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
Trump Threatens to Hit Iran ‘Very Hard’ if More Protesters Killed as Supreme Leader Said to Be Prepared to Flee
Protesters march in downtown Tehran, Iran, Dec. 29, 2025. Photo: Screenshot
US President Donald Trump on Sunday evening warned Iran that it will get “hit very hard” if the regime kills more protesters, as anti-government demonstrations enter a second week and the Iranian Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, is reportedly preparing an escape amid rising domestic unrest.
“We’re watching [the situation] very closely. If they start killing people like they have in the past, I think they’re going to get hit very hard by the United States,” Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One.
Trump’s latest threat comes after he warned last week that Washington will intervene if Iran “violently kills peaceful protesters.”
Sparked by a shopkeepers’ strike in Tehran last week, protests have swept the country, sparked by the soaring cost of living, a worsening economic crisis, and the rial — Iran’s currency — plunging to record lows in the wake of renewed United Nations sanctions.
For more than one week, anti-regime protests have shaken Iran, with violent clashes between demonstrators and security forces escalating amid intensifying domestic crises.
On Saturday, Khamenei accused “enemies of the Islamic Republic” of stoking unrest and warned that “rioters should be put in their place,” Iranian media reported.
Iran’s judiciary chief, Gholamhossein Mohseni Ejei, also said that while citizens have a right to protest, the government will show no leniency toward “rioters.”
According to the US-based Human Rights Activists in Iran (HRAI), protests have spread to at least 78 cities, with the regime killing 20 people — including three children — arresting nearly 1,000, and detaining more than 40 minors.
Amid a deepening economic crisis worsened by a 12-day June war with Israel and the US that struck several of Iran’s nuclear sites, the regime has ramped up its crackdown on protesters and opposition figures trying to maintain stability.
Media reports indicate that anti-riot forces — including the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), the Basij militia, local police, and the army — have used violent tactics such as live fire, tear gas, and water cannons to suppress demonstrations.
In widely circulated social media videos, protesters can be heard chanting slogans such as “Death to the dictator” and “Khamenei will be toppled this year,” while also calling for Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian to step down.
Videos sent to Iran International show security forces confronting protesting shopkeepers in central Tehran on Monday, with riot police deployed around the Grand Bazaar and tear gas used on Jomhouri Street near the Hafez underpass. pic.twitter.com/OyhQlyUJaN
— Iran International English (@IranIntl_En) December 29, 2025
Meanwhile, Khamenei reportedly has a backup plan to flee the country if his security forces fail to suppress protests or begin to desert, according to The Times.
“The ‘plan B’ is for Khamenei and his very close circle of associates and family, including his son and nominated heir apparent, Mojtaba,” an intelligence source told the British newspaper.
Khamenei would reportedly flee to Moscow, following the path of ousted Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in December 2024.
Uncategorized
Pro-Hamas Arson Attack Targets Home of Antisemitism Commissioner in Germany
An image of arson and vandalism near the home of Andreas Büttner, commissioner for combating antisemitism in the German state of Brandenburg. Photo: Screenshot
Investigators in Germany have started reviewing an arson attack on Sunday against the home of Andreas Büttner, commissioner for combating antisemitism in the state of Brandenburg, where assailants set fire to a shed at his property in Templin — a town located approximately 43 miles north of Berlin — and spray-painted an inverted red triangle, the symbol of support for the Islamist terrorist group Hamas.
“My thoughts are with Andreas Büttner and his family,” Israeli Ambassador to Germany Ron Prosor posted on X. “Knowing him as I do, after this attack he will only stand up even more resolutely against antisemitism. For the radical part of the ‘Palestine solidarity’ movement is not only antisemitic, but terrorist.”
Prosor explained the significance of the red triangle, writing, “Attacks on those who think differently and attempted murder: That is what the Hamas triangle stands for — in Gaza as in Brandenburg. And the hatred of Israel goes hand in hand with hatred of our democracy. The rule of law must smash these terrorist organizations — and indeed, before they strike again.”
The red triangle vandalism appeared “on the neighboring house’s door entrance,” according to Germany’s DW media.
The home of Germany’s antisemitism commissioner, Andreas Büttner, was set on fire overnight in a targeted attack.
His family was inside the house at the time.
This is the second attack against Büttner in the past 16 months. His car was previously vandalized with swastikas. This… pic.twitter.com/cAbFnMIwQ7
— Combat Antisemitism Movement (@CombatASemitism) January 5, 2026
“The symbol speaks a clear language. The red Hamas triangle is an internationally known sign of jihadist violence and antisemitic incitement,” Büttner said. “Anyone who uses such a thing wants to intimidate and glorify terror. This is not a protest, it is a threat.”
According to Büttner, his family was inside the house at the time of the arson, the second attack against him in the past 16 months. His car was previously vandalized with swastikas.
Büttner released a statement on X.
“This attack represents a massive escalation,” he wrote. “It is directed against me personally, against my family, and against my home. At the same time, it is an expression of hatred and intimidation. I will not be intimidated by this. Anyone who believes that they can achieve something through violence, arson, or threats is mistaken. Such acts do not lead to me becoming quieter or questioning my commitment — they strengthen me in what I do. I ask that you give us the necessary peace today and refrain from further inquiries at the present time.”
Brandenburg’s Prime Minister Dietmar Woidke also condemned the violence, saying that “violence against people or things is and remains absolutely unacceptable. The police have started the investigation, and I hope that the perpetrator or perpetrators will be caught quickly.”
