RSS
Columbia University President Minouche Shafik Resigns Amid Numerous Antisemitism Scandals
Columbia University administrators and faculty, led by President Minouche Shafik, testified before the US House Committee on Education and the Workforce on April 17, 2024. Photo: Jack Gruber/Reuters Connect
Columbia University president Minouche Shafik resigned on Wednesday, becoming the third Ivy League president in just the last year to leave office amid criticism of what many observers perceived as a refusal to protect Jewish students from antisemitic discrimination, harassment, and assault.
“I write with sadness to tell you that I am stepping down as president of Columbia University effective Aug. 14, 2024,” Shafik said in a statement announcing her decision. “This period has taken a considerable toll on my family, as it has for others in our community. Over the summer, I have been able to reflect and have decided that my moving on at this point would best enable Columbia to traverse the challenges ahead. I am making this announcement now so that new leadership can be in place before the new terms begins.”
Shafik, who took office in 2023, managed to survive a grating US congressional hearing earlier this year in which Republican lawmakers accused her of capitulating to riotous pro-Hamas demonstrators, who, following Hamas’ Oct. 7 massacre across southern Israel, flagrantly broke rules proscribing hate speech and unauthorized protests. Pledging to correct her alleged failures, Shafik seemed poised to continue leading Columbia University with the full support of its trustees and most of its faculty.
However, two incidents over the summer crumbled what little credibility she had left with the public, the Jewish community, and federal lawmakers who have been investigating her administration. In June, the university reached an out of court settlement with a student who accused it of neglecting its obligation to foster a safe learning environment during the final weeks of last spring semester. While stopping short of admitting guilt, the settlement virtually conceded to the plaintiff her argument that the campus is unsafe for Jewish students, agreeing to provide her and others “Safe Passage Liaisons” tasked with protecting them from racist abuse and violence.
Another scandal in the same month took longer to brew. Days before Columbia settled its student’s lawsuit, the Washington Free Beacon published an explosive report about four university administrators who took turns exchanging text messages which, as Shafik described, “touched disturbingly on ancient antisemitic tropes.” According to the Free Beacon, which obtained the communications from a trove of documents shared by the US House Committee on Education and the Workforce, four officials — Susan Chang-Kim, Cristen Kromm, Matthew Patashnick, and Josef Sorett, who is dean of Columbia College — described Jews as “privileged” and venal, reacting to a panel in which Jewish leaders participated to plea for help and explain the link between anti-Zionism and antisemitism.
No one was immediately fired after the report went viral. Outraged, Jewish and pro-Israel leaders lambasted what they perceived as a teflon privilege which insulated administrators from the controversy and pointed to the outcome of the matter as evidence that antisemitism at Columbia is institutional. In response, thousands of rabbis implored Shafik to resign.
“The bigotry and double standards are blatant, and entirely at odds with the experiences that I and others had at Columbia in the past. Imagine if something like this had happened during a session when Black, Latino, Pacific Islander, or LGBTQ faculty and students were speaking about hostility they faced on campus,” said Coalition for Jewish Values (CJV) vice president Rabbi Steven Pruzansky, who led the call for Shafik to step down. “Any faculty dismissing their concerns, much less ridiculing them or sharing hateful sentiments, would find themselves unemployed without delay.”
Pummeled by volleys of opprobrium, Shafik attempted to assuage concerns that Columbia University — one of America’s most prestigious institutions of higher education — had become a sanctuary for antisemites and those who proudly described themselves as enemies of both Israel and the US.
“We will launch a vigorous program of antisemitism and antidiscrimination [sic] training for faculty and staff this fall, with related training for students under the auspices of university life,” she said, addressing the administrators’ conduct. “Columbia’s leadership team recognizes this as an important moment to implement changes that will build a stronger institution as a result. I know that you all share this commitment.”
Ultimately, three of the Columbia administrators embroiled in the text message scandal resigned last week.
For many, Shafik’s words rang false, coming too long after the campus had been commandeered by Columbia students who praised Hamas’ Oct. 7 massacre across southern Israel and chanted “F—k the Jews,” “Death to Jews,” “Jews will not defeat us,” and “From water to water, Palestine will be Arab.”
Faculty had engaged in similar behavior. On Oct. 8, Columbia professor Joseph Massad published in Electronic Intifada an essay cheering Hamas’ atrocities, which included slaughtering children and raping women, as “awesome” and describing men who paraglided into a music festival to kill young people as “the air force of the Palestinian resistance.” Additionally, Shafik stood by while her subordinates launched an investigation into a vocal pro-Israel professor, Shai Davidai, an action he described as revealing “the depths of [Columbia’s] hostility towards its Jewish community.”
