RSS
Guterres Embraces the Authoritarians
U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres meets with Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, the Turkish president, on the sidelines of the general debate of the General Assembly’s 79th session on Sept. 24, 2024. Photo: Eskinder Debebe/U.N. Photo.
JNS.org – It’s often said about antisemitism that Jews are the canary in the coal mine: What starts with them won’t end with them, and sooner or later, the rest of society will suffer the consequences of this thoroughly anti-democratic ideology. I’m not going to delve into that proposition here, save to say that while I don’t entirely agree with it, there are times when its core observation can prove useful.
A case in point concerns the secretary-general of the United Nations, António Guterres. Back in June, I gave voice to the disappointment I know is shared by many other Jews over the evolution of his stance on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. After initially appearing quite promising and making all the right noises on why antisemitism is a global threat that needs to be dealt with, Guterres transformed for the worse after the Hamas pogrom in Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, joining the chorus chiding the Jewish state on the international stage—from Ireland to South Africa, from Spain to Chile, and all points in between. Particularly disgraceful was his decision to place Israel on a blacklist of countries whose militaries abuse children, alongside such paragons of virtue as the Democratic Republic of Congo, Russia, Burma/Myanmar, Somalia, Sudan, South Sudan and Yemen. Other democracies, including the United States, France and the United Kingdom, could easily end up on a list like this given the actions of their militaries in Iraq and Afghanistan, but they don’t because the United Nations understands that the political costs of such an action are minimal only when it comes to Israel.
Now Guterres is burrowing deeper into the authoritarian, conspiracy-addled universe from which antisemitism springs. Last week, the U.N. chief arrived in the Russian city of Kazan for a three-day summit of the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) bloc of states, which bills themselves as an alternative to the economic institutions, like the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, that have dominated the post-World War II global order.
The summit was hosted by Russian President Vladimir Putin, who delightedly used the occasion to demonstrate that his illegal and brutal invasion of Ukraine hasn’t exactly robbed him of allies. More than 20 world leaders joined him in Kazan, among them Chinese President Xi Jinping, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. Other states eager to enter the BRICS fold, including Ethiopia, Egypt and the United Arab Emirates, also sent senior representatives to sit at Putin’s feet.
By attending the summit in Russia, Guterres was effectively spitting in the faces of both Ukraine and Israel. In doing so, he proved that when you flirt with antisemitism and legitimize its tropes, you open yourself up to embracing all of its associated baggage—fake news, outlandish theories and the recasting of terrorism as a form of “resistance.”
BRICS isn’t an exact copy of the Warsaw Pact—the treaty organization that bound the Soviet Union to its Communist satellite states during the Cold War—but it is certainly making moves in that direction. Among its five founders, only Brazil and India have an interest in keeping relations cordial with Western democracies, but they are no match for Chinese or Russian imperatives in this regard. Meanwhile, South Africa and those states that have knocked on the BRICS door more recently—like Turkey, despite its status as a NATO ally—regard the bloc as much more than an economic association. Critically, BRICS will provide rogue states like Iran and even North Korea with a veneer of legitimacy denied to them in Western circles.
Indeed, none of the subjects that the Russian news agency Tass, quoting a Kremlin statement, reported as being on the agenda at a private meeting between Putin and Guterres concerned trade or economic development. Their “discussion will be given to pressing issues on the international agenda, including the Middle East crisis and the situation around Ukraine,” the Kremlin said. What Guterres will hear from Putin is the standard Russian line, defaming Ukraine’s democratic government as a collection of “neo-Nazis” and richly complaining, nearly three years into the invasion of Ukraine, that it is Israel’s multi-front defensive war against an axis of Iranian proxies that is causing instability! Meanwhile, Iran continues to supply Russia with missiles and drones, while North Korea has—according to South Korean and Ukrainian intelligence reports—sent thousands of its troops to fight alongside the Russians.
By feting a group of states who represent, in the words of Kyiv Post commentator Orhan Dragas, “a worrying mix of authoritarianism, anti-democratic governance, and war crimes,” Guterres is compromising the basic values of the world body’s founding charter. His presence amounts to an approval of Russia’s actions in Ukraine and the deepening alliance between Moscow and Tehran. The only way to avoid that impression would be for Guterres to state clearly that Russia must withdraw entirely from Ukraine and that Israel, as a sovereign U.N. member state, has an unquestioned right to defend itself against an association of states and client paramilitaries seeking its destruction. He won’t, of course, say anything that comes even close to that.
