Uncategorized
The historian who uncovered the ADL’s secret plot against the far-right John Birch Society
(JTA) — A historian leafing through files in an archive discovered how a Jewish organization helped bring down an influential far-right extremist movement in the United States in the 1960s and ’70s by going undercover and acting as self-appointed spies.
The discovery of the Anti-Defamation League’s covert operation targeting the John Birch Society is the basis of a chapter in a new book by political historian Matthew Dallek of George Washington University. Published in March, “Birchers: How the John Birch Society Radicalized the American Right” is Dallek’s fourth book. It examines the roots of today’s emboldened conservative movement in the United States.
“Birchers” is a history of a group that at its height numbered as many as 100,000 members and “mobilized a loyal army of activists” in a campaign against what it saw as a vast communist conspiracy. He also examines how the Birchers’ mission to defend Christianity and capitalism morphed into a radical anti-civil rights agenda that groups like the ADL saw as an existential threat.
Dallek, who grew up in a Reform Jewish household in Los Angeles, recently sat with the Jewish Telegraphic Agency to discuss the rise of the Birchers, how the ADL infiltrated their ranks and whether such tactics are justified in the name of fighting extremism.
The conversation has been edited for clarity and brevity.
JTA: Before we get into the Jewish aspect of the book, meaning the chapter on the Anti-Defamation League’s relationship with the John Birch Society, let’s take a step back. Who are so-called Birchers? Why do they matter?
Mathew Dallek: The John Birch Society was a household name in the 1960s, becoming the emblem of far-right extremism. It didn’t have huge numbers, but it did penetrate the culture and the national consciousness. Its leader, Robert Welch, had argued at one point that President Dwight Eisenhower was a dedicated agent of a communist conspiracy taking over the United States. Welch formed the John Birch Society to educate the American people about the nature of the communist threat.
In its heyday, the group had about 60,000 to 100,000 members, organized into small chapters. They sent out literature trying to give members roadmaps or ideas for what they could do. They believed a mass education of the public was needed because traditional two-party politics was not going to be very effective at exposing the communist threat. They would form front groups such as Impeach Earl Warren [the Supreme Court’s chief justice] or Support Your Local Police. They tried to ban certain books that they viewed as socialistic from being used in schools. Some Birchers ran for school board seats and protested at libraries.
Critics feared that the Birchers were a growing fascist or authoritarian group and that if they were not sidelined politically and culturally then the country could be overrun. The Nation magazine wrote that Birchers essentially had given their followers an invitation to engage in civil war, guerrilla-style. Those fears sparked a big debate about democracy. How does one sustain democracy and, at the height of the Cold War and in the shadow of World War II, Nazi fascist Germany, and the Holocaust?
As you were researching, you came across a trove of historical internal documents from the ADL in the archives of the American Jewish Historical Society in New York. Why did you devote a chapter to what you found in those documents? What did those files reveal to you about the John Birch Society?
These papers are a goldmine. They’re this incredible and often detailed window into the far-right and, in particular, the John Birch Society. They show the ADL had an extensive, multi-dimensional counterintelligence operation that they were running against the Birch Society.
People knew at the time that the ADL was attending events where Birchers were speaking. But the ADL also had undercover agents with code names, who were able to infiltrate the society’s headquarters in Belmont, Massachusetts, and various chapter officers. They dug up financial and employment information about individual Birchers. And they not only used the material for their own newsletters and press releases, but they also fed information to the media.
Another layer is about a debate that’s been going on: Were the Birchers racist and antisemitic? The Birch Society always insisted that they did not tolerate white supremacy and didn’t want any KKK members. They said they accepted people of all faiths and races. And it’s true that they did have a handful of Jewish and Black members.
But what the ADL found was that a lot of hate was bubbling up from the grassroots and also leaking out from the top. The ADL was able to document this in a systematic way.
