RSS
Israel’s Understanding of Time
Israeli flag. Photo: Eduardo Castro / Pixabay.
JNS.org – For Israel, it’s all about chronology. Time represents both the most critical determinant of Israel’s survival and the context within which such survival must be ensured. As with an individual human being, time is also the reciprocal of death. This vital relationship is currently most conspicuous regarding Hamas and Hezbollah, but it is most urgently meaningful regarding war with Iran.
For Israel, successful geopolitics will necessarily center on this impending war. Whether the expected conflict will be sudden or incremental, its consequences could prove existential. Of greatest significance for Israel will be avoiding a nuclear war. Inter alia, this objective will be contingent on Jerusalem’s “use of time.”
What can these ambiguous observations mean for Israel in operational terms? What might be learned about the estimable probabilities of an unmanageable war with Iran? Hezbollah’s fighting capacities are greater than those of all other jihadist terror organizations, singularly and cumulatively. These belligerent capacities present a strategic threat to Israel even apart from their Iranian backing.
A key question now arises for Israel: To what extent could a greater conceptual awareness of time generate calculable security advantages for the beleaguered Jewish state?
Though generally unrecognized, Hezbollah and Israel’s other principal terrorist adversaries define authentic victory from the bewildering standpoint of “power over death.” For all these recalcitrant foes, becoming a “martyr” (shahid) represents “power over time.” Accordingly, Jerusalem will need to think about how best to undermine such intangible but determinative notions of power.
In Jerusalem, “real-time” ought never to be interpreted solely in terms of clock measurements. But what would constitute a suitably personalized and policy-centered theory of time?
Whether explicit or implicit, Israeli security analyses should contain theory-based elements of chronology. Israel’s many-sided struggle against war and terror will need to be conducted with more intellectually determined and nuanced concepts of time. Though seemingly “impractical,” such “felt time” or “inner time” conceptualizations could sometimes reveal more about Israel’s core survival problem than any easily decipherable measurements of clocks.
The pertinent notion of “felt time” or “time-as-lived” has its origins in ancient Israel. By rejecting time as a simple linear progression, the early Hebrews approached chronology as a qualitative experience. Once it had been dismissed as something that could submit only to quantitative measures, time began to be understood by seminal Jewish thinkers as a distinctly subjective quality. This view identified time as inseparable from its personally infused content.
In terms of current threats from Iran, Israeli planners should consider chronology not only at the most obvious operational levels (e.g., how much “time” before Iran becomes nuclear?), but also at the level of individual Iranian decision-makers (e.g., what do authoritative leaders in Tehran think about time in shaping their nuclear plans vis-à-vis Israel?).
From its beginnings, the Jewish prophetic vision was one of a community living “in time.” In this formative view, political space or geography was palpably important, but not because of territoriality. Instead, the relevance of particular geographic spaces stemmed from certain unique events that had presumably taken place within their boundaries.
It’s time to return to expressly tactical and strategic issues. For Israel, security policy enhancements should include support for “escalation dominance.” When Israel and Iran are engaged in continuous direct warfare, each adversary can be expected to seek primacy during unprecedented episodes of escalation but to accomplish this objective without heightening the risks of an existential conflict. Among other things, any such expectation would require mutual assumptions of enemy rationality.
There will be multiple particulars. If it could be determined that Iran and/or Hezbollah accept a short time horizon in their search for tangible “victory” over Israel, any Israeli response to enemy aggressions would have to be “swift” in the traditional sense. If it would seem that the presumed enemy time horizon was calculably longer, Jerusalem’s expected response could still be more or less incremental. For Israel, this would mean relying more on the relatively passive dynamics of military deterrence and military defense than on any active strategies of nuclear war fighting.
In the final analysis, the worst case for Israel would be to face an irrational Iran. Moreover, this could happen simultaneously with the appearance of the Hezbollah suicide bomber in microcosm: the flesh-and-blood individual terrorist. Of special interest to Israel’s prime minister and general staff, therefore, should be the hidden time horizons of this jihadist suicide bomber. In essence, this self-defiling terror-criminal is so afraid of “not being” that any plan for “suicide” will be intended as personal death avoidance. Prima facie, such a plan is not “only” literal nonsense; it is also patent cowardice.
An aspiring suicide bomber opposing Israel sees himself or herself as a religious sacrificer. This signals a jihadist adversary’s desperate hope to escape from time that lacks any “sacred” meaning. The relevant jihadist adversary could be an individual Hezbollah terrorist, the sovereign state of Iran or both acting in tandem.
What should Israel do with all such informed understandings of its Islamist adversaries’ concept of time? Jerusalem’s immediate policy response should be to convince both aspiring Hezbollah suicide bombers and Iranian national leaders that their intended “sacrifices” could never elevate them or their societies above the immutably mortal limits of time. This will be an intellectual problem, not a political problem.