The elephant in the room here is the US-led alliance of democratic states around the world. Over the last 80 years, there has been any number of reasons for them to ditch the United Nations in favor of a new world organization that doesn’t allow its members to repress their own populations or sew regional havoc in the name of “national sovereignty.” Yet they have not done so, mainly because they fear an outcome in which they are unable to influence or check the behavior of authoritarian states. And with the future of US foreign policy up for grabs ahead of the US presidential election on Nov. 5, Putin correctly calculates that now is the perfect time for him to strut the world stage, presenting a vision of international relations that will strengthen the positions of Russia and its allies while weakening ours.
The practical effects of this weakness are already painfully visible. To take a few examples: Qatar—an Iranian ally that practices a form of apartheid by disenfranchising nearly 90% of its population—has been elected to the U.N. Human Rights Council; UNRWA—the U.N. agency solely dedicated to the descendants of Palestinian refugees—continues to function despite copious evidence of the overlap between members of its staff and Hamas; and the U.N.’s top official is breaking bread with a Russian leader eager to revive the threat posed by his country during the Cold War.
I could go on, but it will suffice to say that the head-in-the-sand approach of Western leaders to our fracturing international institutions is in large part responsible for the situation in which we find ourselves. The only real pushback that Guterres has received so far has come from Israel, which has declared him persona non grata. As welcome as that decision is, it is an isolated one that will have little impact until other countries pluck up the courage to follow suit.
The post Guterres Embraces the Authoritarians first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Harvard Faculty Oppose Deal With Trump, Distancing From Hamas Apologists: Crimson Poll
Harvard University president Alan Garber attending the 373rd Commencement Exercises at Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts, US, May 23, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Brian Snyder
A recently published Harvard Crimson poll of over 1,400 Harvard faculty revealed sweeping opposition to interim university President Alan Garber’s efforts to strike a deal with the federal government to restore $3 billion in research grants and contracts it froze during the first 100 days of the second Trump administration.
In the survey, conducted from April 23 to May 12, 71 percent of arts and sciences faculty oppose negotiating a settlement with the administration, which may include concessions conservatives have long sought from elite higher education, such as meritocratic admissions, viewpoint diversity, and severe disciplinary sanctions imposed on students who stage unauthorized protests that disrupt academic life.
Additionally, 64 percent “strongly disagree” with shuttering diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs, 73 percent oppose rejecting foreign applicants who hold anti-American beliefs which are “hostile to the American values and institutions inscribed in the US Constitution and Declaration of Independence,” and 70 percent strongly disagree with revoking school recognition from pro-Hamas groups such as the Palestine Solidarity Committee (PSC).
“More than 98 percent of faculty who responded to the survey supported the university’s decision to sue the White House,” The Crimson reported. “The same percentage backed Harvard’s public rejection of the sweeping conditions that the administration set for maintaining the funds — terms that included external audits of Harvard’s hiring practices and the disciplining of student protesters.”
Alyza Lewin of the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law told The Algemeiner that the poll results indicate that Harvard University will continue to struggle to address campus antisemitism on campus, as there is now data showing that its faculty reject the notion of excising intellectualized antisemitism from the university.
“If you, for example, have faculty teaching courses that are regularly denying that the Jews are a people and erasing the Jewish people’s history in the land of Israel, that’s going to undermine your efforts to address the antisemitism on your campus,” Lewin explained. “When Israel is being treated as the ‘collective Jew,’ when the conversation is not about Israel’s policies, when the criticism is not what the [International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of antisemitism] would call criticism of Israel similar to that against any other country, they have to understand that it is the demonization, delegitimization, and applying a double standard to Jews as individuals or to Israel.”
She added, “Faculty must recognize … the demonization, vilification, the shunning, and the marginalizing of Israelis, Jews, and Zionists, when it happens, as violations of the anti-discrimination policies they are legally and contractually obligated to observe.”
The Crimson survey results were published amid reports that Garber was working to reach a deal with the Trump administration that is palatable to all interested parties, including the university’s left-wing social milieu.
According to a June 26 report published by The Crimson, Garber held a phone call with major donors in which he “confirmed in response to a question from [Harvard Corporation Fellow David M. Rubenstein] that talks had resumed” but “declined to share specifics of how Harvard expected to settle with the White House.”
On June 30, the Trump administration issued Harvard a “notice of violation” of civil rights law following an investigation which examined how it responded to dozens of antisemitic incidents reported by Jewish students since the 2023-2024 academic year.
