Uncategorized
‘Fleishman is in Trouble’ hits FX Thursday. Just don’t call it a Jewish series, says its creator.
(JTA) — From Taffy Brodesser-Akner’s point of view, her best-selling 2019 novel “Fleishman Is in Trouble” wasn’t all that Jewish. She’s a little perplexed by the deluge of press junket questions about its Jewish essence.
“It’s funny: I don’t think of it as a Jewish book. I know people do,” she said.
Brodesser-Akner, a journalist famous for her sharp celebrity profiles, is now the showrunner of the book’s star-studded TV adaptation, an 8-episode FX series that debuts on Hulu on Thursday. In the story, Toby Fleishman (played by Jesse Eisenberg) is a 41-year-old Jewish hepatologist who has recently divorced Rachel (Claire Danes), his ambitious, icy, blonde theater agent wife. Early on in the story, Rachel disappears in the middle of the night, leaving Toby with their two children and a truckload of resentment. Toby, who had a nebbishy and romantically insecure youth before marrying Rachel, is now drowning in the sexual bounty of dating apps.
On Zoom, Brodesser-Akner was speaking a few days after the show’s blowout bash at Carnegie Hall and Tavern on the Green, an iconic Central Park restaurant. “I’ve never been to an event like that. It was 600 people,” she said. It sounded like a scene that could have been plucked right from “Fleishman,” which is set on the extremely wealthy Upper East Side, and in which the responsibilities of marriage and parenthood are at odds with the ambitions and personal longings of its middle-aged characters.
Brodesser-Akner, 47, who was both adrenalized and a little frazzled, had to balance the premiere with parenting duties — she’s a mother of two boys, ages 15 and 12. “I’m still picking sequins from my teeth.”
As a writer, Brodesser-Akner likes to play with the power of subjectivity, and she built “Fleishman” on it. Though the story begins as Toby’s, it eventually morphs into a “Rashomon”-esque take on the divorce and what really went wrong in the Fleishmans’ marriage. The story is narrated by Libby (Lizzy Caplan), Toby’s friend from their year abroad in Israel. A former men’s magazine writer, Libby is now a lost and frustrated stay-at-home mom in suburban New Jersey (and a stand-in for Brodesser-Akner). Adam Brody steals scenes as Seth, an immature finance bro and another year-in-Israel friend with whom Toby reconnects after the divorce. (His presence is a homecoming of sorts for those of us who spent our tween years watching him play a different Seth in “The O.C.”)
“I don’t think of it as a Jewish book,” says Taffy Brodesser-Akner.
Brodesser-Akner pieced together the story’s Jewish elements: a doctor named Fleishman, a bat mitzvah, Friday night dinners, a year abroad in Israel, a few jokes about Jews being bad at home repairs (which is the subject of a very funny scene in episode six between Toby and Seth). There are a few insidery details that she fails to mention, like a fake Jewish sleepaway camp called Camp Marah, which sounds like the real Camp Ramah but roughly translates to “Camp Bitter” in Hebrew. Does all this add up to a “Jewish” story?
“I read ‘The Corrections’ by Jonathan Franzen, and it mentions Christmas I think 47 times. I read ‘Crossroads’ and it’s about the family of a youth minister. But neither of those is ever called a Christian book. This is called a Jewish book. I don’t object to it being called a Jewish book. But to me it’s mostly an American story. As a writer and as an observer of the culture, I think that calling this a Jewish book is proof of the answer to an old question: are Jews considered Americans? And the answer is no.” She threw in her characteristic meta analysis: “So now you have a very Jewish profile. How Jewish is that, Sarah?”
The self-aware comment is a good reminder that although her responses may be unguarded, she has not forgotten that she’s on the record. A name in New York media, Brodesser-Akner wrote for GQ and is now a staff writer for The New York Times Magazine, having profiled Gwyneth Paltrow, Ethan Hawke and Tom Hanks and written about the Joshua Cohen novel “The Netanyahus,” the television show “Thirtysomething” and much more. She inserts herself often into her writing, not to make it about herself, but to remind the reader that every profile is by nature filtered through the lens of the writer crafting it. Her writing is searing, self-deprecating — so raw it’s still bleeding and often quite funny.
“I wrote the book the way I would write a profile, just like I always do. But this man doesn’t exist,” she said.