Some critics of the ADL today say the organization has strayed from its mission by focusing not just on antisemitism but on a wider array of causes. But from reading your work, it sounds like the ADL even then took an expansive view of its role, examining not just direct attacks on Jews but also how the political environment can jeopardize Jews. Am I getting that right, and why did the ADL devote so many resources to a group like the John Birch Society?
So, a few things: It’s the late ’50s and ’60s, and a civil rights coalition is emerging. Benjamin Epstein, the national director of the ADL, was friendly with Thurgood Marshall, the Supreme Court justice, and Martin Luther King. John F. Kennedy went to an ADL event and praised the ADL for speaking out very strongly in defense of democracy and pushing for the equal treatment of all Americans.
Isadore Zack, who helped lead the spy operation, at one point wrote to his colleagues that it was only in a democracy that the Jewish community has been allowed to flourish and so, if you want to defend Jewish Americans, you also have to defend democracy.
There certainly were other threats at the time, but the Birch Society was seen by liberal critics, including the ADL, as a very secretive group that promoted conspiracy theories about communists who often became conflated with Jews.
Would you consider the ADL successful in its campaign against the Birchers?
They were successful. They used surreptitious and in some cases underhanded means to expose the antisemitism and the racism and also interest in violence or the violent rhetoric of the Birch Society in the 1960s.
The ADL was at the tip of the spear of a liberal coalition that included the White House, sometimes the Department of Justice, depending on the issue, the NAACP, Americans for Democratic Action, labor unions, the union-backed Group Research Inc., which was tracking the far-right as well. The ADL was one of the most, if not the most effective at constraining and discrediting the society.
Clearly, however, the Birchers’ ideas never died. They lived on and made a comeback.
It’s somewhat ironic that you reveal the existence of this spying apparatus devoted to targeting an extremist and antisemitic group in the 1960s given the infamy the ADL would earn in a later era, the 1990s, for allegations that they colluded with police agencies in San Francisco to spy on and harass political activists. They eventually settled with the Arab American, Black and American Indian groups that brought a federal civil suit. I know you didn’t study these revelations, which are outside the scope of your book, but could you perhaps reflect on why undercover tactics were seen as necessary or justified?
It’s important to remember that in the mid-20th century, law enforcement in the United States was often led by antisemites or people who were much more concerned with alleged internal communist threats — the threat from the left.
From the ADL’s vantage point, one could not rely on the government entities that were by law and by design supposed to protect Jewish Americans. There was a sense that this work had to be done, at least in part, outside of the parameters of the government.
When I first discovered the ADL’s spying, I didn’t quite know what to make of it. But I realized they weren’t just spying to spy, they exposed a lot of scary things, with echoes in our own times — like easy access to firearms, a hatred of the government, a denigration and defamation of minority groups. And this was all happening in the shadow of the Holocaust and World War II. I became much more sympathetic; they were very effective, and they had a vision of equality of treatment for all Americans.
It’s obviously controversial. I try not to shy away from it. But they had a lot of good reasons to fight back right and to fight back in this nonviolent way.
That last thought brings to mind another, right-wing Jewish group that existed in this era of taking things into our own hands, that did use violence, explosives even.
You mean the Jewish Defense League, led by Meir Kahane.
Yes, exactly.
He was a Bircher. Toward the end of my book, I mention that he was a member for a while, under his alias Michael King.
Antisemitism is on the rise, and lots of initiatives are being organized to address it, both by existing groups like the ADL and new ones. The ADL’s budget has almost doubled over the past seven years. I am seeing Jews talk of fighting back and taking things into their own hands. And we are in this politically precarious movement in American history, all of which suggests parallels to the era you examined. What kind of wisdom can we glean from examining the ADL’s secret and public fight against the John Birch Society as people who care about the issues affecting Jews today?
A lot of liberals in the 1960s and a lot of the leadership at the ADL grasped the axiom that things can always get worse.
In 2015-2016, you’ll recall, there was Trump’s demonization of Mexican immigrants, and the so-called “alt-right” around him and his campaign and expressions of vitriol by people like Steve Bannon.
There was an assumption among a lot of Americans and among a lot of Jewish Americans that the fringe right — the antisemites, the explicit racists, the white supremacists — that there’s not a majority for them and they can never achieve power.
If you go back and you look at Trump’s closing 2016 campaign ad, it’s textbook antisemitism. He flashes on screen these wealthy Jewish international bankers, and he argues that basically, there’s a conspiracy of these global elites who are stealing the wealth of honest Americans. There’s also 2017, the white supremacists in Charlottesville, who said “Jews will not replace us” and Trump saying there are fine people on both sides.
The sense that democracy is incredibly fragile is not just a theory or a concept: It’s an actuality, the sense as well, that the United States has only been a multiracial democracy for not very long and a haven for Jews for not that long either.
The work that the ADL and the NAACP and other groups did to try to constrain and discredit as fringe and extremist still goes on today. It’s harder to do for all sorts of reasons today including social media and the loss of faith in institutions. But it still goes on. You see the importance of institutional guardrails including the Department of Justice that is prosecuting 1,000 Jan. 6 insurrectionists.
The last thing I’ll say is that one of the admirable things in the 1960s about the ADL and the liberal coalition it belonged to is that it built support for landmark legislation like the Immigration Act of 1965, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the Voting Rights Act of ’65. And a coalition eventually fell apart, but it was powerful, reminding us why Jewish American groups should care about or focus on issues that don’t directly affect Jewish people.
—
The post The historian who uncovered the ADL’s secret plot against the far-right John Birch Society appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Prominent rabbi and fierce Mamdani critic turns his criticism toward Jews and Israel
(JTA) — In the lead-up to New York City’s mayoral election last month, Elliot Cosgrove emerged as one of the most outspoken rabbinic critics of Zohran Mamdani, the anti-Zionist activist who is now the mayor-elect.
On Monday, speaking to a convention of Zionists, Cosgrove turned his critique toward U.S. Jews, saying that supporters of Israel “shouldn’t be surprised” by Mamdani’s roughly 33% tally among Jewish voters.
“For a liberal Zionist disillusioned by the Israeli government, Mamdani’s anti-Zionism is a difference of degree, not of kind,” said Cosgrove, who leads Park Avenue Synagogue on the Upper East Side. “He understood the fissures of our community better than we ourselves did, and the question we face now is, what are we going to do about it?”
Speaking at the the convention of the American Zionist Movement, Cosgrove laid out a vision for a “new chapter of American Zionism,” calling for his audience to “avoid the reductive and destructive tactic of labeling people with whom we disagree either as self-hating Jews or colonialist aggressors.” He said a rigid vision of what Zionism should look like had been damaging for the Jewish people.
“By making unconditional support for the Israeli government a litmus test for Jewish identity,” Cosgrove said, “we ourselves have inflicted harm on the Jewish future.”
Cosgrove’s speech capped a two-day conference for the AZM, an umbrella organization for 51 U.S. Zionist groups that also serves as the American affiliate to the World Zionist Organization. Tensions were running high at the national assembly as Cosgrove took to the podium to call for the Zionist movement to widen its tent.
Speaking to the conference’s roughly 250 attendees in the East Village, Cosgrove lamented what he described as the increasing ideological divide between American and Israeli Jewry as a result of the war in Gaza. He criticized some Israeli policies in laying out why many in the liberal Jewish majority are feeling distanced from Israel.
“Leaving aside the role of historical revisionism and progressive identity politics, the unresolved status of the Palestinians, lacking as they are in freedom of movement and access, self determination and other accoutrements of sovereignty, forms a wedge issue between an increasingly liberal-leaning American Jewry and an increasingly right-leaning Israeli Jewry,” said Cosgrove.
