RSS
Could Israeli Disunity Lead to More Hamas Executions?
Illustrative: Israeli protesters chant in front of a burning fire at a demonstration against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his nationalist coalition government’s plan for judicial overhaul, in Tel Aviv, Israel, March 27, 2023. REUTERS/Itai Ron
The bodies of six Israeli and American hostages held by Hamas were retrieved from a 65 foot deep tunnel in the Rafah area of Gaza and returned to Israel on Saturday. They are Ori Danino, Alex Lobanov, Hersh Goldberg-Polin, Almog Sarusi, Eden Yerushalmi, and Carmel Gat.
In previous cases where the IDF returned bodies, the victims had typically been deceased for some time, some even as far back as October 7. This weekend was different: Israel has confirmed that Hamas had executed all six of these hostages in recent days by means of a gunshot to the head.
This is deeply heartbreaking to the Israeli people and all people of conscience. For months, we’ve known these names and seen these hostages on posters in every corner of every city and town. We are all struck to the core as if we knew each hostage personally — as if they were our family.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu apologized to one of the hostage’s families, a rarity for him, and in a separate statement asserted that “Anyone who murders hostages does not want a deal,” while adding that he is shocked to the depths of his soul, and that the blood of the hostages is on Hamas’ hands.
At the same time, a number of parents of the hostages as well as Israeli leaders and civilians are fiercely blaming the Israeli government in general, and Netanyahu in particular, for failing to bring our loved ones home sooner. Hundreds of thousands protested on Sunday evening in locations throughout the country with a particular focus on blaming the government and calling for an immediate ceasefire. Most of Israel’s unionized workers have gone on a symbolic one day strike beginning Monday morning.
It is almost impossible to fully comprehend the grief and anger of the families who have lost loved ones after 11 months of emotional torture. But it is also critical at this tragic moment that we perform a reality check.
The anti-government position held by many Israelis presumes that there was some kind of deal on the table that would have brought all the hostages home safely, if only “Bibi” and his government would have simply accepted it. This is, in fact, not the case: there is not, and there never has been, any such offer.
At no point following last November’s temporary ceasefire has Hamas accepted a proposal that would return anything more than a small portion of the hostages at any given time. For example the “three stage” deal proposed by the United States last February (which Hamas in any case rejected) would have brought home only a small number of hostages in the first stage. As Hamas habitually violates ceasefire agreements, Israeli experts widely believe that multi-stage deals will most likely not proceed to completion, leaving large numbers of hostages in captivity indefinitely.
Having rejected the American proposal last February, Hamas went on to reject a version of its own three-stage proposal in March. Just two weeks ago, the United States announced that Israel had accepted America’s latest so-called “Bridging Proposal,” and that the world was now waiting on Hamas, which subsequently rejected the deal and then boycotted further negotiations in Cairo. This is only the latest of dozens of Hamas rejections.
A common refrain by a large, vocal minority of Israelis has been that Israel’s top priority must be the return of the hostages, and not dismantling Hamas. This logic is based on two flawed assumptions: that there is a deal on the table that would bring back all the hostages (there is not) and that the IDF can simply return to fighting in Gaza at any time in the future, even if doing so means violating the terms of a binding agreement.
Yet Hamas is quite sophisticated with respect to this issue: throughout the ceasefire talks, a key Hamas demand has been not only that the terror organization remain in power in Gaza, but also that international guarantees be put in place to tie the IDF’s hands against further military action.
Numerous UN resolutions and international court actions, as well as delays and even “soft embargoes” of needed military supplies by the US and other allies, send a clear message to Israel: that re-entering Gaza in violation of an agreement would be difficult or even impossible.
This pressure also sends a message to Hamas: that given time, Israel’s allies might not stand firm, thus encouraging Hamas to harden its bargaining position and play for additional time.
Given the above realities, one can still hold a reasonable, and even passionate disagreement as to what price Israel should pay to return the hostages alive, whether Hamas should be removed from power, or how far the IDF should go to secure Gaza against future attacks.
Yet to accuse the Israeli government or its leadership of murder, does not make logical sense. One might have placed some portion of the responsibility on the Israeli government if there was a deal on the table that Israel should have, or even could have, accepted. Yet the painful truth is that there was never any such option available.
