Israeli military personnel operate on the Israeli side of the Israel-Gaza border, on the day the Israeli military said it had resumed enforcing the Gaza ceasefire agreement after a series of strikes across the Gaza Strip, in southern Israel, Oct. 29, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Ammar Awad

Israel will need to take over all of Gaza to meet its war objectives, a senior reserve Israeli general said, as the United States moves ahead with plans to assemble a multinational stabilization force that is not expected to deploy in Hamas-controlled areas.

Brig. Gen. (res.) Amir Avivi, a former deputy commander of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF)’s Gaza Division, said the military aims of the war — including the disarmament of Hamas — cannot be achieved without moving into the remaining parts of the enclave still held by the Palestinian terrorist group. 

“There is no way to reach the goals of war without conquering Gaza,” Avivi told The Algemeiner. 

“Ninety-nine point nine percent, the IDF is going to be the [party] that will dismantle Hamas,” Avivi said, noting that the Trump administration’s International Stabilization Force is expected to deploy only in Israeli-held areas and avoid confronting Hamas directly.

A decisive campaign could be completed in a month or two, Avivi said, because the constraints that slowed earlier phases of the war — most notably the presence of Israeli hostages in Hamas-held areas — no longer apply. The IDF could expand from its current 53 percent control of Gaza to 75 percent in “as little as a week,” he said. 

With the Israeli security cabinet focused on Iran, no final decision has been taken yet on the next phase in Gaza, Avivi said. The government is likely to give Hamas “a month or two” to see if a confrontation with Iran materializes before moving to conclude the campaign in Gaza.

Avivi is the founder and chairman of the Israel Defense and Security Forum, known in Hebrew as Habitchonistim, a hawkish group of former senior officers and security officials that has consistently pushed for maximal military objectives in Gaza and opposed negotiated compromises with Hamas.

According to US and Israeli officials, the stabilization force is expected to begin deploying in southern Gaza, starting in Rafah, and expand gradually as conditions allow. The force is intended to help establish governance and security conditions in cleared areas, rather than conduct combat operations or forcibly disarm armed groups. Its commander, US Army Major General Jasper Jeffers, has said five countries — Indonesia, Morocco, Kazakhstan, Kosovo, and Albania — have committed personnel so far, with longer-term planning envisioning a significantly larger deployment of up to 20,000 troops and police focused on policing, security coordination and aid facilitation.

The Guardian reported last week that US contracting documents describe plans for a 350-acre military base in Gaza designed to support 5,000 people that will include watchtowers, bunkers, and training facilities. A US official declined to discuss the contract and reiterated that Washington does not plan to deploy US combat troops to the enclave.

The stabilization effort was formally launched in Washington on Thursday, when US President Donald Trump convened the inaugural meeting of his Board of Peace. Trump said participating countries had pledged roughly $7 billion as an initial down payment for Gaza reconstruction, while making clear that broader rebuilding would be conditioned on Hamas’s disarmament.

US officials and regional partners acknowledge that demilitarization would likely be a long-term process and that reconstruction carries political risk. Some donor states have privately raised concerns about funding rebuilding efforts only for Israel to return to large-scale military operations. 

Avivi said Israel’s takeover of the enclave would be followed by a technically complex cleanup phase focused on dismantling tunnels and weapons stockpiles. “The whole area is full of tunnels and munitions,” he said. “Finding and destroying them is complicated. That part takes time.” 

A strategy gaining traction in the US framework would see Gaza divided into two zones, a Hamas-free “green zone,” where reconstruction and alternative civilian governance could begin, and a “red zone” comprising areas still held by Hamas. 

Former Israeli national security adviser Yaakov Amidror said that while he understands the logic behind the approach, it carries risks. Rebuilding Gaza first in IDF-controlled areas, he said, could allow Hamas to survive politically and militarily elsewhere in the enclave.

“If you build only where the IDF controls, you are effectively telling Hamas: you can stay in Gaza,” Amidror told The Algemeiner.

Avivi agreed that reconstruction would not begin “until they lay down their weapons,” warning that doing otherwise would amount to tolerating Hamas’s continued presence.

The Israeli general pointed to the period leading up to the October ceasefire, when Israeli forces advanced deep into Gaza City and took control of roughly half the city, as an example of how Hamas responds when the IDF enters its core terrain. He said Israel’s subsequent pullback to about 53 percent control of the Gaza Strip was driven by hostage negotiations rather than operational limits.