Israeli policy-makers will need to recognize certain dense problems of chronology as policy-relevant quandaries. They will also need to acknowledge to themselves that any plausible hopes for national security and “escalation dominance” should be informed by reason. In Jerusalem, all ordinary considerations of domestic politics and global geopolitics will need to be understood as both reflective and transient.
“As earthlings,” comments Hoosier author Kurt Vonnegut, “all have had to believe whatever clocks said.” As necessary fonts of national security decision-making, Israeli strategic thinkers now have it in their power to look beyond the simplifying hands of clocks and investigate more policy-purposeful meanings of time. For Jerusalem, exercising such latent intellectual power could offer a survival posture of potentially unimaginable value. In the final analysis, Israel must survive in a subjective time that is “felt” by its enemies while it is being measured by clocks.
The post Israel’s Understanding of Time first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Trump Withholds Another $450 Million From Harvard University Coffers
US President Donald Trump attends a press conference in the Roosevelt Room at the White House in Washington, DC, US, May 12, 2025. Photo: Nathan Howard via Reuters Connect.
The Trump administration has impounded another $450 million in taxpayer funded research grants and contracts previously awarded to Harvard University, citing the school’s history of fostering anti-Zionist extremism and practicing racial preferences in admissions and hiring.
“Harvard University has repeatedly failed to confront the pervasive race discrimination and antisemitic harassment plaguing its campus,” the multi-agency Joint Task Force to Combat Antisemitism, created by US President Donald Trump in February, said in a statement. “This is just the latest chapter in Harvard’s long standing policy and practice of discriminating on the basis of race as recognized by the Supreme Court in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, where the court rebuked Harvard for its unlawful race discrimination in admissions.”
The task force went on, coupling the issue of racial preferences with anti-Zionism in higher education, which conservative activists have said is necessary for reforming what they describe as a hub for far-left radicals who name both Israel and Western civilization as targets for subversion and deposition.
It said, “Harvard’s campus, once a symbol of academic prestige, has become a breeding ground for virtue signaling and discrimination. This is not leadership; it is cowardice. And it’s not academic freedom; it’s institutional disenfranchisement. There is a dark problem on Harvard’s campus, and by prioritizing appeasement over accountability, institutional leaders have forfeited the school’s claim to taxpayer support.”
Harvard University continues to draw criticism over its campus culture.
Earlier this month, a new “preliminary” report published by nonprofit watchdog NGO Monitor said the institution has ties to anti-Zionist nongovernmental organizations and other entities acting as proxy organizations for terrorist groups that warrant scrutiny and reproach.
Titled, “Advocacy NGOs in Academic Frameworks: Harvard University Case Study,” the report presents copious evidence that Harvard’s academic centers, including Harvard Law School, have come under the influence of Al-Haq and Addameer — two groups identified by the Israeli government as agents and propaganda manufacturers for the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), an internationally designated terrorist organization. The NGOs, the report added, influence research and institutional culture, tilting the ideological balance of the campus toward anti-Zionism.
“The report demonstrates the major contribution from prominent advocacy NGOs to the atmosphere of propaganda and antisemitism at Harvard, particularly through frameworks claiming human rights agendas,” Professor Gerald Steinberg, who authored the report alongside Dr. Adi Schwartz, said in a statement. “The close cooperation between prominent NGOs and Harvard academic programs warrants urgent scrutiny. The blurred lines between scholarship and advocacy threaten academic integrity and risk further inflaming campus tensions.”
In April, the Trump administration impounded $2.26 billion in Harvard’s federal funds following the institution’s refusing to agree to a wishlist of policy reforms that Republican lawmakers have long argued will make higher education more meritocratic and less welcoming to anti-Zionists and far-left extremists. Contained in a letter the administration sent to Harvard interim president Alan Garber — who subsequently released it to the public — the policies called for “viewpoint diversity in hiring and admissions,” the “discontinuation of [diversity, equity, and inclusion, or DEI, initiatives],” and “reducing forms of governance bloat.” They also implore Harvard to begin “reforming programs with egregious records of antisemitism” and to recalibrate its approach to “student discipline.”
Since then, Harvard has admitted to being irresponsive to the concerns of Jewish students and the public.
Several weeks after sparring with the Trump administration, as well as suing it in federal court, Harvard released its long anticipated report on campus antisemitism which said that one source of the problem is the institution’s past refusal to afford Jews the same protections against discrimination enjoyed by other minority groups. Garber apologized for the inconsistent application of policy.
“I am sorry for the moments when we failed to meet the high expectations we rightfully set for our community. The grave, extensive impact of the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas assault on Israel and its aftermath had serious repercussions on campus,” Garber said in a statement which accompanied the report. “Harvard cannot — and will not — abide bigotry. We will continue to provide for the safety and security of all members of our community and safeguard their freedom from harassment. We will redouble our efforts to ensure that the university is a place where ideas are welcomed, entertained, and contested in the spirt of seeking truth; where argument proceeds without sacrificing dignity; and where mutual respect is the norm.”
