Uncategorized
Why a liberal Zionist rabbi isn’t taking to the streets over Israel’s judicial reform plan
(JTA) — Israel’s 75th anniversary was supposed to be a blowout birthday party for its supporters, but that was before the country was convulsed by street protests over the right-wing government’s proposal to overhaul its judiciary. Critics call it an unprecedented threat to Israel’s democracy, and supporters of Israel found themselves conflicted. In synagogues across North America, rabbis found themselves giving “yes, but” sermons: Yes, Israel’s existence is a miracle, but its democracy is fragile and in danger.
One of those sermons was given a week ago Saturday by Rabbi Ammiel Hirsch of Manhattan’s Stephen Wise Free Synagogue, expressing his “dismay” over the government’s actions. Hirsch is the former head of ARZA, the Reform movement’s Zionist organization, and the founder of a new organization, Amplify Israel, meant to promote Zionism among Reform Jews. He is often quoted as an example of a mainstream non-Orthodox rabbi who not only criticizes anti-Zionism on the far left but who insists that his liberal colleagues are not doing enough to defend the Jewish state from its critics.
Many on the Jewish left, meanwhile, say Jewish establishment figures, even liberals like Hirsch, have been too reluctant to call out Israel on, for example, its treatment of the Palestinians — thereby enabling the country’s extremists.
In March, however, he warned that the “Israeli government is tearing Israeli society apart and bringing world Jewry along for the dangerous ride.” That is uncharacteristically strong language from a rabbi whose forthcoming book, “The Lilac Tree: A Rabbi’s Reflections on Love, Courage, and History,” includes a number of essays on the limits of criticizing Israel. When does such criticism give “comfort to left-wing hatred of Israel,” as he writes in his book, and when does failure to criticize Israel appear to condone extremism?
Although the book includes essays on God, Torah, history and antisemitism, in a recent interview we focused on the Israel-Diaspora divide, the role of Israel in the lives of Diaspora Jews and why the synagogue remains the “central Jewish institution.”
The interview was edited for length and clarity.
Jewish Telegraphic Agency: You gave a sermon earlier this month about the 75th anniversary of Israel’s founding, which is usually a time of celebration in American synagogues, but you also said you were “dismayed” by the “political extremism” and “religious fundamentalism” of the current government. Was that difficult as a pulpit rabbi?
Rabbi Ammiel Hirsch: The approach is more difficult now with the election of the new government than it has been in all the years of the past. Because we can’t sanitize supremacism, elitism, extremism, fundamentalism, and we’re not going to. Israel is in what’s probably the most serious domestic crisis in the 75-year history of the state. And what happens in Israel affects American Jewry directly. It’s Israeli citizens who elect their representatives, but that’s not the end of the discussion neither for Israelis or for American Jews. At the insistence of both parties, both parties say the relationship is fundamental and critical and it not only entitles but requires Israelis and world Jews to be involved in each other’s affairs.
For American Jewry, in its relationship with Israel, our broadest objective is to sustain that relationship, deepen that relationship, and encourage people to be involved in the affairs in Israel and to go to Israel, spend time in Israel and so forth, and that’s a difficult thing to do and at the same time be critical.
American Jews have been demonstrating here in solidarity with the Israelis who have been protesting the recent judicial overhaul proposals in Israel. Is that a place for liberal American Jews to make their voices heard on what happens in Israel?
I would like to believe that if I were living in Israel, I would be at every single one of those demonstrations on Saturday night, but I don’t participate in demonstrations here because the context of our world and how we operate is different from in Israel when an Israeli citizen goes out and marches on Kaplan Street in Tel Aviv. It’s presumed that they’re Zionists and they’re speaking to their own government. I’m not critical of other people who reach a different perspective in the United States, but for me, our context is different. Even if we say the identical words in Tel Aviv or on West 68th Street, they’re perceived in a different way and they operate in a different context.
What then is the appropriate way for American Jews to express themselves if they are critical of an action by the Israeli government?
My strongest guidance is don’t disengage, don’t turn your back, double down, be more supportive of those who support your worldview and are fighting for it in Israel. Polls seem to suggest that the large majority of Israelis are opposed to these reforms being proposed. Double down on those who are supportive of our worldview.