RELATED: 5 Jewish places that inspired Taffy Brodesser-Akner’s ‘Fleishman Is in Trouble’
We had tried to meet in person near her home on the Upper West Side, but by the time she was available, I was in Tel Aviv, placing us along the Israel-New York axis on which “Fleishman” is set. When Toby suddenly calls Libby to tell her he’s getting divorced, he catapults her into memories of their early twenties in Jerusalem. Those thoughts make Libby miss the possibilities of her youth, the ones time has ruthlessly and inevitably extinguished. Eventually her longing for her past becomes so overwhelming that it threatens her marriage to her menschy and patient husband, played by Josh Radnor. (For more longing-for-younger-days while in Israel content, Brodesser-Akner wrote a Saveur essay about vegetable soup in Jerusalem — her Proustian madeleine. Interviewing Brodesser-Akner from my friend’s apartment in Tel Aviv, a city where I lived in my twenties, I found the theme of longing for the past hit almost too close to home.)
Part of the reason Brodesser-Akner doesn’t think the “Fleishman” story is all that Jewish is that she doesn’t feel all that Jewish — at least not relative to her mother and sisters, who are aligned with the Hasidic Chabad-Lubavitch movement and live within a few blocks of each other in Crown Heights, Brooklyn.
“I don’t think any writer has ever gotten it right,” she says of her Jewish background. “They say I was raised Orthodox. It’s interesting because it always makes me look like the black sheep in my family, when really they are. I’m exactly how I was raised to be until I was 12.”
After her mother, a secular Israeli, and her father, a Conservative Long Islander, divorced, her mother put Brodesser-Akner and her sisters in Jewish school. Some Jewish observance trickled back to her mother, who ended up going the Chabad route.
“My mom had never been inside a synagogue until the day she married my father. Now that is what we call ironic,” Brodesser-Akner said.
Brodesser-Akner’s two sisters followed, and her mother eventually remarried and had another child, the only sibling born into a religious household.
“The thing that made me a journalist was being raised in a home where, at age 12, I was relegated to observer. I had to learn how to understand other people’s points of view. And now that’s what I do,” she said.
Despite their religious differences — Brodesser-Akner attends an Orthodox synagogue but sends her children to an unaffiliated Jewish school and says she wakes up “every morning with new ideas” — the author is very close with her family, and her sisters were at the “Fleishman” premiere.
“They were at the premiere of my perverted sex show,” she joked with a laugh referring to the Hulu series, which features some sexual content as Toby explores the post-divorce New York dating scene. “They show up for me and I show up for them. I have my challenges with it, but I think their challenges must be greater. They never say this to me, but they must think that my life is comparatively…” She looked away thoughtfully, trying to find the right words. “They must think my lifestyle is comparatively less worthwhile. But we really love each other.”
To Brodesser-Akner, the most Jewish show on television is “The Patient,” which she calls “the best show I have seen in 100 years.” And that’s not because it (like “Fleishman”) is on FX. “I’m not that kind of interview!” she said.
Lizzy Caplan plays Toby’s friend Libby. (FX Networks)
“It’s the most Jewish show in all of the Jewish ways. It grapples with a Jewish prisoner; with the difference between a Conservative Jewish female cantor whose son becomes ultra-Orthodox — I’d never seen that on screen. It was kind of the only relatable Jewish matter I’ve ever seen. People ask me if I’ve watched ‘Shtisel.’ And I always say, I’m in the 47th season of an ultra-Orthodox family drama myself and not really interested!” She laughed. “But also I think of the other Jewish matters on television, which are adapted memoirs of people who were ultra-Orthodox and now aren’t. It’s like no one can imagine religious people being happy in their lives. And that’s really shocking to me. My family is very happy.”
Brodesser-Akner wound up with her dream cast: she had a list of five actors — Lizzy Caplan, Jesse Eisenberg, Claire Danes, Josh Radnor and Adam Brody — and no backup plan. She noted the fact that viewers have seen them grow up on screen as one reason they were right for the roles. For many, watching Caplan, Eisenberg and Brody sit across from each other in a diner will feel like a camp reunion, the fulfillment of a Jewish television fantasy they never knew they had.
“One thing that we were trying to get across is ‘how could it be that I am this old when I was once this young?’ And the fact that you have a memory of Claire from ‘My So-Called Life,’ or Jesse from ‘The Squid and the Whale’ — that does so much of the work of the show without writing a word,” Brodesser-Akner said.
Besides Danes (who plays the only main character with a non-Jewish parent, whom the book makes clear she resembles) the lead actors are all Jewish — a notable fact in a time when Jewish representation on screen, and who should be allowed to play Jewish characters, is the subject of continued debate.
