Uncategorized
A scholar sees a common root for antisemitism and racism: ‘Christian supremacy’
(JTA) — Magda Teter’s new book, “Christian Supremacy,” begins in Charlottesville, Virginia, on Aug. 11, 2017. Hundreds of white nationalist neo-Nazis who ostensibly gathered to protest the removal of a statue of Confederate general Robert E. Lee from a local park broke into a chant: “Jews will not replace us.”
Other writers and scholars would note how antisemitism shaped white nationalism. But Teter, professor of history and the Shvidler Chair of Judaic Studies at Fordham University, saw something else: how centuries of Christian thought and practice fed the twin evils of antisemitism and racism.
“The ideology espoused by white supremacists in the US and in Europe is rooted in Christian ideas of social and religious hierarchy,” she writes. “These ideas developed, gradually, first in the Mediterranean and Europe in respect to Jews and then in respect to people of color in European colonies and in the US, before returning transformed back to Europe.”
In the book, subtitled “Reckoning with the Roots of Antisemitism and Racism,” she traces this idea from the writings of the early church fathers like Paul the Apostle, though centuries of Catholic and Protestant debates over the status of Jews in Europe, to the hardening of racist attitudes with the rise of the trans-Atlantic slave trade.
Antisemitic laws and theology, she argues, developed within Christianity a “mental habit” of exclusion and dominance that would eventually be applied to people of color up to and including modern times.
Teter is careful to acknowledge the different forms antisemitism and racism have taken, distinguishing between the Jews’ experience of social and legal exclusion and near annihilation, and the enslavement, displacement and ongoing persecution of Black people. And yet, she writes, “that story began with Christianity’s theological relation with Jews and Judaism.”
Teter is previously the author of “Blood Libel: On The Trail of an Antisemitic Myth,” winner of the 2020 National Jewish Book Award. At Fordham, the Catholic university in the Bronx, she is helping assemble what may be the largest repository of artifacts and literature dedicated to the Jewish history of the borough.
We spoke Thursday about how groups like the Proud Boys embrace centuries-old notions of Christian superiority, how “whiteness” became a thing and how she, as a non-Jew raised in Poland, became a Jewish studies scholar.
Our conversation was edited for length and clarity.
Your book was conceived and written during the COVID lockdown. Where did the idea for the book come from?
It’s an accidental project. I’ve been teaching the history of antisemitism for years, and I live in Harlem so questions of race and racism are very stark in my daily life. And since I grew up in Poland, and American history was not something we were taught or studied, I’ve never been satisfied with the various explanations for the strength of antisemitism and history of racism. And as I mentioned in my prologue, I watched the Raoul Peck documentary, “I Am Not Your Negro,” which has a clip with James Baldwin saying that white people have to figure out why they invented the idea of the N-word and must “embrace this stranger that they have maligned so long.” You could also say that the European Christians created the idea of “the Jew” and that sort of caricature had absolutely nothing to do with flesh and blood Jews. I kept noticing these parallels, as an outsider, reading American and African-American history.
I was also thinking about this idea of servitude that was attached to Jews in Christian theology, and then in law.
You write in your book that “Over time, white European Christians branded both Jews and people of color with ‘badges of servitude’ and inferiority.” What do you mean by servitude in this context?
In Christian theology, from the earliest Christian texts, the idea of servitude and slavery is attached to the concept of Jews and Judaism. Paul does it in his Epistles. He uses this quote from the book of Genesis that “the elder shall serve the younger,” which becomes really embedded in Christian theology. It is the Jews, the elder people, who should serve the Christians, the younger people. Later on in medieval theology and canon law, Jews are in a servile position, consigned for their sin of rejecting Jesus to perpetual servitude. So even though Jews were free people and could live mostly where they wanted to live, marry whoever they wanted to marry — nobody was sold and some even had slaves — that idea of Jews as confined to perpetual servitude to Christians created a habit of thinking of Jews as having an inferior social status.
That language became secularized in modern times, and we see the development of the [antisemitic] trope of Jewish power: that they are in places where they shouldn’t be. I worked on fleshing out the parallels between the idea and then legal status of Jewish servitude and the conceptual perception of Black people in servile and inferior positions.
Magda Teter’s new book explores how “white European Christians branded both Jews and people of color with ‘badges of servitude’ and inferiority.” (Chuck Fishman)
What other kinds of parallels did you find between racism and antisemitism?