You lament in your book that the connections to Israel are weakening among world Jewry, especially among Jewish liberals.
The liberal part of the Jewish world is where I am and where the people I serve are by and large, and where at least 80% of American Jewry resides. It’s a difficult process because we’re operating here in a context of weakening relationship: a rapidly increasing emphasis on universal values, what we sometimes call tikkun olam [social justice], and not as a reflection of Jewish particularism, but often at the expense of Jewish particularism.
There is a counter-argument, however, which you describe in your book: “some left-wing Jewish activists contend that alienation from Israel, especially among the younger generations, is a result of the failures of the American Jewish establishment” — that is, by not doing more to express their concerns about the dangers of Jewish settlement in the West Bank, for example, the establishment alienated young liberal Jews. You’re skeptical of that argument. Tell me why.
Fundamentally I believe that identification with Israel is a reflection of identity. If you have a strong Jewish identity, the tendency is to have a strong connection with the state of Israel and to believe that the Jewish state is an important component of your Jewish identity. I think that surveys bear that out. No doubt the Palestinian question will have an impact on the relationship between American Jews in Israel as long as it’s not resolved, it will be an outstanding irritant because it raises moral dilemmas that should disturb every thinking and caring Jew. And I’ve been active in trying to oppose ultra-Orthodox coercion in Israel. But fundamentally, while these certainly are components putting pressure on the relationship between Israel and Diaspora Jewry, in particular among the elites of the American Jewish leadership, for the majority of American Jews, the relationship with Israel is a reflection of their relationship with Judaism. And if that relationship is weak and weakening, as day follows night, the relationship with Israel will weaken as well.
But what about the criticism that has come from, let’s say, deep within the tent? I am thinking of the American rabbinical students who in 2021 issued a public letter accusing Israel of apartheid and calling on American Jewish communities to hold Israel accountable for the “violent suppression of human rights.” They were certainly engaged Jews, and they might say that they were warning the establishment about the kinds of right-wing tendencies in Israel that you and others in the establishment are criticizing now.
Almost every time I speak about Israel and those who are critical of Israel, I hold that the concept of criticism is central to Jewish tradition. Judaism unfolds through an ongoing process of disputation, disagreement, argumentation, and debate. I’m a pluralist, both politically as well as intellectually.
In response to your question, I would say two things. First of all, I distinguish between those who are Zionist, pro-Israel, active Jews with a strong Jewish identity who criticize this or that policy of the Israeli government, and between those who are anti-Zionists, because anti-Zionism asserts that the Jewish people has no right to a Jewish state, at least in that part of the world. And that inevitably leads to anti-Jewish feelings and very often to antisemitism.
When it came to the students, I didn’t respond at all because I was a student once too, and there are views that I hold today that I didn’t hold when I was a student. Their original article was published in the Forward, if I’m not mistaken, and it generated some debate in all the liberal seminaries. I didn’t respond at all until it became a huge, multi-thousand word piece in The New York Times. Once it left the internal Jewish scene, it seemed to me that I had an obligation to respond. Not that I believe that they’re anti-Zionist — I do not. I didn’t put them in the BDS camp [of those who support the boycott of Israel]. I just simply criticized them.
Hundreds of Jews protest the proposed Israeli court reform outside the Israeli consulate in New York City on Feb. 21, 2023. (Gili Getz)
You signed a letter with other rabbis noting that the students’ petition came during Israel’s war with Hamas that May, writing that “those who aspire to be future leaders of the Jewish people must possess and model empathy for their brothers and sisters in Israel, especially when they are attacked by a terrorist organization whose stated goal is to kill Jews and destroy the Jewish State.”
My main point was that the essence of the Jewish condition is that all Jews feel responsible one for the another — Kol yisrael arevim zeh bazeh. And that relationship starts with emotions. It starts with a feeling of belongingness to the Jewish people, and a feeling of concern for our people who are attacked in the Jewish state. My criticism was based, in the middle of a war, on expressing compassion, support for our people who are under indiscriminate and terrorist assault. I uphold that and even especially in retrospect two years later, why anyone would consider that to be offensive in any way is still beyond me.
