Uncategorized
First antisemitism report conducted with the Polish Jewish community shows how ‘Jew’ is used to discredit enemies
WARSAW (JTA) — A Jewish association has released what is being called the first report on antisemitism conducted with direct input from Polish Jewish community organizations, counting 488 incidents in 2022 submitted via an online portal and collected through extensive interviews with community members.
The incident total released on Monday by the Czulent Jewish Association is more than four times the number reported for 2021 by the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights.
The report’s lead author, Anna Zielińska, said 86% of incidents involved online harassment and insults. She added that the word “Jew” is frequently used online to label an “enemy” as “disloyal, an outsider and unpatriotic.”
“There is not a Polish politician who hasn’t been called a Jew,” Zielińska told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Czulent’s 2022 report detailed one violent act that resulted in injury, four additional violent attacks, 20 threats, 34 instances of damage to Jewish property and memorial sites, 68 cases of antisemitic mass mailings and 372 instances of “abusive” behavior. Zielińska said there was no way to know the real number antisemitic incidents that occur because the “internet is a bottomless pit of hate.”
She is convinced that Czulent, a nongovernmental organization promoting tolerance that cooperates closely with Polish Jewish communities, has just scratched the surface.
“Time and again when I interviewed people they told me they were reluctant to report incidents because it wouldn’t change anything,” said Zielińska, a member of the Warsaw Jewish Community, one of the multiple communal groups under the Union of Jewish Religious Communities in Poland umbrella.
Antisemitic hate speech is more part of the public discourse than it was a decade ago, she added, and focuses on conspiracy theories such as a Jewish involvement in the COVID-19 pandemic.
The Czulent report documented 84 cases of public antisemitic statements that were also anti-Ukrainian. When Polish President Andrzej Duda and Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki met earlier this month with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, who is Jewish, the Polish leaders were accused online of serving Jewish causes, according to Zielińska.
“The context of the Ukrainian-Russian war was used to attack Jews more freely and seemingly legally,” said Zielińska. “In this way antisemitism is being used to discourage the public from supporting Ukrainian refugees.”
Over the past four years, some of the most high-profile antisemitic language in the political arena has been deployed by Grzegorz Braun, a leader of the far-right Confederation Liberty and Independence Party. Braun’s most recent target has been Ukrainian refugees, whom he accuses of seeking to create a “Ukro-Poland” — a reference to “Judeo-Poland,” an expression popularized in the early 20th century by politicians who said Jews wanted to replace Poland with their own state.
In 2019, while he was campaigning, Braun said the United States was a “political and military tool of Jewish blackmail against Poland” and wrote that “Jews have waged war against the Polish nation for centuries, in fact against the whole Christian world.” His party, referred to in Poland as Confederation, is the country’s third most popular, with support from 11% of the electorate, according to a March survey by the independent polling agency Ipsos.
In the upcoming fall parliamentary elections, some analysts have predicted that the ruling right-wing Law and Justice party, which spends significant funds on Jewish monuments and culture, will need the support of Confederation and its voters to form a government. That is one reason some Law and Justice leaders have at times turned a blind eye towards antisemitism, the party’s critics allege.
“We wrote Law and Justice that they had antisemitic comments on their Facebook feed and they didn’t remove them,” Zielińska added.
Over the past five years, specific political developments have fueled negative attitudes towards Jews, she noted. In 2019, thousands of Polish nationalists protested in front of the U.S. Embassy in Warsaw against U.S. efforts to require Poland to compensate Jews whose families lost property during the Holocaust.
Michael Schudrich, Poland’s chief rabbi, said that although he agreed that online public discourse in Poland could be antisemitic, violent acts of antisemitism were incredibly rare. In 2006, a man who yelled “Poland is for Poles,” hit Schudrich and attacked him with pepper spray.
“Thousands of Hasidim come to Poland each year for various anniversaries and there has never been a real problem” he said. “And as for me, the only time anyone attacked me was under a left-wing government.”
He said he sees no evidence that antisemitism in Poland is on the rise, but he believes the government’s push for a nationalistic patriotic narrative of the past — focused on Polish heroism during the Holocaust — and its courting of the extreme right has had consequences.
“Antisemites today feel more empowered to say what’s on their minds,” he said.
Jews in Poland range in number from more than 15,000, according to a government census, to fewer than 10,000, according to the World Jewish Congress.
