RSS
Reconstruction of Gaza Is the Way to Regain Initiative in War on Hamas
An UNRWA aid truck at the Rafah border crossing between Egypt and the Gaza Strip. Photo: Reuters/Amr Abdallah Dalsh
Israel’s wars, according to Israel’s traditional defense strategy, are aimed at thwarting and removing military threats, not at politically shaping the region. Hence our familiar focus on the military dimension. But the goal of the war in Gaza is more ambitious: the destruction of the Hamas regime.
Accordingly, its realization depends on additional dimensions. A slow reconstruction of parts of Gaza based on military achievements can regain the initiative, transfer the pressure back to Hamas, and serve as a lever for a hostage deal. This is also a one-time opportunity for Israel to physically shape the ruined Strip according to its interests. Once we finally get out of the strategic corner we’ve fallen into, we would be wise to return to the more modest Israeli approach to war. We will focus on the effective removal of threats and leave the business of political engineering to the powers.
A total war of attrition
Since the War of Independence, the State of Israel has not known such a long and comprehensive war as the current war in Gaza. The 1970-1971 War of Attrition lasted about a year and a half, but it did not have the scope of forces or continuity of the current war. The First Lebanon War officially lasted only three months.
Elsewhere, I have called the current war Israel’s first total war. I don’t mean “total war” in the sense with which the phrase is applied to the two world wars of the 20th century. Those wars were total in terms of general mobilization, the use of all means of war, including unconventional weapons, and the intentional targeting of civilian populations. The situation in Gaza is the opposite.
It is difficult to recall any other war in which one side fought while making sure to deliver supplies and humanitarian assistance to the enemy population. By the term “total war” I mean to highlight the contrast between this war and its goals from the limited war approach that has always characterized the State of Israel.
Contrary to our original defense strategy, in this war we set as a goal not only the destruction of the Hamas army, but also the destruction of the Hamas regime.
The historical precedents are misleading. In the First Lebanon War (1982), we expelled the PLO from Lebanon and tried to stabilize Maronite rule. The PLO, as we know, was a foreign entity in Lebanon, hated by most Lebanese. The Maronites were a strong local faction and the historical rulers of Lebanon.
The Sinai operation (1956) was indeed intended to damage and overthrow the Nasser regime, but the State of Israel was only a junior partner in the Anglo-French scheme.
Both these affairs are far from the ambition of the current war, which is to remove a neighboring regime that has a strong grip on Gaza. Both those wars are also remembered as total failures.
The historical failures highlight the logic of Israel’s modest approach to wars. Our strategy recognized Israel’s power limitations. No matter how victorious it is on the battlefield, Israel cannot forcefully influence the hatred and hostile intentions on the other side, much less engineer its politics. The core concept of this strategy — decisive defeat on the battlefield — was always reserved for the military dimension alone. Eliminating the immediate military threat was intended to restore security and allow Israel to avoid a prolonged war of attrition that would inevitably serve the other side.
That is exactly what Hamas was aiming for when it invaded Israel on October 7. Sinwar’s strategy was to drag Israel into an attritional war that would eventually exhaust the IDF in general and the reserve forces in particular, empty the munitions stockpile, and turn the international community against Israel.
Rehab program
The goals of the current war, therefore, must by necessity extend beyond Israel’s comfort zone and the healthy understanding that characterized us in the past. Under the circumstances of October 2023, there was no better alternative.
In the article “Sustainable Strategy,” I analyzed the process in which we deviated from the correct basic assumptions of Israeli strategy. Wrong assumptions, primarily the assumption that the State of Israel had become a regional power, maneuvered us into corner where we remain stuck today. I further argued that the flawed theory according to which we can influence the intentions of the enemies in order to “deter them” without paying attention to their combat capabilities is what allowed the building up of the terrorist armies that delivered the blow of October. We now cling to the opposite error.
Much has been written about the Israeli refusal to deal with the “day after” issue. In the absence of a civilian alternative, Hamas has not only returned to control and restored its power in the neighborhoods from which the IDF withdraws, but it does not even feel threatened. There is, therefore, no time constraint from Hamas’s point of view, even in the context of a hostage deal.
If “total victory” means a complete and lasting removal of Hamas, it should only be understood as a long-term strategy that includes not only the military defeat of Hamas and the collapse of its government but also the stabilization and pacification of the Strip. Israel will be required to take care of the stabilization of the Strip through civil, security, and economic control mechanisms.