In the Christian theology, Black people, like Jews, will be seen as cursed by God. Jews were [portrayed as] lazy because they didn’t work physically — they made money and exploited Christians. Black people were [portrayed as] lazy because they were trying to avoid physical labor at the expense of white men. Both people were seen as carnal, both as sexually dangerous, and so on.
I was struck by the fact that the racist turn of Christian supremacy — justifying the enslavement of Black people on theological grounds — is a fairly late development, taking hold in the early modern period when Europeans established slaveholding empires.
That’s right. In the summer of 2020, the summer of George Floyd and Black Lives Matter, we were all thinking about these issues of race and racism and America. And as I was in the middle of writing the article that became the book, I felt that there was a deeper history that needed to be told, and that slavery is not bound by color until the enslavement of Black Africans by Europeans during the colonial expansion of Europe.
After the French Revolution, when Jews were offered “emancipation” in much of Europe, there were deep debates about whether they could be citizens and be entitled to the same rights and protections as Christian citizens of France and England and other countries. How was that debate informed by Christianity?
In pre-modern Europe, there was obviously both a religious and legal framework under which Jews existed. They had their place in a social hierarchy. After the French Revolution, people are creating a new political reality. The idea of equality obviously challenged the social hierarchies that existed, including the idea that Christians were the superior religion. And that begins to play a role on two levels. One is the level of, well, “how can you be equal and be our judges and make decisions about us?” It’s fear of power — political power and political equality. That challenges the habit of thinking that sees Jews as inferior, in servitude and otherwise insolent and arrogant.
The other level comes from Enlightenment scholars who begin to place Jews in the Middle East and in the Holy Land, in Palestine. Jews are no longer seen as European. They are seen as “Oriental,” and they are compared to the non-European religions and practices that these Enlightenment scholars have been studying. Their differences are now also racialized. “They are not like us, they can’t assimilate. They can never be Frenchmen, they can never be Germans.”
And I guess it’s a short step from that to regarding people with dark skin as inferior and subordinate.
That’s right. Enlightenment scholars are also trying to to understand why it is justified to enslave Black Africans and they do it through “scientific” and other means. They classify Africans as inferior intellectually and they create this idea of race.
I began to think about these European politicians and intellectuals in terms of creating their identities, and what I ended up arguing is what we saw in Charlottesville, what we’re seeing in Europe. It’s not necessarily just about hate, but it’s about exclusion and rejection of Jews and people of color from equality, from citizenship.
And the common thread here is that whiteness and Christianity become inseparable. You write that “freedom and liberty now came to be linked not only to Christianity, but to whiteness, and servitude and enslavement to blackness.”
That’s right. White Christian “liberty” becomes embedded and embodied in law.
Did you see any pitfalls in drawing parallels between the Black and Jewish experiences? I am thinking of those in either community who might say, “How dare you compare our suffering to theirs!”
Yes, I was tempered. I think what some call “comparative victimhood” has paralyzed conversations about this subject, and I kept it in my mind all the time. What I hope comes through is that there’s incredible value in a comparative approach. Coming from Jewish studies as my primary field, the comparison with the Black experience gave me clarity on the nature of antisemitism as well as on the nature of the Jewish experience, and vice versa: The Jewish experience can also give clarity to some of the aspects of anti-Black racism.
What’s an example?
So, for instance, questions like, “Are Jews white? Are they not white? When did they become white?” That’s a whole genre of scholarship. And when you look at it through the lens of law and ideology, you begin to see that from a legal perspective, Jews were considered white in the United States because they could immigrate and they could be naturalized according to law. They did not have to go to court to become American. Their rights to vote were not challenged. There was discrimination, they couldn’t stay in hotels and in some places they couldn’t find employment, but by law, they were considered citizens. The debate about the whiteness of Jews is creating a fog of misunderstanding.
Black Americans were targeted by specific legal statutes from the very beginning in the Constitution and then in naturalization law and so on. And then there was the backlash even after the Civil War to the 13th, 14th and 15th amendments [aimed at establishing political equality for Americans of all races].
Statues at the Strasbourg Cathedral depict Ecclesia and Synagoga, representing the triumph of the church, at left, and the servitude of Judaism, which is represented by a blindfolded figure, drooping and carrying a broken lance. (Edelseider/Wikimedia Commons)
How much do modern-day white supremacists, like the Oath Keepers or the Proud Boys, see themselves as Christian? Or is this a kind of white supremacy that doesn’t name itself Christian but doesn’t even realize how many of its ideas are based in theology?
