Uncategorized
Israel’s home demolitions after terrorist attacks, explained
(JTA) – Less than a hour after a terror attack in eastern Jerusalem on Friday killed three people, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu delivered a succinct message: Destroy the Palestinian attacker’s home.
“Prime Minister Netanyahu has decided to take immediate action to seal and demolish the home of the terrorist,” said the statement from Netanyahu’s office.
Home demolition orders have almost become a matter of course following Palestinian attacks. They don’t usually make headlines, nor do they tend to spark public outcry. For decades, Israel has used the tactic as a routine instrument of punishment, claiming that the effect of tearing down the homes of terrorists deters future attacks.
But critics question that claim, and say that home demolitions constitute collective punishment that violates international law. At a moment of deep political strife in Israel, the home demolition practice, like many others related to security, generates little political opposition. And while the Israeli Supreme Court, whose power Israel’s right-wing government hopes to limit, can delay home demolitions, it almost always ultimately permits them to go forward.
Here’s how the practice of Israeli home demolition began, how it’s viewed in Israel and abroad, and how it may be changing under Israel’s new government.
Why does Israel destroy the homes of terrorists?
Israel began demolishing homes of Palestinian attackers after it captured the West Bank and eastern Jerusalem, along with other territories, in the 1967 Six Day War. Since then, according to a 2019 assessment by the Israel Democracy Institute, Israel has demolished some 2,000 homes due to terrorism. The demolitions have taken place in the West Bank and eastern Jerusalem, not within Israel’s internationally recognized borders.
Israel claims that demolishing the homes of terrorists acts as a deterrent, a rationale cited last month in a bill introduced by lawmaker Eliahu Revivo, a member of Netanyahu’s Likud Party who also wants to deter attacks by deporting the families of terrorists.
“The national security establishment and the Israeli army have conducted research over the years into dozens of suicide attackers, and it emerged that the one deterrent for suicide attackers is what the consequences for their families will be after the attack,” the text of the bill said.
Home demolitions were largely suspended in 2005 after the Israel Defense Forces found that the practice had no discernible deterrent effect. The demolitions were sporadically reinstituted a few years later and fully brought back by Netanyahu in November 2014 during a wave of Palestinian attacks.
A 2010 research paper by political scientists at Northwestern University and Hebrew University suggested that home demolition works as a deterrent. The authors of the study based their findings on an examination of home demolitions in the five years prior to the army’s 2005 suspension, a period that coincided with the second intifada.
“We show that punitive house demolitions (those targeting Palestinian suicide terrorists and terror operatives) cause an immediate, significant decrease in the number of suicide attacks,” the paper said. “The effect dissipates over time and by geographic distance.”
This year, Netanyahu’s new government, the most right-wing in Israeli history, has indicated it will accelerate and expand the demolition of the homes of terrorists. It recently ordered the closing-off of an apartment belonging to the family of a 13-year-old who shot and wounded two Israelis near Jerusalem’s Old City. The move was unusual because Israel had previously reserved home demolition for attackers who killed people.
Does Israel demolish the homes of Jewish terrorists?
No. The Palestinian family of a boy murdered by a Jewish terrorist sued to have his killer’s home destroyed. The High Court in 2017 rejected the lawsuit, saying too much time had passed since the 2014 murder. The government argued that deterrence was not necessary in the case of Jewish terrorism, because, in the words of Judge Neal Hendel, Jewish terrorists are “a minority of a minority of a minority.” The Israeli government counted a total of 16 Jewish attacks of terrorism in 2015, according to the Jerusalem Post. Israeli Arab politicians, including Knesset member Ahmed Tibi, had called on the government to demolish the Jewish terrorist’s house as a matter of fair treatment.
Is demolishing terrorists’ homes legal?
Yes, according to Israel. No, according to experts in international law.
Israel bases its argument on a regulation from 1945, when Britain controlled what is now Israel, that was carried over into Israeli law when the state was established in 1948. It is known as “Defense regulation (emergency) 1945, regulation 119.”
The regulation is broadly written, allowing a “A Military Commander” to destroy the home of “anyone who offended, or attempted an offense, or assisted offenders or abetted offenders after the fact,” as determined by a military court.
Multiple international law experts say that home demolition is illegal under international law because it is a form of collective punishment, which is banned by the Geneva Conventions. Israel has long argued that the Geneva Conventions do not apply to its presence in territories it has captured, because the land in question was not the internationally recognized territory of any state prior to 1967.
