Uncategorized
During divided times, this Israeli university promotes inclusion and diversity with an unusual approach
Tal Levine is the first person in her family to go to college. Her mother, a child of illiterate Moroccan immigrants to Israel who spoke only Arabic, left school after eighth grade to help her parents on their Israeli farm. Her father dropped out of high school after his own father died, and he worked his entire career in the Israeli post office.
Levine herself did odd jobs from a young age, scraping together whatever money she could.
“I’ve been working since I was 13 years old, from dog walking to waitressing to whatever I could find,” said Levine, now 28. “My parents could not help me.”
Despite her hardships, Levine found her way into dentistry thanks to a special Hebrew University diversity program that seeks out students from challenging backgrounds. Not only was Levine accepted as a student into the Hebrew University-Hadassah Faculty of Dental Medicine, but she also received a life-changing scholarship that enabled her to pursue her dream.
“I wanted to do something to help people, and not just sit in front of a screen,” Levine said of her career ambitions.
Levine’s story is not unusual: Each year, students from diverse backgrounds are actively recruited to the university, where they are eligible for financial, cultural, academic and mental health support.
It’s part of Hebrew University’s vision for the school as an oasis of diversity, coexistence and inclusion at a time when Israel is facing headwinds of division, discrimination and discord.
The university is a unique and special place in Jerusalem — and in Israel generally — where students from a wide range of socioeconomic, ethnic and religious backgrounds come together. The student body includes Orthodox haredim, Palestinian Arabs, Mizrahim, Ethiopians, people with disabilities and members of the LGBTQ+ community.
“We are working hard to bring together people from different backgrounds, where they practice listening to each other and learning about cultural diversity,” said Professor Mona Khoury, vice president for strategy and diversity and former dean of Hebrew University’s School of Social Work. Khoury made history as the first Arab woman to be appointed as a dean at the university.
“Just as an example, I recently had lunch with Arab and Jewish students from East Jerusalem and Beersheva,” she said. “Right now, it’s hard because the situation in Israel isn’t good. But even though they were very different politically, they were able to talk and had a very real and genuine conversation. This may have been the first time they had this kind of exchange. And it’s because Hebrew University purposefully enables this to happen — encourages it.”
The university seeks to promote inclusion and diversity in a variety of ways. All the signage at the university is in Hebrew, Arabic and English to make it easier for students of all backgrounds to navigate the campus. The Rothberg International School has gender-neutral bathrooms to ensure students of all gender identifications feel comfortable. Extra help with Hebrew is available to new immigrants and Arab students. Students with disabilities receive special assistance. The School of Social Work offers counseling courses in Arabic, sends out emails in three languages, and celebrates Jewish, Muslim and Christian holidays.
Each minority group in Israel faces its own challenges: Economically disadvantaged students may not have enough money even to apply to the university; haredim and ex-haredi students lack basic educational foundations, and Arab students face linguistic,
cultural and social challenges.
Tala Atieh, a 22-year-old student in education and anthropology from Kfar Aqab in Arab-populated eastern Jerusalem, has benefited directly from the university’s efforts. Although she graduated at the top of her class in high school, she did not know any Hebrew. So she enrolled in a yearlong academic preparation course that the university offers students in her situation. Within a year, Atieh’s Hebrew was fluent and she was able to get into a degree program.
Atieh and Levine are both members of Hebrew University’s Ambassadors for Diversity program: 24 students from varied communities who receive scholarships, engage in multicultural activities and commit to working 100 hours in return for their benefits. As part of the program, Atieh shares her experiences with Arab young people and talks to them about how Hebrew University can help them thrive.
“I have met people from all over the country with many different backgrounds and perspectives,” Atieh said. “For example, I learned a lot about the Jewish holidays that I did not know before. And I share my own holidays as well. These exchanges bring
greater understanding between our different peoples.”
Promoting tolerance is among the university’s core values. The Center for the Study of Multiculturalism and Diversity (CSMD) promotes the development of multicultural sensitivity and tolerance, helping students develop critical perspectives on power
relations within their society and offering courses, clinics and events that explore multiculturalism and enable students to interact with those from different backgrounds. The center is the first academic body in Israel to harness behavioral science to focus on multiculturalism, and researchers at the CSMD are developing innovative policies to foster more social integration and cohesion.
“In the Ambassadors program I encounter people I would have never met otherwise,” said Tova Abeve, 34, a master’s degree student in public policy of Ethiopian descent.
Also the first in her family to attend university, Abeve is a social influencer and content creator with podcasts and other media aimed at Jewish women of Ethiopian descent. She uses her influence to tell her followers about the opportunities that Hebrew University offers.
“Most people don’t know that these opportunities exist,” she said. “I’m sharing a vision for what the world could look like.”
Shiran Brosh, a 38-year-old Orthodox student in education, is also in the Ambassadors program. “I have never met such a special group of people with different languages and cultures,” Brosh said. “We all come together. It’s a wonderful experience.”