The correspondence, sent by the Joint Task Force to Combat Antisemitism, charged that Harvard willfully exposed Jewish students to a torrent of racist and antisemitic abuse following the Hamas-led Oct. 7 massacre, which precipitated a surge in anti-Zionist activity on the campus, both in the classroom and out of it.
“Failure to institute adequate changes immediately will result in the loss of all federal financial resources and continue to affect Harvard’s relationship with the federal government,” wrote the four federal officials comprising the multiagency Task Force. “Harvard may of course continue to operate free of federal privileges, and perhaps such an opportunity will spur a commitment to excellence that will help Harvard thrive once again.”
The Trump administration ratcheted up pressure on Harvard again on Wednesday, reporting the institution to its accreditor for alleged civil rights violations resulting from its weak response to reports of antisemitic bullying, discrimination, and harassment following the Oct. 7, 2023 massacre.
Citing Harvard’s failure to treat antisemitism as seriously as it treated other forms of hatred in the past, The US Department of Educationthe called on the New England Commission of Higher Education to review and, potentially, revoke its accreditation — a designation which qualifies Harvard for federal funding and attests to the quality of the educational services its provides.
“Accrediting bodies play a significant role in preserving academic integrity and a campus culture conducive to truth seeking and learning,” said Secretary of Education Linda McMahon. “Part of that is ensuring students are safe on campus and abiding by federal laws that guarantee educational opportunities to all students. By allowing anti-Semitic harassment and discrimination to persist unchecked on its campus, Harvard University has failed in its obligation to students, educators, and American taxpayers.”
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.
The post Harvard Faculty Oppose Deal With Trump, Distancing From Hamas Apologists: Crimson Poll first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Balancing Act: Lebanese President Aoun Affirms Hope for Peace with Israel, Balks At Normalization
Lebanese President Joseph Aoun attends a joint press conference with French President Emmanuel Macron at the Elysee Palace in Paris, France, March 28, 2025. REUTERS/Sarah Meyssonnier/Pool
Lebanese President Joseph Aoun on Friday carefully affirmed his country’s desire for peace with Israel while cautioning that Beirut is not ready to normalize relations with its southern neighbor.
Aoun called for a full Israeli withdrawal from Lebanese territory, according to a statement from his office, while reaffirming his government’s efforts to uphold a state monopoly on arms amid mounting international pressure on the Iran-backed terror group Hezbollah to disarm.
“The decision to restrict arms is final and there is no turning back on it,” Aoun said.
The Lebanese leader drew a clear distinction between pursuing peace and establishing formal normalization in his country’s relationship with the Jewish state.
“Peace is the lack of a state of war, and this is what matters to us in Lebanon at the moment,” Aoun said in a statement. “As for the issue of normalization, it is not currently part of Lebanese foreign policy.”
Aoun’s latest comments come after Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar expressed interest last month in normalizing ties with Lebanon and Syria — an effort Jerusalem says cannot proceed until Hezbollah is fully disarmed.
Earlier this week, Aoun sent his government’s response to a US-backed disarmament proposal as Washington and Jerusalem increased pressure on Lebanon to neutralize the terror group.
While the details remain confidential, US Special Envoy Thomas Barrack said he was “unbelievably satisfied” with their response.
This latest proposal, presented to Lebanese officials during Barrack’s visit on June 19, calls for Hezbollah to be fully disarmed within four months in exchange for Israel halting airstrikes and withdrawing troops from its five occupied posts in southern Lebanon.
However, Hezbollah chief Sheikh Naim Qassem vowed in a televised speech to keep the group’s weapons, rejecting Washington’s disarmament proposal.
“How can you expect us not to stand firm while the Israeli enemy continues its aggression, continues to occupy the five points, and continues to enter our territories and kill?” said Qassem, who succeeded longtime terrorist leader Hassan Nasrallah after Israel killed him last year.
“We will not be part of legitimizing the occupation in Lebanon and the region,” the terrorist leader continued. “We will not accept normalization [with Israel].”
Last fall, Israel decimated Hezbollah’s leadership and military capabilities with an air and ground offensive, following the group’s attacks on Jerusalem — which they claimed were a show of solidarity with the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas amid the war in Gaza.
In November, Lebanon and Israel reached a US-brokered ceasefire agreement that ended a year of fighting between the Jewish state and Hezbollah.
Under the agreement, Israel was given 60 days to withdraw from southern Lebanon, allowing the Lebanese army and UN forces to take over security as Hezbollah disarms and moves away from Israel’s northern border.