You were executive director of ARZA, the Reform Zionist organization, and you write in your book that Israel “is the primary source of our people’s collective energy — the engine for the recreation and restoration of the national home and the national spirit of the Jewish people.” A number of your essays put Israel at the center of the present-day Jewish story. You are a rabbi in New York City. So what’s the role or function of the Diaspora?
Our existence in the Diaspora needs no justification. For practically all of the last 2,000 years, Jewish life has existed in the Diaspora. It’s only for the last 75 years and if you count the beginning of the Zionist movement, the last 125 years or so that Jews have begun en masse to live in the land of Israel. Much of the values of what we call now Judaism was developed in the Diaspora. Moreover, the American Jewish community is the strongest, most influential, most glorious of all the Jewish Diasporas in Jewish history.
And yet, the only place in the Jewish world where the Jewish community is growing is in Israel. More Jewish children now live in Israel than all the other places in the world combined. The central value that powers the sustainability, viability and continuity of the Jewish people is peoplehood. It’s not the values that have sustained the Jewish people in the Diaspora and over the last 2,000 years, which was Torah or God, what we would call religion. I’m a rabbi. I believe in the centrality of God, Torah and religion to sustain Jewish identity. But in the 21st century, Israel is the most eloquent concept of the value of Jewish peoplehood. And therefore, I do not believe that there is enough energy, enough power, enough sustainability in the classical concept of Judaism to sustain continuity in the Diaspora. The concept of Jewish peoplehood is the most powerful way that we can sustain Jewish continuity in the 21st century.
But doesn’t that negate the importance of American Jewry?
In my view, it augments the sustainability of American Jewry. If American Jews disengage from Israel, and from the concept of Jewish peoplehood, and also don’t consider religion to be at the center of their existence, then what’s left? Now there’s a lot of activity, for example, on tikkun olam, which is a part of Jewish tradition. But tikkun olam in Judaism always was a blend between Jewish particularism and universalism — concern for humanity at large but rooted in the concept of Jewish peoplehood. But very often now, tikkun olam in the Diaspora is practiced not as a part of the concept of Jewish particularism but, as I said before, at the expense of Jewish particularism. That will not be enough to sustain Jewish communities going into the 21st century.
I want to ask about the health of the American synagogue as an institution. Considering your concern about the waning centrality of Torah and God in people’s lives — especially among the non-Orthodox — do you feel optimistic about it as an institution? Does it have to change?
I’ve believed since the beginning of my career that there’s no substitute in the Diaspora for the synagogue as the central Jewish institution. We harm ourselves when we underemphasize the central role of the synagogue. Any issue that is being done by one of the hundreds of Jewish agencies that we’ve created rests on our ability as a community to produce Jews into the next generation. And what are those institutions that produce that are most responsible for the production of Jewish continuity? Synagogues, day schools and summer camps, and of the three synagogues are by far the most important for the following reasons: First, we’re the only institution that defines ourselves as and whose purpose is what we call cradle to grave. Second, for most American Jews, if they end up in any institution at all it will be a synagogue. Far fewer American Jews will receive a day school education and or go to Jewish summer camps. That should have ramifications across the board for American Jewish policy, including how we budget Jewish institutions. We should be focusing many, many more resources on these three institutions, and at the core of that is the institution of the synagogue.
—
The post Why a liberal Zionist rabbi isn’t taking to the streets over Israel’s judicial reform plan appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
How a klezmer parade became part of the annual carnival in Sao Paulo
דעם פֿאַרגאַנגענעם חודש איז אין סאַאָ־פּאָולאָ, בראַזיל פֿאָרגעקומען דער יערלעכער כּלי־זמר קאַרניוואַל און פּאַראַד — אַ טייל פֿונעם אַלגעמיינעם קאַרנאַװאַל וואָס איז די גרעסטע פֿאָלקס־שׂמחה אין לאַנד.
