RSS
Any Hostage Swap Would Be a Terrible Mistake for Israel
An Israeli soldier keeps guard next to an entrance to what the Israeli military say is a cross-border attack tunnel dug from Gaza to Israel, on the Israeli side of the Gaza Strip border near Kissufim, Jan. 18, 2018. Photo: REUTERS/Jack Guez/Pool
Until the end of the 1970s, Israel’s policy on hostages, prisoners, and missing persons was based on national considerations. The Entebbe Doctrine permitted no negotiations with terrorist organizations that involved comprehensive deals for the mass release of prisoners, because doing so would amount to a surrender to terror.
Israeli hostages would be released either through operational means, local negotiations, or prisoner exchanges after fighting was concluded. But over the past four decades, ever since the Jibril Agreement of 1985, there has been a change in Israel’s policy on this matter, to involve wholesale prisoner releases. This has caused Israel profound strategic damage.
Negotiating with Hamas for the release of the hostages in Gaza through comprehensive, all-inclusive deals mediated by Qatar (“everyone for everyone”) would undermine Israel’s strategy in the Swords of Iron war. It’s time to make a fundamental change in Israel’s policy on this issue and readopt the Entebbe Doctrine, which can save the lives of the current hostages and prevent the taking of more in the future.
Before I address this difficult issue, I want to make clear that my heart goes out to the hostages in Gaza and their families.
Decisions affecting human lives that are made on the national level have to be based on risk management. Thus, decisions about safety measures, COVID lockdowns, the prevention of deadly infections in hospitals, medication availability, the combating of crime, and others are all based on risk assessments. Public opinion and political pressures factor into these assessments, but they are not usually the predominant factors.
Not so in security. In recent decades, a “shadow principle” has entered Israeli security theory that prioritizes the minimizing of casualties and the creation of “absolute security” above all other considerations. This principle represents a shift from national security to personal security.
The Israeli security organizations obsessively focused on preventing any casualties, and a public discourse requiring “a thorough investigation of every casualty” was enforced. All of this transformed security thinking into straw thinking that was centered on local and tactical risk, making it difficult to see the holistic broader picture.
This kind of thinking collapsed on October 7, and a clear shift back in the direction of national security doctrine is evident.
However, on one critical issue, there hasn’t been sufficient change in the management of security risks: the issue of hostages and missing persons. Ever since the Jibril Agreement of 1985, the obsessive national focus on captives and missing persons has undermined the national security foundations of Israel.
The Second Lebanon War began due to Hezbollah’s kidnapping of two Israeli soldiers and killing of three others, and Operation Cast Lead was launched in part to secure the release of Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit, who had been in Hamas captivity for five years. Israel released 1,027 security prisoners in exchange for Shalit, including 280 who were serving life sentences for terrorism against Israeli targets. In addition, the prisoners who were released as part of the Jibril deal were active in the first intifada.
The issue of captives and missing persons has become the Achilles’ heel of Israel’s national security. It makes us vulnerable in the eyes of our enemies, weakens our regional status in the eyes of potential allies, and is baffling to our international and regional partners, particularly the Americans.
There are many reasons why it is bad for the nation to negotiate the release of captives as part of a comprehensive deal:
Damage to Israeli strategy: Israel’s strategy in the Swords of Iron war is based on the collapse of the Hamas organization in Gaza and the neutralizing of its leadership and military capabilities. These goals cannot coexist with a mass prisoner exchange negotiation, which would constitute a continuation of Israel’s recognition of Hamas as a force on the ground and a legitimate entity.
Damage to Israeli military operations: The IDF faces a tough and sophisticated enemy that has been preparing for this conflict for many years. Only military actions that maintain their strength and pace, effectively destabilizing the enemy and putting it off balance, will lead to the achievement of Israel’s goals with the lowest possible casualty count. Hesitation, delay, or a cessation of military action resulting from prisoner negotiation would likely have operational consequences.
Damage to moral clarity: Hamas, which has committed crimes against humanity and has genocidal aspirations similar to those of the Nazis, has disqualified itself as a legitimate partner for negotiations. By agreeing to conduct negotiations with them anyway, Israel would, in effect, be restoring their international legitimacy and negating Israel’s claims against other countries around the world, such as Russia, on this matter. The release of those involved in the operation on October 7 in an exchange deal would also damage the argument that they had participated in crimes against humanity. Those terrorists, as well as those captured in Gaza, should be brought to trial, with the death penalty hanging over their heads.