In April, while Shafik testified on Capitol Hill, an explosion of anti-Israel demonstrations on the eve of the Jewish holiday of Passover forced the administration to shutter the campus and institute “virtual” learning. Prior to that, footage of the protest showed Columbia students — who occupied a section of campus and named it a “Gaza Solidarity Encampment” — proclaiming support for Hamas, calling for the destruction of Israel, and even threatening to harm members of the Jewish community on campus. The situation was so severe that security officials deactivated Davidai’s identification card and temporarily banned him from campus because his safety could not be “guaranteed,” a measure which reflected the administration’s belief that the students it hesitated to rein in, as well as the non-students they invited to campus, were prepared to perpetrate violence to make their point.
As of the date of her resignation, a lawsuit alleging that Shafik did nothing after pro-Hamas agitators beat up five Jewish students in the school’s Butler Library and another attacked a Jewish student with a stick, lacerating his head and breaking his finger, had yet to reach trial.
“I have tried to navigate a path that upholds academic principles and treats everyone with fairness and compassion,” she said in Wednesday’s statement. “It has been distressing — for the community, for me as president, and on a personal level — to find myself, colleagues, and students the subject of threats and abuse. As President Lincoln said, ‘A house divided against itself cannot stand’ — we must do all we can to resist the forces of polarization in our community. I remain optimistic that differences can be overcome through the honest exchange of views, truly listening — and always — by treating each other with dignity and respect. Again, Columbia’s core mission to create and acquire knowledge, with our values as foundation, will lead us there.”
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.
The post Columbia University President Minouche Shafik Resigns Amid Numerous Antisemitism Scandals first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Why the Houthis Think They Can Beat the US — And Why They’re Wrong
Protesters, mainly Houthi supporters, stand near a screen displaying senior Hamas official Khalil al-Hayya during a rally to show support to Lebanon’s Hezbollah and Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, in Sanaa, Yemen, Oct. 18, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Khaled Abdullah
The Houthi rebels have spent years crafting an image of themselves as a hardened, battle-tested force capable of standing up to the most powerful militaries in the region. Now, in the midst of heightened tensions in the Red Sea and ongoing attacks on commercial shipping, they’ve extended that illusion to the United States. Emboldened by years of asymmetric victories against Saudi Arabia, bolstered by Iranian weaponry, and legitimized by propaganda that casts them as the spearhead of a broader “resistance” movement, the Houthis have convinced themselves — and their supporters — that they are capable of not just resisting US military pressure, but prevailing against it.
This belief is a dangerous miscalculation.
Their confidence stems, in part, from real battlefield experience. For nearly a decade, the Houthis have survived and even thrived despite relentless airstrikes, economic blockades, and shifting coalitions aligned against them. Saudi Arabia, with its modern air force and US-supplied munitions, failed to achieve decisive victory, and the perception within Houthi circles is that American power will be no more effective. Their propaganda machine amplifies every moment of defiance — a ship that reroutes, a drone that gets through, a Western strike that doesn’t dismantle their network — and translates it into a narrative of victory. To them, every surviving radar station is proof that the empire can bleed.
But the United States is not Saudi Arabia. The comparison reflects not just poor military judgment, but a profound misunderstanding of American strategic capacity and intent. Unlike regional actors, the US is not burdened by the political minefields of sectarian loyalties, tribal politics, or proximity. It can strike from the Mediterranean, the Gulf of Aden, or from submarines under the Red Sea. It does not need to occupy territory to destroy critical infrastructure. And when Washington decides that a threat must be neutralized, it tends to play a long game — using precision, partnerships, and pressure points until that threat is either dismantled or buried under economic and military consequences.
The Houthis lack the strategic depth to survive this kind of prolonged targeting. They are not a state with layered defenses, they are a militia with a territory — and that territory, while difficult to fully conquer, is not indestructible. Their command centers, storage depots, and drone assembly lines can only be relocated so many times. A concentrated American campaign, especially if paired with increased maritime interdiction and regional intelligence sharing, would gradually degrade the very tools that have made Houthi escalation possible. Their coastal control gives them influence over shipping routes, but also makes them highly visible. Their reliance on external supply chains — from Iran through smuggling routes and covert logistics — exposes them to disruption and surveillance. The longer they play this game, the more they risk pulling the US into a sustained campaign that their organization is not structurally prepared to endure.
Yet the illusion persists — and may even intensify. Faced with growing losses, the Houthis are likely to lean further into psychological warfare. Propaganda will surge. They will publish shaky videos of “downed” drones, stage missile launches, and portray every Western casualty, real or fabricated, as a blow against imperialism. Their goal is not battlefield victory but narrative control. If they can’t defeat the US militarily, they’ll try to erode its political will through a war of images, slogans, and social media virality. In doing so, they hope to sway anti-interventionist voices in the West and rally populist support across the Arab world.
