Connect with us

Uncategorized

Anti-Israel Boycotts in Defense, Economics, and the Arts Are Gaining Ground

A pro-BDS demonstration. Photo: Wikimedia Commons.

Attacks against individual Jews and Jewish institutions have become so numerous, that only a sample may be listed here.

A few notable examples include: 

Universities continue to complain about the settlements reached by Brown, Columbia, and the University of Pennsylvania over allegations of antisemitism and systematic discrimination, with insiders describing these as shakedowns 

Momentum toward a settlement with Harvard has slowed, with the Federal government stating in September that the university has not complied with requests for data regarding race-based admission. Some reports have also indicated the question of third party monitors, such as that agreed on by Columbia, is a major sticking point.

With student protests growing, universities find themselves needing to act. Cognizant of the new levels of Federal and public scrutiny, Columbia and New York University announced anti-discrimination investigations in response to early semester incidents of antisemitic vandalism. Regulations regarding the time, place, and manner of demonstrations have also been put into place at many universities, along with complex speech rules.

In one such development, Harvard’s new guidelines noted that calling someone a “terrorist sympathizercould violate its anti-discrimination policy.

A more systematic form of control was revealed by a House Committee on Education and Workforce investigation, which included an interview with now ousted Northwestern University president Michael Schill. Committee staff members revealed the agreement between Northwestern and the Qatar Foundation regarding the university’s campus in Qatar, which stipulates “NU, NU-Q, and their respective employees, students, faculty, families, contractors and agents, shall be subject to the applicable laws and regulations of the State of Qatar, and shall respect the cultural, religious and social customs of the State of Qatar.” 

A small number of faculty members took the lead in berating Charlie Kirk and applauding his murder. This echoed the extremist stances of faculty regarding Israel.

Similarly, a new study of Jewish faculty points to the central role of anti-Israel faculty in driving campus antisemitism. The study noted that on 77% of campuses with a Faculty for Justice in Palestine chapters, faculty were engaged in anti-Israel programming, 80% helped organize anti-Israel demonstrations, and 85% endorsed BDS campaigns.

Overall, 73% of Jewish faculty reported witnessing anti-Jewish activities or statements from faculty, administrators or staff. The intense outpourings of anti-Israel and antisemitic hatred from pro-Palestinian faculty cannot be explained as mere political beliefs, but suggest deeper devotion to a secular religious cause.

The full implications of faculty hatred of Israel as both a foundational pedagogical structure and basis for personal behavior was demonstrated at Cornell University, where a noted anti-Israel professor, Eric Chayfetz, was suspended for allegedly prohibiting an Israeli student from participating in a class on Gaza.

Cheyfitz, formerly a faculty advisor to the school’s Jewish Voice for Peace chapter, taught the class “Gaza, Indigeneity, Resistance,” in the spring.

Student protests have also escalated on campus. Examples include picketing at job fairs at the University of Louisville, Cornell University, and the University of Massachusetts, where corporations accused of “complicity” with Israel were present, such as GE Aerospace, Raytheon Technologies, L3Harris, and Toyota.

At the University of Pisa, pro-Hamas students stormed a classroom of a professor they accused of being Zionist, beating students and waving flags. The professor had criticized the university’s decision to cut ties with Israeli institutions.

At the Polytechnic University of Turin, students stormed a lecture being given by an Israeli faculty member who defended the war in Gaza and the Israeli military. The faculty member was then suspended by the university. 

A BDS resolution proposed in the University of Connecticut student government failed. The University of Maryland student government voted overwhelmingly to demand that the school “formally and publicly acknowledge the ongoing situation in Gaza as a genocide” and “issue a public statement urging for an immediate and permanent ceasefire in Gaza.” A vote on a BDS resolution originally scheduled for Rosh Hashanah, but after protests was rescheduled for Yom Kippur approved.

In another example of anger regarding university responses to the post-October 7th campus environment, the group Northwestern Graduate Workers for Palestine protested required antisemitism and “Islamophobia” bias training. Some 300 students have been prohibited from registering for classes and may lose financial aid and access to campus housing.

In a rare acknowledgment that arms embargoes were impacting Israel, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced that Israel might have to become an “autarkic characteristics” which he described as a “super-Sparta.”