יעדן פֿעברואַר פֿאַרשטעלן זיך מיליאָנען מענטשן און גײען טאַנצן אױף די גאַסן פֿון טױזנטער שטעט און שטעטלעך צום טאַקט פֿון פֿרײלעכער מוזיק, דער עיקר — סאַמבאַ און אַשע מוזיק. אין באָם־רעטיראָ, אַ געגנט װאָס האָט זיך אױסגעפֿורעמט דורך כּסדרדיקע און פֿאַרשײדנאַרטיקע אימיגראַציע־כװאַליעס, איז די דאָזיקע שׂמחה געװאָרן אַ פּלאַטפֿאָרמע צו פֿײַערן אויך די ייִדישע קולטור.
אַ װידעאָ פֿונעם פּאַראַד קען מען זען דאָ.
די טעמע פֿונעם הײַיאָריקן פּאַראַד, וואָס איז פֿאָרגעקומען דעם 8טן פֿעברואַר, איז געווען „באָמרעלע“ — די הײמישע באַצײכענונג פֿון דער געגנט וווּ אימיגראַנטן האָבן געוווינט אױפֿן סאַאָ־פּאַולער ייִדיש. דער ציל איז געװען אָפּצוגעבן כּבֿוד די אומפֿאַרגעסלעכע ייִדישע פּאַרשױנען פֿונעם פֿאָלקלאָר פֿון דער אָרטיקער קהילה. אָט זענען עטלעכע פֿון זיי:
- מעכעלע דער קליענטלטשיק (פּעדלער, אױף בראַזיליאַנער ייִדיש) מיט זײַן גראָבן מאַנטל, פֿול געפּאַקט מיט סחורה
- בעני־יאַנגאַ, אַ ייִד פֿון ראַזשאַסטאַן װאָס האָט זיך אַזױ גוט אױסגעלערנט ייִדיש אַז ער איז געװאָרן אַ ייִדיש־לערער אין דער אָרטיקער שלום־עליכם שול
- דער בײגל־פֿאַרקױפֿער װאָס פֿלעג גײען איבער די גאַסן פֿון באָם־רעטיראָ שרײַענדיק „דער בײגלמאַן גײט שױן אַװעק!“
צװישן אַנדערע פֿיגורן האָט מען אויך אָפּגעגעבן כּבֿוד די אַזױ גערופֿענע „פּאָלאַקאַס“ — די ייִדישקעס, דער עיקר פֿון פּױלן, װאָס זײַנען געװאָרן קרבנות פֿון פֿרױען־האַנדל דורך דער „צבֿי־מגדל מאַפֿיע“ און אַנדערע קרימינעלע באַנדעס. דערבײַ האָט דאָס דערמאָנט אַלטע מחלוקתן און װײטיקדיקע קאַפּיטלען פֿון דער בראַזיליאַנער ייִדישער געשיכטע.
די מערהײט פֿון די דאָזיקע פֿרױען האָט מען אָפּגענאַרט נאָך איידער זיי זענען אַוועק פֿון פּוילן, צוזאָגנדיק זיי חתנים און פֿעסטע אַרבעט־שטעלעס. אָנקומענדיק קײן בראַזיל, האָט מען זײ אָבער געצװוּנגען צו אַרבעטן ווי פּראָסטיטוטקעס. די ייִדישע קהילה, אַנשטאָט זײ אױפֿצונעמען און העלפֿן פֿאַרבעסערן זײער לאַגע, האָט זײ באַרעדט און זיי אויסגעשלאָסן פֿון דער געזעלשאַפֿט. האָבן די דאָזיקע מוטיקע פֿרױען געמוזט גרינדן זײערע אײגענע ייִדישע אינסטיטוציעס, שולן און בית־עולמס.
די געגנט באָם־רעטיראָ איז דער טראַדיציאָנעלער ייִדישער קוואַרטאַל פֿון סאַאָ פּאַולאָ, װוּ טױזנטער ייִדישע אימיגראַנטן, דער עיקר פֿון מזרח־אײראָפּע, האָבן זיך באַזעצט במשך דעם 19טן און 20סטן יאָרהונדערט. אַחוץ ייִדן, האָט די געגנט מקבל־פּנים געװען איטאַליענישע, גריכישע און אַרמענישע אימיגראַנטן, װי אױך בראַזיליאַנער פֿון צפֿון־מזרח לאַנד. הײַנט װערט די געגנט איבערהױפּט באַצײכנט דורך די קאָרעאַנישע און לאַטײַן־אַמעריקאַנער באַפֿעלקערונגען. לעצטנס האַלטן די באָליװיאַנער אײַנוווינער אָפּ זייער אײגענעם קאַרנאַװאַל־פּאַראַד אין דעם קװאַרטאַל.