Abichai Tzur, 24, is a former Orthodox Jew who spent much of his teen years cut off from his family following his decision to leave Orthodoxy. In order to get into the university’s program in international relations and communication, Tzur not only needed help overcoming gaps in his education but also financial support, mental health support and mentorship. Today, in addition to studying, he works at the Ministry of Social Equality in the LGBTQ division as manager of international relations, leads the Model United Nations program at the university, and speaks to other ex-Orthodox Jews about diversity and inclusion.
“The reason I advocate for social equality and share my story is that I know what it feels like to have a disadvantage and to need some help to get on your feet,” Tzur said.
Levine also talks to prospective students about her experience.
“My message to students is simple: You can do it,” Levine said. “Even if you don’t have money, even if you don’t think you are a good student, even if you haven’t studied — you can overcome all those obstacles and succeed.”
—
The post During divided times, this Israeli university promotes inclusion and diversity with an unusual approach appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
War with Iran puts the US-Israel alliance at grave risk
The Iran war is strategically sound yet politically unsupported — an unstable foundation for a gamble that could reshape the Middle East. That creates danger for Israel, which needs the support of an American public that is rapidly drifting away.
For decades, the country’s greatest strategic asset has not been its military technology or intelligence capabilities — spectacular as these are — but rather the political, diplomatic and military backing of the United States. That relationship has not been merely transactional. It was supposed to rest on shared values and deep public support across the American political spectrum.
If that support erodes or disappears, Israel’s strategic environment will fundamentally change. To be blunt: it will not be able to arm its military. This creates a paradox. A campaign that has so far demonstrated extraordinary value for the Jewish state also stands a risk of fundamentally weakening it.
An alliance at its strongest
The conflict has showcased the depth of the current U.S.–Israel alliance. To many observers, and critically to Israel’s enemies, the operation has underscored not only Israel’s capabilities but also the reality that it stands alongside the world’s most powerful state.
The strikes have projected deep into Iranian territory, revealed astonishing intelligence penetration, and destroyed or degraded key threats. Israel’s enemies across the region have already been weakened by previous rounds of fighting since Oct. 7, and the current operation has reinforced the impression that Israel can reach its adversaries wherever they operate.
Moreover, Iran’s regime has managed to isolate itself to the point where most Arab countries are in effect on the side of Israel and the U.S. That projection — of an unbreakable and strong alliance – may ultimately be the most important strategic element of this war.
But therein lies the rub.
The political foundations of American support for Israel are eroding, which means the very element that currently strengthens Israel’s deterrence — American participation — may also be the one most at risk.
A just war, unjustified
Americans do not understand why their country is at war.
A Reuters/Ipsos survey conducted at the start of the conflict found only 27% of Americans supported the U.S. action, while 43% opposed it. Other surveys show similar results, with roughly six in ten Americans against the military intervention.
In modern American history that is highly unusual. Most wars begin with a “rally around the flag” moment when public support surges. Even conflicts that later became controversial — from Afghanistan to Iraq — initially enjoyed majority backing.
This one did not — in part because the case for it has not been made clearly to the public.
That error is compounded by years of polarization in American politics; declining trust in institutions and leadership; and the record of President Donald Trump, who has spent years spreading conspiracy theories and demonstrating a remarkable indifference to factual truth. It is no exaggeration to say that many Americans do not believe a word he says – which is perhaps unprecedented.
When a president with that record launches a war, at least half the country assumes the worst. Even if the strategic logic is sound, the credibility deficit remains.
The tragedy is that the war is, in fact, eminently justifiable. The Islamic Republic has long since forfeited the moral legitimacy that normally shields states from outside force. It brutally suppresses its own population, jailing and killing protesters, policing women’s bodies, and crushing dissent with an apparatus of repression. Its foreign policy is not defensive but revolutionary. Through proxy militias it has destabilized Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen, as well as the Palestinian areas, in some cases for decades.
The regime has pursued nuclear weapons through a series of transparent machinations, deceptions and brinkmanship. Negotiations have repeatedly been used as delaying tactics while enrichment continued. Any deal that relieved sanctions would not simply reduce tensions; it would also inject new resources into a system dedicated both to repression at home and aggression abroad — one that is despised by the vast majority of its own people, as murderous dictatorships inevitably will be.
There is a doctrine in international law known as the Responsibility to Protect — the principle that when a state systematically brutalizes its own population, the international community may have the right, even the obligation, to act. By that standard, the Iranian regime has been skating on thin ice for years.
But with this clear rationale left uncommunicated, the politically dangerous perception has spread that the U.S. was reacting to Israel rather than acting on its own strategic judgment.
A perilous future
If Americans come to believe that Israel caused a costly war that they did not support in the first place, the backlash could be severe.
For centuries, one of the most persistent antisemitic tropes has been the accusation that Jews manipulate powerful states into fighting wars on their behalf. The suggestion that Israel can pull the U.S. into conflict feeds directly into that mythology. Once such perceptions take hold, they can be extremely difficult to reverse.