“It’s going to happen the nice way or the hard way,” Avivi said. “The hard way is the IDF. So, they either lay down the weapons and get out of Gaza or the IDF will go in and impose demilitarization.”

Amidror rejected arguments that Hamas is emerging from the war in a stronger position because of potential involvement by countries such as Qatar or Turkey, calling the claim disconnected from current military realities.

“It’s a stupid argument because Hamas is surrounded on all sides by the IDF — 300 degrees by land and 60 degrees by sea, which the IDF also controls,” Amidror told The Algemeiner. The terrorist group, he explained, cannot receive weapons because it has no land border with Egypt, cannot manufacture arms because Israel has destroyed its production infrastructure, and is surrounded on all sides by Israeli forces.

“The most it can do is fire a missile, probably once every six months,” Amidror said.

Procession arrives at Place des Terreaux with a banner reading, “Against Antisemitism, for the Republic,” during the march against antisemitism, in Lyon, France, June 25, 2024. Photo: Romain Costaseca / Hans Lucas via Reuters Connect

A kosher restaurant in Paris has been vandalized with acid, damaging the facility and leading the prosecutor’s office to open an investigation into what authorities suspect was an antisemitism attack.

Employees at Kokoriko, an eatery located in the French capital’s 17th arrondissement, discovered on Friday morning that the acid had been sprayed overnight on the tables, walls, and floor, according to French media.

The crockery, cutlery, and glasses were rendered unusable. White dust was found on the tables from where the acid corroded the surfaces.

The Paris public prosecutor’s office immediately opened an investigation for “damage to the property of others by a means dangerous … committed because of race, ethnicity, nation, or religion.” The crime is punishable by a sentence of 15 years in prison and a fine of 150,000 euros.

Last week was not the first time that Kokoriko was targeted, according to French media. In October, the Kosher restaurant’s façade was sprayed with sulfuric acid. However, the investigation was closed, as authorities were unable to identify the perpetrators.

The most recent attack came one week after the French Interior Ministry released its annual report on anti-religious acts, revealing a troubling rise in antisemitic incidents documented in a joint dataset compiled with the Jewish Community Protection Service.

Antisemitism in France remained at alarmingly high levels last year, with 1,320 incidents recorded nationwide, as Jews and Israelis faced several targeted attacks amid a relentlessly hostile climate despite heightened security measures, according to the newly published data.

Although the total number of antisemitic outrages in 2025 fell by 16 percent compared to 2024’s second highest ever total of 1,570 cases, the newly released report warned that antisemitism remained “historically high,” with more than 3.5 attacks occurring every day.

Over the past 25 years, antisemitic acts “have never been as numerous as in the past three years,” the report said, noting a dramatic spike following the Hamas-led invasion of and massacre across southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023.

Even though Jews make up less than 1 percent of France’s population, they accounted for 53 percent of all religiously motivated crimes last year.

Between 2022 and 2025, antisemitic attacks across France quadrupled, leaving the Jewish community more exposed than ever.

The most recent figure of total antisemitic incidents represents a 21 percent decline from 2023’s record high of 1,676 incidents, but a 203 percent increase from the 436 antisemitic acts recorded in 2022, before the Oct. 7 atrocities.

According to French officials, this latest report, which was based on documented cases and official complaints, still underestimated the true scope of the problem, largely due to widespread underreporting.

The rise in antisemitism appears to have carried into this year. Earlier this month, for example, a 13-year-old boy on his way to synagogue in Paris was brutally beaten by a knife-wielding assailant.

Days earlier, three Jewish men wearing kippahs were physically threatened with a knife and forced to flee after leaving their Shabbat services.

That incident came shortly after a Jewish primary school was vandalized, with windows smashed and security equipment damaged.

All three incidents took place in Paris.

A man walks a subway platform in New York City, United States, on Oct/ 25, 2022. Photo: Jakub Porzycki/NurPhoto via Reuters Connect

New York City is home to the largest Jewish population outside of Israel. For generations, Jews here have built schools, businesses, synagogues, and civic institutions with the assumption that this city, whatever its flaws, understands the cost of antisemitism.

That assumption feels less stable today.

The NYPD’s numbers are unambiguous. Jews remain the most targeted group in reported hate crimes in New York City. The volume is not symbolic. It is disproportionate and sustained. Yet beyond the statistics, there is a quieter shift taking place inside schools and workplaces. Antisemitism is not always denied. It is deprioritized.

I saw this pattern unfold inside my son’s school over the past two academic years.