Harvard’s contrition has not changed Trump’s opinion about the institution. After the report’s release he announced plans to revoke Harvard University’s tax exempt status, which it enjoys as a nonprofit entity.
“It’s what they deserve,” Trump said.
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.
The post Trump Withholds Another $450 Million From Harvard University Coffers first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Trump Vows ‘Most Destructive Force’ Iran Won’t Get Nuclear Weapon as Tehran Defends Enrichment Program
US President Donald Trump attends the Saudi-US Investment Forum, in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, May 13, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Brian Snyder
US President Donald Trump on Tuesday denounced Iran as the “most destructive force” in the Middle East, accusing Tehran of fueling regional instability and vowing that Washington would never allow the country to acquire a nuclear weapon.
During his visit to Saudi Arabia, Trump also accused Iran of causing “unthinkable suffering in Syria, Lebanon, Gaza, Iraq, Yemen, and beyond,” just two days after US and Iranian officials held a fourth round of nuclear talks in Oman.
Trump’s comments came as Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson, Esmaeil Baghaei, described the recent round of talks between the adversaries as productive, but criticized Washington’s new sanctions as undermining the ongoing diplomacy.
“In recent days, they [the Trump administration] issued sanctions on Iran; this is completely incompatible with the process of negotiations,” the Iranian diplomat said. “This will definitely affect our positions.”
This week, the US imposed sanctions on an Iranian oil smuggling network accused of facilitating billions of dollars in crude oil sales to China.
As part of the Trump administration’s “maximum pressure” campaign against Iran — which aims to cut the country’s crude exports to zero and prevent it from obtaining a nuclear weapon — Washington has been targeting Tehran’s oil industry with mounting sanctions.
The fourth round of nuclear talks between Iranian and US officials concluded in Oman on Sunday, with additional negotiations scheduled as Tehran continues to publicly insist on advancing its uranium enrichment.
Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian declared in Tehran on Tuesday that Iran “will not retreat from its inalienable right to nuclear technology for peaceful purposes.”
Earlier this month, Iran accused the Trump administration of “contradictory behavior and provocative statements” following remarks by US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, who warned the country of severe consequences for supporting Yemen’s Houthi militia, an internationally designated terrorist organization.
The Iran-backed group, which controls northern Yemen, has been targeting ships in the Red Sea since November 2023, disrupting global trade, while justifying the attacks as acts of solidarity with the Palestinians in Gaza.
In April, Tehran and Washington held their first official nuclear negotiation since the US withdrew from a now-defunct 2015 nuclear deal that had imposed temporary limits on Iran’s nuclear program in exchange for sanction relief.
The first and third rounds of talks were held in Oman, while the second round took place in Rome at the residence of the Omani ambassador.
Tehran has previously rejected halting its uranium enrichment program, insisting that the country’s right to enrich uranium is non-negotiable, despite Washington’s threats of military action, additional sanctions, and tariffs if an agreement is not reached to curb Iran’s nuclear activities.
However, US special envoy Steve Witkoff said that any deal with Iran must require the complete dismantling of its “nuclear enrichment and weaponization program.” Witkoff’s comments came after he received criticism for suggesting the Islamic Republic would be allowed to maintain its nuclear program in a limited capacity.
Trump indicated last Wednesday during a radio interview that he is seeking to “blow up” Iran’s nuclear centrifuges “nicely” through an agreement with Tehran but is also prepared to do so “viciously” in an attack if necessary. That same day, however, when asked by a reporter in the White House whether his administration would allow Iran to maintain an enrichment program as long as it doesn’t enrich uranium to weapons-grade levels, Trump said his team had not decided. “We haven’t made that decision yet,” Trump said. “We will, but we haven’t made that decision.”
Despite Iran’s claims that its nuclear program is solely for civilian purposes rather than weapons development, Western states have said there is no “credible civilian justification” for the country’s recent nuclear activity, arguing it “gives Iran the capability to rapidly produce sufficient fissile material for multiple nuclear weapons.”
The post Trump Vows ‘Most Destructive Force’ Iran Won’t Get Nuclear Weapon as Tehran Defends Enrichment Program first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
New York City Mayor Establishes First-of-Its-Kind Office to Combat Antisemitism
New York City Mayor Eric Adams announcing the formation of the Mayor’s Office to Combat Antisemitism at a press conference at City Hall on May 13, 2025. Photo: Ed Reed/Mayoral Photography Office.
New York City Mayor Eric Adams announced at a press conference on Tuesday morning the creation of the Mayor’s Office to Combat Antisemitism, the first office of its kind to be established in a major city in the US.
The first task of the new mayoral office will be to immediately establish an inter-agency taskforce that will focus on tacking “all forms of antisemitism,” which include monitoring court cases and outcomes in the justice system, cooperating with the New York City Law Department on cases to bring or join, and advising on executive orders to issue and legislation to propose to address antisemitism. The office will also liaise with the New York City Police Department (NYPD) to take action against antisemitism, and it will have the authority to ensure that city-funded entities, taxpayer-funded organizations, and city agencies do not promote antisemitism.
“Anything funded by the city, there are rules and regulations of how you can contract with the city and behave when you contract with the city, and we’re going to make sure that is taken care of in the proper way,” Moshe Davis, the inaugural executive director of the Office to Combat Antisemitism, told The Algemeiner. He explained that the new office will make sure “that these [city-funded] agencies are not doing the wrong thing and if they are, and we have the legal ability, we are going to make sure they are not going to be able to continue doing that.”
“By establishing the Mayor’s Office to Combat Antisemitism, our administration is taking immediate and concrete steps to address antisemitism at every level of city life,” Davis added during the press conference.
Adams made the announcement about the new initiative amid an unprecedented uptick in antisemitism in New York City and across the nation. In 2024, the NYPD reported that 54 percent of all hate crimes in New York City were against Jewish New Yorkers. During the first quarter of 2025, that number rose to 62 percent.
Meanwhile, the Anti-Defamation League’s latest Audit of Antisemitic Incidents revealed a record number of 9,354 antisemitic incidents across the US in 2024. The highest number of incidents were in New York.
New York City has the largest Jewish population outside of Israel, and Jews make up 10 percent of the population, according to the mayor. New York has 960,000 Jewish residents.
Adams said it is “imperative” to address the increase in antisemitism in New York City.
“We can’t move on with business as usual when we have a population in your city that is overwhelmingly being targeted merely because of their religion or way of life,” Adams said on Tuesday at the press conference. He added that the new Office to Combat Antisemitism will help “send a very clear message in this city that antisemitism cannot live and most importantly cannot grow – cannot grow on our college campuses, cannot grow in our schools, in our work environments … And let’s be honest, it’s not a Jewish issue. Any hate on a group is an issue that we should address. This administration will not remain silent while our Jewish brothers and sisters are targeted.”
“As we continue to see the rising tide of antisemitism here at home, and across the country, this moment calls for decisive action,” the mayor further said in a released statement. “The Office to Combat Antisemitism … will tackle antisemitism in all of its forms, working across city agencies to ensure Jewish New Yorkers are protected and can thrive here in the five boroughs. Antisemitism is an attack not only on Jewish New Yorkers, but on the very idea of New York City as a place where people from all backgrounds can live together.”
Davis’s first course of action as the executive director of the new office will be to form a commission of Jewish leaders from across the city to oversee and advise on the office’s work. The mayor described Davis in a press statement as “a tireless advocate on behalf of Jewish New Yorkers, and he is exactly the right person to lead and build this office.”
Davis joined the Adams administration in November 2022 as Jewish liaison in the Mayor’s Office of Community Affairs. He formerly managed the city’s first Jewish Advisory Council, which the mayor established in June 2023.
“Combating antisemitism requires a sledgehammer approach: coordinated, unapologetic, and immediate,” Davis said. “Mayor Adams has been a modern-day Maccabee, standing up for the Jewish community, and, with the establishment of this office, he is strengthening his resolve to ensure Jewish New Yorkers thrive in our city. I look forward to working closely with Mayor Eric Adams and First Deputy Mayor Randy Mastro to continue our forceful response against anti-Jewish hate and discrimination.”
Davis was previously the rabbinic leader at the Manhattan Jewish Experience, a program for young Jewish professionals. He also founded New York Jews in Politics, an initiative that connects Jewish professionals who work in government, advocacy, and nonprofit sectors, and received his ordination from the Rabbinical Council of Jerusalem. As executive director of the Office to Combat Antisemitism, he will report directly to First Deputy Mayor Mastro.
“We are a city that will not tolerate antisemitism,” Mastro said at the press conference on Tuesday.
“The rise in antisemitism in our city, in our country, and around the world is both alarming and intolerable,” Mastro added in a released statement. “Today, Mayor Adams is taking a stand — that in the city with the largest Jewish population in the world — antisemitism is unacceptable, and we have to do more to address it. So, New York City will lead the way as the first major city in America to establish an office dedicated solely to combatting antisemitism.”
New York City also has an Office for the Prevention of Hate Crimes, which was launched in 2019 and is still active, and the NYPD has a Hate Crime Task Force that addresses bias-motivated threats, harassment, discrimination, and violence throughout New York.
The post New York City Mayor Establishes First-of-Its-Kind Office to Combat Antisemitism first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Israel’s Understanding of Time
Israeli flag. Photo: Eduardo Castro / Pixabay.