The decision to murder six Israeli hostages was made completely by Hamas: not by Israel, its leaders or its people. The question now is whether Hamas will see these murders as a strategic win that bears repeating, or as a colossal blunder to be avoided in the future.
If Hamas sees that executing hostages increases pressure on Israel, both internally and externally, then the terror organization might conclude that doing so provides a strategic advantage.
Hamas might even conclude that such executions can bring the terror group closer to its immediate goal of retaining power in Gaza, as well as its long term goal of mounting further October 7 style massacres.
Despite being one of the most prominent voices pressuring Israel to make a ceasefire deal, Vice President Kamala Harris said in her statement yesterday that Hamas must be “eliminated” and cannot be allowed to remain in power in Gaza; but that is what Hamas has been insisting on, and has long been a significant sticking point in negotiations.
Many Israelis agree: the current protests are, at their core, an expression of deep emotional connections, and a symbol of how Israeli families feel one another’s pain. Yet actual opinions in Israel are more nuanced: even though Israelis nearly unanimously support a deal that would end the war and return the hostages, only 49% would support a deal that involves the IDF leaving the critical Philadelphi corridor which gives Hamas access to Egypt, with 32% opposed, and 19% uncertain.
It is impossible to know how any of us might feel if our own family members were held captive in Gaza: we might be willing to sacrifice anything and everything to bring them home. Yet there are other families in Israel as well, including parents who are concerned for the safety of their children in a possible future massacre, should Israel make the wrong decisions at this critical time.
The deaths of Ori, Alex, Hersh, Almog, Eden, and Carmel are beyond heartbreaking, and today Israelis feel that pain as if it were personal to each and every one of us; but nine million more Israelis will face future kidnappings or Oct.7-like massacres if Hamas is not properly deterred and prevented from committing such atrocities.
Today Israelis are expressing pain and anger toward those we trusted to protect us. Yet we are also aware of a fundamental truth: that Hamas murdered civilians in cold blood, while international negotiations were ongoing to save them — and that’s a message the world needs to hear.
Netanyahu and his government are fair subject for criticism — to do so is the imperative of any free democracy. But even the most passionate disagreements demand a basis in factual reality: the supposed deal for which some Israelis advocate never actually existed. In truth, Israel’s current reality is as impossible as it is heartbreaking.
Daniel Pomerantz is the CEO of RealityCheck, an organization dedicated to deepening public conversation through robust research studies and public speaking.
The post Could Israeli Disunity Lead to More Hamas Executions? first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Syria’s Sharaa Says Talks With Israel Could Yield Results ‘In Coming Days’
Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa speaks at the opening ceremony of the 62nd Damascus International Fair, the first edition held since the fall of Bashar al-Assad’s regime, in Damascus, Syria, Aug. 27, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Khalil Ashawi
Syria’s President Ahmed al-Sharaa said on Wednesday that ongoing negotiations with Israel to reach a security pact could lead to results “in the coming days.”
He told reporters in Damascus the security pact was a “necessity” and that it would need to respect Syria’s airspace and territorial unity and be monitored by the United Nations.
Syria and Israel are in talks to reach an agreement that Damascus hopes will secure a halt to Israeli airstrikes and the withdrawal of Israeli troops who have pushed into southern Syria.
Reuters reported this week that Washington was pressuring Syria to reach a deal before world leaders gather next week for the UN General Assembly in New York.
But Sharaa, in a briefing with journalists including Reuters ahead of his expected trip to New York to attend the meeting, denied the US was putting any pressure on Syria and said instead that it was playing a mediating role.
He said Israel had carried out more than 1,000 strikes on Syria and conducted more than 400 ground incursions since Dec. 8, when the rebel offensive he led toppled former Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad.
Sharaa said Israel’s actions were contradicting the stated American policy of a stable and unified Syria, which he said was “very dangerous.”
He said Damascus was seeking a deal similar to a 1974 disengagement agreement between Israel and Syria that created a demilitarized zone between the two countries.
