Uncategorized
Michael Shafir, who played a key role in Holocaust memory in his native Romania, dies at 78
BUCHAREST (JTA) — When Michael Shafir moved to Israel from his native Romania as a teenager in the 1960s, it wasn’t because the Jewish teen was burning with Zionist fervor. Instead, it was the first country that agreed to take him.
“I would have left for wherever there was no communism, because I could no longer live with the feeling that you say one thing outside the house and another at home,” Shafir once said in an interview with Romanian media.
More than four decades later, Shafir would return to the country where he was born, as a professor of international relations. From his post at Babes-Bolyai University, in northwestern Romania, Shafir studied and published extensively on how post-communist right-wing nationalists distorted the past and trivialized or denied the Holocaust in Eastern Europe.
Shafir, who died Nov. 9 at 78, was known in his work and in his personal life for his straightforward and often humorous presentation of difficult truths.
“He was among the first to see the early emergence of nationalism in the [Romanian] communist regime’s politics,” his friend and colleague Liviu Rotman, an Israeli historian of Romanian Jewry, told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Rotman said Shafir’s 2004 book “Between denial and trivialization. Holocaust denial in post-communist countries in Central and Eastern Europe” represented a “real encyclopedia” of Holocaust denial, as it outlined three forms that Shafir observed in post-communist states — outright, deflective (which “minimizes own-nation participation”) and selective (a combination of the other two). Shafir also took aim at what he called “comparative trivialization” of the Holocaust, or denying its uniqueness by equating it with communist crimes.
“I used to joke with Michael and told him that he produced a Mendeleev Table of Holocaust denial,” Rotman wrote on Facebook after his friend’s death, referring to the formal name for the periodic table that organizes elements according to their characteristics.
Known in Romania for his irreverent sense of humor and his chain smoking, Shafir’s massive figure wearing a trench coat — and occasionally a hat — could often be seen in the threshold of the conferences and events he attended.
“He was a person with an exceptional sense of humor, who always sent his friends jokes, who always found things to laugh about,” Jewish studies scholar Felicia Waldman told JTA.
“He liked to share everything he discovered, everything he thought,” added Waldman, who also recalled Shafir’s “undiplomatic” vehemence. “Sometimes that created problems for him.”
Shafir promoted his ideas in books and scholarly writing and conferences, but also in the Romanian press, where he proved to be a redoubtable polemicist. As a member of the International Commission for the Holocaust in Romania, he worked to make sure that people in his country understood the truth about the Holocaust and Romanian authorities’ collaboration with the Nazi regime. That history was obscured during the communist era and contested after it.
The commission was established by Romanian president Ion Iliescu in 2003 and headed by Romanian-born Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel. Shafir and his fellow commission members concluded that between 280,000 and 380,000 Jews were murdered in territories under Romanian control during World War II.
In 2004, their report was officially adopted by the Romanian state, which for the first time acknowledged its participation in the destruction of the European Jews.
“Today’s negationism can no longer have the excuse ‘I’ve not read, I’ve haven’t access to information,’” Shafir said in a podcast by the Wiesel Institute in 2021, in which he warns about the crafty and convoluted nature of most contemporary Holocaust denial.
Shafir was still working with the Elie Wiesel National Institute for the Study of the Holocaust in Romania at the time of his death, which the institute and his family members confirmed.
Born in Bucharest in 1944, Shafir managed to move to Israel as a teenager in 1961, during one of the periods when Romania relaxed emigration rules for its Jews. He had run afoul of the Communist regime and sought to escape it.
In Israel, Shafir served in the army before moving to Munich, to work as a researcher on audiences at Radio Free Europe, the U.S.-funded radio station for communist Europe. From then on he balanced journalism with academic work: He then returned to Israel, earning a bachelor’s degree in political science and English literature at Hebrew University while directing foreign news at the Kol Israel radio station, a position he held until 1982. He had just earned a political science PhD at Hebrew University after writing a thesis on the Romanian intelligentsia under communist dictator Nicolae Ceausescu.