—
The post First antisemitism report conducted with the Polish Jewish community shows how ‘Jew’ is used to discredit enemies appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
A nose is a nose is a nose: A Brooklyn artist’s quest to paint 100 Jewish noses, including mine
I have never been good at resisting advertising, but one day last July, I came across a poster aimed at me like a heat-seeking missile: “Are you Jewish? Do you have a nose?”
Check and check.
The flyer went on: “Looking for noses for the 100 Jewish Noses Project, a series of 100 Jewish nose paintings.”
Strange forces were afoot on Franklin Avenue. I had seen a lot of papers taped to poles in my time, but never one that had seen me so clearly. The page was dominated by a painting of a nose, a handsome Romanesque specimen with an oily sheen. Below, the mystery artist invited me to “Submit your nose here” via a tinyurl link. I didn’t need to be asked twice.
After I filled out a Google Form that asked some basic questions (name, genre of Jewish heritage, availability to come to Brooklyn for reference photos) and a few more nasally-reflective inquiries relating to my nose-job status and my general relationship with my nose, I found myself in artist Goldie Gross’ Crown Heights apartment, preparing to do some modeling for the first time in my life. Gross was reserved but generous with her laughter. Her loose black dress, mane of golden-brown crinkly curls and red nail polish lended her a certain Jew-ne-sais-quoi.
“I don’t think there is such a thing as a Jewish nose,” said Gross once we had sat down on her couch to talk, “and so I wanted to do a series that captures the full range, the diversity of the Jewish nose across one hundred paintings.”

There are Jewish noses hanging on Gross’ living room wall. Well, paintings of Jewish noses. Noses of every conceivable style, from the aquiline to the Asiatic, the beringed to the bulbous. Gross began painting (not just noses) in 2012, when she was 15 or 16, before going on to earn a BA in Art and Business at Baruch College and an MA in Art History at NYU’s Institute of Fine Arts. The 100 Jewish Noses idea intrigued her because it fulfilled a trifecta of artistic goals.
“I wanted a longstanding series that would take time, that would be something on the easel, and that would allow me to master something that was also relevant to the current moment,” she told me.
To Gross, the stereotype of the “Jewish Nose” has cast a huge, humped and hooked shadow over Jewish collective self-esteem for centuries. And, Gross pointed out, unlike wearing a yarmulke or claiming the title “People of the Book,” the “Jewish Nose” is not a feature that the Chosen People chose to be known by.
“It goes back to the 12th or 13th century, just a way to differentiate Jews as ‘other,’” Gross said. “The Nazis really ran with it. A ton of Nazi propaganda has the big nose as this way to ‘other’ the Jew. This propaganda has, I think, become part of our cultural identity. We’ve accepted this image of the Jew as a big-nosed, unattractive person as an actual reflection of who we are and how we view ourselves.”
Like endocrine disruptors sneaking into the bloodstream, these nasal prejudices have been encoded in the Jewish cultural genome and passed from generation to generation. “Asking people to submit their noses, I asked people to write about their relationships with their noses. And so many people have bad relationships with their noses,” Gross said. “They’re like, ‘I hated it growing up, I was bullied, my family made fun of me.’ Or conversely, ‘I have a small nose; I was always proud of it.”
Proud of it? I snorted indignantly through my not-inconspicuous schnozz. Those tiny-nosed Jews — they might laugh now, but they would never, ever build the true grit demanded by a plus-size honker. I almost pitied them.

But as Gross positioned me in direct light and prepared to snap some nose pics, a bit of my bravado wore off. I thought of younger, bat-mitzvah-age Clara, who would have had the same reaction to an iPhone camera pointed at her nose as an AK-47. She would rather have posed nude for a remake of the “Draw me like one of your French girls” scene in Titanic than pose her nose.
Like many girls in middle school, I celebrated my entrance to womanhood by selecting at least one arbitrary physical feature to rag on. I picked my nose (not like that). For years, I fretted over my nose. I pinched and poked it. I spent many enriching hours flaring my nostrils in front of the mirror, amazed and horrified by the width I could achieve. I wished for a more unobtrusive nose, like Keira Knightley’s — or, failing that, Voldemort’s. Never mind that with a Korean-American mother and a Jewish father, looking like Voldemort wasn’t even phenotypically possible.