During his address, Cosgrove also criticized the lack of recognition of the Conservative and Reform movements in Israel, adding that the country “neither supports, defends nor recognizes Judaism as I teach it and preach it.”
“The fact that the same government that fails to recognize American Jews also fails to recognize the Palestinian right to self determination only serves to increase American Jews’ sense of estrangement,” said Cosgrove.
The AZM Biennial National Assembly, which was titled “Zionism: Many Visions, One Dream,” brought together representatives from a wide range of U.S. Zionist groups. An hour before Cosgrove’s remarks, Israeli President Isaac Herzog also gave a talk where he lamented growing antisemitism within the United States.
In a Jewish environment shaped by the Oct. 7 attacks and the war in Gaza that followed, Jews have been buffeted by intense criticism on the left, a rise in antisemitism and internal fissures. Cosgrove both referenced and reflected these divisions, which often pit Jews offering full-throated support for Israel, its military and its government, against those like Cosgrove who are committed Zionists but expressed doubts about the conduct of the war and Israel’s political direction. Far to the left of both groups are increasingly visible Jewish anti-Zionists and younger Jews deeply disillusioned with the Jewish state, whom Cosgrove also referenced in his talk.
To address the growing divide within American Jewry over support for Israel, Cosgrove called for “heshbon hanefesh,” or a “self audit.” But the onus for “heshbon hanefesh,” Cosgrove added, “goes both ways” — and he reinforced red lines that he laid out in a October sermon against Mamdani and his Jewish supporters that spurred a rabbinic statement that drew more than 1,300 signatures.
“For such a time as this, when Israel is surrounded by enemies, Jewish critics of Israel need to be judicious in how they voice their dissent,” continued Cosgrove. “It’s one thing to attend a pro-democracy rally in a sea of Israeli flags that begins and ends with the singing of ‘Hatikvah.’ It’s another thing to stand in an encampment next to someone calling for global intifada.”
But within the broad Zionist tent, Cosgrove argued, all views should be taken seriously in the quest to build a future for Zionism while it is under attack..
“The future dream of American Zionism depends not on my vision or yours, not on the right or the left, religious or the secular,” said Cosgrove. “It’s a dream that depends on all of us together, an American Zionism for such a time as this, bold enough to embrace the voices, complexities, paradoxes and even contradictions of our age.”
At the conclusion of his speech, dozens of audience members stood to applaud, though a couple of “boos” could be heard across the room.
During a brief Q&A following the keynote speech, Marc Jacob, a member of the Haredi Orthodox slate Eretz HaKodesh, said he felt “ostracized” by Cosgrove for “wanting to open the door to those who are sitting in camps that are against the Jewish state.”
In response, Cosgrove clarified that he was “trying to stand firm in my convictions, but also embrace those views to the left of me who don’t represent my views.”
“I was not speaking about those outside of the camp who seek the ill will and destruction of the Jewish people,” said Cosgrove. “I was speaking about the ability of those within the tent to find an opportunity, a platform to support Israel in a way that need not be aligned with every policy of this or that Israeli government.”
The post Prominent rabbi and fierce Mamdani critic turns his criticism toward Jews and Israel appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Israel faces a most dire threat, and there’s only one solution
Most discussions about “saving” Israel revolve around geopolitics and security from the dangers posed by the rest of the Middle East. But the most vexing of the challenges facing the Jewish state is internal.
The burgeoning military and economic crisis surrounding Haredi communities risks destabilizing the entire state. What is needed is an organized effort, across all sectors of society, to incentivize hundreds of thousands of Haredi Jews to participate in Israel’s shared life in ways that, while honoring their practice, will prevent the social and economic disintegration that looms if no drastic changes are made.
This effort should be organized through a new ministry, tasked with encouraging and assisting Haredim in pursuing a more modern education, employment, military service and active citizenship. Ideally, it would be an independent statutory body, shielded from daily politics.