פּונקט אין דער דאָזיקער פֿאַרשײדנאַרטיקער טעריטאָריע דעפֿילירט די קאַפּעליע, „בלאָקאָ כּלי־זמר“. יעדעס יאָר קלײַבט זי צונױף איבער 30 כּלי־זמרים און ברענגט דערמיט די ייִדישע מוזיק צו די גאַסן לױטן בראַזיליאַנער סטיל׃ מיט שװוּנג און פֿרײד פֿון טאַנצנדיקע מאַסן.
דער בלאָקאָ באַגרענעצט זיך ניט נאָר מיט מוזיק, װאָרן עס באַטײליקן זיך אין פּאַראַד אױך אַקטיאָרן, פֿאָרשערס, פּאָעטן, פּראָדוצענטן, דעזײַנערס און אײַנװױנערס פֿון דער געגנט, װאָס גרײטן זיך צו במשך די פֿילצאָליקע רעפּעטיציעס ממש אַ יאָר לאַנג. דורך פֿילפֿאַרביקע קאָסטיומען און גרויסע טאַנצנדיקע ליאַלקעס ווערט די גאַס פֿאַרװאַנדלט אין אַ לעבעדיקן אַרכיװ פֿון ייִדישן געדעכעניש פֿון שטאָט.
דער „בלאָקאָ“ האָט דעפֿילירט צום ערשטן מאָל מיט צװײ יאָר צוריק און איז זינט דעמאָלט ממשותדיק געװאַקסן. אין 2025 איז דער לאָזונג פֿון פּאַראַד געװען „ס’איז פֿרײלעך אין שטעטל“ און מע האָט געפֿײַערט די „חתונה“ צװישן דער כּלי־זמר־מוזיק און דעם בראַזיליאַנער קאַרנאַװאַל, מיט אַ קאָלעקטיװן טאַנץ אונטער אַ גיגאַנטישער חופּה, װאָס איז געשטעלט געװאָרן אין מיטן גאַס.
אינספּירירט דורכן קאָנצעפּט פֿון דאָיִקײט, האָט דער בלאָקאָ װידער אױפֿגעלעבט די זכרונות פֿון אַ מאָל און באַװיזן אַז ייִדן געהערן אױך צו דער פֿילמיניקער קולטורעלער לאַנדשאַפֿט פֿון בראַזיל. דער בלאָקאָ כּלי־זמר האָט אױך דערװיזן אַז די רײַכע קולטור־ירושה פֿון מזרח־אײראָפּעיִשן ייִדנטום לעבט דאָ װײַטער, מחוץ אַרכיװן און אַקאַדעמישע אַנשטאַלטן. זי לעבט אױך אין דער היץ פֿונעם טראָפּישן זומער, צװישן קאָנפֿעטי, שװייס און די קלאַנגען פֿונעם קלאַרנעט.
[דער אַרטיקל איז רעדאַקטירט געוואָרן מיט דער הילף פֿון גוסטאַװאָ־גרשום עמאָס]
The post How a klezmer parade became part of the annual carnival in Sao Paulo appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Chabad on high alert after false Tucker Carlson and Candace Owens war claims
Jewish institutions are on high alert after Tucker Carlson falsely claimed on his podcast Wednesday that the Chabad-Lubavitch movement is behind the war in Iran.
Carlson claimed that Chabad is orchestrating a religious war aimed at destroying the Al-Aqsa mosque and the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem’s Old City so that the Third Temple could be rebuilt in its place.
“This has been going on a long time in public through, in part, the efforts of a group called Chabad. C-H-A-B-A-D,” Carlson said.