Last month, New Yorker TV critic Emily Nussbaum, who is Jewish, tweeted, “There is a simple solution to the question of whether various non-Jewish actors are allowed to play Jews & that is to ask me.” Brodesser-Akner responded to the tweet, writing “[Non-Jew] Oscar Isaac in Scenes from a Marriage is the best ex-ortho I ever saw on screen!”
About casting Jewish actors, Brodesser-Akner noted a legal issue rarely mentioned in the representation debate: one can cast based on looks, but it’s illegal in the United States to cast based on religion. She took this very seriously.
“I spoke to [‘The Plot Against America’ director] David Simon about it and he said, ‘They’re actors. You let them act.’ And I agree with that. The question that I asked myself was who was perfect for it?” she said.
Even if Brodesser-Akner rejects the claim that “Fleishman” is a definitively Jewish story, wasn’t she consciously playing with some Philip Roth-inspired Jewish archetypes? Toby the nice Jewish doctor, the devoted, idealistic dad who’s also self-righteous, horny and insecure.
No, she insists she wasn’t. But also Philip Roth is so ingrained in her that who’s to say? And isn’t the question flawed in the first place?
“All I can say is that I am made out of Philip Roth. I’m so formed by his books. I actually would say that you have a bias in the asking of your question, in that you’re Jewish too. And you also are made out of Philip Roth books since you’re a writer. Again, that goes back to the same question as ‘are we American?’ To me, Toby is not ‘a Jewish guy.’ He’s just a guy! He’s the kind of guy I know! I was just trying to be myself.”
“Fleishman is in Trouble” premieres its first two episodes on Hulu on Nov. 17. It will release each of its six remaining episodes weekly on Thursdays.
—
The post ‘Fleishman is in Trouble’ hits FX Thursday. Just don’t call it a Jewish series, says its creator. appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Azealia Banks is done with Israel, again: ‘On second thought, F—K ISRAEL’
(JTA) — It’s been months since Azealia Banks turned heads when she declared she was a “Zionist” on social media in June and gave a concert in Israel for the two-year anniversary of Hamas’ Oct. 7 attacks.
But in a tirade on X this week, the rapper reversed course, lambasting the toll of the United States and Israel’s war with Iran and declaring in a series of profane posts that she no longer supports the country.
“Israel really did us dirty. This is not about terrorism, they actually wanted to see us face china head to head. Israel wants to see the petrodollar flunk. I actually HOPE Netanyahu is dead. We should strike a big [deal] with Iran and just go to war with Israel and keep the petrodollar strong,” wrote Banks in a post on X Tuesday evening.
“On second thought, F—CK ISRAEL,” Banks, who has over 240,000 followers on X, concluded.
While the rapper has frequently commented on Israel and Judaism, previously weighing in on Ashkenazi cuisine and antisemitic conspiracy theories, her latest disavowal of the Jewish state marks a sharp break from her staunch expressions of support for Israel last year.
“The lore of Israel & Zionism and the Jews is charming and relatable as hell,” Banks wrote on X ahead of her concert in Tel Aviv last October. She likened Israel to Wakanda, the futuristic Black homeland in the “Black Panther” movies, writing that “Zionism is iconic” and “Zionism is punk.”
Her reversal, which was criticized by some Jewish influencers, comes as the war in Iran has sparked growing public backlash and claims in some political and online circles that Israeli influence drove the conflict.
It wasn’t the first time that Banks has staked out an anti-Israel view. In 2018, she vowed she would never visit Israel, which she called “nuts,” after she said she encountered racism while performing there.
In posts beginning last Wednesday, Banks pivoted from criticizing Arab states to promoting internet conspiracy theories that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had died and saying that she was “she was “Israel/Iran/Maga’d out.”
“The way Aipac eggs it on like israeli death is cool so long as it feeds fragile jewish american ego is actually psychotic,” wrote Banks in a post on X Tuesday, referring to the pro-Israel lobby. “Like the self cannibalism, double dealing and american jealousy is too obvious to not see. The state of israel is fucking haram [prohibited] The nation, the people dont deserve to be forced into bullshit wars over american and british interests this is crazyyyyyyy.”
The post Azealia Banks is done with Israel, again: ‘On second thought, F—K ISRAEL’ appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Longing for the way secular Jews used to be
איך זיץ דאָ און הער זיך צו צום קול פֿון מײַן פֿעטער יונה ז״ל ווי ער ריכט אָפּ דעם פּסח־סדר אינעם יאָר 1962… און איך קוועל דערפֿון.
