Uncategorized
The White House intends to fight antisemitism. That starts with a sensible definition.
(JTA) — In the coming days, the White House is expected to release what President Joe Biden has called “the first-ever U.S. national strategy to counter antisemitism.” It will likely include calls to action by Congress, state and local governments, as well as guidance for technology and other companies, civil society and faith leaders.
In preparation, the Biden administration sought input from a wide range of Jewish community members and stakeholders, including the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, which I lead. In addition to this engagement with the forthcoming report on antisemitism, I will travel to Cordoba, Spain, next month for the United Nations antisemitism summit, and then to the European Parliament in Brussels with parliamentarians from across the globe convening against antisemitism.
In both settings, the message of world Jewry remains unchanged: Adopting the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of antisemitism, known as IHRA, is an essential and seminal tool to combat anti-Jewish hate
Support for adopting the IHRA definition is significant, as seen in a letter last week from over 175 Jewish community organizations around the world, a letter last week from over 600 rabbis from all four Jewish streams and dozens of letters from American Jewish organizations, all making the important case for adoption of the IHRA definition. Members of Congress have weighed in. Mayors have weighed in. Across the board, a strong and clear consensus of support exists for the definition.
The IHRA definition is the most authoritative and internationally accepted definition of antisemitism. Forty-one nations, as well as hundreds of local governments, academic institutions, NGOs and other entities have formally adopted in different ways the IHRA definition of antisemitism. Over half — 31 — American states also adopted it.
RELATED: The IHRA definition of anti-Semitism and why people are fighting over it, explained (2021)
Since the Obama Administration, the U.S. Department of State has utilized and promoted the IHRA definition (and previously, its similarly-phrased predecessor from the European Union’s Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia). Both Secretary of State Antony Blinken and the State Department’s Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Antisemitism Ambassador Deborah Lipstadt are leaders in advocating for its usage around the globe. The U.S. Department of Education also employs the IHRA definition as a tool in determining antisemitism discrimination in Title VI discrimination cases.
The IHRA definition continues to gain significant attention and support among governments and civil society actors. Fifty-one of the 53 member organizations of the Conference of Presidents adopted the definition – a clear recognition from every corner of a disparate Jewish community that we are unified when it comes to applauding the comprehensive approach it provides for labeling and addressing antisemitism.
One particular aspect of the IHRA definition that draws attention — and criticism from some groups — is its treatment of the relationship between anti-Israel bias and antisemitism. For too long, definitions of antisemitism failed to account for how anti-Zionism often serves as a cover for antisemitism. Forms of antisemitism that are masked as “anti-Zionism” and that deny the right of the Jewish people to self-determination are among those most frequently encountered by many Jews today, whether or not they are Zionists, as documented in surveys by the Anti-Defamation League and by the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights.
RELATED: A manufactured ‘mainstream’ wants the White House to define antisemitism on its own flawed terms (Opinion)
The IHRA definition addresses the relationship between anti-Zionism and antisemitism, while not conflating legitimate criticism with actual antisemitism. Critics fail to identify actual instances where the IHRA definition suppressed free speech. In fact, over the last 20 weeks, as debates raged around the world over Israel’s proposed judicial reform — with hundreds of thousands of Israelis of all political stripes expressing virulent criticism of the Israeli government’s proposed overhaul — I have yet to hear one individual accuse the critics of being antisemitic. Despite the fact that the IHRA definition is so ubiquitous, legitimate speech that is critical of Israeli government policy is not censored. When put to the test, the IHRA definition does not do what its critics say it does.
We at the Conference of Presidents steadily campaign for states, localities, international governments and organizations to adopt the IHRA definition. The Biden administration seems poised to reassert their ongoing endorsement of the IHRA definition, pushing back yet again against those who distort the nature of the definition’s treatment of legitimate criticism of Israel governmental policies.
In a time when antisemitism in the United States has become all too often lethal, this would mean a vital and praiseworthy evolution of policy.