I think they might not be conscious of this legacy, but neo-Nazis take from the legacy of the Nazis who themselves were not thinking of themselves as Christian necessarily. But what I argue in the book is that white Christian supremacy becomes white supremacy. It never discards the Christian sense of domination and superiority that emerges from its early relationship with Jews and Judaism.
In the United States, Black people serve as contrast figures to whiteness, in the law and in the culture. You cannot have whiteness without Blackness. For Christians, Jews serve as that contrast figure. Consciously or unconsciously, the Proud Boys are embracing that. They talk of “God-given” freedoms for white people. That is the Christian legacy.
You said that the Nazis didn’t necessarily see themselves as a Christian movement. But I must ask, even though it is not the scope of your book, was the Holocaust a culmination of white Christian supremacy? Because I think many Christian theologians would want to say that Nazism was godless, and a perversion of the true faith.
I’ll say that when exclusionary ideology is coupled with the power of the state, that’s where it can lead.
In the years since the Holocaust especially, there have been many efforts by Christian leaders to address the ideological failings of the past. You write about Nostra Aetate, the 1965 declaration by the Catholic Church absolving Jews of collective guilt in the death of Jesus and some Protestant documents of contrition. But I got the feeling you were disappointed that many denominations haven’t gone far enough in reckoning with the past.
There was a sort of a moral sense that something needs to be addressed after the Holocaust. But then it is not fully addressed. I don’t think anybody has addressed the issue of power — the roots of hate, yes, but not the dynamics of power. We’ll see where the book goes, but maybe theologians will begin to grapple with this legacy of superiority and domination, and the way hierarchical habits of thinking have been developed through theology and through religious culture.
What other impact do you hope the book may have?
White supremacy is very much in the air. We need to speak up against it, and make connections and allyships. I hope that maybe because the book deals with law and power, it may create bridges among people who care about “We the People” as a vision of people who are diverse, respectful and equal, and not the exclusionary vision offered by white and Christian supremacy.
A cross burns at a Ku Klux Klan rally on Aug. 8, 1925. (National Photo Company Collection)
I’d love to talk about your background. You’re not Jewish but you are chair of Jewish Studies at Fordham, a Catholic university. What drew you to the study of Judaism and the Jews?
I grew up in Poland with a father who from the time I was a little girl would point out to me that there had been Jews in Poland. We would drive through the countryside, and he’d say, “This used to be a Jewish town and there used to be a synagogue and there was the Jewish cemetery.” I grew up being very conscious of the past’s presence and this kind of stark absence of Jews in Poland, where in the 1970s when I grew up Jewish history was taboo.
As soon as Jewish books on Jewish subjects began to be published, including those that dealt with antisemitism, we would read it together. We would talk about it. He wouldn’t just shift the destruction and murder of Jews in Poland on to the Nazis.
There was no Jewish studies program in Poland when I was applying to universities, so I studied Hebrew in Israel, and then studied Yiddish in New York at YIVO. I came to Columbia University to get my PhD in Jewish history and my career went in the direction it did. I was a professor of history and director of the Jewish and Israel studies program at Wesleyan University. I came to Fordham eight years ago and created a program in Jewish studies.
Your previous book was about the blood libel, the historic canard that Jews murdered Christian children to use their blood. This one’s about antisemitism. I don’t want to presume, but is your interest in these subjects in any way an act of contrition?
I grew up in a very secular household. I did not grow up Catholic. But I think growing up in Poland made me very, very aware of antisemitism and the history of antisemitism. I got my PhD from Columbia University in Jewish history, which did not emphasize Jewish suffering, but Jewish life, and I have studied Jewish life and teach about Jewish life — not just about Jewish suffering.
However, in the last few years, antisemitism has certainly been on the minds of many of us. I also am committed to the idea of shared history, and therefore all my scholarship, as much as it is about Jews, it is also about the church and Poland and the law. Jews are an integral part of that history and culture. And, as such, I’m committed to that, to teaching about the vibrancy of Jewish life as much as the dynamics of what made that life difficult over the centuries.