יונה גאָטעסמאַן איז געווען אַ סעקולערער ייִד, אָדער ווי מע פֿלעג עס רופֿן אין יענע יאָרן — אַ וועלטלעכער. ער האָט נישט געהיט שבת אָדער כּשרות, און טאַקע דערפֿאַר איז בײַ אים נישט געווען קיין מניעה צו רעקאָרדירן זײַן קול בײַם סדר. אָבער ווען מע הערט ווי ער זאָגט דעם יום־טובֿדיקן קידוש, אָדער דעם „הא לחמא עניא‟ (די דערקלערונג וואָס רופֿט יעדן איינעם וואָס ס׳איז הונגעריק צו קומען און עסן) אָדער דעם „אחד מי יודע‟, דאַכט זיך דיר אַז סע זינגט אַ פֿרומער ייִד מיט אַ קיטל. ער זאָגט די הגדה מיט אַ ניגון וואָס חזרט זיך כּסדר איבער און די ווערטער פֿליִען פֿאַרבײַ אַזוי גיך אַז ס׳איז מיר אַ מאָל שווער צו דערקענען וווּ ער האַלט. אָבער טאַקע דערפֿאַר קלינגט עס אַזוי נאַטירלעך.
אונטן קענט איר אַליין הערן ווי יונה גאָטעסמאַן ריכט אָפּ דעם סדר. די ערשטע 30 סעקונדעס זענען שווער צו הערן אָבער דערנאָך הערט מען שוין אַ סך בעסער.
ווי אַ סך ייִדן פֿון זײַן דור איז דער פֿעטער דערצויגן געוואָרן אין אַ פֿרומער שטוב. די משפּחה האָט געוווינט אין סערעט, אין דער בוקאָווינע, און יונה האָט, אַ פּנים, גוט געדענקט דעם נוסח פֿון זײַן טאַטן, חיים, וואָס האָט געדאַוונט סײַ בײַ די וויזשניצער חסידים, סײַ בײַ די סאַדעגערער. ווי עס דערציילט זײַן זון, איציק גאָטעסמאַן, האָט יונהס טאַטע אָנגעשטעלט אַ גמרא־מלמד צו לערנען מיט אים ווײַל קיין ישיבֿה איז אין סערעט נישט געווען. אַפֿילו מיט יאָרן שפּעטער, ווען יונה האָט שוין אויסשטודירט אויף דאָקטער און מער נישט געפֿירט קיין פֿרום לעבן, אַז ער איז געפֿאָרן צו גאַסט צו טאַטע־מאַמע האָט דער טאַטע אָנגעשטעלט פֿאַר אים אַ גמרא־לערער.
אונדזער שרײַבערין מרים האָפֿמאַן דערציילט אַז איר מאַן, מענדל ז״ל, אויך אַן אָפּשטאַמיקער פֿון די וויזשניצער חסידים, האָט געטאָן דאָס זעלבע. נישט געקוקט אויף דעם וואָס ער האָט נאָכן חורבן (בפֿרט נאָך דעם וואָס ער האָט אָנגעוווירן זײַן טאַטע־מאַמע, זײַן 12־יעריק ברידערל בנימעלע און דרײַ שוועסטער אין גאַזקאַמער) אָפּגעוואָרפֿן זײַן אמונה און אַפֿילו געהייסן זײַן פֿרוי נישט פּראַווען קיין שבת אָדער האַלטן אַ כּשרע קיך אויס כּעס צום אייבערשטן, פֿלעגט ער יעדן פּסח זיך אָנטאָן אַ יאַרמלקע און אָפּריכטן דעם גאַנצן סדר אויפֿן אַלטן שטייגער.
אויך מײַן טאַטע האָט יעדעס יאָר אָנגעפֿירט מיט אַ טראַדיציאָנעלן סדר אויף לשון־קודש כאָטש ער איז, אין פֿאַרגלײַך מיט יונהן און מענדלען, דווקא נישט דערצויגן געוואָרן אין אַ פֿרומער היים. ווי אַ דערוואַקסענער האָט ער זיך אַליין אויסגעלערנט ווי אָפּצוריכטן דעם סדר — מסתּמא טאַקע פֿון זײַן שוואָגער יונה — ווײַל ער האָט געוואָלט אַז דער סדר זאָל האָבן אַ דורותדיק פּנים.