I don’t remember a revelatory flash that made me accept my nose. My father tried to inspire me by telling me about the “Black Is Beautiful” movement from the 1960s, but I struggled to apply it: “Jewish is … Jewtiful?!” By and by, I became too busy to worry about my nose. Noses receded into the rearview mirror as I sped down the highway of life.
Yet I wonder whether things might have changed for me if I had seen a project like Gross’ sooner. Even if I didn’t suddenly start reveling in my nose’s beauty, I might have seen that nature is creative and full of variety. There’s beauty in that. Around six months after I posed for Gross, she sent me a message on Instagram; my nose was finished. And there it was, Nose 14 of 100, nestled among its Jewish brethren. I blinked at it like a caveman examining his own reflection in a puddle. Could that be me? Yet there my Jewish nose was, one nose among noses beaked, beringed, button and bulbous. Paint me like one of your Jewish girls, I thought.
The post A nose is a nose is a nose: A Brooklyn artist’s quest to paint 100 Jewish noses, including mine appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Trump, on eve of new ceasefire talks: ‘Israel never talked me into the war with Iran’
(JTA) — President Donald Trump insisted that “Israel never talked me into the war with Iran” on his social network Monday, apparently seeking to tamp down a series of reports — including from members of his own administration — that the Israeli government had manipulated him into striking the Islamic Republic.
In the same post on Truth Social, Trump added that his own reaction to the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attack on Israel contributed to his decision: “Israel never talked me into the war with Iran, the results of Oct. 7th, added to my lifelong opinion that IRAN CAN NEVER HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON, did.”
Trump is facing growing backlash to the Iran war that had been launched with joint U.S.-Israeli strikes, with members of his own party joining a chorus of voices opposing it. A key point of contention is to what degree Israeli pressure played a role in the president’s decision to go to war, with the GOP’s anti-Israel wing maintaining that Trump was manipulated by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and Secretary of State Marco Rubio initially suggesting that Israel had forced the president’s hand.
Anti-war protesters have often linked the strikes either to Trump and Netanyahu equally, or portrayed Netanyahu as Trump’s puppet master.
A recent report in The New York Times also indicated that Trump had trusted Netanyahu’s assessment that regime change in Iran would be swift, rather than dissenting views among his own generals. The war has continued for nearly two months, with Iran’s blockade of the Strait of Hormuz undercutting the world’s oil supply. The Trump administration is currently eyeing an exit ramp, with polls showing that Jewish Americans are largely opposed to the war even as they support its aims.
But in his new post, Trump continued to confidently declare that regime change in Iran was a possibility.
“Just like the results in Venezuela, which the media doesn’t like talking about, the results in Iran will be amazing,” the president wrote. “And if Iran’s new leaders (Regime Change!) are smart, Iran can have a great and prosperous future!”
Trump’s post comes days after another that appeared designed to combat the perception that he was not in full control. A day after announcing a truce in the Israel-Hezbollah fight in Lebanon, which reportedly surprised even members of Netanyahu’s cabinet, he posted, “Israel will not be bombing Lebanon any longer. They are PROHIBITED from doing so by the U.S.A. Enough is enough!!!” White House officials, responding to confusion from the Israelis, later clarified that the prohibition did not extended to strikes that are considered defensive.
The new post comes as Trump has sent competing signals about the future of the ceasefire, which is set to expire on Tuesday. Over the weekend, he both indicated that he believed the ceasefire would be extended and warned in a different post that the Iranians must comply with his demands or he would target the country’s civilian infrastructure.
“We’re offering a very fair and reasonable DEAL, and I hope they take it because, if they don’t, the United States is going to knock out every single Power Plant, and every single Bridge, in Iran,” Trump wrote. “NO MORE MR. NICE GUY!”
Iran has said it has “no plans” to attend talks meant to extend the ceasefire scheduled for Monday night in Islamabad, Pakistan. Netanyahu, meanwhile, told Israelis on Monday that he stands ready to return to war if needed.
This article originally appeared on JTA.org.