He said Syria sought the withdrawal of Israeli troops but that Israel wanted to remain at strategic locations it seized after Dec. 8, including Mount Hermon. Israeli ministers have publicly said Israel intends to keep control of the sites.
He said if the security pact succeeds, other agreements could be reached. He did not provide details, but said a peace agreement or normalization deal like the US-mediated Abraham Accords, under which several Muslim-majority countries agreed to normalize diplomatic ties with Israel, was not currently on the table.
He also said it was too early to discuss the fate of the Golan Heights because it was “a big deal.”
Reuters reported this week that Israel had ruled out handing back the zone, which Donald Trump unilaterally recognized as Israeli during his first term as US president.
“It’s a difficult case – you have negotiations between a Damascene and a Jew,” Sharaa told reporters, smiling.
SECURITY PACT DERAILED IN JULY
Sharaa also said Syria and Israel had been just “four to five days” away from reaching the basis of a security pact in July, but that developments in the southern province of Sweida had derailed those discussions.
Syrian troops were deployed to Sweida in July to quell fighting between Druze armed factions and Bedouin fighters. But the violence worsened, with Syrian forces accused of execution-style killings and Israel striking southern Syria, the defense ministry in Damascus and near the presidential palace.
Sharaa on Wednesday described the strikes near the presidential palace as “not a message, but a declaration of war,” and said Syria had still refrained from responding militarily to preserve the negotiations.
RSS
Anti-Israel Activists Gear Up to ‘Flood’ UN General Assembly
US Capitol Police and NYPD officers clash with anti-Israel demonstrators, on the day Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addresses a joint meeting of Congress, on Capitol Hill, in Washington, DC, July 24, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Umit Bektas
Anti-Israel groups are planning a wave of raucous protests in New York City during the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) over the next several days, prompting concerns that the demonstrations could descend into antisemitic rhetoric and intimidation.
A coalition of anti-Israel activists is organizing the protests in and around UN headquarters to coincide with speeches from Middle Eastern leaders and appearances by US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The demonstrations are expected to draw large crowds and feature prominent pro-Palestinian voices, some of whom have been criticized for trafficking in antisemitic tropes, in addition to calling for the destruction of Israe.
Organizers of the demonstrations have promoted the coordinated events on social media as an opportunity to pressure world leaders to hold Israel accountable for its military campaign against Hamas in Gaza, with some messaging framed in sharply hostile terms.
On Sunday, for example, activists shouted at Israel’s Ambassador to the UN Danny Danon.
“Zionism is terrorism. All you guys are terrorists committing ethnic cleansing and genocide in Gaza and Palestine. Shame on you, Zionist animals,” they shouted.
BREAKING: PRO-PALESTINE PROTESTORS CONFRONT “ISRAELI” AMBASSADOR DANNY DANON AT THE UNITED NATIONS
1/5 pic.twitter.com/4G1VYEMGzV
— Within Our Lifetime (@WOLPalestine) September 14, 2025
The Combat Antisemitism Movement (CAM), warned on its website that the scale and tone of the planned demonstrations risk crossing the line from political protest into hate speech, arguing that anti-Israel activists are attempting to hijack the UN gathering to spread antisemitism and delegitimize the Jewish state’s right to exist.
Outside the UN last week, masked protesters belonging to the activist group INDECLINE kicked a realistic replica of Netanyahu’s decapitated head as though it were a soccer ball.
US activist group plays soccer with Bibi’s mock decapitated HEAD right outside NYC UN HQ
Peep shot at 00:40
Footage posted by INDECLINE collective just as UN General Assembly about to kick off
‘Following the game, ball was donated to Palestinian Genocide Museum’ pic.twitter.com/TQ84sgZhKr
— RT (@RT_com) September 9, 2025
Within Our Lifetime (WOL), a radical anti-Israel activist group, has vowed to “flood” the UNGA on behalf of the pro-Palestine movement.
WOL, one of the most prolific anti-Israel activist groups, came under immense fire after it organized a protest against an exhibition to honor the victims of the Oct. 7 massacre at the Nova Music Festival in southern Israel. During the event, the group chanted “resistance is justified when people are occupied!” and “Israel, go to hell!”