—
The post A scholar sees a common root for antisemitism and racism: ‘Christian supremacy’ appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Venice Biennale Jury Resigns Amid Israel, Russia Controversy; Organizers Announce New Awards, Ceremony
A poster for the 61st Venice Biennale running from May 9 to November 22. Photo: IMAGO/Frank Ossenbrink via Reuters Connect
The jury for the 2026 Venice Biennale announced their resignation mere days before the 61st edition of the show is set to open to the public on May 9.
The move comes after the five members of the jury, which selects the winners for the exhibition’s top prizes, said on April 22 that they would not consider giving awards to artists from countries accused by the International Criminal Court (ICC) of crimes against humanity, which include Israel and Russia. Both countries are participating in this year’s Venice Biennale, a fact that has caused controversy in light of the Israel-Hamas war and the Russia-Ukraine war.
The ICC issued an arrest warrant in 2023 for Russian President Vladimir Putin, who has been accused of war crimes in Ukraine, and an arrest warrant in 2024 for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu due to his country’s military actions in the Gaza Strip during its war against Hamas terrorists. Israel, which launched its military campaign in response to Hamas’s invasion and massacre of Israelis on Oct. 7, 2023, has strongly denied the ICC’s allegations, with officials saying the Israeli military has gone to unprecedented lengths to try and avoid civilian casualties.
“As of April 30, 2026, we, the international jury selected by Koyo Kouoh, artistic director of the 61st edition of La Biennale di Venezia ‘In Minor Keys,’ have resigned,” the jurors said in a released statement. “We do so in acknowledgment of our Statement of Intention issued on 22 April 2026.” No further information was provided regarding the resignation.
The Venice Biennale did not respond to The Algemeiner‘s request for comment about the decision but acknowledged the jury’s resignation in a released statement on April 30. Organizers announced in a separate statement that the event’s awards ceremony will be moved from May 9 to Nov. 22, which is the last day of the show. The decision to reschedule the awards ceremony was made in light of the jury’s resignation “as well as the exceptional nature of the current international geopolitical situation,” the Venice Biennale said.
The jury for the Venice Biennale typically selects the winners for the highly coveted Golden and Silver Lion prizes. With no jury this year, the Venice Biennale said it will instead establish two “Visitors’ Lions” awards. Visitors will be able to vote for “the Best Participant in the 61st Exhibition ‘In Minor Keys’ by Koyo Kouoh” and “the Best National Participation in the 61st Exhibition.”
Each Venice Biennale ticket holder who visited both of the exhibition’s venues during this year’s show will be eligible to cast one vote for each of the two new awards. All participants n the 2026 Venice Biennale, including those from Israel, will be eligible for the Visitors’ Lion award for Best National Participation “following the principle of inclusion and equal treatment among all participants.”
“This is consistent with the founding spirit of La Biennale, based on openness, dialogue, and the rejection of any form of closure or censorship,” organizers said. “La Biennale seeks to be — and must remain — a place of truce in the name of art, culture, and artistic freedom.”
An open letter calling for Israel to be banned from the 61st Venice Biennale exhibition was published in March and signed by 178 Biennale participants. Romanian artist Belu-Simion Fainaru is representing Israel in this year’s show and recently criticized the jury’s April 22 decision not to consider awarding artists from the country.
Because of backlash over Russia’s participation, the Venice Biennale announced on April 28 that the Russian Pavilion in this year’s show will be only open to the public during the four-day preview. The European Union has already decided to withdraw $2.3 million in funding from the Venice Biennale because of Russia’s inclusion this year.
Uncategorized
All Major Jewish Organizations in Norway Criticize Holocaust Center for Repeatedly ‘Relativizing the Holocaust’
A drone view of the “Arbeit macht frei” gate at the former Auschwitz concentration camp ahead of the 80th anniversary of its liberation, Oswiecim, Poland, Jan. 10, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Kacper Pempel
Representatives from the largest Jewish organizations in Norway collectively published an open letter on Monday that accused the Norwegian Center for Studies of Holocaust and Religious Minorities (HL-Center) of repeatedly “relativizing the Holocaust.”
The open letter, which addressed the board and director of the HL-Center, accused the institution of using the Holocaust “in direct or indirect connection with the wars in the Middle East and other historical events.” The signatories noted that for “several years” there have been “repeated incidents” of the institution promoting “Holocaust revitalization.”