Clear strategic thinking, not politicization of the war, is required. The analogy of the Second World War, which was used to establish the idea of ”absolute victory,” indicates what is required here. De-radicalization of Germany and Japan was possible not only thanks to their unconditional surrender but also to some civil-economic measures that were taken.
In an attempt to correct the mistake of three decades of appeasement and deterrence strategy, Israel is now making the opposite mistake. We set a clear political war goal — removing the rule of Hamas — but continue to refuse to carry out any non-military war planning.
In principle, I do not believe a war for regime change is the right idea for the State of Israel. But in a practical sense, we have attached ourselves to that aim by allowing the build-up of terrorist armies on our borders. This war should be considered a painful but one-time weaning process. If we have committed to this, it is necessary to see the constraint as an opportunity as well.
Resume initiative by dictating the terms of restoration
The truth must be told. The war is stuck.
The pressure on all fronts — a hostage deal, international hostility, the economy, the northern front, the internal front, even the combat stockpiles — is all on Israel. The military raids returning to the Strip and the operation that started in Rafah, as important as they are, will not restore Israel’s strategic initiative. It is also absolutely clear from Hamas’ demands in the negotiations that the war has moved to the stage where the parties are competing for the future political order in Gaza.
The rehabilitation of Gaza should be transformed from a Hamas demand in the negotiations, which the State of Israel is presented as refusing, to a strategic lever that will return the initiative to Israel and the pressure to Hamas.
Meanwhile, the desired end state for Israel must be discussed again. The current strategic vision according to which the Gaza Strip will become a “lawn mowing” space is correct but not satisfactory. Although it is too early and too painful at the moment, we must seize the crisis in Gaza as an opportunity for a redesign of the Palestinian arena.
Instead of repeatedly occupying the same neighborhoods in the Gaza Strip, Israel should take advantage of the reoccupation to create safe spaces for rehabilitation. These spaces can be secured by IDF activity around them and managed by an Arab-American-Palestinian coalition. All the actors mentioned desire such an initiative and are ready for it. Initiating this move would allow Israel to influence the way secured neighborhoods are restored, such as through the registration of citizens; prevention of the entry of Hamas operatives; kicking out Hamas-supporting UNRWA people; introducing alternative education and welfare systems, including an extensive de-radicalization program; and more. Humanitarian and economic support mechanisms can make these supervised rehabilitation areas attractive. The threat to Hamas rule would intensify as the areas of rehabilitation are stabilized and expanded.
As the reconstruction expands to more neighborhoods, Israel will also be able to participate in the urban re-planning of the Gaza Strip. Roads and transportation, employment centers, and other infrastructures will be rebuilt with Israeli interests in mind, like an open buffer zone and other security needs. As the economic planning of the Strip expands, Israel will be able to better build its financial oversight mechanisms, which have been neglected under the fault strategy. Replacing the terror-finance-based economy with a productive one for the people of Gaza should also contribute to de-radicalization.
Focusing and concentrating efforts on specific neighborhoods for rehabilitation will increase the chances of success and build the capacity for gradual expansion. Successful reconstruction areas will not only undermine Hamas’s self-confidence. It is possible that local prosperity, conditional on systematic de-radicalization, could also influence the West Bank as a pressure lever on the corrupt and terror-supporting Palestinian regime there.
Take politics out of the equation
The issue of “the day after” is stuck on the political level. The right wing in the coalition refuses to discuss it since its vision is not Palestinian self-government but settlement of the Strip. But the Israeli strategy should not relate to the political vision. As long as no one assumes the two million residents of the Gaza Strip will disappear, the discussion about restoring their lives stands on its own. Since the Six Day War, the State of Israel has preferred civilian control mechanisms that are as independent as possible for the Palestinian population. Even before the establishment of the Palestinian Authority, mayors were local and civil mechanisms functioned. The great 2002 anti-terror offensive in the West Bank was only possible because the IDF made sure the PA’s civil mechanism would continue to function. Today, the stabilization of the Gaza Strip as a safe and functioning civilian space is a condition for any political vision, settlement or disengagement, which includes the safe return of Israeli citizens to the Western Negev region.
The percolation of the concept of “decisive defeat” from the military level into the political culture has created a devastating paralysis. This paralysis played a role in the crisis that brought us to war and continues to play a destructive role.
