. The war proved to them that they need to improve their capabilities, mainly in the security field and in alternatives to oil and gas flows.
Turkey‘s approach also retreated somewhat as a result of the war. It has shifted from a country that strives more and more after power to one that flees from weakness.
Israel: Epic Fury/Roaring Lion constituted a significant achievement in Israel’s pursuit of power – with an asterisk.
David Ben-Gurion’s national security strategy was designed as a flight from inherent weakness. It created a durable force with five components: a qualitative conventional military advantage, an image of nuclear deterrence, special relations with a superpower, economic and technological superiority, and national resilience.
Over a long process, Israel’s approach transformed from a flight from weakness to the pursuit of power. A number of key events can be highlighted: the Six-Day War, which confirmed Israel’s military power in the region and ultimately led to the peace agreement with Egypt; the leap to a hi-tech, free-market economy that manifested from 1992; and the process, resulting from the shock of the October 7, 2023 attack, of releasing itself from the constraints it had placed upon itself on its use of military force. That unshackling manifested in the operation in Khan Yunis in early 2024, the beeper operation and elimination of Nasrallah at the end of that year, and Operation Rising Lion in 2025. The State of Israel today is, as a result of the current war, a country with military and economic power much greater than its objective geo-political posture. However, when we look forward, we see that its position is unbalanced. Israel must re-strengthen the other elements of its power (see Perspective Paper No. 2347, June 3, 2025): an advanced, resilient society and economy, with improved long-term positioning of its relations with the United States and other powers.
Col. (res.) Shay Shabtai is a senior researcher at the BESA Center and an expert in national security, strategic planning, and strategic communication. He is a cyber security strategist and a consultant to leading companies in Israel. A version of this article was originally published by The BESA Center.
Uncategorized
Shocking: How Palestinian Propaganda Mirrors Language Directly From the Nazis
The Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al-Husseini, meets with Adolf Hitler in 1941. Photo: German Federal Archives via Wikimedia Commons.
How similar are narratives presented in Palestinian society, and the words spewed by the Nazis? Read for yourself below and decide:
Hitler:
“The Jews are the eternal archenemy of the human race. They manipulate, corrupt, and destroy societies.”[Mein Kampf, Vol. 1, Chap. 11]
Palestinian Writers’ Union General Secretariat member Talal Abu Afifa:
“The Jews, wherever they settle, they try to take control of the country’s economy and wealth… They did this not just in Britain, but in most of the European states…”
Official PA TV host: “Indeed, wherever they arrived, destruction followed.”
[Official PA TV, In Memory, Nov. 2, 2024]
Hitler:
“The Jews … are a race of parasites… systematically undermining the fabric of societies”[Mein Kampf, Vol. 1, Chap. 10]
PA TV religious lesson:
Palestinian researcher Muhammad Al-Yahya: “Jews are by nature arrogant, do not accept the other… Their [Jewish] thinking is based on racism that caused them to be hated everywhere. The Zionist thinking is based on them being ‘God’s chosen people.’ [as written] In the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.”[Official PA TV, Returning, Jan. 17, 2023 and Feb. 27, 2023, May 14, 2023]
Hitler:
“If the Jew, with the help of his Marxist creed, is victorious over the peoples of this world, then his crown will be the funeral wreath of humanity”[Mein Kampf, Vol. 1, Chap.11]
Abbas’ advisor, Mahmoud Al-Habbash:
“The occupation (i.e., Israel) is the cause of all evils… of all crises and disasters that everyone … even possibly the whole world, experiences.”[PA leader Mahmoud Abbas’ Advisor on Religious Affairs and Islamic Relations Mahmoud Al-Habbash, YouTube channel, Jan. 19, 2025]
Hitler:
“The Jewish people, by virtue of their innate characteristics, were driven to world domination.”[Mein Kampf, Vol. 1, Chap. 11]
PA Daily:
“They [Jews] want to subjugate the entire world”[Official PA daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Dec. 15, 2024]
Hitler:
“The danger represented by the Jews today finds expression in the undeniable dislike of them felt by a large section of our people.”[Letter from Hitler to Adolf Gimlich, 1919]
Fatah leader Tayseer Nasrallah:
“What happened in the Netherlands [attack on Jewish sports fans] is the best proof that the world is sick of the Jews.”TV host: “Right.”
[Official PA TV, Nov. 10, 2024]
Hitler:
“The personification of the devil as the symbol of all evil assumes the living shape of the Jew.”[Mein Kampf, Vol. 1, Chap. 11]
Mahmoud Abbas’ Advisor Mahmoud Al-Habbash:
“Satan does not have to be in the form of a demon, hidden, he can also be in your form, but he is Satan. In the form of man, but he is Satan. And they (i.e., Satan-Jews) are still fighting us until they turn us back from our religion.”
[Official PA TV, July 7, 2023]
Hitler:
“The Jew’s existence is a crime against humanity, and the only solution is his removal from our midst.”[Mein Kampf, Vol. 2, Chap. 13]
PA Ministry of Religious Affairs:
“The Hour [of Resurrection] will not come until the Muslims fight the Jews and kill them until the Jews hide behind rocks and trees, and the rock or a tree will say: ‘Muslim, O servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him’”
[PA Ministry of Religious Affairs, Facebook page, Oct. 18, 2023]
Facebook page of the PA Ministry of Religious Affairs, Oct. 18, 2023
Hitler:
“The result will not be the … victory of Jewry but the annihilation of the Jewish race in Europe.”[Hitler to Reichstag, January 30, 1939]
PA Shari’ah Judge Abdallah Harb: “Allah, strike the aggressive Jews, count them and kill them one by one, and do not leave even one.”
[Official PA TV Live, July 5, 2024]
Hitler:
“I defend myself against the Jew.”[Mein Kampf, 1,2]
PA leader Mahmoud Abbas:
“They said that Hitler killed the Jews because they were Jews, and Europe hates the Jews because they are Jews. No!… They fought [the Jews] because of their social role…“Hitler … fought the Jews because they worked based on usury and money. In other words, they caused ruin in his opinion, and therefore he hated them”
[Official PA TV, August 24, 2023]
The author is the Founder and Director of Palestinian Media Watch, where a version of this article first appeared.