—
The post The White House intends to fight antisemitism. That starts with a sensible definition. appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Anti-Israel Candidates for US Senate Boast Strong Polling Numbers in Michigan Democratic Primary
Mallory McMorrow, a Democrat running for US Senate in Michigan. Photo: Screenshot
Mallory McMorrow, a vocal critic of Israel’s war in Gaza and a candidate for the US Senate in Michigan, holds a narrow lead over the rest of the Democratic primary field, according to a new poll.
The Emerson College Polling/Nexstar Media survey shows McMorrow, a member of the Michigan state Senate, ahead of the pack with 22 percent of the vote. US Rep. Haley Stevens (D-MI) sits in second place with 17 percent of the vote. Abdul El-Sayed, a physician with an anti-Israel policy platform, holds a respectable 16 percent of the primary vote.
McMorrow’s lead over the field may spark consternation among supporters of Israel, whose defensive military campaign in Gaza has been characterized by McMorrow as tantamount to “genocide.”
Just days before the anniversary of Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, massacre across southern Israel, McMorrow called Israel’s response in Gaza a “moral abomination,” saying it was “just as horrendous” as the attack carried out by Hamas-led Palestinian terrorists, who perpetrated the deadliest massacre of Jews since the Holocaust.
However, in a recent interview, McMorrow indicated tentativeness over her previous condemnation of Israel, admitting that the word “genocide” has become a “purity test” among progressive activists in Democratic primaries.
“I am somebody who looks at the videos, the photos, the amount of pain that has been caused in the Middle East, and you can’t not be heartbroken,” McMorrow said during an interview earlier this month. “But I also feel like we are getting lost in this conversation, and it feels like a political purity test on a word — a word that, by the way, to people who lost family members in the Holocaust, does mean something very different and very visceral — and we’re losing sight of what I believe is a broadly shared goal among most Michiganders, that this violence needs to stop, that a temporary ceasefire needs to become a permanent ceasefire, that Palestinians deserve long term peace and security, that Israelis deserve long term peace and security, and that should be the role of the next US senator.”
Conversely, Stevens has established herself as the favorite among pro-Israel Michiganders. Stevens scored an endorsement from the Democratic Majority for Israel in November 2025. In a statement, DMFI praised Stevens as someone who has “stood firm against extremism, antisemitism, and efforts to undermine America’s alliances.”
Stevens has routinely touted her pro-Israel bona fides, vowing to stand beside the closest US ally in the Middle East despite mounting pressure by party activists to cut ties with the Jewish state. The lawmaker promised that if elected she would continue to support legislation which bolsters Israel’s security.
“As a proud pro-Israel Democrat, I believe America is stronger when we stand with our democratic allies, confront antisemitism and extremism, and keep our promises to our friends abroad and our working families here at home,” Stevens said in a statement. “In the Senate, I’ll keep fighting to protect our democracy, support Israel’s security, ensure the ceasefire holds in Gaza, and deliver for Michiganders in every corner of our state.”
El-Sayed, the most far-left candidate in the race, has been especially critical of Israel’s war in Gaza. On Oct. 21, 2023, two weeks after the Hamas-led slaughter of 1,200 people and kidnapping of 251 hostages in southern Israel, the progressive politician accused Israel of “genocide.” The comment came before the Israeli military launched its ground campaign in Gaza.
He also compared Israel’s defensive military operations to the Hamas terrorist group’s conduct on Oct. 7, writing, “You can both condemn Hamas terrorism AND Israel’s murder since.”
In comments to Politico, El-Sayed criticized Democrats’ handling of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, arguing that they should become the “party of peace and justice” and said that they “ought not to be the party sending bombs and money to foreign militaries to drop bombs on other people’s kids in their schools and their hospitals.” He called on Democrats to stop supporting military aid for Israel, saying, “We should be spending that money here at home.”