It was absurd to think for years that we had the power to change the intentions of our enemies without overwhelming their military power. We are paying for this deterrence-based strategy today. It is essential that we do not now adhere to the mirror image of this error — a strategy of political defeat while stubbornly focusing on military means alone.
The rehabilitation of Gaza, as painful as the phrase may be to Israeli ears after the October attack, can and should be Israel’s ultimate weapon against Hamas. It is customary in wartime that the first stage of the campaign is intended to prepare the conditions for the next. In the current war, the ground maneuver did not cleanse the Gaza underground or eradicate the Hamas regime, but it created and can continue to create the conditions for the next stage. That stage should be dedicated to the stabilization and slow rehabilitation of the Gaza Strip.
Step by step, the IDF will secure limited locations and the reconstruction coalition will create a more attractive alternative in those areas. Time will turn against Hamas, the pressure will shift to it, and Israel will stop being seen as conducting a vengeful war and will start serving its own long-term interests. Above all, a quick hostage deal will return to the status of an existential interest of Hamas.
Brig. Gen. (res.) Eran Ortal recently retired from military service as commander of the Dado Center for Multidisciplinary Military Thinking. He is a well-known military thinker both in Israel and abroad. His works have been published in The Military Review, War on the Rocks, Small Wars Journal at the Hoover Institution, at Stanford, and elsewhere. His book The Battle Before the War (MOD 2022, in Hebrew) dealt with the IDF’s need to change, innovate and renew a decisive war approach. A version of this article was originally published by The BESA Center.
The post Reconstruction of Gaza Is the Way to Regain Initiative in War on Hamas first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Slammed by Progressives After Voting for Resolution Condemning ‘Global Antisemitism’
US Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) speaks during a press conference on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC, on March 21, 2024. Photo: Craig Hudson/Sipa USA via Reuters Connect
US Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) has received an onslaught of criticism from anti-Israel progressives over her decision to vote in favor of a resolution “condemning the rise of global antisemitism.”
On Wednesday, Ocasio-Cortez supported House Resolution 1449, which affirms the State Department-endorsed “global guidelines for countering antisemitism.” The resolution passed the House by a 388-21 margin.
Ocasio-Cortez, who commonly goes by the nickname “AOC,” voted opposite three fellow members of the so-called “Squad” — a cohort of progressive Democrats with left-wing positions on issues ranging from foreign policy to economics. Reps. Cori Bush (D-MO), Rashida Tlaib (D-MI), and Ilhan Omar (D-MN) — all stalwart anti-Israel voices in Congress — voted against the resolution, along with a handful of Republicans.
In the face of progressive backlash, Ocasio-Cortez took to Bluesky, a social media website, to explain her decision to vote in favor of the resolution. She implored her followers to “read the text of this bill” and emphasized that it is not “an IHRA bill.” The left-wing congresswoman clarified that she would “NEVER vote for codifying IHRA.”
She added that a “subclause references a separate [State Department] guideline which noncomittally references IHRA” and that it is “nonbinding.” The congresswoman minimized the bill as a right-wing attempt “to get the left infighting.”
The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA), an intergovernmental organization comprising dozens of countries including the US and Israel, adopted a non-legally binding “working definition” of antisemitism in 2016. Since then, the definition has been widely accepted by Jewish groups and well over 1,000 global entities, from countries to companies. The US State Department, the European Union, and the United Nations all use it.
According to the definition, antisemitism “is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”
IHRA provides 11 specific, contemporary examples of antisemitism in public life, the media, schools, the workplace, and in the religious sphere. Beyond classic antisemitic behavior associated with the likes of the medieval period and Nazi Germany, the examples include denial of the Holocaust and newer forms of antisemitism targeting Israel such as demonizing the Jewish state, denying its right to exist, and holding it to standards not expected of any other democratic state.
Opponents of the IHRA definition of antisemitism assert that it exists as a pretext for governments and institutions to silence anti-Israel criticism and squash pro-Palestine activism.
Despite Ocasio-Cortez’s reassurances that she does not support the definition, anti-Israel progressives still condemned the congresswoman for “normalizing” it. They also blasted the lawmaker for her previous overtures to the Jewish community, such as participating in an online event with the Jewish Council for Public Affairs, a liberal pro-Israel organization.
“This absolute goddamn fraud voted for HR 1449 tonight, which further cements criticism of Israel as antisemitic under the law, and will encourage more mass arrests on campus, defunding charities, and strangling aid to Gaza,” wrote one X/Twitter user about Ocasio-Cortez.