The erosion of the positions of Israel and the US in the Middle East: After the events of October 7, the collapse of Hamas is essential for the restoration of Israel’s position – and, consequently, the standing of the United States — in the Middle East. It forms the basis for Israel’s continued partnerships with Saudi Arabia and moderate states. The realization of a comprehensive mass prisoner-exchange deal would adversely affect both.
Hamas doesn’t really want a deal: Hamas understands that its very existence is at stake. Its continued hold on the hostages has one object: to use endless negotiation in order to undermine the dismantling of its political and military power.
There is no “everyone for everyone”: Hamas has only partial knowledge of which hostages are located where in the Gaza Strip and what condition they are in. For Hamas to organize the exchanges, it would need several weeks of quiet organization to locate them all. Israel cannot allow this for the reasons mentioned. Moreover, prisoners who subsequently fell into Hamas’ hands as the fighting continued would open the question of negotiations all over again. There will be no end to this unless Israel puts a stop to it. On top of these considerations, the mass release of Hamas prisoners would have significant and obvious security implications of its own.
A strict ban on joining the humanitarian effort: The humanitarian effort is a condition for Israel’s strategic ability to undermine Hamas politically and militarily. Connecting it to the issue of the hostages must be avoided.
For all these reasons, continuing negotiations for a deal for the hostages that includes the release of Hamas prisoners would be a serious strategic mistake on Israel’s part. In the management of national risks, there is no logic justifying the continuation of negotiations like this, which goes against all the above considerations.
Israel can create a historic change in the issue of captives and missing persons. A clear approach has the potential to fundamentally alter this area by achieving these goals:
Sending a vital message to Israel’s allies: Israel would be sending this message: “We are a Western and liberal nation committed to the welfare of our citizens as well as the citizens of other countries. We have conducted an examination of all the options available to rescue the hostages. We understand that this issue is being used as a strategic card against us to divert us from our main goal of the complete military and administrative dismantling of the Hamas organization, which commits crimes against humanity against us and against others. From this point forward, we will not engage in comprehensive negotiations for the release of captives with such an organization as it has disqualified itself as a legitimate negotiating partner.”
Enhancing international and Israeli pressure on countries engaging in dialogue with the Hamas leadership to secure the release of the hostages, with an emphasis on foreign nationals, civilians in general, the elderly, women, and children.
Spurring on-the-ground activity to promote the release of hostages.
Encouraging local deals for the release of hostages.
Promoting a process for locating hostages and conducting prisoner exchanges with the new regime in Gaza after the war is over.
This new approach by Israel would amount to a long-term strategic shift regarding the issue of captives and missing persons and a reversal of the ongoing serious damage caused by extensive deals with terrorists. The old approach caused Israel considerable harm. The new one has the potential to rescue the current hostages and prevent new cycles of abductions.
Col. (Res.) Shay Shabtai is a senior researcher at the BESA Center, an expert in national security, strategic planning and strategic communication. Cyber defense strategist and consultant to leading companies in Israel. Shay is about to finish his doctorate at Bar-Ilan University. A version of this article was originally published by The BESA Center.
The post Any Hostage Swap Would Be a Terrible Mistake for Israel first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Trump Withholds Another $450 Million From Harvard University Coffers

US President Donald Trump attends a press conference in the Roosevelt Room at the White House in Washington, DC, US, May 12, 2025. Photo: Nathan Howard via Reuters Connect.
The Trump administration has impounded another $450 million in taxpayer funded research grants and contracts previously awarded to Harvard University, citing the school’s history of fostering anti-Zionist extremism and practicing racial preferences in admissions and hiring.
“Harvard University has repeatedly failed to confront the pervasive race discrimination and antisemitic harassment plaguing its campus,” the multi-agency Joint Task Force to Combat Antisemitism, created by US President Donald Trump in February, said in a statement. “This is just the latest chapter in Harvard’s long standing policy and practice of discriminating on the basis of race as recognized by the Supreme Court in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, where the court rebuked Harvard for its unlawful race discrimination in admissions.”