מיט אַנדערע ווערטער, אין יענע יאָרן איז געווען אָנגענומען אַז איינער וואָס האַלט זיך פֿאַר אַ פֿולשטענדיקן סעקולערן ייִד קען נאָך אַלץ, כאָטש איין מאָל אַ יאָר, אָנפֿירן מיט אַ רעליגיעזע צערעמאָניע (אַפֿילו אַ דרײַ־שעהיקן ריטואַל ווי דער סדר), כאָטש עס דערמאָנט גאָט אויף שריט און טריט.
אַן אַטעיִסט וואָלט אפֿשר געשטעלט די פֿראַגע: וואָס איז דער שׂכל פֿון מאַכן ברכות און דורכפֿירן רעליגיעזע ריטואַלן ווען מע גלייבט אַליין נישט אין דעם? איז דאָס נישט אַ מין נישט־אויסגעהאַלטנקייט? מײַן טאַטע ע״ה פֿלעגט, למשל, יעדן שבת מאַכן קידוש און המוציא אויף אַזאַ נאַטירלעכן אופֿן, אַז איך בין געווען זיכער ער איז אַ גלייביקער. און דערפֿאַר ווען איך האָב צו 17 יאָר אַליין זיך פֿאַראינטערעסירט אין גײַסטיקע ענינים און געפּרוּווט פֿאַרפֿירן אַ שמועס מיט אים וועגן דעם, האָט ער פּלוצלינג אויסגערופֿן: „פֿאַר וואָס פֿרעגסטו מיך די אַלע שאלות? דו ווייסט דאָך, אַז איך בין אַן אַטעיִסט!‟
„דו ביסט אַן אַטעיִסט?‟ האָב איך איבערגעפֿרעגט, אַ פֿאַרחידושטע. „פֿאַר וואָס זשע האָסטו די אַלע יאָרן געמאַכט קידוש און המוציא יעדן שבת?‟
זײַן ענטפֿער: „צוליב אײַך!‟
לאַנגע יאָרן האָב איך איבערגעקלערט וואָס עס מיינט טאַקע דער „צוליב אײַך‟. הייסט עס, אַז ער אַליין האָט נישט הנאה געהאַט דערפֿון? אַז דאָס איז בלויז געווען אַ מיטל צו פֿאַרבעסערן די שאַנסן אַז זײַנע קינדער זאָלן זיך שטאַרק אידענטיפֿיצירט ווי ייִדן?
אַז איך קלער איצט וועגן דעם, זעט מיר אויס אַז עס זענען מסתּמא געווען עטלעכע סיבות פֿאַר וואָס די דרײַ וועלטלעכע ייִדן (צוויי פֿון זיי — געשוווירענע אַטעיִסטן) און אַ סך אַנדערע פֿון זייער דור, זענען געווען גרייט אָנצופֿירן מיט אַ רעליגיעזן סדר. ערשטנס, ווי מײַן טאַטע האָט געזאָגט, האָבן זיי עס געטאָן פֿאַר זייערע קינדערס וועגן. ס׳שטייט דאָך בפֿירוש געשריבן אין דער הגדה: „והגדת לבנך — זאָלסט דערציילן דײַנע קינדער וואָס ס׳איז געשען אין לאַנד מצרים‟.
נו, אויב אַזוי, האָבן זיי דאָך געקענט פּשוט דערציילן די געשיכטע פֿון די ייִדן אין מצרים און זייער באַפֿרײַונג אויף אַ סעקולערן אופֿן, אָן צו דערמאָנען גאָט בכלל. זיי האָבן געקענט ניצן די הגדה אַרויסגעגעבן פֿונעם אַרבעטער־רינג אָדער אַן אַנדער סעקולערער ייִדישער אינסטיטוציע. זיי האָבן דאָס אָבער נישט געטאָן. יאָ, אויפֿן סדר־טיש זענען טאַקע געלעגן די וועלטלעכע הגדות, כּדי מע זאָל קענען זינגען בציבור די שיינע מאָדערנע ייִדישע לידער ווי אַבֿרהם רייזענס „אויפֿן ניל‟, דוד עדעלשטאַדטס „אין דעם לאַנד פֿון פּיראַמידן‟ און יצחק לוקאָווסקיס „חד גדיא‟. די וועלטלעכע הגדה איז אָבער בלויז געווען אַ צוגאָב צום סדר, נישט דער הויפּטטעקסט.