“When the Holocaust is systematically placed in parallel with other conflicts, there is a risk of relativizing its unique historical status. Over time, we have come to view this not as isolated judgments, but as a pattern,” wrote those representing the majority of Jewish life in Norway. They called on the HL-Center to “exercise far greater scholarly and institutional caution in how the Holocaust is discussed and contextualized.”
On April 30, the HL-Center hosted an event that drew parallels between the Holocaust and the Palestinian “Nakba” and how “they have functioned as competing cultural traumas.” “Nakba,” the Arabic term for “catastrophe,” is used by Palestinians and anti-Israel activists to refer to the establishment of the modern state of Israel in 1948.
Israel’s Embassy in Norway said the center’s decision to host the event was a “grotesque distortion of Holocaust memory.”
The open letter on Monday mentioned the April 30 event and also expressed concerns by Norway’s Jewish community about an upcoming event on June 3, titled “Holocaust Memorial after Gaza,” which will discuss Holocaust remembrance in relation to contemporary politics, specifically the Israel-Hamas war in Gaza.
“We wish to emphasize that it is both legitimate and necessary to acknowledge the suffering of civilians in armed conflicts, including the experiences of Palestinians after 1948,” Jewish community leaders wrote in the open letter, before noting “this is a subject that can be addressed without bringing the Holocaust into it.”
“A more natural parallel would be the consequences for the more than 1 million Jews who suffered in, and were forced to flee from, Arab countries after the establishment of Israel,” they added. “It is essential to maintain that the Holocaust represents a historical event without parallel: an industrial, ideologically driven genocide whose aim was the total extermination of the Jewish people.”
The letter was signed by B’nai B’rith Norway Lodge, The National Council for Jewish Communities in Norway, Kos & Kaos The Nordic Jewish Network, Chabad Lubavitch of Norway, Det Mosaiske Trossamfund (congregation) in Oslo, The Jewish Community of Trondheim, and The Jewish Community of Bergen, as well as The Jewish Community of Norway.
The groups asked the HL-Center board to issue a clarification about its role and mandate, “particularly with regard to comparisons between the Holocaust and contemporary conflicts.” They also want the center to establish clear guidelines about how its leadership and events will reflect “ongoing political conflicts,” most likely referring to the Israel-Hamas war.
“We expect the board to take this communication seriously. Our goal is to ensure that the HL Center remains a unifying and academically credible institution — also for the Jewish minority it was founded to protect and serve,” they noted. “We also wish to remind you of several previous communications concerning this matter, including the open letter from descendants of Holocaust victims and B’nai B’rith’s thorough report on the shortcomings we are again raising here. None of these has been answered in a satisfactory manner.”
Representatives from Norway’s major Jewish organizations said they previously reached out to the board of the HL-Center with their concerns regarding Holocaust trivialization, the director’s public statements, the center’s role in political conflicts, and how “Holocaust memory has been connected to contemporary wars during central commemorative events” at the center. Their concerns “appear to have led to little change,” they noted.
“The center has a particular responsibility to preserve the memory of the millions of Jews who were murdered, and to ensure that this memory is not relativized or instrumentalized for political purposes,” they added, after pointing out that the institution was established partially with funds from a restitution settlement following the liquidation of Jewish property during the Holocaust.
“The point is not to preclude criticism of Israeli policy, but to make clear how easily such parallels can contribute to trivializing the particular character of the Holocaust, and that such rhetoric can contribute to increased antisemitism,” the open letter pointed out.
Norway is a part of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA). According to the IHRA definition of antisemitism, drawing a comparison between Israel and the Nazis is a contemporary example of antisemitism.
Uncategorized
Iran Hits Ships and UAE Oil Port in Show of Force After Trump Orders Navy to Open Strait
Ships and boats in the Strait of Hormuz, Musandam, Oman, May 1, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Stringer TPX IMAGES OF THE DAY
Iran hit several ships in the Strait of Hormuz on Monday and set a UAE oil port ablaze, following President Donald Trump‘s announcement that he will use the US Navy to free up shipping.
The Iranian attacks marked the war’s biggest escalation since a ceasefire was declared four weeks ago.
Trump‘s new mission “Project Freedom,” which he announced on social media overnight to release ships stuck in the strait, was the first apparent attempt to make use of naval power to unblock the world’s most important energy shipping route.
But at least in the initial hours on Monday, the effort brought no surge of merchant shipping through the strait while provoking a show of force from Iran, which had long threatened to respond to any escalation with new attacks on its neighbors.