Other moves to isolate Israel economically expanded in September. The exclusion of Israeli state owned assets from the Danish sovereign wealth fund on the basis of “international humanitarian principles” and human rights. This followed the August decision by the Norwegian fund to exclude Israeli companies, which became an issue in the September elections, where far left parties demanded the Labor Party expand Israeli boycott as a condition for joining a coalition. The UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights also added 68 companies to its blacklist of firms doing business in the West Bank.

In a move long sought by the BDS movement, Microsoft disabled Israeli military access to its Azure cloud computing platform. An internal investigation showed that data obtained from surveillance of Palestinian civilian communications was being stored on the platform and that AI services were being used. The company stated this violated its policies regarding privacy and mass surveillance

Efforts to boycott and isolate Israel have come as European defense industries struggle to scale up production against growing Russian threats. Fear of competitors, above all Israel and the US, motivate policies even as the need for Israeli and American products and technologies grows.

One example are European plans for continental anti-missile defenses which would integrate Israeli systems, acquisition of which is now threatened by boycott efforts. Another example is Morocco’s continued shift away from French arms to Israeli suppliers, which undermines French political influence in North Africa. Domestic political pressure, including from Muslim populations, however, has motivated the Philippines to terminate an arms contract with Israel. Greece has also delayed a major arms deal with Israel.

These economic challenges provide some of the backdrop for the British decision to ban official Israeli representation from the DSEI UK 2025 arms fair. Israeli companies were permitted to exhibit. Dubai also banned Israeli representation at the UAE air show, ostensibly over comments from Israeli ministers regarding annexation of the West Bank.

The Scottish Parliament’s vote in favor of a full boycott of Israel included demands that the British government adopt a full arms embargo, banned the import of Israeli “settlement goods,” and removed subsidies for Scottish firms accused of involvement in Israeli “genocide.”

Having taken the lead in accusing Israel of genocide, Spain announced a total arms embargo on Israel and canceled three major defense contracts. Shipments of arms to Israel will also be banned, a decision that brought criticism from the US State Department. The Spanish decision jeopardizes use of American military bases in Spain as transshipment points for resupplying Israel.

Efforts continue in the arts and cultural sphere to expel Israelis, Jews, and those who do not explicitly support the Palestinian cause.

In one notable incident, Israeli conductor Lahav Shani was scheduled to conduct the Munich Philharmonic at the Flanders Festival Ghent in Belgium. The invitation was revoked when as organizers determined that “in the light of his role as the chief conductor of the Israel Philharmonic Orchestra, we are unable to provide sufficient clarity about his attitude to the genocidal regime in Tel Aviv.”

The orchestra and city of Munich condemned the Belgian decision, as did German and Belgian politicians including Prime Minister Bart De Wever.

The demand that Shani clarify his stance on “genocide” is paralleled by those being placed on Israeli pop artists throughout Europe, including signed statements and videos, especially by venue organizers and owners.

Other efforts continue to exclude Israel from international cultural life. Though the next Eurovision song contest will not be held until 2026, Spain, Slovenia, Iceland, Ireland, and the Netherlands have pledged to withdraw if Israel is allowed to participate.

Reports indicate Eurovision organizers have floated the idea that Israeli could be permitted to perform but without their flag or other identification. The sponsoring body, the European Broadcasting Union, has now called for an extraordinary meeting in November at which member broadcasters will vote on Israeli participation.

The hostility toward Israel also took several notable turns in the film industry. At the Cannes Film Festival the film The Voice of Hind Rajab about a Palestinian girl in Gaza who was killed during the Israeli counterattack received an unprecedented 22 minute ovation.

The award was followed by an open letter signed by some 4000 film industry members pledging to boycott the Israeli film industry. The group which promoted the original letter, Film Workers for Palestine, is closely aligned with the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine.

Similarly, at the Emmy Awards, a number of actors appeared with “ceasefire now” and other pro-Hamas regalia including pins representing bloody hands, a Palestinian symbol depicting the bloody hands of a Palestinian who had just murdered two Israeli soldiers.

Actor Hannah Einbinder won an award and during her speech stated “Go Birds, f**k ICE and free Palestine,” adding later that “I feel like it is my obligation as a Jewish person to distinguish Jews from the State of Israel, because our religion and our culture is such an important and long standing institution that is really separate to this sort of ethno-nationalist state.”

In contrast, an Israeli documentary on October 7th that organizers had tried to bar won a popular award at the Toronto Film Festival.