On the night of October 7, 2023, as Israelis were still counting their dead after 1,200 people were murdered and more than 200 were kidnapped by Hamas, the school principal sent a message to families. The email expressed sorrow over the situation in Gaza. It did not mention the massacre in Israel. It did not acknowledge the Jewish families in the community who were grieving in real time.

That omission was not technical. It was moral. At a moment when Jews across the world were processing the largest slaughter of Jews since the Holocaust, the institutional expression of sympathy pointed elsewhere.

Throughout that same school year, a music teacher regularly wore a keffiyeh in class. In isolation, one could argue that clothing is personal expression. But context matters. This was happening in the immediate aftermath of October 7, when Jewish students were experiencing rising hostility across the city. During curriculum nights, parents had been told that students would learn songs connected to Jewish holidays as part of the music program. Those commitments were not fulfilled. Jewish content quietly disappeared while visible political symbolism remained present.

Concerns were raised. The response was to remain calm and avoid escalation.

Later that year, a fifth-grade student arrived at school with a swastika drawn on his arm. That symbol of genocide was present inside a New York City classroom. The matter was handled privately. There was no schoolwide reaffirmation of values, no public condemnation of the symbol, no communication to families explaining what had occurred and how it would be addressed. It was resolved behind closed doors.

Then came another incident. My son returned home disturbed by a flag displayed in class that closely resembled a Nazi symbol. I sent an urgent email requesting clarification. The following day, I was told it was an ancient Indian symbol. That explanation may have been historically accurate. But the issue was not intent. The issue was impact.

In a school community that includes descendants of Holocaust survivors, imagery resembling a swastika carries emotional weight. Children react before they research. I asked that the school address the matter openly and provide context to students so that confusion and hurt would not linger. The image was removed. There was no broader communication.

Weeks later, a racist remark targeting another minority group during a public meeting triggered an immediate and forceful response from leadership. Families received a strong statement. The language was clear. The commitment to accountability was public.

That response was appropriate. Racism demands clarity.

The contrast between responses is the issue.

When swastikas are handled quietly, when Jewish curriculum promises fade, when the murder of 1,200 Israelis is omitted from expressions of institutional sympathy, and when Jewish concerns receive polite acknowledgment without operational follow-through, a message accumulates. Antisemitism becomes something to manage discreetly rather than confront directly.

This pattern is not isolated to one school. Across New York, Jews who speak openly in support of Israel report professional and social consequences. Anti-Zionist rhetoric has become normalized in many institutional spaces. The distinction between anti-Zionism and antisemitism is often presented as clean and obvious. In practice, it rarely is.

When Jewish students see authority figures signaling affiliation with movements that openly question the legitimacy of the Jewish state, while Jewish identity is treated as politically sensitive or secondary, the environment shifts. Jewish belonging becomes conditional.

I say this not as an activist seeking attention, but as someone whose professional life is rooted in safety and resilience. I am the founder of Krav Maga Experts in New York City. I work daily with civilians, executives, and families on preparedness, threat awareness, and responsible self-defense. Over the past year, I have heard the same concern repeatedly: Jews feel that institutional standards are uneven.

Some advise restraint. They argue that raising Jewish concerns risks appearing divisive. They note the historical suffering of other communities and suggest that Jewish worries should be measured against broader narratives of oppression.

Equal standards do not require comparison. They require consistency.

If a racist act demands public condemnation in one instance, it demands the same in every instance. If a symbol that evokes trauma for one group requires explanation and restorative action, the same principle applies universally. Institutional credibility depends on even enforcement of values.

Antisemitism rarely announces itself with clarity. It adapts. It embeds itself in prevailing political language. It thrives in environments where moral hesitation replaces moral steadiness.

The solution is not complicated. Schools and workplaces should explicitly include antisemitism in their bias and inclusion frameworks. Crisis communications should acknowledge Jewish trauma when it occurs. Symbols with genocidal associations should be addressed transparently. Curriculum commitments should be honored without selective erosion.

New York’s Jewish community does not require special treatment. It requires principled treatment. Safety is not built on selective outrage. It is built on consistent standards applied without fear or favor.

The city that holds the largest Jewish population outside Israel should lead in moral clarity. That clarity begins with a simple rule: hate is hate, regardless of who it targets. When institutions decide which hate merits urgency and which can be handled quietly, they weaken the trust that holds diverse communities together.

Consistency is not a political position. It is a test of integrity.

Tsahi Shemesh is an Israeli-American IDF veteran and the founder of Krav Maga Experts in NYC. A father and educator, he writes about Jewish identity, resilience, moral courage, and the ethics of strength in a time of rising antisemitism.