An unavoidable demographic problem
The significantly higher-than-average Haredi birthrate means the Haredim are projected to make up a third of Israel’s citizens by 2050, and a majority soon thereafter.
This creates a major economic problem. Right now, Haredi communities are broadly subsidized by the Israeli government: As one indicator, Haredi men have a participation level in the workforce of just around 50%. Many of those who do work do so in jobs in the religious establishment — as kashrut supervisors, mikveh workers, and so on.
That lack of economic productivity is made up for by governmental spending. For the 2023–2024 budget cycle, some reporting estimates that spending directly targeting Haredi communities — including through stipends for scholars and funding for yeshivas and religious institutions — was on the order of NIS 13.7 billion, about $4 billion. But more spending on the community is not officially recorded — for example, that on the child subsidies, which overwhelming benefit the Haredim, whose birthrate is almost three times higher than that of other Israelis.
The Haredi leadership is entrenched in its refusal to change. They reject all calls to have yeshivas integrate a core curriculum that would enable the next generation to be employable in a modern economy, insist on Torah study as the main vocation for men well into adulthood, and have practically sanctified draft evasion.
The implications are existential. Already today, as the productive sector bears an ever-heavier burden, there is growing emigration among non-Haredim — engineers, doctors, and entrepreneurs taking with them the talent and capital that drive Israel’s economy. According to recent data, about 125,000 Israelis have left since 2022.
And as the Haredi share of the population rises, it is likely they will help secure the political right — for which they overwhelmingly vote, in large part because of support for a continuing Haredi draft exemption — as something like the permanent ruling bloc.
That outcome is all but sure to further accelerate emigration. The result will be deepening poverty, and further military insecurity, as less Orthodox portions of the population increasingly rebel against a system they see as unjustly demanding they put their lives on the line to protect the Haredim from the dangers of war.
At present, every incentive structure encourages the Haredim to persist in this madness. The Haredi community, to a large extent, ostracizes those who leave the flock — estimated as between 5% and 15% of the community — and in many cases even the tiny minority who merely enlist in the army.
A radical solution
With communal leadership so averse to change, what can the rest of Israel do?
The incentive structure must be turned on its head, through a series of radical but necessary governmental moves.
- Tie all school funding to compliance with a national core curriculum. Haredi youth, particularly boys, currently experience little to no instruction in modern subjects. This cannot continue. It creates a crippled society that is beholden to the rabbis, and ensures the Haredi community cannot contribute meaningfully to Israel’s economy, as new generations are not given the knowledge and skills to work. This lack puts an unbearable economic burden on the ever-shrinking rest of Israeli society.
- Phase out study stipends past university age. Some will object that this move will destroy the yeshiva lifestyle. But that lifestyle is a result of power politics, not tradition: in the West, many Haredim are working members of society and thrive as such.
- Redesign child subsidies. Haredim currently have an average of almost seven children per family, which is financially possible largely because of child subsidies issued by the state. To encourage workforce participation, this system must be adjusted, such that families cannot subsist primarily on these subsidies: If this trend continues, the state will buckle under the economic burden of supporting the rapidly expanding community. This must be done with great sensitivity, and apply only to future births.
- And, critically, mandate full national or military service for all citizens, with some tailored options for Haredi sensibilities.
The message would be that modern Israel will not continue to fund its own destruction. In charge of implementing it would be the new ministry. Its main areas of responsibility would include:
- Public outreach and culture — Enshrining the message that integration is not betrayal of faith, but rather an expansion of opportunity: Torah and modernity can coexist, and work, service and education are deeply Jewish values.
- Military and national service — In coordination with the IDF, establishing dedicated Haredi military tracks, alongside national service paths for some men and women who insist on that route. This would involve expanding existing routes, including the number of dedicated Haredi units in the military, and providing housing and psychological support for recruits facing ostracism.