JNS.org – For Israel, it’s all about chronology. Time represents both the most critical determinant of Israel’s survival and the context within which such survival must be ensured. As with an individual human being, time is also the reciprocal of death. This vital relationship is currently most conspicuous regarding Hamas and Hezbollah, but it is most urgently meaningful regarding war with Iran.
For Israel, successful geopolitics will necessarily center on this impending war. Whether the expected conflict will be sudden or incremental, its consequences could prove existential. Of greatest significance for Israel will be avoiding a nuclear war. Inter alia, this objective will be contingent on Jerusalem’s “use of time.”
What can these ambiguous observations mean for Israel in operational terms? What might be learned about the estimable probabilities of an unmanageable war with Iran? Hezbollah’s fighting capacities are greater than those of all other jihadist terror organizations, singularly and cumulatively. These belligerent capacities present a strategic threat to Israel even apart from their Iranian backing.
A key question now arises for Israel: To what extent could a greater conceptual awareness of time generate calculable security advantages for the beleaguered Jewish state?
Though generally unrecognized, Hezbollah and Israel’s other principal terrorist adversaries define authentic victory from the bewildering standpoint of “power over death.” For all these recalcitrant foes, becoming a “martyr” (shahid) represents “power over time.” Accordingly, Jerusalem will need to think about how best to undermine such intangible but determinative notions of power.
In Jerusalem, “real-time” ought never to be interpreted solely in terms of clock measurements. But what would constitute a suitably personalized and policy-centered theory of time?
Whether explicit or implicit, Israeli security analyses should contain theory-based elements of chronology. Israel’s many-sided struggle against war and terror will need to be conducted with more intellectually determined and nuanced concepts of time. Though seemingly “impractical,” such “felt time” or “inner time” conceptualizations could sometimes reveal more about Israel’s core survival problem than any easily decipherable measurements of clocks.
The pertinent notion of “felt time” or “time-as-lived” has its origins in ancient Israel. By rejecting time as a simple linear progression, the early Hebrews approached chronology as a qualitative experience. Once it had been dismissed as something that could submit only to quantitative measures, time began to be understood by seminal Jewish thinkers as a distinctly subjective quality. This view identified time as inseparable from its personally infused content.
In terms of current threats from Iran, Israeli planners should consider chronology not only at the most obvious operational levels (e.g., how much “time” before Iran becomes nuclear?), but also at the level of individual Iranian decision-makers (e.g., what do authoritative leaders in Tehran think about time in shaping their nuclear plans vis-à-vis Israel?).
From its beginnings, the Jewish prophetic vision was one of a community living “in time.” In this formative view, political space or geography was palpably important, but not because of territoriality. Instead, the relevance of particular geographic spaces stemmed from certain unique events that had presumably taken place within their boundaries.
It’s time to return to expressly tactical and strategic issues. For Israel, security policy enhancements should include support for “escalation dominance.” When Israel and Iran are engaged in continuous direct warfare, each adversary can be expected to seek primacy during unprecedented episodes of escalation but to accomplish this objective without heightening the risks of an existential conflict. Among other things, any such expectation would require mutual assumptions of enemy rationality.
There will be multiple particulars. If it could be determined that Iran and/or Hezbollah accept a short time horizon in their search for tangible “victory” over Israel, any Israeli response to enemy aggressions would have to be “swift” in the traditional sense. If it would seem that the presumed enemy time horizon was calculably longer, Jerusalem’s expected response could still be more or less incremental. For Israel, this would mean relying more on the relatively passive dynamics of military deterrence and military defense than on any active strategies of nuclear war fighting.
In the final analysis, the worst case for Israel would be to face an irrational Iran. Moreover, this could happen simultaneously with the appearance of the Hezbollah suicide bomber in microcosm: the flesh-and-blood individual terrorist. Of special interest to Israel’s prime minister and general staff, therefore, should be the hidden time horizons of this jihadist suicide bomber. In essence, this self-defiling terror-criminal is so afraid of “not being” that any plan for “suicide” will be intended as personal death avoidance. Prima facie, such a plan is not “only” literal nonsense; it is also patent cowardice.
An aspiring suicide bomber opposing Israel sees himself or herself as a religious sacrificer. This signals a jihadist adversary’s desperate hope to escape from time that lacks any “sacred” meaning. The relevant jihadist adversary could be an individual Hezbollah terrorist, the sovereign state of Iran or both acting in tandem.
What should Israel do with all such informed understandings of its Islamist adversaries’ concept of time? Jerusalem’s immediate policy response should be to convince both aspiring Hezbollah suicide bombers and Iranian national leaders that their intended “sacrifices” could never elevate them or their societies above the immutably mortal limits of time. This will be an intellectual problem, not a political problem.