“AOC’s vote for HR 1449 hurts. This definition of antisemitism — one that condemns accusations of Israel as ‘racist’ or ‘colonial’ — leaves no room for anti-Zionist Jews,” wrote another X/Twitter user.
Meanwhile, the virulently anti-Israel publication The Electronic Intifada published a story on Ocasio-Cortez’s vote with the headline, “AOC votes to back Israel lobby’s bogus ‘antisemitism’ definition.”
Over the past year, Ocasio-Cortez has stoked ire from anti-Israel progressives over her attempts to balance her harsh repudiations of the Jewish state with expressions of empathy for victims of antisemitism. She sparked outrage from progressives in August when she posed for a photo with the parent of an American taken hostage by the Hamas terrorist group during its massacre across southern Israel last Oct. 7.
However, Ocasio-Cortez also drew outrage for pro-Israel activists on Sunday when she denounced the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the foremost pro-Israel lobbying group in the US, as an “overly influenced by a special interest group pushing a wildly unpopular agenda.” Her commentary on AIPAC, which came a couple weeks after US Vice President Kamala Harris’s loss in the presidential election, drew accusations of antisemitism from some critics.
The global guidelines endorsed by HR 1449 praise the IHRA definition as “an important internationally recognized instrument” and urge governments and political leaders to take certain steps to address the global surge in antisemitism since Hamas’s invasion of Israel last October.
The post Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Slammed by Progressives After Voting for Resolution Condemning ‘Global Antisemitism’ first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Columbia University Locks Down Campus Amid Anti-Hillel Protest
Pro-Hamas students staging an anti-Hillel protest as New York City Police Department (NYPD) officers look on. Photo: Columbia Jewish & Israeli Students/Screenshot
Columbia University locked down its campus on Thursday, following an anti-Hillel protest staged by a front group for Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) outside the Kraft Center for Jewish Student Life.
“SIPA, SIPA, you can’t hide, you invest in genocide!” the mob chanted, according to The Columbia Daily Spectator, as they held signs calling for the university to “abolish” the Birthright Israel program, which grants Jewish students a free trip to their ancient homeland.
As The Algemeiner previously reported, this assault on Columbia’s Jewish life, perpetrated by a group which calls itself the Palestine Working Group (PWG), appears to have been prompted by an event held by the university on Thursday, in which Israeli journalist Barak Ravid spoke as a guest of the Kraft Center — where the Hillel chapter serving both Columbia and Barnard College students is located — and the School of International and Public Affairs’ (SIPA) Institute of Global Politics (IGP).
Reputed to be the largest Jewish collegiate organization in the world, Hillel International is a “home away from home” for the 180,000 students at over 850 colleges who avail themselves of its religious services, relationship building opportunities, and recreational activities. PWG, along with another group called Columbia University Apartheid Divest (CUAD), insists, however, that “Hillel is complicit in manufacturing propaganda and consent for the Zionist entity’s imperialist and colonial projects.”
On Friday, Columbia University — which has come under fire for its alleged failure to combat the incubation of antisemitism and jihadist extremism on its campus — denounced the attacks on Hillel.
“The Kraft Center for Jewish Student Life, the home of Columbia and Barnard’s vibrant Hillel, is a vital part of our campus, providing a welcoming space for our students to explore and celebrate Jewish culture and identity,” Columbia University said in a statement that was not attributed to any one official. “We appreciate the many contributions the Kraft Center and Hillel and make to supporting our Jewish community and building our university community. Any efforts to intimidate the Kraft Center, Hillel, and our Jewish community and all forms of antisemitism are unacceptable and inimical to what we stand for as a university.”
Columbia Apartheid Divest hit back at the university hours later, charging that it “directly engages in the colonization and destruction of Palestinian life and land through the construction of their ‘Tel Aviv Global Center’ on stolen land,” linking the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to the popular left-wing issue of gentrification in urban cities. Such messaging continues a pattern of blaming Israel, the lone Jewish state, for the world’s problems.
“On top of the centuries of continuing gentrification and displacement of Harlem residents, the entire campus is illegally isolated solely to punish and hide the brutality Columbia inflicts on us for fighting for Palestinian liberation,” the group continued.
The campaign to kick Hillel chapters off college campuses is not new. The campus group National Students for Justice in Palestine (NSJP) launched the initiative, titled “Drop Hillel,” in October, just weeks after the one-year anniversary of Hamas’s massacre across southern Israel last Oct. 7.