“We will be there to confront them with the truth: Their silence and inaction enable genocide. The world cannot continue as if Gaza does not exist,” WOL said of its planned demonstrations in New York. “This is the time to make our voices impossible to ignore. Come to New York by any means necessary, to stand, to march, to demand the UN act and end the siege.”
Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP) and Palestinian Youth Movement (PYM), two other anti-Israel organizations that have helped organize widespread demonstrations against the Jewish state during the war in Gaza, also announced they are planning a march from Times Square to the UN headquarters on Friday.
“The time is now for each and every UN member state to uphold their duty under international law: sanction Israel and end the genocide,” the groups said in a statement.
JVP, an organization that purports to fight for “Palestinian liberation,” has positioned itself as a staunch adversary of the Jewish state. The group argued in a 2021 booklet that Jews should not write Hebrew liturgy because hearing the language would be “deeply traumatizing” to Palestinians. JVP has repeatedly defended the Oct. 7 massacre of roughly 1,200 people in southern Israel by Hamas as a justified “resistance.” Chapters of the organization have urged other self-described “progressives” to throw their support behind Hamas and other terrorist groups against Israel
Similarly, PYM, another radical anti-Israel group, has repeatedly defended terrorism and violence against the Jewish state. PYM has organized many anti-Israel protests in the two years following the Oct. 7 attacks in the Jewish state. Recently, Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AK) called for a federal investigation into the organization after Aisha Nizar, one of the group’s leaders, urged supporters to sabotage the US supply chain for the F-35 fighter jet, one of the most advanced US military assets and a critical component of Israel’s defense.
The UN General Assembly has historically been a flashpoint for heated debate over the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Previous gatherings have seen dueling demonstrations outside the Manhattan venue, with pro-Israel and pro-Palestinian groups both seeking to influence the international spotlight.
While warning about the demonstrations, CAM noted it recently launched a new mobile app, Report It, that allows users worldwide to quickly and securely report antisemitic incidents in real time.
RSS
Nina Davidson Presses Universities to Back Words With Action as Jewish Students Return to Campus Amid Antisemitism Crisis
Nina Davidson on The Algemeiner’s ‘J100’ podcast. Photo: Screenshot
Philanthropist Nina Davidson, who served on the board of Barnard College, has called on universities to pair tough rhetoric on combatting antisemitism with enforcement as Jewish students returned to campuses for the new academic year.
“Years ago, The Algemeiner had published a list ranking the most antisemitic colleges in the country. And number one was Columbia,” Davidson recalled on a recent episode of The Algemeiner‘s “J100” podcast. “As a board member and as someone who was representing the institution, it really upset me … At the board meeting, I brought it up and I said, ‘What are we going to do about this?’”
Host David Cohen, chief executive officer of The Algemeiner, explained he had revisited Davidson’s remarks while she was being honored for her work at The Algemeiner‘s 8th annual J100 gala, held in October 2021, noting their continued relevance.
“It could have been the same speech in 2025,” he said, underscoring how longstanding concerns about campus antisemitism, while having intensified in the aftermath of Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, massacre across southern Israel, are not new.
Davidson argued that universities already possess the tools to protect students – codes of conduct, time-place-manner rules, and consequences for threats or targeted harassment – but too often fail to apply them evenly. “Statements are not enough,” she said, arguing that institutions need to enforce their rules and set a precedent that there will be consequences for individuals who refuse to follow them.
She also said that stakeholders – alumni, parents, and donors – are reassessing their relationships with schools that, in their view, have not safeguarded Jewish students. While supportive of open debate, Davidson distinguished between protest and intimidation, calling for leadership that protects expression while ensuring campus safety.
The episode surveyed specific pressure points that administrators will face this fall: repeat anti-Israel encampments, disruptions of Jewish programming, and the challenge of distinguishing political speech from conduct that violates university rules. “Unless schools draw those lines now,” Davidson warned, “they’ll be scrambling once the next crisis hits.”
Cohen closed by framing the discussion as a test of institutional credibility, asking whether universities will “turn policy into protection” in real time. Davidson agreed, pointing to students who “need to know the rules aren’t just on paper.”
The full conversation is available on The Algemeiner’s “J100” podcast.