Meanwhile, Iran will tighten its grip. The deeper the Houthis get, the more reliant they become on Tehran’s support — not just for weapons, but for expertise. We may see the quiet transfer of more sophisticated drone systems, longer-range missiles, and even the arrival of Iranian advisers on the ground to coordinate more complex attacks. Tehran has every interest in keeping US forces tied up in Yemen and distracted from other fronts like Syria or the Gulf. But that support will come at a cost: it will make the Houthis more vulnerable to becoming a direct target of Western-Iranian proxy escalation.
All of this is moving toward a dangerous inflection point. The Houthis are pushing the boundaries of what they can get away with — harassing ships in a key global chokepoint, attacking US assets, and daring the world’s most powerful navy to respond. Eventually, that response will escalate in ways they cannot control. A more aggressive US posture, especially in coordination with allies like the UK and France, could impose a maritime siege, take out port infrastructure, or even strike symbolic leadership targets. If the Houthis attempt to retaliate by mining the Bab el-Mandeb Strait or attacking Western vessels more directly, they may trigger a regional conflagration that leaves northern Yemen not as a “liberated” zone but a ruin.
This is why the illusion matters. The Houthis are not just overestimating their strength — they are gambling with the future of their movement and the lives of millions under their control. Their strategic calculus is shaped more by ideology and self-delusion than by sober assessments of military reality. The longer they cling to this fantasy of victory, the closer they come to waking up to its catastrophic consequences.
Amine Ayoub, a fellow at the Middle East Forum, is a policy analyst and writer based in Morocco. Follow him on X: @amineayoubx
The post Why the Houthis Think They Can Beat the US — And Why They’re Wrong first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Finding Our Jewish Pride: The Star of David Effect
Edith Bruck, in white, attends the unveiling event for the mural “The Star of David” by contemporary artist aleXsandro Palombo at the Fondazione Museo della Shoah in Rome, Italy on April 7, 2025. Photo: Ariel Nacamulli
In the aftermath of October 7, Jewish people around the world have experienced a deep recalibration — fear and shock has been replaced by anger, resilience, and pride. This has led to a reassessment of identity and a recognition of purpose. This awakening has taken on many forms, in the realm of advocacy campaigns, coordinated social media efforts, rallies and protests, letter-writing initiatives, WhatsApp group activism, and countless grassroots political movements.
Jewish visibility is increasing in other ways, too. One particularly striking yet underappreciated phenomenon is what I’d call the “Star of David Effect.” This refers to the growing number of Jewish individuals — particularly younger Jews — who are visibly and deliberately wearing Magen David’s or Chai necklaces in public. What in the past may have been a rare quiet personal expression of faith has now become a visible symbol of resistance and pride.
It has become a rather frequent occurrence within certain sectors of the Jewish community, where young people are outwardly displaying these necklaces and it speaks to a desire to fight back in their own way. This a proactive way to take a level of control back from the onslaught of incoming negativity that people have been exposed to. It’s these people’s way of saying, “yes I’m here, yes I’m Jewish, and what?”
This may seem like a small gesture, but in reality, it’s a powerful statement. It is a reassuring demonstration by the younger generations of their pride in who they are. It reflects a generation beginning to see their Jewish identity not as incidental, but as essential. In an era where Jewish people have been forced to confront an ancient hatred in a modern context, the Star of David has transformed into both armor and resistance.
In recent discussions with Rabbi Jonathan Blake, the senior rabbi at Westchester Reform Temple in New York, he described how pre-Oct. 7, he had concerns about teaching the lessons of the Holocaust to younger generations. He expressed that the passage of time and the fading presence of survivors, coupled with the Shoah being too distant to be relatable to current generations, presented a challenge.
Rabbi Blake noted that October 7 has created a kind of unfortunate, but undeniable, educational opening. “For the first time in their lives,” he told me, “these students understand what it feels like to be targeted simply for being Jewish. It’s terrifying — but also awakening something in them.”
The “Star of David Effect” is becoming a fashion statement that is a symbol of power. As the piece of jewelry sits around someone’s neck, there is a certain strength it embodies and a type of coolness that it conjures up. Whether it’s the young man wearing a Magen David in the university cafeteria or the woman with a Chai pendant on the subway, they are all part of something larger. They are, in their own way, demonstrating bravery and making a statement, and it is worth recognizing.