The task force went on, coupling the issue of racial preferences with anti-Zionism in higher education, which conservative activists have said is necessary for reforming what they describe as a hub for far-left radicals who name both Israel and Western civilization as targets for subversion and deposition.
It said, “Harvard’s campus, once a symbol of academic prestige, has become a breeding ground for virtue signaling and discrimination. This is not leadership; it is cowardice. And it’s not academic freedom; it’s institutional disenfranchisement. There is a dark problem on Harvard’s campus, and by prioritizing appeasement over accountability, institutional leaders have forfeited the school’s claim to taxpayer support.”
Harvard University continues to draw criticism over its campus culture.
Earlier this month, a new “preliminary” report published by nonprofit watchdog NGO Monitor said the institution has ties to anti-Zionist nongovernmental organizations and other entities acting as proxy organizations for terrorist groups that warrant scrutiny and reproach.
Titled, “Advocacy NGOs in Academic Frameworks: Harvard University Case Study,” the report presents copious evidence that Harvard’s academic centers, including Harvard Law School, have come under the influence of Al-Haq and Addameer — two groups identified by the Israeli government as agents and propaganda manufacturers for the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), an internationally designated terrorist organization. The NGOs, the report added, influence research and institutional culture, tilting the ideological balance of the campus toward anti-Zionism.
“The report demonstrates the major contribution from prominent advocacy NGOs to the atmosphere of propaganda and antisemitism at Harvard, particularly through frameworks claiming human rights agendas,” Professor Gerald Steinberg, who authored the report alongside Dr. Adi Schwartz, said in a statement. “The close cooperation between prominent NGOs and Harvard academic programs warrants urgent scrutiny. The blurred lines between scholarship and advocacy threaten academic integrity and risk further inflaming campus tensions.”
In April, the Trump administration impounded $2.26 billion in Harvard’s federal funds following the institution’s refusing to agree to a wishlist of policy reforms that Republican lawmakers have long argued will make higher education more meritocratic and less welcoming to anti-Zionists and far-left extremists. Contained in a letter the administration sent to Harvard interim president Alan Garber — who subsequently released it to the public — the policies called for “viewpoint diversity in hiring and admissions,” the “discontinuation of [diversity, equity, and inclusion, or DEI, initiatives],” and “reducing forms of governance bloat.” They also implore Harvard to begin “reforming programs with egregious records of antisemitism” and to recalibrate its approach to “student discipline.”
Since then, Harvard has admitted to being irresponsive to the concerns of Jewish students and the public.
Several weeks after sparring with the Trump administration, as well as suing it in federal court, Harvard released its long anticipated report on campus antisemitism which said that one source of the problem is the institution’s past refusal to afford Jews the same protections against discrimination enjoyed by other minority groups. Garber apologized for the inconsistent application of policy.
“I am sorry for the moments when we failed to meet the high expectations we rightfully set for our community. The grave, extensive impact of the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas assault on Israel and its aftermath had serious repercussions on campus,” Garber said in a statement which accompanied the report. “Harvard cannot — and will not — abide bigotry. We will continue to provide for the safety and security of all members of our community and safeguard their freedom from harassment. We will redouble our efforts to ensure that the university is a place where ideas are welcomed, entertained, and contested in the spirt of seeking truth; where argument proceeds without sacrificing dignity; and where mutual respect is the norm.”
Harvard’s contrition has not changed Trump’s opinion about the institution. After the report’s release he announced plans to revoke Harvard University’s tax exempt status, which it enjoys as a nonprofit entity.
“It’s what they deserve,” Trump said.
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.
The post Trump Withholds Another $450 Million From Harvard University Coffers first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Trump Vows ‘Most Destructive Force’ Iran Won’t Get Nuclear Weapon as Tehran Defends Enrichment Program

US President Donald Trump attends the Saudi-US Investment Forum, in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, May 13, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Brian Snyder
US President Donald Trump on Tuesday denounced Iran as the “most destructive force” in the Middle East, accusing Tehran of fueling regional instability and vowing that Washington would never allow the country to acquire a nuclear weapon.
During his visit to Saudi Arabia, Trump also accused Iran of causing “unthinkable suffering in Syria, Lebanon, Gaza, Iraq, Yemen, and beyond,” just two days after US and Iranian officials held a fourth round of nuclear talks in Oman.