Shafir rejoined Radio Free Europe in the mid 1980s and held positions there until well after the fall of the Iron Curtain. His return to Romania and reclamation of his Romanian citizenship in 2005 inspired the country’s progressive left.
“Shafir meant a lot to me; he’s been a reference for his honesty and intellectual courage, and someone capable, like not many others, to review his positions when new data or historical sources asked for it,” Romanian-American software engineer-turned-historian Andrei Ursu told JTA.
Ursu was recently appointed scientific director of the Institute of the Romanian 1989 Revolution, an organization whose mission is to study that year’s Romanian anticommunist revolution. Two of his great-grandparents and a grandfather were killed during the Holocaust.
Ursu — whose father Gheorghe died after being savagely beaten while in politically motivated detention by Romania’s Communist secret police, the infamous Securitate — has been fighting for decades to combat the whitewashing of the Securitate in the country’s public discourse.
He described Shafir as “a person with an endless humor” and “without the exaggerated vanity common to many Romanian intellectuals.” Despite his frail health, Ursu said, Shafir agreed to review part of Ursu’s latest editorial project on the 1989 Romanian anti-communist revolution, “The Fall of a Dictator.”
Like other specialists who collaborated with Shafir, Ursu praised his work ethics and the precision of his sourcing and investigative work.
His media comments and public appearances were frequently peppered with jokes and anecdotes. In 2019, while speaking in an interview about the tens of thousands of Jews whom Ceausescu let emigrate in exchange for cash payments from Israel, Shafir told an old Romanian joke that starts with the Romanian dictator visiting a cooperative producing corn.
“How much do you get for a ton of maize?” Ceausescu asked the apparatchik in charge of the cooperative. “Just that? I get more if I sell 10 Jews.” To which the apparatchik retorts: “Then it’d be good if we start sowing Jews.”
In the interview, Shafir also recalled that the Jewish community headquarters in Bucharest used to display a sign warning gentiles desperate to get a visa to Israel and escape communism that “no conversions are accepted.”
“In the end, a conversion is much less dangerous than crossing the Danube swimming,” Shafir observed.
Although Shafir left Israel, he remained close to his family there and invested in the country’s politics. An activist with Peace Now who defined himself as a “critical Zionist,” Shafir rejected characterizations of Israel as an apartheid state but saw the Israeli continued military presence in the Palestinian territories as incompatible with democracy in the long term.
“He was very much worried about our future here in a country that is drifting to the right,” his daughter, Maurit Beeri, wrote on Facebook after her father’s death. She said he had recently spent time in Israel with his family, including his grandchildren.
Shafir’s body lay in state Nov. 13 at one of his university’s buildings in Cluj, Romania, where he lived with his wife, Aneta Feldman-Shafir.
—
The post Michael Shafir, who played a key role in Holocaust memory in his native Romania, dies at 78 appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Why are we so focused on Mamdani — not Nazi-inspired ideas proliferating on the right?
Zohran Mamdani’s candidacy for mayor of New York City has become a matter of national debate — particularly among Jews. Recently, more than 1,000 rabbis across the country signed a letter singling out Mamdani as a threat to Jewish safety under the heading, “Defending the Jewish future.”
If you didn’t know better, you might think that Mamdani had used Nazi rhetoric or used racist or antisemitic language. He hasn’t. He’s only “guilty” of criticizing Israel: The rabbis’ letter references no antisemitic language because, by all appearances, Mamdani has not trafficked in antisemitic rhetoric.
This week marked the seventh anniversary of the massacre at the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh, the single bloodiest day for Jews in the history of the United States. The killer justified the slaughter by invoking a conspiracy theory that Jewish groups like HIAS were bringing immigrant “invaders in that kill our people.” The following year, a gunman who killed one synagogue-goer in the town of Poway, California — where a number of my congregants live — penned a similar screed, claiming that “every Jew is responsible for the meticulously planned genocide of the European race… and every Jew plays his part to enslave the other races around him.”
The contrast between the anniversary of the tragedy of the Tree of Life and the furor about Mamdani has deeply troubled me. