Uncategorized
The JTA conversation: Pogrom? Terrorism? What do we call what happened in Huwara?
(JTA) — On Sunday, after a Palestinian gunman shot and killed two Israeli brothers in the West Bank, Jewish settlers rioted in the nearby Palestinian town of Huwara, burning cars and buildings. A Palestinian was killed and dozens were injured.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu condemned the Jewish rioters for “taking the law in their own hands,” but many observers — including the top Israeli general in the West Bank and Abraham Foxman, director emeritus of the the Anti-Defamation League — used stronger language, calling the attacks a “pogrom.”
The use of the word, which most famously refers to a wave of anti-Jewish violence in the Russian empire beginning in the late 19th century, in turn became the subject of debate. Does using “pogrom” co-opt Jewish history unfairly and inaccurately by suggesting Jews are no better than their historical persecutors? Does avoiding the term mean Israel and its supporters are not taking sufficient responsibility for the actions of its Jewish citizens?
The debate is not just about language, but about controlling the narrative. Political speech can minimize or exaggerate events, put them in their proper context or distort them in ways that, per George Orwell, can “corrupt thought.”
We asked historians, linguists and activists to consider the word pogrom, and asked them what politicians, journalists and everyday people should call what happened at Huwara. Their responses are below.
Sidestepping the real issue
Dr. Jeffrey Shandler
Distinguished Professor, Department of Jewish Studies, Rutgers University
The meanings of the word “pogrom” in different languages are key here. In Russian, it means a massacre or raid, as it does in Yiddish; in neither language is it understood as specifically about violence against Jews. The Oxford English Dictionary concurs that pogrom means an “organized massacre… of any body or class,” but notes that, in the English-language press, it was first used mostly to refer to anti-Jewish attacks in Russia, citing examples from 1905-1906.
Therefore, though the association of pogrom with violence targeting Jews is widely familiar, its meaning is broader.
That said, because of English speakers’ widely familiar association of the term with Jews as victims, to use pogrom to describe violence perpetrated by Jews is provocative. As to whether it is appropriate to refer to recent attacks by Jewish settlers on Palestinians, it seems to me that this question sidesteps the more important question of whether the actions being called pogroms are appropriate.
Call it what it is: “settler terrorism”
Sara Yael Hirschhorn
’22-’23 Research Fellow at the Center for Antisemitism Research at the ADL, and author, “City on a Hilltop: American Jews and the Israeli Settler Movement”
Let me say first with a loud and clear conscience: What happened in Huwara was abhorrent, immoral, and unconscionable and certainly was not committed in my name.
But to paraphrase Raymond Carver’s famous formulation: How do we talk about it when we talk about Huwara? What kind of descriptive and analytical framework can adequately and contextually interpret that horrific event?
The shorthand of choice seems to be “pogrom” — but it isn’t clear that all who deploy the term are signifying the same thing. For some, pogrom is a synonym for pillage, rampage, fire, property damage and violence in the streets — a one-word general summary of brutal acts. For others, pogrom refers to vigilante justice, an abbreviated story of the non-state or non-institutional actors and their motivations.
More specifically, however, pogrom is seemingly being mobilized as a metaphor to Jewish history, juxtaposing the Jewish victims of yesterday to the Jewish-Israeli perpetrators of today, an implicit analogy to the prelude to the Shoah, recasting Zionists as organized bands of genocidaires (with or without regime sponsorship) like the Cossacks, the Nationalist Fronts or even the Einsatzgruppen. Some would use the word to incorporate all three meanings (and more).
As a historian, I am troubled by the haphazard and harmful use of terms that are attached to a specific time and place — such as the thousand-year history of Jews in the Rhinelands and Eastern Europe, with many layers of imperial, national, local, economic and religious forces that precipitated these events — in such an ahistorical manner. Nor do I find the parallels between Zionists and Nazis to be historically careful (if deliberately offensive) — the State of Israel is committing crimes in the West Bank, but not a genocide. The equivalence also all too easily and incorrectly grafts tropes of racism and white supremacy drawn from American history into the West Bank’s soil.
So what to say about Huwara? Israel — for reasons both political and lexiconographical — has failed to consistently adopt a term for such attacks. (Often the euphemism of “errant weeds” who are “taking matters into their own hands” is the choice of Knesset politicians.) To my mind, the best term is “settler terrorism,” which puts Jewish-Israeli acts on par with Palestinian terrorism. It should also mean that these actions merit the same consequences under the occupation like trial, imprisonment, home demolition and other deterrents enforced against all those who choose the path of violence.
Last but not least, a pogrom was historically an unpunished crime against humanity that led only to war and annihilation. Don’t we aspire for more in Israel/Palestine?
Palestinians call it “ethnic cleansing”
Ibrahim Eid Dalalsha
Director, Horizon Center for Political Studies and Media Outreach, Ramallah, and member of Israel Policy Forum’s Critical Neighbors task force
Palestinians generally view and describe what happened during Sunday’s Huwara attacks as “racist hate crimes seeking to destroy and dispossess the Palestinian people of their homes and properties.” While no specific term has been used to describe these attacks, it was likened to the barbaric and savage invasion of Baghdad by Hulagu, the 13th-century Mongol commander.
Palestinian intellectuals tend to use “ethnic cleansing,” savage and barbaric ethnically motivated violence against innocent civilians, as another way of referring to these attacks. When such events include killing, Palestinian politicians and intellectuals tend to use the term massacre, or “majzara,” to underline the irrational and indiscriminate violence against defenseless civilians. I don’t think the term “pogrom” and its historic connotation are widely known to most people here. From a Palestinian perspective, using such terms, including “Holocaust,” is not considered a mistake. In fact, even using “Holocaust“ to describe violence against Palestinian civilians in and around 1948 was not considered a mistake until very recently when it caused such a saga for Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas in Germany.
View of cars burned by Jewish settlers during riots in Huwara, in the West Bank, near Nablus, Feb. 27, 2023. (Nasser Ishtayeh/Flash90)
In the name of historical accuracy
Rukhl Schaechter
Yiddish Editor, The Forward
The recent attacks by Israeli settlers on Palestinians in Huwara are abhorrent. I commend those in Israel calling them peulot teror, “actions of terror,” and I trust that the perpetrators will be brought to justice. But these riots were not pogroms.
The word pogrom refers to one of the many violent riots and subsequent massacres of Jews in Eastern Europe between the 17th and 20th centuries. These attacks were committed by local non-Jewish, often peasant populations. They were instigated by rabble-rousers like Bogdan Chmielnicki, who led a Cossack and peasant uprising against Polish rule in Ukraine in 1648 and ended up destroying hundreds of Jewish communities. According to eyewitnesses, the attackers also committed atrocities on pregnant women.
Note that the massacres of Jews carried out by the Nazis, and the murders of Armenians by the Turkish government at the turn of the 20th century — as horrific as they were — were never called pogroms because in both cases, there was a government behind it. In the name of historic accuracy, let’s continue to use the word pogrom solely for mob attacks on and massacres of Jews.
When the Poles banned “pogrom”
Samuel D. Kassow
Professor of History, Trinity College, Hartford, Connecticut
In Poland in the late 1930s, altercations between a Jew and a Pole sometimes ended with either the Jew or the Pole getting badly hurt or even killed. When the victim was a Pole, mobs of Poles rampaged through Jewish neighborhoods smashing windows, looting shops and often beating or even killing Jews. Poles often held Jews collectively responsible for the death of one of their own. This happened in Przytyk, Minsk-Mazowieck, Grodno and other places. Jews called these riots “pogroms,” which they were. But the Polish government banned use of the term in the press. After all, “pogrom” was a Russian word, and “pogroms” happened only in a place characterized by barbarism and ignorance. Since Poland was not Russia, and since Poles were eminently civilized, logically speaking, pogroms simply did not take place in Poland. What happened in these towns were to be called “excesses” (zajscia). But certainly not pogroms!
I take it that since we Jews are so civilized, we too are incapable of pogroms. So should we label what these settlers did “‘excesses”? Or perhaps we should take a deep breath and call them pogroms?
A Jewish, but not exclusive, history
Henry Abramson
Historian
The word “pogrom” is rooted in time and place, although the type of violence it describes is as old as human history. It is a Russian word, but it entered the English language in the late 19th century through the medium of Yiddish-speakers, outraged at the wave of antisemitic disturbances that surged under rule of the last tsar of the Russian Empire, Nicholas II. Russians themselves used a variety of words for the ugly phenomenon, with translations like “riot” or “persecution,” but the term “pogrom” proved the most evocative: the Slavic prefix “po” suggests a directed attack, and the root “grom” is the word for “thunder.” A pogrom, therefore, meant a focused point where a great deal of energy was dissipated in a single dramatic act of violence.
The focused point, in the context of that dark history, was the civilian Jewish population in the tiny shtetls that dotted the Pale of Settlement. In this regard the word could be used to encompass attacks on Jewish populations from as long ago as the year 38 in Alexandria, Egypt. It does not, however, have any specific designation to indicate that Jews are the victims.
—
The post The JTA conversation: Pogrom? Terrorism? What do we call what happened in Huwara? appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Netanyahu, Touting Push Toward Greater Self-Reliance, Denies Report Israel Seeking 20-Year US Military Aid Deal
US President Donald Trump greets Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the White House in Washington, DC, US, Sept. 29, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque
Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has denied reports that his country is seeking a new 20-year military aid deal with the US, insisting that the Jewish state is working to wean itself off American assistance.
“I don’t know what they’re talking about. My direction is the exact opposite,” Netanyahu said on “The Erin Molan Show” on Thursday when asked by the Australian journalist about a new Axios report saying Israel was pursuing the security agreement.
According to Axios, the deal under discussion would include “America First” provisions to win the Trump administration’s support. The current 10-year memorandum of understanding between the two countries — the third such agreement signed — expires in 2028. It includes around $3.8 billion of annual military aid to Israel, which spends nearly all the assistance in the US to purchase American-made weapons and equipment.
The report comes amid growing criticism in the US among progressives and, increasingly, some conservatives over American military support for Israel, especially among younger Americans.
“Now, I want to make our arms industry independent, totally as independent as possible,” Netanyahu said on Thursday. “I think that it is time to ensure that Israel is independent.”
Netanyahu added that US defense aid to Israel is a “tiny fraction” of what Washington spends in the Middle East.
“We have a very strong economy, a very strong arms industry, and even though we get what we get, which we appreciate, 80 percent of that is spent in the US and produces jobs in the US,” he continued, saying he wants to see “an even more independent Israeli defense industry.”
The Israeli premier went on to stress that his country has never asked a single American solider to fight for Israel.
“Israel does not ask others to fight for us,” he said. “Israel is the one American ally in the world that says, ‘We don’t need boots on the ground, we don’t need American servicemen fighting on the ground for Israel or around Israel. We’re fine.’ We fight our own battles, but in doing so, we serve important American interests, like preventing countries that chant ‘Death to America’ from having nuclear bombs to throw at America.”
Uncategorized
South African President Says ‘Boycotts Never Really Work’ Despite BDS Support
South Africa’s President Cyril Ramaphosa attends the 20th East Asia Summit (EAS), as part of the 47th ASEAN Summit in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, Oct. 27, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Hasnoor Hussain
South African President Cyril Ramaphosa insisted that “boycott politics doesn’t work” following the Trump administration’s announced absence from a summit in his country later this month — despite his ruling party’s ongoing support for the boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel.
On Wednesday, Ramaphosa urged US President Donald Trump to reconsider his decision to boycott the G20 Leaders’ Summit, scheduled for Nov. 22-23 in Johannesburg, northeastern South Africa.
Ramaphosa criticized Washington for “giving up the very important role that they should be playing as the biggest economy in the world” in its decision to skip the summit — the first to be held in Africa.
“It is unfortunate that the United States has decided not to attend the G20. All I can say in my experience in politics is that boycotts never really work. They have a very contradictory effect,” the South African leader told reporters outside parliament in Cape Town.
Trump, who has previously accused the South African government of human rights abuses against white minorities — including land seizures and killings — called the decision to host the G20 summit in the country a “total disgrace.”
“No US government official will attend [the summit] as long as these human rights abuses continue,” he wrote in a post on Truth Social.
However, the South African government has strongly rejected any claims of genocide, saying such accusations are “widely discredited and unsupported by reliable evidence.”
Ramaphosa reaffirmed that the summit will proceed as scheduled, regardless of Washington’s absence.
“The G20 will go on. All other heads of state will be here, and in the end, we will take fundamental decisions. And their absence is their loss,” he said.
“The US needs to think again whether boycott politics actually works, because in my experience, it doesn’t work. It’s better to be inside the tent rather than being outside the tent,” he continued.
Despite such claims, Ramaphosa’s ruling African National Congress (ANC) party has officially endorsed the BDS campaign against Israel for years.
The BDS movement seeks to isolate the Jewish state internationally as a step toward its eventual elimination. Leaders of the campaign have repeatedly stated their goal is to destroy the world’s only Jewish state.
In 2012, the ANC announced its full backing of the BDS movement, urging “all South Africans to support the programs and campaigns of the Palestinian civil society which seek to put pressure on Israel to engage with the Palestinian people to reach a just solution.”
Following Ramaphosa’s comments this week, it remains unclear why he continues to back anti-Israel boycotts if he believes they don’t work.
Since the start of the war in Gaza, the South African government has been one of Israel’s fiercest critics, actively confronting the Jewish state on the international stage.
Beyond its open hostility toward Israel, South Africa has actively supported Hamas, hosting officials from the Palestinian terrorist group and expressing solidarity with their “cause.”
In one instance, Ramaphosa led a crowd at an election rally in a chant of “From the river to the sea, Palestine shall be free” — a popular slogan among anti-Israel activists that has been widely interpreted as a genocidal call for the destruction of the Jewish state, which is located between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea.
Since December 2023, South Africa has also been pursuing its case before the International Court of Justice accusing Israel of committing “state-led genocide” in its defensive war against Hamas in Gaza.
Israeli leaders have condemned the case as an “obscene exploitation” of the Genocide Convention, noting that the Jewish state is targeting terrorists who use civilians as human shields in its military campaign.
Uncategorized
Peter Beinart Lambasted by Leading Anti-Israel Activist for Calling Antisemitism a ‘Real Social Phenomenon’
Peter Beinart, a prominent anti-Israel writer, being interviewed in January 2025. Photo: Screenshot
One of the most notorious anti-Israel activists in the US has castigated prominent Jewish writer Peter Beinart, a strident critic of Israel himself, for describing antisemitism as a “real” phenomenon rather than a political tool.
The fracas began on Nov. 5, when Nerdeen Kiswani, the founder of the radical anti-Israel organization Within Our Lifetime (WOL), attacked New York City Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani, another anti-Israel activist, on social media, posting that Mamdani’s condemnation of swastika graffiti spray-painted outside a Jewish school in Brooklyn the day after his election victory. In his tweet, Mamdani called the vandalism “disgusting and heartbreaking” and said he will “always stand steadfast with our Jewish neighbors to root the scourge of antisemitism out of our city.”
Kiswani took issue with Mamdani’s statement, despite the mayor-elect’s fierce opposition to the Jewish state.
There’s no “scourge of antisemitism” in NYC. Acts like these, while reprehensible, are often weaponized to justify Zionist narratives and repression of Palestine solidarity. Many past “antisemitic” scares turned out to be fake, like the Israeli Jewish teenager who made hundreds… https://t.co/gwuKcpT584
— Nerdeen Kiswani (@NerdeenKiswani) November 5, 2025
Swastikas were found painted on the exterior walls of Magen David Yeshiva, a Jewish school in Brooklyn, in the early morning on Nov. 5, in what police are investigating as a hate crime. Surveillance footage reportedly shows a man on a bicycle scrawling the antisemitic symbols before fleeing the scene. The incident came just hours after Mamdani was elected mayor of New York City, prompting renewed concern over rising antisemitic acts across the city.