- Adult education — Establishing adult education institutions offering full core studies to Haredim who never learned math, English or science. State scholarships and stipends during the transition period, would encourage participation.
- Employment and entrepreneurship — Creating partnerships with employers to fund professional training, apprenticeships, and personal mentorship, as well as tax incentives for companies hiring Haredim or ex-Haredim — especially in high-tech, healthcare and education, fields where Haredim have already made some inroads.
- Social and family support — Forming a national network of counselors, social workers and career coaches to accompany Haredim through their increasing integration into the modern world. Many Haredim will be deeply resistant to this change; establishing thoughtful routes to help them will be crucial to the initiative’s success.
The necessity of adaptation
Integration does not mean the Haredi lifestyle must end — only that it must adapt, so that the society in which it exists can sustain into the future. The goal would be to make integration safe and feasible.
The scale of the initiative must match that of the threat. It will cost tens of billions of shekels — but the money must be found, just as it was found for the endless Gaza war, which, for all its importance, posed a lesser risk to Israel’s continuance. Israel already spends vast sums each year subsidizing unemployment and ignorance in the Haredi sector. Redirecting some of these funds to integration will yield immense economic and social returns. I hope that many donors, secular and religious alike, will join the effort.
A great confrontation over such an ambitious effort would be unavoidable. Many Haredim, including their elected officials, will rage and accuse the government of waging war on Judaism. Protests, petitions to the Supreme Court, and even charges of antisemitism will follow. The Haredi leadership will claim the government seeks to “convert” them. But this fight must be fought at some point; the options are to fight it now, or to risk an even worse version of it in the future.
The irony is that the current situation is bad for the Haredim themselves. They are trapped in a system that denies them opportunities, and leads them instead to enforced poverty and dependence on rabbinic leadership. This leadership has built a structure of control that survives only by keeping its public helpless.
For too long, powerful parties, including the governing Likud, have kicked this issue down the road, sacrificing the nation’s future for coalition stability. It is a moral and strategic disaster. Israel’s place in the modern world hangs in the balance.
The post Israel faces a most dire threat, and there’s only one solution appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Qatar, Turkey Try to Circumvent Hamas Disarmament as Terror Group Escalates Crackdown in Gaza
Palestinians walk past the rubble of destroyed buildings, amid a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, in Jabalia, northern Gaza Strip, November 6, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Mahmoud Issa
As the United States pushes for the second phase of President Donald Trump’s Gaza ceasefire to begin, Israel is warning that Qatar and Turkey are trying to shield Hamas from disarmament as the Palestinian terrorist group seeks to reassert control over the war-torn enclave.
Qatar and Turkey have proposed alternatives to a central provision of Trump’s peace plan, according to Israeli media reports. Rather than requiring Hamas to disarm, Qatari and Turkish officials have pushed for the Islamist group either to hand over its weapons to the Palestinian Authority or place them in secure storage under international oversight.
As part of this plan, Qatar and Turkey are reportedly advocating a two‑year grace period during which Hamas could legally retain its weapons.
However, Israeli officials have rejected these options as unacceptable, arguing they would allow the terrorist group to maintain its influence in Gaza, which Hamas has ruled for nearly two decades.
Israel has made clear it will allow Hamas just a few months to give up its weapons, warning it will act unilaterally if the group is not disarmed promptly.
Turkey and Qatar, both longtime backers of Hamas, have been trying to expand their roles in Gaza’s post-war reconstruction, which experts have warned could potentially strengthen Hamas’s terrorist infrastructure.
Israeli officials have repeatedly rejected any Turkish or Qatari involvement in post-war Gaza.
The first stage of Trump’s peace plan, which took effect in October, included Hamas releasing all the remaining hostages, both living and deceased, who were kidnapped by Hamas-led Palestinian terrorists during their Oct. 7, 2023, invasion of and massacre across southern Israel. In exchange, Israel released thousands of Palestinian prisoners and detainees, including many convicted terrorists serving life sentences, and partially withdrew its military forces in Gaza to a newly drawn “Yellow Line,” roughly dividing the enclave between east and west.