The Biden administration also considers home demolitions to be collective punishment. “We attach a good deal of priority to this, knowing that the home of an entire family shouldn’t be demolished for the action of one individual,” State Department spokesman Ned Price said in 2021.
Israeli human rights groups, including B’tselem and the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions, agree with international scholars that the practice violates international law. B’tselem cites both the Fourth Geneva Convention and a verse in Deuteronomy that reads, “Parents shall not be put to death for children, nor children be put to death for parents: they shall each be put to death only for their own crime.”
Who owns the land once a home is demolished?
Under the 1945 regulation, military authorities maintain control of the land, and it reverts to the original owners — if they are present — once military authorities leave.
How long does it take for a home demolition to take place? What happens to the family?
Generally, the military consults with Israel’s intelligence services before ordering a home demolition.In the case of high-profile attacks, however, the order may come down immediately, as it did on Friday. Families have 48 hours to appeal a demolition to the military commander or another relevant authority.
However, Israel’s Supreme Court has reserved the right to review demolition orders. This may delay demolition for months or years, but B’Tselem reports that in the majority of cases, the court ultimately upholds the demolition. In one notable case in 2018, the court stopped the demolition after the family presented evidence showing that the assailant suffered from a mental illness.
Homes may be demolished by bulldozers. Apartments or rooms are generally filled with cement, rendering them unlivable. Families sometimes split up among relatives, at least in the near term, according to a United Nations report.
According to the Jerusalem Post, the army commission that recommended ending the practice in 2005 reported that families of the terrorists often rebuild their homes with compensation funds from the Palestinian Authority and other sources. The Palestinian Authority pays monthly stipends to the families of Palestinians imprisoned by Israel or killed while committing violent attacks. Israel and its advocates decry the payments as an incentive for terrorism.
How many home demolitions have taken place? Are homes demolished for reasons other than deterrence?
According to the Israel Democracy Institute, more than 50 homes “have been either fully or partially demolished” between 2014 and 2019 as a deterrent to terrorism. Hamoked, an Israeli human rights group, placed the total since 2014 at 75, according to Haaretz.
Israel has demolished a far greater number of Palestinian buildings due to lack of a building permit. Palestinian groups and Israeli human rights organizations argue that Palestinians face discrimination in obtaining such permits. Israel also has a policy of demolishing Palestinian dwellings for being built in a closed military zone.
The same academic paper that concluded demolishing the homes of suicide attackers was an effective deterrent also found that home demolitions for other reasons — including as a preventative measure — spurred an increase in terror attacks.
—
The post Israel’s home demolitions after terrorist attacks, explained appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Richmond mayor facing resignation calls over posts calling Sydney massacre ‘false flag’
Bay Area Jewish leaders are calling for the resignation of Richmond Mayor Eduardo Martinez after he re-shared multiple LinkedIn posts that called Sunday’s massacre of Jewish people in Sydney an Israeli “false flag attack.”
Martinez, who was elected by the city just north of Berkeley in 2023, also shared posts claiming that “the root cause of antisemitism is the behavior of Israel and Israelis.”
Martinez has since removed the posts from his account and apologized for sharing them “without thinking” — but he did not disavow the false flag conspiracy theory about the attack. He clarified only that “we know that antisemitism was here before the creation of the state of Israel.”
“As I’ve said many times before, we should not conflate Zionism with Judaism,” Martinez wrote on LinkedIn. “They are two separate beliefs.”
He later added, “I want to assure everyone that these postings are my opinions (or my mistakes) and mine only. They are not statements from my office or the city of Richmond. If I make a mistake, that mistake is mine only. Once again, I apologize for posting in haste without full understanding of the posting.”
He did not discuss the attack, which killed 15 people and injured dozens.
The Jewish Community Relations Council of the Bay Area was outraged by Martinez’s online activity and left cold by his apology. It called for his resignation Thursday in a statement posted to JCRC social media.
“These actions reflect a consistent and deeply troubling disregard for the safety and dignity of Jewish people,” the organization wrote on Instagram. “They erode public trust and send a chilling message to Jewish residents that they are neither protected nor respected by their own mayor.”
The local chapter of the Anti-Defamation League, ADL Central Pacific, also condemned the post.