Trump’s comments came as Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson, Esmaeil Baghaei, described the recent round of talks between the adversaries as productive, but criticized Washington’s new sanctions as undermining the ongoing diplomacy.
“In recent days, they [the Trump administration] issued sanctions on Iran; this is completely incompatible with the process of negotiations,” the Iranian diplomat said. “This will definitely affect our positions.”
This week, the US imposed sanctions on an Iranian oil smuggling network accused of facilitating billions of dollars in crude oil sales to China.
As part of the Trump administration’s “maximum pressure” campaign against Iran — which aims to cut the country’s crude exports to zero and prevent it from obtaining a nuclear weapon — Washington has been targeting Tehran’s oil industry with mounting sanctions.
The fourth round of nuclear talks between Iranian and US officials concluded in Oman on Sunday, with additional negotiations scheduled as Tehran continues to publicly insist on advancing its uranium enrichment.
Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian declared in Tehran on Tuesday that Iran “will not retreat from its inalienable right to nuclear technology for peaceful purposes.”
Earlier this month, Iran accused the Trump administration of “contradictory behavior and provocative statements” following remarks by US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, who warned the country of severe consequences for supporting Yemen’s Houthi militia, an internationally designated terrorist organization.
The Iran-backed group, which controls northern Yemen, has been targeting ships in the Red Sea since November 2023, disrupting global trade, while justifying the attacks as acts of solidarity with the Palestinians in Gaza.
In April, Tehran and Washington held their first official nuclear negotiation since the US withdrew from a now-defunct 2015 nuclear deal that had imposed temporary limits on Iran’s nuclear program in exchange for sanction relief.
The first and third rounds of talks were held in Oman, while the second round took place in Rome at the residence of the Omani ambassador.
Tehran has previously rejected halting its uranium enrichment program, insisting that the country’s right to enrich uranium is non-negotiable, despite Washington’s threats of military action, additional sanctions, and tariffs if an agreement is not reached to curb Iran’s nuclear activities.
However, US special envoy Steve Witkoff said that any deal with Iran must require the complete dismantling of its “nuclear enrichment and weaponization program.” Witkoff’s comments came after he received criticism for suggesting the Islamic Republic would be allowed to maintain its nuclear program in a limited capacity.
Trump indicated last Wednesday during a radio interview that he is seeking to “blow up” Iran’s nuclear centrifuges “nicely” through an agreement with Tehran but is also prepared to do so “viciously” in an attack if necessary. That same day, however, when asked by a reporter in the White House whether his administration would allow Iran to maintain an enrichment program as long as it doesn’t enrich uranium to weapons-grade levels, Trump said his team had not decided. “We haven’t made that decision yet,” Trump said. “We will, but we haven’t made that decision.”
Despite Iran’s claims that its nuclear program is solely for civilian purposes rather than weapons development, Western states have said there is no “credible civilian justification” for the country’s recent nuclear activity, arguing it “gives Iran the capability to rapidly produce sufficient fissile material for multiple nuclear weapons.”
The post Trump Vows ‘Most Destructive Force’ Iran Won’t Get Nuclear Weapon as Tehran Defends Enrichment Program first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
New York City Mayor Establishes First-of-Its-Kind Office to Combat Antisemitism

New York City Mayor Eric Adams announcing the formation of the Mayor’s Office to Combat Antisemitism at a press conference at City Hall on May 13, 2025. Photo: Ed Reed/Mayoral Photography Office.
New York City Mayor Eric Adams announced at a press conference on Tuesday morning the creation of the Mayor’s Office to Combat Antisemitism, the first office of its kind to be established in a major city in the US.
The first task of the new mayoral office will be to immediately establish an inter-agency taskforce that will focus on tacking “all forms of antisemitism,” which include monitoring court cases and outcomes in the justice system, cooperating with the New York City Law Department on cases to bring or join, and advising on executive orders to issue and legislation to propose to address antisemitism. The office will also liaise with the New York City Police Department (NYPD) to take action against antisemitism, and it will have the authority to ensure that city-funded entities, taxpayer-funded organizations, and city agencies do not promote antisemitism.