Israeli policy-makers will need to recognize certain dense problems of chronology as policy-relevant quandaries. They will also need to acknowledge to themselves that any plausible hopes for national security and “escalation dominance” should be informed by reason. In Jerusalem, all ordinary considerations of domestic politics and global geopolitics will need to be understood as both reflective and transient.
“As earthlings,” comments Hoosier author Kurt Vonnegut, “all have had to believe whatever clocks said.” As necessary fonts of national security decision-making, Israeli strategic thinkers now have it in their power to look beyond the simplifying hands of clocks and investigate more policy-purposeful meanings of time. For Jerusalem, exercising such latent intellectual power could offer a survival posture of potentially unimaginable value. In the final analysis, Israel must survive in a subjective time that is “felt” by its enemies while it is being measured by clocks.
The post Israel’s Understanding of Time first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Trump Withholds Another $450 Million From Harvard University Coffers
US President Donald Trump attends a press conference in the Roosevelt Room at the White House in Washington, DC, US, May 12, 2025. Photo: Nathan Howard via Reuters Connect.
The Trump administration has impounded another $450 million in taxpayer funded research grants and contracts previously awarded to Harvard University, citing the school’s history of fostering anti-Zionist extremism and practicing racial preferences in admissions and hiring.
“Harvard University has repeatedly failed to confront the pervasive race discrimination and antisemitic harassment plaguing its campus,” the multi-agency Joint Task Force to Combat Antisemitism, created by US President Donald Trump in February, said in a statement. “This is just the latest chapter in Harvard’s long standing policy and practice of discriminating on the basis of race as recognized by the Supreme Court in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, where the court rebuked Harvard for its unlawful race discrimination in admissions.”
The task force went on, coupling the issue of racial preferences with anti-Zionism in higher education, which conservative activists have said is necessary for reforming what they describe as a hub for far-left radicals who name both Israel and Western civilization as targets for subversion and deposition.
It said, “Harvard’s campus, once a symbol of academic prestige, has become a breeding ground for virtue signaling and discrimination. This is not leadership; it is cowardice. And it’s not academic freedom; it’s institutional disenfranchisement. There is a dark problem on Harvard’s campus, and by prioritizing appeasement over accountability, institutional leaders have forfeited the school’s claim to taxpayer support.”
Harvard University continues to draw criticism over its campus culture.
Earlier this month, a new “preliminary” report published by nonprofit watchdog NGO Monitor said the institution has ties to anti-Zionist nongovernmental organizations and other entities acting as proxy organizations for terrorist groups that warrant scrutiny and reproach.
Titled, “Advocacy NGOs in Academic Frameworks: Harvard University Case Study,” the report presents copious evidence that Harvard’s academic centers, including Harvard Law School, have come under the influence of Al-Haq and Addameer — two groups identified by the Israeli government as agents and propaganda manufacturers for the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), an internationally designated terrorist organization. The NGOs, the report added, influence research and institutional culture, tilting the ideological balance of the campus toward anti-Zionism.
“The report demonstrates the major contribution from prominent advocacy NGOs to the atmosphere of propaganda and antisemitism at Harvard, particularly through frameworks claiming human rights agendas,” Professor Gerald Steinberg, who authored the report alongside Dr. Adi Schwartz, said in a statement. “The close cooperation between prominent NGOs and Harvard academic programs warrants urgent scrutiny. The blurred lines between scholarship and advocacy threaten academic integrity and risk further inflaming campus tensions.”
In April, the Trump administration impounded $2.26 billion in Harvard’s federal funds following the institution’s refusing to agree to a wishlist of policy reforms that Republican lawmakers have long argued will make higher education more meritocratic and less welcoming to anti-Zionists and far-left extremists. Contained in a letter the administration sent to Harvard interim president Alan Garber — who subsequently released it to the public — the policies called for “viewpoint diversity in hiring and admissions,” the “discontinuation of [diversity, equity, and inclusion, or DEI, initiatives],” and “reducing forms of governance bloat.” They also implore Harvard to begin “reforming programs with egregious records of antisemitism” and to recalibrate its approach to “student discipline.”
Since then, Harvard has admitted to being irresponsive to the concerns of Jewish students and the public.
Several weeks after sparring with the Trump administration, as well as suing it in federal court, Harvard released its long anticipated report on campus antisemitism which said that one source of the problem is the institution’s past refusal to afford Jews the same protections against discrimination enjoyed by other minority groups. Garber apologized for the inconsistent application of policy.
“I am sorry for the moments when we failed to meet the high expectations we rightfully set for our community. The grave, extensive impact of the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas assault on Israel and its aftermath had serious repercussions on campus,” Garber said in a statement which accompanied the report. “Harvard cannot — and will not — abide bigotry. We will continue to provide for the safety and security of all members of our community and safeguard their freedom from harassment. We will redouble our efforts to ensure that the university is a place where ideas are welcomed, entertained, and contested in the spirt of seeking truth; where argument proceeds without sacrificing dignity; and where mutual respect is the norm.”
Harvard’s contrition has not changed Trump’s opinion about the institution. After the report’s release he announced plans to revoke Harvard University’s tax exempt status, which it enjoys as a nonprofit entity.
“It’s what they deserve,” Trump said.
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.
The post Trump Withholds Another $450 Million From Harvard University Coffers first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Trump Vows ‘Most Destructive Force’ Iran Won’t Get Nuclear Weapon as Tehran Defends Enrichment Program
US President Donald Trump attends the Saudi-US Investment Forum, in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, May 13, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Brian Snyder
US President Donald Trump on Tuesday denounced Iran as the “most destructive force” in the Middle East, accusing Tehran of fueling regional instability and vowing that Washington would never allow the country to acquire a nuclear weapon.
During his visit to Saudi Arabia, Trump also accused Iran of causing “unthinkable suffering in Syria, Lebanon, Gaza, Iraq, Yemen, and beyond,” just two days after US and Iranian officials held a fourth round of nuclear talks in Oman.
Trump’s comments came as Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson, Esmaeil Baghaei, described the recent round of talks between the adversaries as productive, but criticized Washington’s new sanctions as undermining the ongoing diplomacy.
“In recent days, they [the Trump administration] issued sanctions on Iran; this is completely incompatible with the process of negotiations,” the Iranian diplomat said. “This will definitely affect our positions.”
This week, the US imposed sanctions on an Iranian oil smuggling network accused of facilitating billions of dollars in crude oil sales to China.
As part of the Trump administration’s “maximum pressure” campaign against Iran — which aims to cut the country’s crude exports to zero and prevent it from obtaining a nuclear weapon — Washington has been targeting Tehran’s oil industry with mounting sanctions.
The fourth round of nuclear talks between Iranian and US officials concluded in Oman on Sunday, with additional negotiations scheduled as Tehran continues to publicly insist on advancing its uranium enrichment.
Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian declared in Tehran on Tuesday that Iran “will not retreat from its inalienable right to nuclear technology for peaceful purposes.”
Earlier this month, Iran accused the Trump administration of “contradictory behavior and provocative statements” following remarks by US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, who warned the country of severe consequences for supporting Yemen’s Houthi militia, an internationally designated terrorist organization.
The Iran-backed group, which controls northern Yemen, has been targeting ships in the Red Sea since November 2023, disrupting global trade, while justifying the attacks as acts of solidarity with the Palestinians in Gaza.
In April, Tehran and Washington held their first official nuclear negotiation since the US withdrew from a now-defunct 2015 nuclear deal that had imposed temporary limits on Iran’s nuclear program in exchange for sanction relief.
The first and third rounds of talks were held in Oman, while the second round took place in Rome at the residence of the Omani ambassador.
Tehran has previously rejected halting its uranium enrichment program, insisting that the country’s right to enrich uranium is non-negotiable, despite Washington’s threats of military action, additional sanctions, and tariffs if an agreement is not reached to curb Iran’s nuclear activities.
However, US special envoy Steve Witkoff said that any deal with Iran must require the complete dismantling of its “nuclear enrichment and weaponization program.” Witkoff’s comments came after he received criticism for suggesting the Islamic Republic would be allowed to maintain its nuclear program in a limited capacity.
Trump indicated last Wednesday during a radio interview that he is seeking to “blow up” Iran’s nuclear centrifuges “nicely” through an agreement with Tehran but is also prepared to do so “viciously” in an attack if necessary. That same day, however, when asked by a reporter in the White House whether his administration would allow Iran to maintain an enrichment program as long as it doesn’t enrich uranium to weapons-grade levels, Trump said his team had not decided. “We haven’t made that decision yet,” Trump said. “We will, but we haven’t made that decision.”
Despite Iran’s claims that its nuclear program is solely for civilian purposes rather than weapons development, Western states have said there is no “credible civilian justification” for the country’s recent nuclear activity, arguing it “gives Iran the capability to rapidly produce sufficient fissile material for multiple nuclear weapons.”
The post Trump Vows ‘Most Destructive Force’ Iran Won’t Get Nuclear Weapon as Tehran Defends Enrichment Program first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
New York City Mayor Establishes First-of-Its-Kind Office to Combat Antisemitism
New York City Mayor Eric Adams announcing the formation of the Mayor’s Office to Combat Antisemitism at a press conference at City Hall on May 13, 2025. Photo: Ed Reed/Mayoral Photography Office.
New York City Mayor Eric Adams announced at a press conference on Tuesday morning the creation of the Mayor’s Office to Combat Antisemitism, the first office of its kind to be established in a major city in the US.
The first task of the new mayoral office will be to immediately establish an inter-agency taskforce that will focus on tacking “all forms of antisemitism,” which include monitoring court cases and outcomes in the justice system, cooperating with the New York City Law Department on cases to bring or join, and advising on executive orders to issue and legislation to propose to address antisemitism. The office will also liaise with the New York City Police Department (NYPD) to take action against antisemitism, and it will have the authority to ensure that city-funded entities, taxpayer-funded organizations, and city agencies do not promote antisemitism.
“Anything funded by the city, there are rules and regulations of how you can contract with the city and behave when you contract with the city, and we’re going to make sure that is taken care of in the proper way,” Moshe Davis, the inaugural executive director of the Office to Combat Antisemitism, told The Algemeiner. He explained that the new office will make sure “that these [city-funded] agencies are not doing the wrong thing and if they are, and we have the legal ability, we are going to make sure they are not going to be able to continue doing that.”
“By establishing the Mayor’s Office to Combat Antisemitism, our administration is taking immediate and concrete steps to address antisemitism at every level of city life,” Davis added during the press conference.
Adams made the announcement about the new initiative amid an unprecedented uptick in antisemitism in New York City and across the nation. In 2024, the NYPD reported that 54 percent of all hate crimes in New York City were against Jewish New Yorkers. During the first quarter of 2025, that number rose to 62 percent.
Meanwhile, the Anti-Defamation League’s latest Audit of Antisemitic Incidents revealed a record number of 9,354 antisemitic incidents across the US in 2024. The highest number of incidents were in New York.
New York City has the largest Jewish population outside of Israel, and Jews make up 10 percent of the population, according to the mayor. New York has 960,000 Jewish residents.
Adams said it is “imperative” to address the increase in antisemitism in New York City.
“We can’t move on with business as usual when we have a population in your city that is overwhelmingly being targeted merely because of their religion or way of life,” Adams said on Tuesday at the press conference. He added that the new Office to Combat Antisemitism will help “send a very clear message in this city that antisemitism cannot live and most importantly cannot grow – cannot grow on our college campuses, cannot grow in our schools, in our work environments … And let’s be honest, it’s not a Jewish issue. Any hate on a group is an issue that we should address. This administration will not remain silent while our Jewish brothers and sisters are targeted.”
“As we continue to see the rising tide of antisemitism here at home, and across the country, this moment calls for decisive action,” the mayor further said in a released statement. “The Office to Combat Antisemitism … will tackle antisemitism in all of its forms, working across city agencies to ensure Jewish New Yorkers are protected and can thrive here in the five boroughs. Antisemitism is an attack not only on Jewish New Yorkers, but on the very idea of New York City as a place where people from all backgrounds can live together.”
Davis’s first course of action as the executive director of the new office will be to form a commission of Jewish leaders from across the city to oversee and advise on the office’s work. The mayor described Davis in a press statement as “a tireless advocate on behalf of Jewish New Yorkers, and he is exactly the right person to lead and build this office.”
Davis joined the Adams administration in November 2022 as Jewish liaison in the Mayor’s Office of Community Affairs. He formerly managed the city’s first Jewish Advisory Council, which the mayor established in June 2023.
“Combating antisemitism requires a sledgehammer approach: coordinated, unapologetic, and immediate,” Davis said. “Mayor Adams has been a modern-day Maccabee, standing up for the Jewish community, and, with the establishment of this office, he is strengthening his resolve to ensure Jewish New Yorkers thrive in our city. I look forward to working closely with Mayor Eric Adams and First Deputy Mayor Randy Mastro to continue our forceful response against anti-Jewish hate and discrimination.”
Davis was previously the rabbinic leader at the Manhattan Jewish Experience, a program for young Jewish professionals. He also founded New York Jews in Politics, an initiative that connects Jewish professionals who work in government, advocacy, and nonprofit sectors, and received his ordination from the Rabbinical Council of Jerusalem. As executive director of the Office to Combat Antisemitism, he will report directly to First Deputy Mayor Mastro.
“We are a city that will not tolerate antisemitism,” Mastro said at the press conference on Tuesday.
“The rise in antisemitism in our city, in our country, and around the world is both alarming and intolerable,” Mastro added in a released statement. “Today, Mayor Adams is taking a stand — that in the city with the largest Jewish population in the world — antisemitism is unacceptable, and we have to do more to address it. So, New York City will lead the way as the first major city in America to establish an office dedicated solely to combatting antisemitism.”
New York City also has an Office for the Prevention of Hate Crimes, which was launched in 2019 and is still active, and the NYPD has a Hate Crime Task Force that addresses bias-motivated threats, harassment, discrimination, and violence throughout New York.
The post New York City Mayor Establishes First-of-Its-Kind Office to Combat Antisemitism first appeared on Algemeiner.com.