The post Trump, on eve of new ceasefire talks: ‘Israel never talked me into the war with Iran’ appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
If Iran Won’t Deal, Trump Must Make the Cost of Refusal Unbearable
A US Navy sailor signals an F/A-18E Super Hornet on the flight deck of the Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln in support of the Operation Epic Fury attack on Iran at an undisclosed location, March 4, 2026. Photo: US Navy/Handout via REUTERS
The ceasefire with Iran is expiring. The talks collapsed after 21 hours in Islamabad. Iran has closed the Strait of Hormuz. Trump himself, speaking aboard Air Force One, put the choice plainly: “Maybe I won’t extend [the ceasefire]. So you have a blockade, and unfortunately, we’ll have to start dropping bombs again.”
That is the right instinct. But dropping bombs alone is not a strategy. It is a continuation of what has not worked. The question before the administration is not whether to apply pressure, but what kind of pressure actually changes Iran’s calculus. The answer requires being honest about what the war has so far failed to accomplish, and clear about what must follow.
Start with what the strikes achieved and what they did not. The United States and Israel killed Iran’s supreme leader, wiped out much of its senior military command, and damaged its nuclear facilities. These were historic accomplishments. But US intelligence assessments say Iran’s regime likely will remain in place for now, weakened but more hardline, with the Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) exerting greater control. As one analyst put it: “When President Trump says he has changed the regime in Iran, he’s right in one sense: he’s changed it to a much more radicalized regime.” The war shifted who holds power in Tehran, but it did not shift what that power wants.
The IRGC, which now runs Iran more openly than at any point since 1979, looks at the nuclear question through the lens of survival. Analysts say the IRGC will be looking toward the example of North Korea, noting that the country has not been subject to attacks precisely because it possesses a nuclear deterrent. Former Supreme Leader Khamenei’s fatwa banning a nuclear bomb died with him, and for any military whose conventional deterrence has been degraded, the ultimate deterrent is now “a very attractive prospect.”
This is the central strategic reality the Trump administration must accept: Iran’s incentive to acquire a nuclear weapon has increased, not decreased, as a result of the war. Bombing alone will not change that. Only a combination of measures that makes the pursuit of the bomb more costly than abandoning it can.
The first requirement is maintaining the naval blockade unconditionally, regardless of Iranian announcements about Hormuz openings. Iran has been selectively admitting ships from China, Turkey, Pakistan, and India under bilateral arrangements while blocking others, converting the strait into a political instrument rather than surrendering the leverage it provides. A blockade that can be circumvented through side deals is not a blockade. It is theater. CENTCOM must enforce the blockade against all sanctioned traffic without exceptions, including Chinese tankers, and Trump must be prepared to make that enforcement the hill his presidency stands on, economically and diplomatically.
The second requirement is activating European snap-back sanctions immediately. Secretary of State Marco Rubio urged European countries on April 18 to quickly reimpose sanctions, warning that Iran is approaching nuclear weapons capability. This call should not have been made publicly as a request. It should have been delivered as a condition. Washington has leverage over European access to American markets and defense cooperation that it has consistently refused to use in Iran policy. That reluctance must end. A European sanctions regime that closes off the money that the blockade does not reach, will give Iran no economic off-ramp that does not run through US terms.
The third requirement is the most uncomfortable to name. The Iranian people have already done the work the administration hoped bombing would do. Surveys conducted inside Iran show that Iranians believe protests, foreign pressure, and intervention are more likely to bring about political change than elections and reforms. The regime is militarily weakened, culturally weakened, and economically weakened, with a plummeting currency. Protests that began in December 2025 over economic conditions grew into nationwide demonstrations in all 31 provinces, with hundreds of thousands participating and calls shifting from economic grievances to the overthrow of the Islamic Republic itself. This is the most significant popular uprising Iran has seen since 1979, and it is happening right now, under the weight of the war and the blockade.
Trump called on the Iranian people to take their government at the outset of the war. He should not abandon that call as a diplomatic inconvenience. Materially supporting the opposition, providing Internet access to circumvent the regime’s blackout, and making unambiguous public commitments to the protesters that American pressure will not cease while the IRGC shoots demonstrators in the street are actions within the administration’s power. They cost nothing militarily and they impose a political cost on the regime that no bomb can replicate.
A deal that leaves Iran with a five-year enrichment window and underground missile cities under reconstruction is not a deal. It is a countdown. Trump knows what the alternative looks like. He should pursue it.
Amine Ayoub, a fellow at the Middle East Forum, is a policy analyst and writer based in Morocco. Follow him on X: @amineayoubx