“Anything funded by the city, there are rules and regulations of how you can contract with the city and behave when you contract with the city, and we’re going to make sure that is taken care of in the proper way,” Moshe Davis, the inaugural executive director of the Office to Combat Antisemitism, told The Algemeiner. He explained that the new office will make sure “that these [city-funded] agencies are not doing the wrong thing and if they are, and we have the legal ability, we are going to make sure they are not going to be able to continue doing that.”
“By establishing the Mayor’s Office to Combat Antisemitism, our administration is taking immediate and concrete steps to address antisemitism at every level of city life,” Davis added during the press conference.
Adams made the announcement about the new initiative amid an unprecedented uptick in antisemitism in New York City and across the nation. In 2024, the NYPD reported that 54 percent of all hate crimes in New York City were against Jewish New Yorkers. During the first quarter of 2025, that number rose to 62 percent.
Meanwhile, the Anti-Defamation League’s latest Audit of Antisemitic Incidents revealed a record number of 9,354 antisemitic incidents across the US in 2024. The highest number of incidents were in New York.
New York City has the largest Jewish population outside of Israel, and Jews make up 10 percent of the population, according to the mayor. New York has 960,000 Jewish residents.
Adams said it is “imperative” to address the increase in antisemitism in New York City.
“We can’t move on with business as usual when we have a population in your city that is overwhelmingly being targeted merely because of their religion or way of life,” Adams said on Tuesday at the press conference. He added that the new Office to Combat Antisemitism will help “send a very clear message in this city that antisemitism cannot live and most importantly cannot grow – cannot grow on our college campuses, cannot grow in our schools, in our work environments … And let’s be honest, it’s not a Jewish issue. Any hate on a group is an issue that we should address. This administration will not remain silent while our Jewish brothers and sisters are targeted.”
“As we continue to see the rising tide of antisemitism here at home, and across the country, this moment calls for decisive action,” the mayor further said in a released statement. “The Office to Combat Antisemitism … will tackle antisemitism in all of its forms, working across city agencies to ensure Jewish New Yorkers are protected and can thrive here in the five boroughs. Antisemitism is an attack not only on Jewish New Yorkers, but on the very idea of New York City as a place where people from all backgrounds can live together.”
Davis’s first course of action as the executive director of the new office will be to form a commission of Jewish leaders from across the city to oversee and advise on the office’s work. The mayor described Davis in a press statement as “a tireless advocate on behalf of Jewish New Yorkers, and he is exactly the right person to lead and build this office.”
Davis joined the Adams administration in November 2022 as Jewish liaison in the Mayor’s Office of Community Affairs. He formerly managed the city’s first Jewish Advisory Council, which the mayor established in June 2023.
“Combating antisemitism requires a sledgehammer approach: coordinated, unapologetic, and immediate,” Davis said. “Mayor Adams has been a modern-day Maccabee, standing up for the Jewish community, and, with the establishment of this office, he is strengthening his resolve to ensure Jewish New Yorkers thrive in our city. I look forward to working closely with Mayor Eric Adams and First Deputy Mayor Randy Mastro to continue our forceful response against anti-Jewish hate and discrimination.”
Davis was previously the rabbinic leader at the Manhattan Jewish Experience, a program for young Jewish professionals. He also founded New York Jews in Politics, an initiative that connects Jewish professionals who work in government, advocacy, and nonprofit sectors, and received his ordination from the Rabbinical Council of Jerusalem. As executive director of the Office to Combat Antisemitism, he will report directly to First Deputy Mayor Mastro.
“We are a city that will not tolerate antisemitism,” Mastro said at the press conference on Tuesday.
“The rise in antisemitism in our city, in our country, and around the world is both alarming and intolerable,” Mastro added in a released statement. “Today, Mayor Adams is taking a stand — that in the city with the largest Jewish population in the world — antisemitism is unacceptable, and we have to do more to address it. So, New York City will lead the way as the first major city in America to establish an office dedicated solely to combatting antisemitism.”
New York City also has an Office for the Prevention of Hate Crimes, which was launched in 2019 and is still active, and the NYPD has a Hate Crime Task Force that addresses bias-motivated threats, harassment, discrimination, and violence throughout New York.
The post New York City Mayor Establishes First-of-Its-Kind Office to Combat Antisemitism first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
You must be logged in to post a comment Login