Beinart chided Kiswani, asserting that antisemitism is in fact a “real social phenomenon” that needs to be countered. He pointed to the growing popularity of antisemitic streamer Nick Fuentes as evidence of societal antisemitism on the rise.
“Your response to a swastika at a yeshiva is to condemn the mayor for condemning it? Because that might imply that antisemitism is a ‘real social phenomenon?’” Beinart wrote. “Yes, like other bigotries, it’s a ‘real social phenomenon.’ If you don’t believe me, ask the 1 million people who follow Nick Fuentes on this platform.”
In her retort, Kiswani clarified that while she found the swastika graffiti “reprehensible,” she took issue with Mamdani asserting that antisemitism is a “problem in NYC.” She argued that Jews weaponize antisemitism to silence critics of Israel and accused Beinart of using the plight of Palestinians to sell books.
In his new book, Being Jewish After the Destruction of Gaza: A Reckoning, Beinart writes that Jewish texts, history, and language have been “deployed to justify mass slaughter and starvation [of the population of Gaza].”
“I took issue with the implication that there’s an antisemitism problem in NYC and cited Norman Finkelstein on the idea that it’s not a social phenomenon. He talks about it in the context of the US, I referenced NYC,” Kiswani wrote, referencing another prominent anti-Zionist.
You really have some nerve, grifting and writing books about “after” the genocide of my people as it’s still ongoing, to completely reframe what I was saying. I never condemned his condemnation of the graffiti, I explicitly called it reprehensible myself. I took issue with the… https://t.co/Gx52RnGsyx
— Nerdeen Kiswani (@NerdeenKiswani) November 7, 2025
New York City has experienced a surge in anti-Jewish hate crimes since the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, massacre across southern Israel, amid the ensuing war in Gaza.
“There’s no structural disadvantage to being Jewish like there is to being Palestinian, and you know that. You’re being purposely obtuse. You can pander to the anti-genocide line but you’re still a liberal zionist [sic],” she continued, further attacking the Jewish academic.
“Peter Beinart calling Palestinians antisemites while claiming to ‘recognize our suffering’ shows what liberal Zionism really is: a project to save Zionism’s legitimacy, not dismantle its violence. It’s the rebranding of supremacy into something palatable, the illusion of moral balance while genocide continues,” Kiswani added.
Kiswani has called for the expulsion of Zionists from all public spaces and for Israel to be “wiped off the map.” Leadership for WOL has repeatedly expressed support for terrorist groups such as Hamas and for violence against Israel, defending Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, invasion of and massacre across southern Israeli communities. Previously, Kiswani reprimanded US Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), one of the foremost critics of Israel in the US Congress, as a “genocide apologist” for honoring the victims of the Nova Music Festival, where hundreds of Israelis were murdered and dozens were kidnapped by Hamas-led Palestinian terrorists during the Oct. 7 atrocities.
Beinart, meanwhile, has established himself as one of the most prominent anti-Zionist public intellectuals in the US in recent years. As a contributing opinion columnist for the New York Times, he penned an op-ed for the newspaper disavowing his previous support for Israel, claiming that he “no longer believes in a Jewish state.” He has accused Israel of oppressing Palestinians and erecting an “apartheid” state built on the notion of ethnic supremacy.
Though Beinart has condemned the Hamas-led massacre, he has also compared the deadliest day for Jews since the Holocaust to the Haitian Slave Revolt and Warsaw Ghetto Uprising, arguing that Israel’s alleged “oppression” of Palestinians led to the Oct. 7 invasion. He has also accused Israel of perpetrating a “genocide” in Gaza.
Some observers noted on social media that Kiswani’s attacks against Beinart were an example that “for those who object to Jewish peoplehood to begin with, no Jew will ever be anti-Zionist enough.”