“Over the past several decades, Hillel has monopolized for Jewish campus life into a pipeline for pro-Israel indoctrination, genocide-apologia, and material support to the Zionist project and its crimes,” a social media account operating the campaign said in a manifesto published in concurrence with its launching. “Across the country, Hillel chapters have invited Israeli soldiers to their campuses; promoted propaganda trips such as birthright; and organized charity drives for the Israeli military.”
The idea has already been picked up by pro-Hamas student groups at one college, the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, according to The Daily Tar Heel, the school’s official student newspaper. On Oct. 9, it reported, a member of SJP unveiled the idea for “no more Hillel” during a rally which, among other things, demanded removing Israel from UNC’s study abroad program and adopting the boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) movement. Addressing the comments to the paper days later, SJP, which has been linked to Islamist terrorist organizations, proclaimed that shuttering Hillel is a coveted goal of the anti-Zionist movement.
The #DropHillel campaign comes amid an unprecedented surge in anti-Israel incidents on college campuses, which, according to a report published in September by the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), have reached crisis levels.
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.
The post Columbia University Locks Down Campus Amid Anti-Hillel Protest first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Half of French People Adhere to Over 6 Antisemitic Prejudices, 12% Happy to See Jews Leave Country: Survey
Sign reading “+1000% of Antisemitic Acts: These Are Not Just Numbers” during a march against antisemitism, in Lyon, France, June 25, 2024. Photo: Romain Costaseca / Hans Lucas via Reuters Connect
Hostility toward the Jewish people has surged to alarming levels in France, where half the population adhere to more than six antisemitic prejudices and nearly one in five young people want to see the departure of Jews from the country, according to a new survey.
Ipsos, a market research and consulting firm, conducted the survey of the French public for the Representative Council of Jewish Institutions of France (CRIF), the main representative body of French Jews, to examine the country’s attitudes toward the Jewish community amid a surge in antisemitic hate crimes over the past year.
The findings, unveiled by CRIF on Thursday and first reported by the French news magazine Le Point, revealed a surge in antisemitic attitudes across France.
Among France’s general population, 12 percent of people are happy to see Jews leave the country, up from just 6 percent in 2020, according to the survey.
“It’s a terrifying figure,” CRIF president Yonathan Arfi told the radio station Europe 1 when asked about the finding.
The number goes up among people under the age of 35, of whom a striking 17 percent think that the departure of Jews from France would be good for the country.
“It is contrary to the historical trend,” Arfi told Le Point. “Young people are more receptive to antisemitic, Islamist, and conspiracy theories, which are invading social networks.”
As for people aged 18 to 24, only 53 percent think that the majority of Jews are well integrated into the population, compared to 84 percent of French people more broadly, the survey found.
Overall, nearly half (46 percent) of French people today adhere to more than six anti-Jewish prejudices, compared to 37 percent in 2020, according to the results. Meanwhile, almost a quarter of those surveyed think that Jews are not really French like the rest of their countrymen, an uptick of more than six points.
The numbers increase among backers of France’s main far-left and far-right political parties. Indeed, the survey found that 52 percent of those who support the far-right Rassemblement National (RN — “National Rally”) and 55 percent of those who support the far-left La France Insoumise (LFI — “France Unbowed”) adhere to at least six antisemitic stereotypes. And a third of LFI supporters indicated they adhere to at least nine such prejudices.
LFI is the largest member of the New Popular Front (NFP), an anti-Israel leftist coalition of political parties that came to power in France’s snap parliamentary elections in July. The coalition gained the most seats of any political bloc but not enough for a majority. Its leader, Jean-Luc Melenchon, has been lambasted by French Jews as a threat to their community as well as those who support Israel.
“It seems France has no future for Jews,” Rabbi Moshe Sebbag of Paris’ Grand Synagogue told the Times of Israel following the ascension of the NFP in July’s elections. “We fear for the future of our children.”
According to the survey, 20 percent of LFI supporters consider the departure of Jews from France desirable, compared to 15 percent of those who back RN.
Similarly troubling, the results showed that 25 percent of LFI supporters have “sympathy” for Hamas, and 40 percent refuse to label the Palestinian Islamist group as a terrorist organization.