The US military said two US merchant ships had made it through the strait, without saying when. Iran denied any such crossings had taken place.
The commander of US forces in the region said his fleet had destroyed six small Iranian boats, which Iran also denied. Admiral Brad Cooper said he “strongly advised” Iranian forces to keep clear of US military assets carrying out the mission.
Iranian authorities, for their part, released a map of what they said was an expanded sea area now under their control, which went far beyond the strait to include swathes of international waters, including long stretches of the United Arab Emirates’ coastline on either side of the strait.
South Korea reported one of its merchant ships had been hit by an explosion and fire inside the strait. The British maritime security agency UKMTO reported two ships had been hit off the coast of the UAE, and the Emirati oil company ADNOC said one of its empty oil tankers was hit by Iranian drones while trying to cross.
“Iran has taken some shots at unrelated Nations with respect to the Ship Movement, PROJECT FREEDOM, including a South Korean Cargo Ship. Perhaps it’s time for South Korea to come and join the mission!” Trump posted on social media on Monday.
After reported drone and missile attacks inside the UAE throughout the day, including one that caused a fire at an important oil port, the UAE said Iranian attacks marked a serious escalation and it reserved the right to respond.
STRAIT STILL BLOCKED
Trump has struggled to find a solution to the disruption of international energy supplies caused by Iran‘s blockade of the strait, which carried a fifth of global oil and liquefied natural gas before the war.
In the more than two months since Trump launched an air war against Iran alongside Israel, Tehran has largely blocked the strait to ships apart from its own. Since last month, the United States has imposed its own blockade of ships leaving and entering Iranian ports, further crippling Iran’s already ailing economy.
The warring sides issued contradictory statements on Monday about the initial impact of the new US mission, and Reuters could not independently verify the full situation there.
But there was no immediate sign that large numbers of merchant ships were making new attempts to cross, and major shipping companies said they were likely to wait for an agreed end to hostilities before trying to sail through.
REVOLUTIONARY GUARDS SAY NO TRANSITS TOOK PLACE
In a post on X, US Central Command said some of its Navy guided-missile destroyers were inside the Gulf supporting the operation, and that two US-flagged merchant vessels had crossed the strait “and are safely headed on their journey.”
It did not identify either the warships or the merchant vessels or say when any of those crossings had taken place.
Iran‘s Revolutionary Guards said no commercial vessels had crossed the strait in the past few hours, and that US claims to the contrary were false.
Earlier, Iran said it had fired on a US warship approaching the strait, forcing it to turn around. An initial Iranian report had said a US warship was struck, but Washington denied this and Iranian officials later described the fire as warning shots.
South Korea’s Foreign Ministry said there was a fire and an explosion onboard the Namu, a merchant ship operated by South Korean shipper HMM. Yonhap news agency reported that the government was checking intelligence indicating the vessel may have been attacked.
The UAE, meanwhile, reported a fire at an oil installation in its port of Fujairah following an Iranian drone attack. Fujairah lies beyond the strait, making it one of the few export routes for Middle East oil that does not require passing through it.
SHIPPING INDUSTRY AWAITS CLARITY ON SAFETY
Oil prices jumped more than 5% in volatile trade as news of the increased Iranian attacks emerged.
In his social media post announcing the new mission, Trump gave few details of what action the US Navy would take to get ships through the strait.
“We have told these Countries that we will guide their Ships safely out of these restricted Waterways, so that they can freely and ably get on with their business,” Trump wrote.
In response, Iran‘s unified command told commercial ships and oil tankers:
“We have repeatedly said the security of the Strait of Hormuz is in our hands and that the safe passage of vessels needs to be coordinated with the armed forces … We warn that any foreign armed forces, especially the aggressive US Army, will be attacked if they intend to approach and enter the Strait of Hormuz.”
The United States and Israel suspended their bombing campaign against Iran four weeks ago, and US and Iranian officials held one round of face-to-face talks. But attempts to set up further meetings have failed.
Iranian state media said on Sunday that Washington had conveyed its response to a 14-point Iranian proposal via Pakistan, and that Tehran was now reviewing it. Neither side gave details of any US response.
The Iranian proposal would postpone discussion of Iran‘s nuclear program until after an agreement to end the war and resolve the standoff over shipping. Trump said over the weekend he was still studying it but would probably reject it.