However, Israel maintained troops at several posts in southern Lebanon beyond the ceasefire deadline, as its leaders aimed to reassure northern residents that it was safe to return home.
Jerusalem has continued carrying out strikes targeting remaining Hezbollah activity, with Israeli leaders accusing the group of maintaining combat infrastructure, including rocket launchers — calling this “blatant violations of understandings between Israel and Lebanon.”
The post Balancing Act: Lebanese President Aoun Affirms Hope for Peace with Israel, Balks At Normalization first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Peace Meals: Chef José Andrés Says ‘Good People’ On Both Sides of Gaza Conflict Ill-Served By Leaders, Food Can Bridge Divide
Chef and head of World Central Kitchen Jose Andres attends the Milken Institute Global Conference 2025 in Beverly Hills, California, US, May 5, 2025. Photo: Reuters/Mike Blake.
Renowned Spanish chef and World Central Kitchen (WCK) founder José Andrés called the Oct. 7 attack “horrendous” in an interview Wednesday and shared his hopes for reconciliation between the “vast majority” on both sides of the Israeli-Palestinian divide who are “good people that very often are not served well by their leaders”
WCK is a US-based, nonprofit organization that provides fresh meals to people in conflict zones around the world. The charity has been actively serving Palestinians in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank since the Oct. 7 massacre in southern Israel. Since the Hamas attack, WCK has served more than 133 million meals across Gaza, according to its website.
The restaurateur and humanitarian has been quoted saying in past interviews that “sometimes very big problems have very simple solutions.” On Wednesday’s episode of the Wall Street Journal podcast “Bold Names,” he was asked to elaborate on that thought. He responded by saying he believes good meals and good leaders can help resolve issues between Israelis and Palestinians, who, he believes, genuinely want to live harmoniously with each other.
“I had people in Gaza, mothers, women making bread,” he said. “Moments that you had of closeness they were telling you: ‘What Hamas did was wrong. I wouldn’t [want] anybody to do this to my children.’ And I had Israelis that even lost family members. They say, ‘I would love to go to Gaza to be next to the people to show them that we respect them …’ And this to me is very fascinating because it’s the reality.
“Maybe some people call me naive. [But] the vast majority of the people are good people that very often are not served well by their leaders. And the simple reality of recognizing that many truths can be true at the same time in the same phrase that what happened on October 7th was horrendous and was never supposed to happen. And that’s why World Central Kitchen was there next to the people in Israel feeding in the kibbutz from day one, and at the same time that I defended obviously the right of Israel to defend itself and to try to bring back the hostages. Equally, what is happening in Gaza is not supposed to be happening either.”
Andres noted that he supports Israel’s efforts to target Hamas terrorists but then seemingly accused Israel of “continuously” targeting children and civilians during its military operations against the terror group.
“We need leaders that believe in that, that believe in longer tables,” he concluded. “It’s so simple to invest in peace … It’s so simple to do good. It’s so simple to invest in a better tomorrow. Food is a solution to many of the issues we’re facing. Let’s hope that … one day in the Middle East it’ll be people just celebrating the cultures that sometimes if you look at what they eat, they seem all to eat exactly the same.”
In 2024, WCK fired at least 62 of its staff members in Gaza after Israel said they had ties to terrorist groups. In one case, Israel discovered that a WCK employee named Ahed Azmi Qdeih took part in the deadly Hamas rampage across southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023. Qdeih was killed in an Israeli airstrike in Gaza in November 2024.
In April 2024, the Israel Defense Forces received backlash for carrying out airstrikes on a WCK vehicle convoy which killed seven of the charity’s employees. Israel’s military chief, Lt. Gen. Herzi Halevi, said the airstrikes were “a mistake that followed a misidentification,” and Israel dismissed two senior officers as a result of the mishandled military operation.
The strikes “were not just some unfortunate mistake in the fog of war,” Andrés alleged.
“It was a direct attack on clearly marked vehicles whose movements were known by” the Israeli military, he claimed in an op-ed published by Israeli newspaper Yediot Aharonot. “It was also the direct result of [the Israeli] government’s policy to squeeze humanitarian aid to desperate levels.”
In a statement on X, Andres accused Israel of “indiscriminate killing,” saying the Jewish state “needs to stop restricting humanitarian aid, stop killing civilians and aid workers, and stop using food as a weapon.”
The post Peace Meals: Chef José Andrés Says ‘Good People’ On Both Sides of Gaza Conflict Ill-Served By Leaders, Food Can Bridge Divide first appeared on Algemeiner.com.