Currently, the Israeli military controls 53 percent of Gaza’s territory, and Hamas has moved to reestablish control over the other 47 percent. However, the vast majority of the Gazan population is located in the Hamas-controlled half, where the Islamist group has been imposing a brutal crackdown.
The second stage of the US plan is supposed to install an interim administrative authority — a so-called “technocratic government” — deploy an International Stabilization Force — a multinational force meant to take over security in Gaza — and begin the demilitarization of Hamas.
As the international community works to implement phase two of the ceasefire deal, Qatar and Turkey are now insisting that Israel must withdraw from Gaza before Hamas can disarm — a demand Jerusalem vehemently opposes, warning it would give the terrorist group time to reassert full control over its half of Gaza and remove any incentive to disarm later on.
On Saturday, Qatari Prime Minister Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani said the international community has only achieved a “pause” in fighting, but not a full ceasefire, stressing that Israel would need to withdraw from the entire enclave to make it possible.
“A ceasefire cannot be completed unless there is a full withdrawal of the Israeli forces, there is stability back in Gaza [and] people can go in and out, which is not the case today,” Al Thani said during a press conference.
The Qatari leader also said that the mediating countries, including Turkey, Egypt, and the US, are “getting together in order to force the way forward for the next phase.”
However, Al Thani emphasized Qatar considers phase two to be “temporary,” arguing that addressing the immediate situation in Gaza alone is insufficient without tackling what he described as the underlying causes of the conflict.
“This conflict is not only about Gaza, but also the West Bank. It’s about the rights of the Palestinians for their state,” he said. “We are hoping that we can work together with the US administration to achieve this vision.”
According to the ceasefire plan, the Israeli army is required to withdraw further as the disarmament process unfolds. However, Israel has made clear that it will not pull back until Hamas disarms and other conditions are met.
“We will not allow Hamas to reestablish itself. We have operational control over extensive parts of the Gaza Strip, and we will remain on those defense lines,” Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir, chief of staff of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), said on Sunday. “The Yellow Line is a new border line, serving as a forward defensive line for our communities and a line of operational activity.”
Meanwhile, Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan said a credible Palestinian civil administration and a vetted, trained police force should be established before Hamas can disarm.
In a press conference, Fidan emphasized that without these conditions, expecting Hamas to disarm is neither “realistic nor doable.”
However, Hamas continues to reject full disarmament, saying the group is only open to storing or freezing its weapons in order to preserve “the Palestinians’ ability to defend themselves.”
“Hamas is willing to discuss these ideas in the context of a ceasefire or long-term truce within a political process that will lead to the establishment of a Palestinian state,” senior Hamas official Basem Naim said in a statement.
In Gaza, Hamas’s brutal crackdown has continued to escalate dramatically as the terrorist group moves to reassert control over the enclave and consolidate its weakened position.
Following the death of Yasser Abu Shabab, the leader of an armed anti-Hamas Palestinian faction, last week, Hamas has given militants a 10-day ultimatum to surrender in exchange for promises of amnesty, according to Israel’s Channel 12 and reports on social media.
Abu Shabab, a Bedouin tribal leader based in Israeli-held Rafah in southern Gaza, had led one of the most prominent of several small anti-Hamas groups that emerged in the enclave during the war that began more than two years ago.
He died last week while mediating an internal dispute between families and groups within the militia, dealing a setback to Israeli efforts to support Gazan clans against the ruling Islamist group.
Since the ceasefire took effect two months ago, Hamas has targeted Palestinians who it labeled as “lawbreakers and collaborators with Israel,” sparking widespread clashes and violence as the group moves to seize weapons and eliminate any opposition.
Social media videos widely circulated online show Hamas members brutally beating Palestinians and carrying out public executions of alleged collaborators and rival militia members.