מיט אַנדערע ווערטער, די אָ דרײַ וועלטלעכע ייִדיש־רעדנדיקע ייִדן האָבן געוואָלט ביידע: סײַ דעם כּמעט צוויי טויזנט־יאָריקן נוסח, סײַ די וועלטלעכע ייִדישע עלעמענטן.
אויב אַזוי איז די כּוונה, אַ פּנים, געווען עפּעס שטאַרקערס ווי בלויז איבערגעבן די געשיכטע פֿון יציאת־מצרים. ס׳איז אויך געווען אַן אופֿן צו ווײַזן דעם ייִנגערן דור ווי רײַך און ווי טיף איז די ייִדישע טראַדיציע; אַז ייִדיש איז נישט בלויז אַ לשון נאָר אַ גאַנצע קולטור, וואָס איז אָנגעזאַפּט מיט רעליגיעזן וויסן; אַז אַ ייִד דאַרף קענען, אָדער כאָטש זײַן היימיש מיט, דעם רעליגיעזן אַספּעקט פֿון דער ייִדישער טראַדיציע, אַפֿילו אויב ער אַליין איז נישט קיין פֿרומער.
פֿון מײַן זײַט בין איך גאָר צופֿרידן וואָס איציק גאָטעסמאַן האָט אָנגעהאַלטן די רעקאָרדירונג פֿון זײַן טאַטן. איצט קען איך — און ווער נאָך עס וויל נאָר — זיך אויסלערנען דעם סדר־נוסח פֿון די אַמאָליקע בוקאָווינער ייִדן און דערבײַ באַרײַכערן דעם אייגענעם סדר.
The post Longing for the way secular Jews used to be appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Iran War Increases Threat to Sweden, Security Service Says
Swedish Security Service Chief Charlotte von Essen speaks next to Fredrik Hallstroem, chief of operations, during a press conference where the Swedish Security Service (SAPO) presents the situational picture of the country’s security, in Stockholm, Sweden, March 18, 2026. Photo: TT News Agency/Claudio Bresciani via REUTERS
Sweden‘s Security Service (SAPO) warned on Wednesday of increased threats to the Nordic nation from the war in Iran, including risks to Jewish targets, as it released its annual national security assessment.
“History has shown that a desperate and pressured regime can be a dangerous regime,” SAPO operative chief Fredrik Hallstrom told a press conference, referring to the US-Israeli war on Iran.
Iran has long been considered a serious threat, and Swedish authorities have noted how criminal networks – already at the center of a decade-long surge in gang-related violence – have been exploited by state actors to carry out attacks.
“The US-Israeli military operation against Iran, and the countermeasures carried out by Iran, have increased the threat against American, Israeli, and Jewish targets in Sweden,” Security Service Chief Charlotte von Essen said in the report.
In recent years, the agency has also highlighted threats from China and, above all, Russia, which it describes as increasingly willing to take risks in support of its war in Ukraine — including through hybrid operations across Europe.
“Overall, we expect that the threat levels against Sweden will continue to deteriorate in the coming years,” von Essen said, adding that Russia was regarded as a primary driver.
While it is difficult to determine what can be linked to a particular actor, Sweden assesses that Russia is behind several sabotage incidents in Europe targeting critical infrastructure, the security service said. Moscow has denied any involvement.
The agency said it has reviewed hundreds of cases of suspected sabotage in Sweden, including of underwater cables, electricity substations and water-treatment facilities.
“It has so far not been possible to link any physical sabotage to a foreign power,” it said.
The comments came as Iran executed a Swedish citizen on Wednesday, according to Sweden‘s foreign minister, who added that she had summoned the Iranian ambassador in Stockholm to condemn the decision.
The person, who was not named, was arrested in Iran in June of last year and Sweden has repeatedly raised the case with Iranian officials, Foreign Minister Maria Malmer Stenergard said.
“The death penalty is an inhumane, cruel, and irreversible punishment. Sweden, together with the rest of the EU, condemns its application in all circumstances,” Stenergard said.
The legal proceedings leading up to the execution did not meet the standards of due process, she added.
The European Union’s foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas condemned the execution in a statement on Wednesday evening.
“The appalling human rights situation in Iran and the alarming increase in executions are intolerable and show the regime’s true colors,” she said, sending condolences to the family of the citizen.
The Swedish foreign ministry and the Iranian embassy in Stockholm did not immediately respond to a request for comment when contacted by Reuters via phone and email.