Organizers had ludicrously claimed that filmmakers had not obtained permission from Hamas to include video footage shot by terrorists during the attack.

Anti-Israel protests also continue to plague sports. Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez reiterated his demand that Israel be banned from all international sports. The call came after pro-Hamas protestors wrecked the end of the Vuelta a España cycling race by blocking the final stages into Madrid.

Sánchez expressed his admiration for protestors who disrupted the race but Madrid mayor José Luis Martínez-Almeida condemned both the protestors and Sánchez, as did race organizers.

The impact of the attack, however, prompted the Israeli team’s sponsor, Factor Bikes, to demand the team compete under a different flag. The company’s founder stated “There’s just a certain amount of controversy we can’t afford regarding the brand.” The Israeli team was then not invited to a competition in Italy after threats of violence prompted “safety concerns.”

The author is a contributor to SPME, where a completely different version of this article was published. 

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

The Trump administration’s latest affront to Jewish history

President Donald Trump’s administration either does not understand or does not care about the point of the International Criminal Court.

In announcing that the United States would try to “dismantle” the ICC, Secretary of State Marco Rubio recently wrote in The Wall Street Journal that “the ICC and its allies seek a standing world tribunal with near-unlimited reach, empowered to override the courts and constitutions of the U.S. and other sovereign states — and to prosecute and arrest our citizens.”

As examples of the court’s potential overreach, he cited the possibility of it taking action in response to activist pleas to prosecute Trump administration officials for deporting people to a notoriously inhumane El Salvador prison — regardless of their country of origin — and calls to treat the administration’s airstrike campaign against alleged drug smuggling boats as a crime against humanity.

The ICC is an imperfect institution. But to argue against its necessity is an affront to Jewish history, which has taught us, over and over again, that a country sometimes needs to be held to international account over its treatment of disempowered minority groups.

Because while the ICC is the self-described court of last resort, meant in large part to complement national courts, it exists at least in part because there are times that national courts — like nation states more generally — do not consider everyone within their borders to be worthy of their protection, and when words like “sovereignty” are used to bludgeon individual human rights and dignity.

The proof of the court’s importance lies in how deeply tied its origin story is to the crimes of the Holocaust, even though the ICC itself was only formally established in the 1990s.

Aryeh Neier, whose family fled Nazi Germany when he was a small child, was instrumental in the creation of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia — the development of which was an important stop on the way to the creation of the ICC. Ben Ferencz, top prosecutor against the Einsatzgruppen at Nuremberg, was a prominent advocate both for the creation of the court and for the adoption of the Rome Statute, the treaty that established the court and the court’s jurisdiction over four core crimes: genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression. (The U.S. has never ratified that treaty.)

Theodor Meron, who was born in Poland in 1930 and survived the Holocaust before becoming an Israeli diplomat, spent decades as a judge both for the ICTY and for a similar special tribunal for Rwanda. He was part of the delegation that led to the ICC’s establishment in the 1990s, and in 2024, he recommended that the ICC consider issuing warrants for the arrest of both Israeli and Hamas leaders for war crimes and crimes against humanity as a result of the Oct. 7 attack and the subsequent Gaza war.

It’s not coincidental that all these men were Jewish, and aware from firsthand experience of the dangers of unchecked national power.

Ben Ferencz deliberately drew a connection between the two in 2011, when he delivered the closing prosecution speech at the first trial ever heard by the ICC at its home in the Hague. “The case we present is a plea of humanity to law,” he said — the same statement he used in his opening statement at the Einsatzgruppen trial.

In a Prospect UK interview in 2024, Meron said he has always been driven by the desire to bring ours closer to being “a world with no holocausts.”

Neier, for his part, has criticized the ICC for its ineffectiveness, despite being one of its leading proponents. But writing in The New York Review of Books over the weekend, Neier — who suggested that Rubio’s announcement may be motivated by the coming Israeli elections — pointed out the court’s continued significance.

“The trial in the International Criminal Court of former President Rodrigo Duterte of the Philippines is scheduled to get underway this fall. While in power, Duterte presided over the summary executions of many thousands of Filipinos, most of them poor people, because they were suspected of using contraband drugs,” he wrote. “It is a shame to see the United States try to destroy the ICC — the only global institution with a mandate to address such horrors — merely because those subject to its jurisdiction may be Americans or their friends.”

There are those who see the ICC itself as an affront to Jewish history, including prominent Jews who have condemned the ICC over its outstanding warrant out for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s arrest. They, too, point to Jewish history to make their case: Netanyahu’s office called the warrant a”modern Dreyfus trial,” and Israeli President Isaac Herzog said that “the outrageous decision at the ICC has turned universal justice into a universal laughing stock.” Meanwhile, attorney Alan Dershowitz posted, “The ICC has never indicted Assad. Of course not because he’s neither Israeli nor Jewish.”

Their common argument: that the ICC has become yet another venue for international antisemitism.

But Neier, Ferencz and Meron’s arguments in favor of the court are more persuasive. They didn’t just think  the court was important; they saw international law as so necessary that they dedicated their lives to trying to make it matter, in part through the ICC. Meron said he was working for “a universe in which injustice and violence and mistreatment of people on ethnic and religious grounds is less likely.” That vision is only a threat to sovereignty when sovereignty is interested in injustice.

This does not mean that the U.S. government needs to agree with every ICC decision. Nor does it mean that every individual associated with the ICC is above censure. (Karim Khan, the chief prosecutor of the ICC, was accused of sexual misconduct and is now facing a vote as to whether he will keep his role; Ken Roth, former head of Human Rights Watch, noted that the accusations — and the fact that the ICC Executive Bureau found Khan’s denials lacking credibility — seriously challenge Khan’s ability to do his job.)

What it does mean is this: The ICC does not exist to be friendly — or, for that matter, to be unfriendly — to any country. Nor does it exist to undermine sovereignty, or to treat sovereignty as sacrosanct. To only think of the court in terms of protecting or violating sovereignty is to overlook its real purpose: to protect our shared humanity, and bring justice to people who are no less worthy of dignity or justice than Netanyahu, Rubio or Trump.

The post The Trump administration’s latest affront to Jewish history appeared first on The Forward.

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

75 artifacts tell the fitful, inspiring, unfinished story of Jews in America

In May 1818, Mordecai Manuel Noah, a prominent Jew of his time and a member of the Madison administration, delivered a discourse on Jewish history on the occasion of a synagogue consecration. One man read Noah’s words with interest, and took pen to paper to say so.

“Your sect by its sufferings has furnished a remarkable proof of the universal spirit of religious intolerance,” the correspondent noted, in elegant cursive. “Our laws have applied the only antidote to this vice, protecting our religious, as they do our civil, rights by putting them all on equal footing. But more remains to be done, for although we are free by the law, we are not so in practice.”

The letter’s author was Thomas Jefferson. 200 years later, there’s still work to do.

The Jefferson letter is one of 75 objects on view at All We Have Standing Between Us: 250 Years of Jews and American Democracy, the American Jewish Historical Society’s new exhibit at the Center for Jewish History. Arranged in chronological order, from the outbreak of the Revolution to the tiki torches of Charlottesville, the survey takes stock of the at times harmonious but very often discordant, relationship between American Jews and the country, and among themselves.

“One of the throughlines is that for 250 years, American Jews have certainly not been a monolithic community in terms of how they’ve approached key issues,” said Gavriel Rosenfeld, president for the Center for Jewish History.

Thomas Jefferson’s letter to Mordecai Manuel Noah, praising laws that grant freedom, but lamenting their limits. Courtesy of Collection of Yeshiva University Museum, Gift of Erica and Ludwig Jesselson

To that end, visitors can see Shearith Israel’s hazzan Gershom Mendes Seixas’ patriot prayer for the Continental Congress and, a vitrine or two away, a sampler from the loyalist Hendricks family of Psalm 78, whose words were associated with a pro-monarchist sentiment.

Most Jews lived in the Union at the outbreak of the Civil War, but currency with Judah Benjamin’s face, from the Confederate Secretary’s own collection, is proof of just how embedded Southern Jews were in their communities. A telegram nearby, denouncing General Grant’s wartime expulsion order for the Jews of Kentucky, shows how tenuous Jewish belonging was.

A Confederate banknote featuring Judah Benjamin. Courtesy of the American Jewish Historical Society, New York. From the Judah P. Benjamin Collection

The story was never only one of brother against brother. Moving into the 20th Century, with wall text addressing the Gilded Age, we see how American Jews confronted the revival of the Klan and the “Cross of Gold” populism of William Jennings Bryan with the influx of Jews from Eastern Europe. (An explanation of Woodrow Wilson’s veto of a literacy test for immigrants is displayed, as is a scroll inviting well-heeled Jews to a Purim benefit for new arrivals.)