Earlier this month, The Algemeiner reported that El-Sayed is facing scrutiny over his past fundraising and public support for a political advocacy group whose affiliates organized anti-Israel protests at Holocaust memorial sites in Washington, DC, and the Detroit metro area.
Uncategorized
Hamas Doubles Down on Refusal to Disarm as Trump Pushes Phase Two of Gaza Peace Plan
Palestinian Hamas terrorists stand guard at a site as Hamas says it continues to search for the bodies of deceased hostages, in Beit Lahiya in the northern Gaza Strip, Dec. 3, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Stringer
As the United States and its allies prepare to roll out phase two of President Donald Trump’s Gaza peace plan, Hamas has doubled down on its refusal to disarm, clouding hopes for a breakthrough.
In an interview with the Qatari media network Al Jazeera on Wednesday, senior Hamas official Musa Abu Marzouk said the Palestinian terrorist group — which ruled Gaza before its war with Israel and still controls nearly half the enclave’s territory — never agreed to lay down its weapons under the ceasefire agreement.
“Not for a single moment did we talk about surrender the weapons, or any formula about destroying, surrendering, or disarmament,” the terrorist leader said, echoing repeated statements by Hamas officials saying they have no intention of disarming.
Abu Marzouk also reaffirmed that Hamas has moved to “restore order” in parts of the Gaza Strip from which Israeli forces withdrew as part of the ceasefire deal.
Currently, the Israeli military controls 53 percent of Gaza’s territory, and Hamas has moved to reestablish control over the rest. 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.
Disarmament “was never even presented to us,” Abu Marzouk told Al Jazeera.
“After a battle of this magnitude … and with the inability of Israel, America, and the West to disarm or destroy Hamas’s weapons, did they think they could obtain it through talks?” he continued.
The comments came one day before Trump said that Hamas would in fact give up its weapons.
“A lot of people said they’ll never disarm. It looks like they’re going to disarm,” Trump told a cabinet meeting on Thursday.
The US president also asked his special envoy, Steve Witkoff, for an update on the situation.
“We’ve got the terrorists out of there and they’re going to demilitarize. They will because they have no choice,” Witkoff said. “They’re going to give it up. They’re going to give up the AK-47s.”
Last week, Trump warned that Hamas “will be blown away very quickly” if it refuses to disarm and cooperate with the second phase of his administration’s 20-point peace plan.
According to multiple media reports, Washington is expected to announce a deadline in the coming days for the terrorist group to lay down its weapons, in an effort to set the terms of the disarmament process.
On Monday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu insisted that the next phase of the ceasefire deal would focus on disarming Hamas and demilitarizing the enclave, rather than on reconstruction.
“We are at the threshold of the next phase: Disarming Hamas and demilitarizing the Gaza Strip,” the Israeli leader told parliament, shortly after he officially announced that the remains of the last hostage had been recovered.
“The next phase is not reconstruction,” he continued. “We have an interest in advancing this phase, not delaying it. The sooner we do so, the sooner we will complete the objectives of the war.”
Under phase one of Trump’s peace plan, a ceasefire took effect and Hamas was required to release all remaining hostages, both living and deceased, who were kidnapped by Hamas-led Palestinian terrorists during the group’s invasion of and massacre across southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023.
The body of the final hostage, Israeli police officer Ran Gvili, was returned on Monday, and he was buried on Wednesday.
In exchange for Hamas’s releasing nearly all the hostages, Israel freed thousands of Palestinian prisoners, including many serving life sentences for terrorism, and partially withdrew its military forces in Gaza to a newly drawn “Yellow Line,” roughly dividing the enclave between east and west.
The second stage of the US-backed peace plan is supposed to establish an interim administrative authority, a so-called “technocratic government,” deploy an International Stabilization Force (ISF) to oversee security in Gaza, and begin the demilitarization of Hamas.
In an effort to advance his regional peace initiative, Trump launched the so-called Board of Peace last week, inviting several countries — including Turkey — despite Israel’s opposition to its participation.