Chabad, a sect of Hasidic Judaism known for its global religious outreach and houses on hundreds of college campuses, does not function as a political advocacy organization. Its teachings describe the rebuilding of the Third Temple as part of a future messianic redemption achieved through acts of mitzvot — not a project to be advanced through modern warfare or the destruction of the Al-Aqsa Mosque.
“To blame it on a Hasidic movement based in Brooklyn that just goes around the world, spreading Judaism, spreading love, spreading kindness, it’s the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever heard,” Yossi Farro, a member of the Chabad movement known for wrapping tefillin with celebrities, told the Forward in a phone interview. “He’s appealing to people that have never heard of Chabad and now, their first opinion is, this is horrible, these people are warmongers — which is the exact opposite of what we represent.”
The right-wing podcaster Candace Owens amplified the claim, posting to X, “Tucker is telling the truth about the Chabad Lubavitch.”
The comments come as Congress is set to vote today on a war powers resolution that would halt President Donald Trump’s military action in Iran. Several polls show that Republicans overwhelmingly support the decision to attack Iran, while a majority of Democrats oppose the military action.
The rhetoric also follows a series of attacks targeting Chabad celebrations. In December, a gunman opened fire at a Chabad Hanukkah celebration at Bondi Beach in Sydney, Australia. The incident left 15 people dead, including a Chabad rabbi, a Holocaust survivor and a 10-year-old girl.
In January, a driver repeatedly rammed his car into an entrance to the Chabad-Lubavitch world headquarters in Crown Heights, Brooklyn, damaging the building on a night thousands had gathered there to celebrate.
Both Owens and Carlson have ramped up their use of conspiratorial anti-Israel rhetoric over the past year. In October 2025, Carlson drew widespread condemnation after hosting avowed antisemite and white nationalist Nick Fuentes for a friendly conversation.
During yesterday’s podcast, Carlson showed photos of IDF soldiers wearing patches embroidered with an outline of the Temple Mount as evidence of his claim that Chabad was behind the war in Iran, saying that “it seems like, from the reading we did recently, that those patches actually came from Chabad.”
The photos Carlson shared match those posted by the Temple Institute in January 2024 — long before the U.S. military campaign in Iran. The Temple Institute is a Jerusalem-based nonprofit that aims to “bring about the building of the Holy Temple in our time” and is unaffiliated with Chabad.
“He is also wrong about the Temple patches. They did not come from Chabad. Had he done even basic research, that would be clear,” Rabbi Yaacov Berman, a Chabad spokesperson, posted to X. “It would also show that many who wear the Temple patches see them as symbols of faith and hope for peace, and a yearning for the day when there will be no more war.”
The post Chabad on high alert after false Tucker Carlson and Candace Owens war claims appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Top PLO, Fatah Officials: Hamas Should Join Us, No Need to Disarm
Hamas police officers stand guard, amid a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, in Gaza City, Oct. 11, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Stringer
The Palestinian Authority (PA) appears eager to hijack the Board of Peace’s UN Security Council-approved administration of Gaza and unite with Hamas to control the Strip themselves, according to comments made by a top PLO official in a new interview documented by Palestinian Media Watch.
According to Egyptian reports, PLO Executive Committee Secretary Azzam Al-Ahmad has been in Cairo meeting with Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad:
Two informed Palestinian sources said Azzam Al-Ahmad, the secretary-general of the PLO Executive Committee, held talks in Cairo with faction leaders including Hamas and Islamic Jihad about the two movements joining the PLO.
[Manassa.news (Egypt), Feb. 22, 2026]
Officials from the governing PA and its parent political body the Palestine Liberation Organization have been making repeated overtures to Hamas to join the PLO.
In November 2025, Fatah Central Committee Secretary Jibril Rajoub called on Egyptian help to “bridge the gaps” between Fatah and Hamas so they can unite against Israel.
The previous month, PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas’ Advisor Mahmoud Al-Habbash declared “our hands are extended, and our hearts are open to rapprochement with Hamas.”
The implicit hope behind the unity push is that move might satisfy international demands for Hamas to relinquish control of Gaza. Back in October, Al-Habbash said that Hamas needed to disarm, but clearly the PA position has since softened. As a sweetener for Hamas to agree to join the PLO, the PLO says it is now ready to appease the terror group by allowing it to keep its weapons and remain an armed force on the ground.