The Anti-Defamation League, a copy of whose founding charter is on display, was formed after the conviction of Leo Frank. But by the 1950s, with the Red Scare gathering storm clouds, the ADL Bulletin dismissed the claim that the Rosenberg trial was animated by antisemitism.

“This is the latest propaganda tactic with which the Communist Party hopes to bludgeon the Jewish community to its support,” Oliver Pilat wrote in March 1952.

A letter from Eleanor Roosevelt, stating her support for the idea that a “member of the Jewish faith” should be able to run for President of the United States. Courtesy of the American Jewish Historical Society, New York. From the Bernard Postal papers

Fissures in the community continued with the Civil Rights Movement.

That Jews played an outsized role in the push for Black equality — attested to by Ben Shahn’s lithographs of James Chaney and Northern Jews Andrew Goodman and Michael Schwerner  — is contextualized with the objections of their Southern coreligionists, who feared the blowback of their neighbors.

Betty Friedan wrote The Feminine Mystique, and Midge Decter savaged it in Commentary. The so-called culture wars that dominate our discourse today are nothing new.

Among the more recent acquisitions are former U.S. Representative Steve Israel’s handwritten notes on a Sept. 13, 2001 FEMA briefing, marking the start of a new American reality. But one is struck by how much remains the same.

A signed photo of Nita Lowey shaking hands with Barack Obama — a Jewish congresswoman and a Black president— was unthinkable in the days of Jefferson and Noah, but their dynamic was not dissimilar from those two men. The intolerance Jefferson wrote about has not abated, only shifted its focus. A Time report on the Unite the Right Rally tells the tale.

Nita Lowey shakes hands with Barack Obama. Courtesy of Nita Lowey Archive at the American Jewish Historical Society

The exhibit stops short of the pandemic, Oct. 7 and the emerging rifts among American Jews and their neighbors. That history is still in progress.

“Longer than there’s been a country, there have been Jews,” said Gemma Birnbaum, executive director of the AJHS. At first it was only 23 off the boat to New Amsterdam, she said, but the Jewish story has always been a part of the American one.

Birnbaum and Rosenfeld want visitors to recognize continuities in the unfinished American Revolution, both the progress and the work that remains. Sometimes, this means reassuring visitors. One thing they’re asked a lot: “Does it ever get better?”

“What is better?” Birnbaum asks. “There are times when things are really difficult, and there are times when things feel a little less difficult. And if you can take inspiration from that — to me, I find it grounding.”

The American Jewish Historical Society’s exhibit All We Have Standing Between Us: 250 Years of Jews and American Democracy is on view at the Center for Jewish History through Dec. 31, 2026.

The post 75 artifacts tell the fitful, inspiring, unfinished story of Jews in America appeared first on The Forward.

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Diary of a Jewish ghetto refugee, written in a pigsty

אין דער װעלט פֿון ייִדיש איז בערל כּהנס נאָמען גוט באַקאַנט צוליב זײַנע היסטאָרישע און ביבליאָגראַפֿישע שטודיעס, צװישן זײ — דער צוגאָב־באַנד צו דעם „לעקסיקאָן פֿון דער נײַער ייִדישער ליטעראַטור“ און „ייִדישע שטעט, שטעטלעך און דאָרפֿישע ייִשובים אין ליטע ביז 1918“.

אָבער זײַן ערשט בוך איז געװען דער חורבן־טאָגבוך „אַ ייִד אין װאַלד“, װאָס איז אַרױס אין ניו־יאָרק אין 1955. דאָ דערצײלט כּהן װעגן צען חדשים אונטער דער דײַטשישער אָקופּאַציע פֿון ליטע צװישן אָקטאָבער 1943 און אױגוסט 1944. די דאָזיקע צײַט האָט ער, אין אײנעם מיט זיבן אַנדערע פּליטים פֿונעם קאָװנער געטאָ, פֿאַרבראַכט אין אַ באַהעלטעניש טיף אין ליטװישע װעלדער.

איצט, העכער װי 70 יאָר נאָך דער פּובליקאַציע פֿון דעם ייִדישן טאָגבוך, איז עס סוף־כּל־סוף אַרױס אױף ענגליש מיטן טיטל, „אַ ייִד אין וואַלד: זײַטלעך פֿון אַ טאָגבוך“.