“There’s no excuse for an elected leader to be amplifying warped antisemitic conspiracy theories that seek to blame the victim,” ADL regional director Marc Levine wrote in a statement to J. The Jewish News of Northern California. “The Australian community has already faced enough tragedy over the last few days. We hope Mayor Martinez will reconsider his hurtful words, which have absolutely no place in public discourse.”
The Forward has reached out to Martinez for comment.
Martinez’s LinkedIn posts were the latest in what local leaders say is a slew of antisemitic incidents during the progressive’s tenure. In 2023, just weeks after the Oct. 7 attacks, Martinez
Martinez, a former schoolteacher, posts regularly about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict on LinkedIn, sometimes multiple times per day.
In August, speaking at the People’s Conference for Palestine in Detroit, Martinez likened the Oct. 7 attack to someone snapping after being bullied on the playground, J. reported, adding that whether he supported Hamas was “complicated.”
The post Richmond mayor facing resignation calls over posts calling Sydney massacre ‘false flag’ appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Mamdani appointee resigns over past antisemitic online posts about ‘money hungry Jews’
(JTA) — New York City Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani’s pick for a crucial City Hall position resigned on Thursday, shortly after her history of antisemitic posts on X came to light.
Mamdani had announced his appointment of Catherine Almonte Da Costa as director of appointments, responsible for staffing City Hall, on Wednesday. But on Thursday, several posts on X where she peddled age-old antisemitic stereotypes were published by the Judge Street Journal, a Substack about New York City politics.
“Money hungry Jews smh,” Da Costa posted on a now-deleted account on X in January 2011, when she 19 years old.
In another post from June 2012, she wrote, “Far Rockaway train is the Jew train,” appearing to reference the large Jewish communities off the line.
The Judge Street Journal also highlighted posts that suggested an antipathy to white men by Da Costa, who has worked in diversity, equity and inclusion roles in multiple companies.
As a firestorm grew, Da Costa said she would step down.
“I spoke with the mayor-elect this afternoon, apologized, and expressed my deep regret for my past statements,” she said in a statement shared by the Mamdani transition team. “These statements are not indicative of who I am. As the mother of Jewish children, I feel a profound sense of sadness and remorse at the harm these words have caused. As this has become a distraction from the work at hand, I have offered my resignation.”
Mamdani released a statement of his own. “Catherine expressed her deep remorse over her past statements and tendered her resignation, and I accepted,” he said.
The incident came as Mamdani’s election has roiled the city’s Jewish community, with many expressing fear and discomfort over the mayor-elect’s history of anti-Israel rhetoric and policies. He has emphasized that he aims to make the city safe and welcoming for all of its residents, including Jews, and has condemned antisemitic rhetoric and displays since his election.
Still, his transition period has been dotted with tensions, including While Mamdani has made inroads in the city’s Jewish community since election night last month, the appointment of an official with a visible history of antisemitic rhetoric could pose another hurdle for his incoming term.
The New York and New Jersey branch of the Anti-Defamation League, which launched what it is calling a “Mamdani Monitor” following November’s election, called Da Costa’s posts “indefensible” in a post on X.
“We appreciate Da Costa has relationships with members of the Jewish community,” the group tweeted. “But her posts require immediate explanation — not just from Ms. Da Costa, but also from the Mayor-Elect.”
Several Jewish leaders praised Da Costa’s resignation.
The CEO of the Jewish Democratic Council of America, Halie Soifer, welcomed the news of in a statement Thursday evening.
“Glad to see that Catherine Almonte Da Costa has resigned,” said Soifer in a statement. “The views she expressed are unacceptable and intolerable. Especially at a time of rising antisemitism, she had no place in the mayor’s office of the city with the largest Jewish population in the world.”
Sara Forman, executive director of the New York Solidarity Network, which backed Mamdani’s leading opponent in the election, praised “cutting ties” with Da Costa as” the right thing to do.” But Forman speculated that “had she said ‘Zionist’ instead of ‘Jew’ the response from the incoming Mamdani administration and the outcome we just witnessed would likely have been quite different.”
Da Costa’s husband, Ricky Da Costa, is a deputy in the office of Comptroller Brad Lander, Mamdani’s most prominent Jewish backer during the campaign. He is Jewish and posted on X for the first time in more than a year in a half on Thursday afternoon, in response to the criticism of his wife.
“I don’t come back to this awful place much these days but as the Jew who married Cat, I can guarantee she has grown so much since some dumb tweets when she was 19,” he wrote. “Her remorse, like everything else about her, is deeply genuine & she works so hard for a NYC where everyone is safe.”