The PA and PLO are aware that to legitimize absorbing Hamas into the PLO, Hamas – the perpetrators of the largest massacre of Jews since the Holocaust – must also be laundered of the stigma of being defined as a terror organization.
During al-Ahmad’s visit, he was interviewed by an Egyptian newspaper, tacitly confirming his mission:
They [US President Donald Trump and the Board of Peace] do not want Hamas to play any role in the Gaza Strip, and we reject this completely, because Hamas is part of the Palestinian national activity. It is true that it has not yet joined the PLO, but we are in a constant national dialogue with them to complete what is required for their entry into the PLO. Therefore, all talk about disarming Hamas and it being a terror organization is unacceptable to us, because Hamas is not a terror organization. [emphasis added]
[Shorouk News (Egyptian paper), Feb. 23, 2026]
The immediate follow-up question in the interview was seen as so important by Al-Ahmad that he made it into a post for his Facebook page:
Shorouk News’ Mohammed Khayal: “You mean clearly that you in the PLO do not view Hamas as a terror organization?”
Azzam Al-Ahmad: “We have never viewed it as a terror organization, and we always oppose when a decision is made by any international institution or any government classifying them as a terror organization, because they are part of the Palestinian national fabric.”
[Azzam Al-Ahmed’s Facebook page, Feb. 23, 2026]
Lest anyone thought that Al-Ahmad had misspoken, his strong statement was soon backed by Rajoub:
“Fatah Central Committee [Secretary and] member Jibril Rajoub emphasized that [PLO Executive Committee member] Azzam Al-Ahmad did not err in defending the weapons of the Hamas Movement and stating that it is part of the Palestinian national fabric.”
[Shahed, independent Palestinian news website, Feb. 24, 2026]
Meanwhile, without referencing Al-Ahmad directly, Fatah Movement Central Committee member Abbas Zaki doubled down on the renewed push for unity with the Islamist terror groups.
“Fatah Movement Central Committee member Abbas Zaki emphasized that national dialogue among Palestinian factions, foremost among them Hamas and Islamic Jihad, constitutes a ‘necessary path and an urgent national need… The real enemy of this unity is the Israeli occupation, and those who stand behind it politically and militarily, foremost among them the US, which is working to rearrange the region in a way that will serve Israel’s sovereignty at the expense of the Arab and Islamic rights.’”
[Sanad News, independent Palestinian news agency, Feb. 26, 2026]
Statements like these are nothing new for PA or PLO officials, who have been making overtures to Hamas for years. Yet the timing and stridency of this particular effort is everything, as it seeks to directly undermine the Trump-brokered ceasefire agreement and Gaza reconstruction plan based on the establishment of a technocratic government.
A technocratic government, to be known as the National Committee for the Administration of Gaza (NCAG), was chosen as the most effective way to begin to restore services to Gazans, and that makes sense. It provides the administrative structure to deliver essential services while at the same time depriving oxygen to any resumption of warfare against Israel from the territory – at least the parts of Gaza that Hamas no longer controls.
While the PA has decided to go along with the plan, a recent letter from PA Vice Chairman Hussein Al-Sheikh welcoming a PA liaison office with the NCAG stressed the PA’s expectation that this was all just a “transitional” prelude to PA control.
“These constitute practical transitional steps that contribute to alleviating the suffering of our people and providing administrative and security services, without creating administrative, legal, or security duality among our people in Gaza and the West Bank, and while reinforcing the principle of one system, one law, and one legitimate authority over arms.”
[WAFA, official PA news agency, English edition, Feb. 21, 2026]
In the PA’s mindset, whatever moves can hasten the end of this transition, the better, as the notion of suspending conflict with Israel in any Palestinian-populated area even temporarily is anathema to the PLO and Hamas alike.
As evidenced by Al-Ahmad’s latest remarks and others, the PA and PLO have no problem whatsoever with Hamas’ zeal for terrorism – but only appear to differ with the Islamist terror group on who gets to decide when and how it is used.
The author is a contributor to Palestinian Media Watch, where a version of this article first appeared.