Jochen Feilcke, chairman of the German-Israeli Society Berlin and Brandenburg, described the attack “as where Hamas’s terrorism was applied on a small scale, including the Hamas triangle, in order to ultimately intimidate all people who defend themselves against increasing antisemitism in Berlin and Brandenburg.”
“Especially the parties of the left camp have every reason to deal with it, because they tolerate this mood or still fuel it,” Feilcke told Tagesspiegel. “They are so jointly responsible for when debates turn into violence.””
The Jewish Virtual Library describes how the inverted red triangle symbol was originally used by the Nazis to designate political prisoners.
“According to Holocaust historians, this triangle was part of a dehumanizing classification system, where each prisoner was identified by different colored triangles depending on their ‘crime,’” writes Or Shaked, deputy director of the Jewish Virtual Library. “The red triangle identified political dissidents, including socialists and communists. After World War II, the survivors of Nazi persecution and their families reclaimed the red triangle as a symbol of resistance to fascism.”
Shaked explains the revival of the symbol in recent years, noting that following Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, massacre across southern Israel, the symbol began appearing in Hamas-produced propaganda, marking Israeli military targets. Its use spread to anti-Israel protests, particularly on college campuses and social media, where demonstrators use it to show solidarity with Palestinians.
Uncategorized
Orthodox Jewish Judge to Preside Over Maduro Trial in New York
US District Judge Alvin Hellerstein presides at the Manhattan Federal Court hearing over former US President Donald Trump’s push to move his criminal case to federal court, in New York City, US, June 27, 2023, in a courtroom sketch. Photo: Jane Rosenberg via Reuters Connect
The US federal judge presiding over the criminal proceedings of deposed Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro is an Orthodox Jew from New York City whose 70 years as a legal professional has seen him work on a slew of major cases with historic implications, touching on matters from the 9/11 terrorist attacks to the felony convictions of Donald Trump.
Born in 1933 — a year in which Franklin D. Roosevelt assumed the US presidency, Adolf Hitler rose to power in Germany, and the British Broadcasting Corporation aired the first ever televised boxing match — the future US district judge Alvin Kenneth Hellerstein graduated from Columbia Law School in 1956, the third year of the first Eisenhower administration and the year of the Suez Crisis.
Forty-two years later, after serving as a law clerk, achieving first lieutenant rank in the US Army, and becoming partner at the Stroock & Stroock & Lavan LLP, Hellerstein was appointed to the federal bench by former US President Bill Clinton in 1998 at the height of the Monica Lewinsky scandal, a first of its kind cable media event in which Clinton was accused of carrying on a torrid extramarital affair with a White House intern.
On Monday, Hellerstein lived through another moment of major historical significance, as he arraigned Maduro on narcoterrorism charges stemming from a federal indictment which alleges that he operated a gargantuan drug trafficking operation while administering a dictatorship over Venezuela.
Maduro was transported to New York City by the US military and federal law enforcement agents following an operation to extract him from Venezuela during the early morning hours of Jan. 3. He has since been held at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn, whose list of recent high-profile inmates include Sam Bankman-Fried, Sean “Diddy” Combs, and Ghislaine Maxwell.
“I was captured at my home in Caracas, Venezuela,” Maduro, joined by his wife and alleged co-conspirator Cilia Flores, told Hellerstein when asked to confirm his name in court on Monday. “I am a decent man. I am still president of my country.”
Hellerstein responded, “There will be a time and a place to go into all of this.” He later notified Maduro of his right to remain silent and authorized the requests of the deposed leader and his wife to receive medical attention.
Maduro’s capture was described by the Trump administration as both a law enforcement action and an application of the Roosevelt Corollary, in which the US assumes the right to secure and stabilize the Western Hemisphere by directly intervening in the domestic affairs of states within it. The policy has shown several faces since its first utterance as the Monroe Doctrine which opposed European colonialism in the hemisphere, and in accordance with it the US has staged actions in Cuba, Haiti, and Grenada.
Hellerstein’s tenure as a federal judge has been eventful. Sept. 11, 2001, victims, narcoterrorists, presidents, and the US government all have sought favorable rulings in his courtroom. In one of his more recent cases, he presided over the trial of Charlie Javice, who was convicted of defrauding JPMorgan Chase of $175 million dollars by duping the firm, one of the oldest and most important in the history of US finance, into believing that she had discovered a way to “simplify” the process for college students to apply for student financial aid. A jury convicted Javice, and Hellerstein sentenced her to 85 months in prison.
As a former president and candidate for the White House, Trump asked Hellerstein to transfer a criminal case alleging that he paid money to quell accusations of an extramarital affair from state court to federal court, a request Hellerstein repelled twice.
Hellerstein has also ruled against the second Trump administration’s attempt to deport alleged illegal migrants of Venezuelan origin under the Alien Enemies Act and detain them in El Salvador, where they would await repatriation. Hellerstein argued that the administration failed to show cause and settled on a different remedy.
“The destination, El Salvador, a country paid to take our aliens, is neither the country from which the aliens came, nor to which they wish to be removed,” Hellerstein wrote in his decision, issued in May amid of flurry of actions taken by new president. “But they are taken there, and there to remain, indefinitely, in a notoriously evil jail, unable to communicate with counsel, family, or friends.”
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.