פֿאַר דער מלחמה איז כּהן געװען אַן אַקטיװער לינקער ציוניסט און האָט געשריבן פֿאַר קאָװנער ייִדישע צײַטונגען. װען די דײַטשן האָבן פֿאַרכאַפּט די שטאָט, האָט ער זיך געפֿונען אינעם געטאָ אין דער ייִדישער פֿאָרשטאָט סלאַבאָדקע.

„אין דער צװײטער העלפֿט פֿון 1943 זײַנען די אילוזיעס פֿון די פֿאַרשפּאָרטע ייִדן אין סלאַבאָדקער געטאָ אַריבערצולעבן היטלערן געװאָרן אַלץ שװאַכער.“ אַזױ הײבט כּהן אָן די דערצײלונג װעגן זײַן ראַטעװען זיך פֿונעם חורבן.

כּהן, זײַן פֿרױ ראַיע און איר שװעסטער נחמה זײַנען אַנטלאָפֿן פֿונעם געטאָ מיט דער הילף פֿון אַ ליטװישן פּױער טאַדעוש. ער האָט זײ פֿאַרבאַהאַלטן אינעם חזיר־שטאַל בײַ זײַן שטוב אין אַ װײַטן דערפֿל אין מיטן װאַלד.

אין זײַנע נאָטיצן האָט כּהן פֿאַרפֿיקסירט פּרטים פֿון זײער טאָג־טעגלעכן לעבן מיט אַלע דאגות, אַנגסטן און האָפֿענונגען. ער האָט אױך געפּרוּװט צו באַזיניקן דאָס, װאָס עס קומט פֿאָר מיט זײ און מיט אַנדערע ייִדן, כאָטש קײן פֿאַרלאָזלעכע ידיעות פֿון דער ברײטערער װעלט האָט ער ניט געקענט קריגן.

פֿאַרװאָס האָט אַן עלטערער ליטװינער באַשלאָסן צו ראַטעװען ייִדן? טאַדעוש האָט דערקלערט: „איך טו עס ניט דערפֿאַר, װאָס איך װיל פֿאַרדינען געלט. איך בין שױן אַלט – און דאָס געלט אין דער ערד װעל איך סײַ װי ניט מיטנעמען. איך װיל אָבער, אַז ס׳זאָל ניט פֿאַרגאָסן װערן נאָך אומשולדיק בלוט. װאָלט איך געקענט װאָלט איך געראַטעװעט נאָך ייִדן, קען איך עס ניט, װעל איך באַשיצן די, װעמען איך האָב יאָ געראַטעװעט.“

אינעם טאָגבוך ווײַזט כּהן אַרויס אַ סך דרך־ארץ פֿאַר טאַדעוש און זײַן פֿרױ באַרבאַראַ, װאָס שטעלן אײַן זײער לעבן פֿאַר פֿרעמדע מענטשן. ער פֿרעגט זיך: „װיפֿל ייִדן װאָלטן געווען פֿעיִק אַזױנס צו טאָן?“

יעדע מינוט קען װערן די לעצטע פֿאַר די ייִדישע פּליטים אינעם שטאַל. אָבער כּהן איז געװױר אױך פֿונעם שװערן מצבֿ פֿון די ליטװינער: „פֿון דײַטשן װילן זײ פּטור װערן, אָבער דעם רוס װילן זײ אױך ניט האָבן.“

די גרעסטע סכּנה פֿאַר ייִדישע פּליטים קומט טאַקע ניט פֿון די דײַטשן, װאָס באַװײַזן זיך זעלטן אין יענע טיף־באַגראָבענע מקומות, נאָר פֿון די שכנישע פּױערים און פֿון די ליטװישע פּאַרטיזאַנער, װאָס הרגענען ייִדן.

אָבער די מיאוסטע פּאַרשױנען אינעם בוך זײַנען ניט קײן דײַטשן און ניט קײן ליטװינער, נאָר צװײ מיטגלידער פֿון זײער גרופּע — דער „אַמאָליקער פּריץ“ און זײַן פֿרױ. פֿאַר דער מלחמה האָט דער דאָזיקער ייִד געפֿירט געשעפֿטן אין דער געגנט און איצט האַלט ער, אַז די אָרטיקע פּױערים זײַנען אים מחויבֿ צו העלפֿן.