Israeli officials have repeatedly rejected any Turkish role in Gaza’s postwar reconstruction, warning that Ankara’s push to expand its regional influence could bolster Hamas’s terrorist infrastructure, as Turkey has been a longtime backer of the Islamist group.
Under Trump’s Gaza peace plan, the newly created Board of Peace will oversee the interim technocratic Palestinian government in the enclave, supported for at least two years by the ISF.
The ISF — comprising troops from multiple participating countries — will oversee the ceasefire deal between Israel and Hamas, train local security forces, secure Gaza’s borders with Israel and Egypt, and protect civilians while maintaining humanitarian corridors.
In addition, the ISF would seemingly be expected to take on the responsibility of disarming Hamas. Even though several countries — including Hamas backers Qatar and Turkey — have expressed interest in joining the international peacekeeping force, no final agreement has been reached.
Further Israeli military withdrawals in Gaza are tied to Hamas’s disarmament.
During his Wednesday interview, Abu Marzouk declared that “nobody can enter Gaza without understandings with Hamas,” emphasizing that the group will not give up control of the enclave.
“If Hamas doesn’t agree to the administrative committee, it cannot enter the Gaza Strip,” he told Al Jazeera, asserting that the group has the final say over who sits on it.
Trump’s peace plan, which has been endorsed by the United Nations, calls on Hamas to relinquish any governing role in Gaza.
Despite Hamas’s comments, the peace plan is moving forward with a transitional technocratic Palestinian administration in Gaza. The newly established 15-member body is led by Ali Shaath, a former deputy minister in the Palestinian Authority.
According to media reports, Hamas is looking to position around 10,000 members of its police force within the new Palestinian administration for Gaza.
Uncategorized
Forverts podcast, episode three: The cemetery
דער פֿאָרווערטס האָט שוין אַרויסגעלאָזט דעם דריטן קאַפּיטל פֿונעם ייִדישן פּאָדקאַסט, Yiddish With Rukhl. דאָס מאָל איז די טעמע „דער בית־עולם“. די פֿאַרגאַנגענע וואָך איז זי געווען „ליבע“. צו הערן ביידע קאַפּיטלען גיט אַ קוועטש דאָ.
אין דעם איצטיקן קאַפּיטל לייענט שׂרה־רחל שעכטער פֿאָר צוויי אַרטיקלען, „אַ טראַדיציאָנעלער מינהג געפֿירט פֿון פֿרויען: פֿעלדמעסטן און קנייטלעך לייגן“ פֿון אַנאַבעל כּהן, און „דאָס אַרײַנלייגן אין דר׳ערד: די פֿאַרשידענע ווערטער און אויסדרוקן פֿאַרן וואָרט ׳בית־עולם׳“ פֿון הערשל גלעזער.
אויב איר ווילט אויך לייענען דעם געדרוקטן טעקסט פֿון די אַרטיקלען, גיט אַ קוועטש דאָ און קוקט אונטן בײַם סוף פֿון דער זײַט.
אין דעם וואָכיקן פּאָדקאַסט לייענט די פֿאָרווערטס־רעדאַקטאָרין שׂרה־רחל שעכטער פֿאָר געקליבענע אַרטיקלען וואָס דער פֿאָרווערטס האָט געדרוקט במשך פֿון די יאָרן. דערווײַל איז דער פּאָדקאַסט בלויז אַ פּראָבע פֿון פֿינעף קאַפּיטלען. אויב ס׳וועט ווײַטער וואַקסן דער אינטערעס צו אים, וועט ער ווערן אַ געוויינטלעכער טייל פֿונעם פֿאָרווערטס.
טאָמער האָט איר קאָמענטאַרן אָדער פֿאָרלייגן, שרײַבט אַ בריוול דעם פֿאָרווערטס: schaechter@forward.com
The post Forverts podcast, episode three: The cemetery appeared first on The Forward.