Even people who reject antisemitism outright can absorb a softer version of the same idea: that American interests are being subordinated to Israeli ones. In a political environment already marked by growing skepticism toward Israel, that perception risks deepening the erosion of support that has been underway for years.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio seemed to inadvertently feed such notions by suggesting in recent days that the U.S. had to attack Iran because Israel was going to do so “anyway,” and then America would have been a target. It was a short path from that to conspiracy theorists like Tucker Carlson blaming Chabad for the war.
A future Democratic president, facing a base that appears to have abandoned Israel, may feel far less obligation to defend it diplomatically or militarily. Even a Republican successor could prove unreliable if the party continues its drift toward isolationism.
That likelihood is compounded by studies showing that a large part of the U.S. Jewish community itself no longer backs Zionism. That process is driven by Israel’s own policies, including the West Bank occupation and the deadly brutality of the war in Gaza.
So the very war that is showcasing the best the U.S.-Israel alliance has to offer is also at risk of fundamentally damaging that partnership. Particularly if Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu — the rightful object of much American ire — manipulates the Iran campaign into an electoral victory this year, the alliance’s greatest success could also be its undoing.
The post War with Iran puts the US-Israel alliance at grave risk appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Report: Iran’s New Military Plan Is Regime Survival Through Regional Escalation
Members of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) attend an IRGC ground forces military drill in the Aras area, East Azerbaijan province, Iran, Oct. 17, 2022. Photo: IRGC/WANA (West Asia News Agency)/Handout via REUTERS
i24 News – After last year’s devastating conflict with the United States and Israel, Iranian leaders have reportedly adopted a major strategic shift aimed at expanding the war across the Middle East to secure the regime’s survival, according to the Wall Street Journal.
Previously, Iran responded to foreign strikes with limited, targeted reprisals. The new doctrine abandons that approach, aiming instead to escalate the conflict regionally, particularly against Gulf Arab states and critical economic infrastructure. The goal is to disrupt the global economy and pressure Washington into shortening the war.
This decision followed the twelve-day war with Israel in June 2025, during which Israeli and US strikes eliminated senior Iranian military leaders, destroyed key air defense systems, and severely damaged nuclear facilities. In response, Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei—before his elimination early in the current conflict—activated a strategy designed to maintain continuity even if top commanders were neutralized.
Central to this approach is the so-called “mosaic defense” doctrine: a decentralized military structure in which the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) operates through multiple regional command centers. Each center can conduct operations independently, allowing local commanders to continue fighting even if national leadership is incapacitated. This makes the military apparatus more resilient to targeted strikes.
Analysts cited by the Wall Street Journal suggest that Tehran’s calculation is to make the conflict costly enough for all parties to force the US and its allies into a diplomatic resolution.
However, the plan carries enormous risks. By escalating attacks on regional states and international economic interests, Iran could provoke a broader coalition against itself. Despite prior military losses, Iranian forces retain the capability to launch drone and missile strikes, maintaining their influence over the ongoing conflict.
For Iranian leaders, the immediate priority remains unchanged: the survival of the regime, even if it requires a major regional escalation.
Uncategorized
Katz Warns Lebanon to Disarm Hezbollah or ‘Pay a Heavy Price’
Israel’s Defense Minister Israel Katz and his Greek counterpart Nikos Dendias make statements to the press, at the Ministry of Defense in Athens Greece, Jan. 20, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Louisa Gouliamaki
i24 News – Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz on Saturday warned Lebanon’s leadership that it must act to disarm Hezbollah and enforce existing agreements, cautioning that failure to do so could lead to severe consequences for the Lebanese state.
Speaking after a high-level security assessment with senior military officials, Katz directed a message to Lebanese President Joseph Aoun, saying Beirut had committed to enforcing an agreement requiring Hezbollah’s disarmament but had failed to follow through.
“You pledged to uphold the agreement and disarm Hezbollah — and this is not happening,” Katz said. “Act and enforce it before we do even more.”
The meeting took place in Israel’s military command center and included Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir and other senior defense officials, as Israel continues operations on multiple fronts.
Katz emphasized that Israel would not tolerate attacks on its communities or soldiers from Lebanese territory.
“We will not allow harm to our communities or to our soldiers,” he said. “If the choice is between protecting our citizens and soldiers or protecting the State of Lebanon, we will choose our citizens and soldiers — and the Lebanese government and Lebanon will pay a very heavy price.”
The defense minister also referenced Hezbollah’s leadership, warning that the group’s current chief could lead Lebanon into further destruction.
“If Hassan Nasrallah destroyed Lebanon, then Naim Qassem will destroy it as well,” Katz said.
Katz stressed that Israel has no territorial ambitions in Lebanon but said it would not accept a return to the years in which Hezbollah launched repeated attacks on Israel from Lebanese territory.
“We have no territorial claims against Lebanon,” he said. “But we will not allow Lebanese territory to again become a platform for attacks against the State of Israel.”
He concluded with a warning to Lebanese authorities to take action against Hezbollah before Israel escalates its response.
“Do and act before we do even more,” Katz said.