זײַן אַני־מאמין איז געװען „כּל־זמן מע לעבט, דאַרף מען מאַכן געשעפֿטן.“ און ער האָט טאַקע געװאָלט באַקומען רװח אַפֿילו פֿון די פּליטים אינעם אײגענעם שטאַל.

אָבער װאָרעם זײ האָבן ניט געהאַט מיט װאָס צו באַצאָלן, האָט זיך דער פּריץ ניט געטײלט מיט זײ מיטן עסן, װאָס ער האָט געקױפֿט בײַ די פּױערים: „די אַמאָליקע ייִדישע פּריצים עסן פֿאַר אונזערע אױגן פֿלײש און אַלדאָס גוטס – און מיר זיצן און חלומען װעגן אַ שטיקל טרוקן ברױט“, פֿאַרשרײַבט כּהן אינעם טאָגבוך.

אַפֿילו אין יענע ביטערע באַדינגונגען האָט כּהן אָפּגעהיט אַן אײגנאַרטיקן חוש פֿון הומאָר. דאָס קומט פֿאָר למשל אין זײַנע שילדערונגען פֿון די באַציִונגען צװישן ייִדן און דעם חזיר: „אונדזער אײנציקער ׳ניט־ייִדישער׳ שכן אין שײַער איז – דער חזיריוק. אַזױ װי מע קען דאָך ניט פֿיר און צװאַנציק שעה אין מעת־לעת טראַכטן װעגן טױט – קוקט מען גאָר אָפֿט אױפֿן קלײנעם חזיר. די עקלדיקסטע באַשעפֿעניש פֿאַר אַ ייִד […] װאַקסט ברוך־השם פֿון טאָג [צו טאָג].“

מאַקס ראָזענפֿעלדס ענגלישע איבערזעצונג פֿונעם טאָגבוך איז גאַנץ פּינקטלעך און פֿליסיק, אָבער זי גיט ניט איבער דעם אײגנאַרטיקן טעם פֿון כּהנס פּראָזע.

אָט איז אַ משל: אײן טאָג אַנטלױפֿט דער חזיר פֿונעם שטאַל און ייִדן מוזן זיך יאָגן נאָך אים כּדי צו ברענגען אים צוריק. כּהן באַשרײַבט דאָס בזה הלשון: „מיר פֿירן דעם דבֿר־אחר צו זײַן מקום־מקלט“. אָבער אױף ענגליש קלינגט דאָס פּשוט: „we are taking him back to the barn“. דאָ  איז ניטאָ קײן שפּור פֿון כּהנס איראָניע, װאָס שטאַמט פֿון זײַן שפּיל מיט לשון־קדוש.

דער חורבן־היסטאָריקער יצחק ארד האָט אָפּגעשאַצט, אַז בערך 25,000 ייִדן זײַנען אַנטלאָפֿן פֿון די געטאָס אין װעלדער בעתן חורבן. אַרום 15,000 פֿון זײ האָבן זיך צוגעשטאַנען צו די סאָװעטישע פּאַרטיזאַנער, בעת 10,000 האָבן געפּרוּװט איבערלעבן אין קלײנע גרופּקעס, אָפֿט מאָל מיט דער הילף פֿון ניט־ייִדישע פּױערים.

די גענױע צאָל פֿון די, װאָס האָבן זיך געראַטעװעט אונטער אַזעלכע ביטערע און געפֿערלרכע באַדינגונגען, װעט מען קײן מאָל ניט װיסן, זאָגט ארד. װאָס איז יאָ זיכער, איז אַז זײער צאָל איז געװען אַ סך קלענער אײדער די צאָל פֿון די, װעמען עס האָט זיך אײַגעגעבן צו אַנטלױפֿן פֿון די געטאָס.

כּהנס טאָגבוך איז ניט נאָר אַ ביז גאָר װיכטיקער היסטאָרישער מקור װעגן דער דאָזיקער דערפֿאַרונג, אָבער אױך אַ מערקװירדיקער מענטשלעכער דאָקומענט און אַ פֿאַרכאַפּנדיקע לעקטור דערצו.

The post Diary of a Jewish ghetto refugee, written in a pigsty appeared first on The Forward.

Continue Reading

Copyright © 2017 - 2023 Jewish Post & News