The post Mamdani appointee resigns over past antisemitic online posts about ‘money hungry Jews’ appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Belgium Reverses Decision to Cut Federal Security in Antwerp’s Jewish District Amid Community Outcry
Police officers on patrol in the Belgian city of Antwerp. Photo: Reuters / Nicolas Maeterlink
After facing strong opposition from public officials and the local Jewish community over plans to withdraw federal security in Antwerp’s Jewish district, the Belgian government announced it will maintain current security measures, keeping federal police deployed for the time being.
Belgian Interior Minister Bernard Quintin announced on Thursday that federal officers will remain deployed in the district, reversing an earlier government plan to cut the police presence there by roughly half. The reversal followed Quintin’s meeting with representatives of Antwerp’s Jewish community
Avec des représentants de la communauté juive d’#Anvers.
Leur sécurité est une priorité absolue: les dispositifs actuellement en place sont maintenus.
Je souhaite les renforcer par la présence de #militaires et espère que cette mesure pourra aboutir dans les heures à venir. pic.twitter.com/ODKh8sjMZ6
— Bernard Quintin (@BernardQuintin_) December 18, 2025
This latest decision comes just days after a deadly attack on a Hanukkah celebration at Sydney’s Bondi Beach that left 15 dead and at least 40 injured, amid ongoing concerns about threats to Jewish communities worldwide.
On Monday, the Antwerp branch of the far-right political party Vlaams Belang had called for increased protection for Jewish schools and institutions during a city council meeting, Belgian media reported.
The government had originally rejected calls to bolster security, planning instead to withdraw the federal deployment, a move that sparked outrage from city leaders and renewed concern within the Jewish community amid ongoing threats.
Addressing these concerns, Quintin stressed that protecting Jewish sites is a top priority for the government, but emphasized that the federal police presence in Antwerp is not intended as a permanent solution, with local police responsible for maintaining security on the ground.
Antwerp Mayor Els van Doesburg had condemned the government’s earlier decision as “incomprehensible,” warning that the city cannot risk a security gap, especially in the wake of the Bondi Beach attack on Sunday.
“There must be no vacuum in the safety of Antwerp’s Jewish quarter,” Doesburg told Belgian media. “This is something we have to do together. It goes beyond the Antwerp police.”
Since the deadly attack at Brussels’ Jewish Museum in 2014, security measures have been strengthened, with Belgian intelligence consistently warning of elevated threats to Jewish sites.
In response, Antwerp has long maintained a mixed model in which local and federal police share responsibility for their protection.
The federal government has now proposed an alternative plan to deploy military personnel at Jewish community sites in Antwerp to support local police and increase capacity, though a government-wide consensus has yet to be reached.
Jewish community leaders had previously sharply criticized proposals to reduce security, dismissing Quintin’s explanation and denouncing it as a “political decision.”
Ralph Pais, deputy chair of the Jewish Information and Documentation Center (JID), a Belgian nonprofit that combats antisemitism, noted that the planned withdrawal, both in its timing and execution, had heightened concern within the community.
Despite the community’s expectation that authorities would address the issue, Pais had warned that inadequate security could lead to serious problems.
Dus geen 48 uur na de verschrikkelijke aanslag op joden in Australië zet nota bene onze minister van Binnenlandse Zaken @BernardQuintin_ de federale politiebeveiliging in @Stad_Antwerpen stop!
Burgemeester @elsvandoesburg vindt het uiteraard…
— JID (@s_antisemitisme) December 16, 2025
Van Doesburg had called for federal officers to remain in place until a suitable replacement could be established, whether through increased local police staffing or the deployment of military personnel — a request now addressed by the government’s decision to maintain current measures.
The European Jewish Association (EJA) said in a statement that it “welcomed” the move to maintain current federal police levels in Antwerp, noting that the initial plan “caused deep concern within the Jewish community and beyond.”
“This decision follows direct engagement with elected officials and Jewish representatives and sends an important message: the safety of Jewish life is a core responsibility of the state and cannot be subject to uncertainty or gradual erosion,” the EJA said. “The EJA wishes to express its sincere appreciation to [Quintin] for listening carefully to these concerns and for acting decisively to prevent any security vacuum. We also commend MP Michael Freilich, who raised the issue forcefully in Parliament.”