Every generation questions whether the next generation has what it takes to carry the torch of survival. Certainly, the young Jewish people of Israel have proven they have what it takes, and it is not wrong to assess that this generation of American Jewry are showing their resolve by donning there Magen Davids and their Chais. In doing so, they echo the power of generations before them — it would not be out of place to give these young people a pat on the back and let them know that their demonstration of pride is cool and deserves our respect.
Daniel Rosen has been a recognized opinion leader since his early college days, when he co-founded Torchpac, a pro-Israel advocacy group at New York University. Daniel is currently the chairman and co-founder of the pro-Israel group, Minds and Hearts.
The post Finding Our Jewish Pride: The Star of David Effect first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Mike Huckabee Presents Credentials to Israel’s President, Begins Duties as US Ambassador
US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee looks on during the day he visits the Western Wall, Judaism’s holiest prayer site, in Jerusalem’s Old City, April 18, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Ronen Zvulun
US Ambassador Mike Huckabee on Monday presented his credentials to Israeli President Isaac Herzog in Jerusalem, officially beginning his time as the Trump administration’s chief diplomatic representative in Israel.
Huckabee, a Baptist minister and the former governor of Arkansas, described the opportunity to become the official US ambassador to Israel as “an honor and incredible joy.”
“Over 50 years ago I came to Israel for the first time,” he said. “I was amazed to be standing in the land of the Bible. Now I come back as an old man, but with a sense of joy and awe that I am in the land that God said, ‘This is mine and these are my people.’ I came here because I believe that this not just geopolitical, because I also love to see it through the eyes of people who come here for the first time.”
During his remarks at the Israeli presidential residence, Huckabee warned that Iran seeks to destroy not only Israel but also the United States.
“It has always been their desire that Israel would be the opening act and then it would be America’s turn to face destruction,” Huckabee said. “Or, to put it another simple way, Israel is the appetizer, and the United States is the entrée.”
Huckabee’s comments came on the heels of the Trump administration’s second round of discussions with Iran over the weekend regarding the regime’s nuclear program. The Trump administration has stated that it aims to dismantle the Iranian program, sharing the view of other Western states that Iran seeks to build nuclear weapons. Tehran claims its nuclear activities are only for civilian energy use.
Huckabee lauded his new position as “divine” and vowed “to stand with the people of Israel for peace and prosperity.”
Herzog showered praise on Huckabee, calling the American official “a shining reflection of [US President Donald Trump’s] love, friendship, and support for the State of Israel.”
The newly minted ambassador arrived in Israel last week, visiting the Western Wall on Friday. Huckabee placed his hand on the holy Jewish site, lowered his head in prayer, and then inserted a slip of paper containing a prayer into the wall.
Huckabee said the prayer, which was delivered on behalf of Trump, read, “For peace in Israel.”
“What an honor it is for me to come on behalf of the president of the United States, President Donald Trump, and to present a prayer that he handwrote, gave to me last Thursday at the White House, with the instruction that my first act as ambassador would be to take his prayer — praying for the peace of Jerusalem — and to bring it to the wall, and to pray that there would in fact be, peace in the land,” Huckabee said.
The US Senate earlier this month voted to confirm Huckabee as the new ambassador to Israel, placing a strong pro-Israel conservative in the prominent position.
The Senate voted 53 to 46 in favor of Huckabee, with all Democrats except Pennsylvania’s John Fetterman voting against him. Every Republican voted to confirm Huckabee.
Huckabee, an evangelical Christian, has long been a stalwart ally of the Jewish state. He has repudiated the anti-Israel protests that erupted in the wake of Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, massacre across southern Israel and criticized former US President Joe Biden for sympathizing with anti-Israel protesters during his speech at the 2024 Democratic National Convention (DNC). The incoming ambassador also lambasted the anti-Israel encampments at elite universities, stating that there should be “outrage” over the targeting and mistreatment of Jewish college students.
Huckabee has defended Israel’s right to build settlements in the West Bank, acknowledging the Jewish people’s ties to the land dating back to the ancient world. He has also vowed to refer to the West Bank as “Judea and Samaria,” adopting terminology preferred by Israel.
“There is no such thing as the West Bank — it’s Judea and Samaria,” Huckabee has said, referring to the biblical names for the area. “There is no such thing as settlements — they’re communities, they’re neighborhoods, they’re cities. There is no such thing as an occupation.”
During Huckabee’s 2008 US presidential campaign, he stated that “there’s really no such thing as a Palestinian,” and that land for a potential Palestinian state should be taken from other Arab states and not Israel.
The post Mike Huckabee Presents Credentials to Israel’s President, Begins Duties as US Ambassador first appeared on Algemeiner.com.