Hamas, which has been designated internationally as a terrorist group, launched the war in Gaza with its invasion of southern Israel last Oct. 7. During the onslaught, Hamas-led Palestinian terrorists murdered 1,200 people, mostly civilians, wounded thousands more, and kidnapped 251 hostages while perpetrating rampant sexual violence, including torture and gang rape.
The survey noted that one in two French people now suspect their Jewish fellow citizens of “double allegiance” to Israel — a reality that Arfi blamed in part on LFI’s fierce anti-Israel opposition.
“LFI has given antisemitism a political endorsement,” he told Le Point. “We observe this toxic porosity between criticism of Israel and the ostracization of French Jews. The Palestinian cause becomes a license to hate.”
The findings also showed that, among the French people surveyed, 64 percent believe that Jews have reason to be afraid of living in France, and 70 percent believe that the country has experienced an increase in antisemitism.
The survey results came as France has experienced a record surge of antisemitism in the wake of Hamas’s atrocities last Oct. 7, amid the ensuing war in Gaza. Antisemitic outrages rose by over 1,000 percent in the final three months of 2023 compared with the previous year, with over 1,200 incidents reported — greater than the total number of incidents in France for the previous three years combined.
This year, anti-Jewish hate crimes and demonstrations in France have continued to skyrocket.
Earlier this month, for example, a monument honoring victims of the Nazis located in eastern France was vandalized with graffiti reading “Nique Israël,” or “F—k Israel” in English.
Last month, a man wearing a sports jersey with the words “Anti-Jew” written in French was photographed riding the Paris metro, prompting an investigation by law enforcement and outcry from Jewish leaders who lamented what they described as public indifference to surging antisemitism in France.
Days earlier, a visibly Jewish teenager was assaulted by two youths as he was leaving a metro station in the northwest suburbs of Paris.
That incident followed three men brutally attacking a Jewish woman at the entrance to her home in Paris on the one-year anniversary of Hamas’s Oct. 7 atrocities. The victim stated that the assailants threatened her with a box knife, made antisemitic threats, and mentioned the events of last Oct. 7.
In September, a kosher restaurant in Villeurbanne, near the eastern city of Lyon, was defaced with red paint and tagged with the message “Free Gaza.”
The incident came days after French police arrested a 33-year-old Algerian man suspected of trying to set a synagogue ablaze in the southern French city of la Grande-Motte.
Two months earlier, an elderly Jewish woman was attacked in a Paris suburb by two assailants who punched her in the face, pushed her to the ground, and kicked her while hurling antisemitic slurs, including “dirty Jew, this is what you deserve.”
In another egregious attack that garnered international headlines, a 12-year-old Jewish girl was raped by three Muslim boys in a different Paris suburb on June 15. The child told investigators that the assailants called her a “dirty Jew” and hurled other antisemitic comments at her during the attack. In response to the incident, French President Emmanuel Macron denounced the “scourge of antisemitism” plaguing his country.
Around the same time in June, an Israeli family visiting Paris was denied service at a hotel after an attendant noticed their Israeli passports.
In May, French police shot dead a knife-wielding Algerian man who set fire to a synagogue and threatened law enforcement in the city of Rouen.
One month earlier, a Jewish woman was beaten and raped in a suburb of Paris as “vengeance for Palestine.”
Such incidents are part of an explosion of antisemitic outrages across France that has continued since last Oct. 7.
In August, then-French Interior Minister Gérald Darmanin warned that incidents targeting the country’s Jewish community spiked by about 200 percent since Jan. 1.
“Two-thirds of anti-religious acts … are against Jews,” he added, according to French broadcaster BFM TV.
Darmanin’s comments followed him stating weeks earlier that antisemitic acts in France have tripled over the last year. In the first half of 2024, 887 such incidents were recorded, almost triple the 304 recorded in the same period last year, he said.
Despite widespread concern among French Jews, senior officials including Macron have repeatedly said they are committing to combating antisemitism and supporting the country’s Jewish community.
According to Arfi, a whole-of-government response is needed to combat the surge in antisemitism, which he largely attributed to people spreading misleading information about the Israel-Hamas war and blaming Jews worldwide for false allegations leveled against Israel.
“The hysteria of the debate on Gaza has blown the last barriers,” Arfi observed, adding that elected officials are making the Palestinian cause “an electoral business” and using it for “criminal instrumentalization.”
“We need a systemic response,” he concluded.
The post Half of French People Adhere to Over 6 Antisemitic Prejudices, 12% Happy to See Jews Leave Country: Survey first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
You must be logged in to post a comment Login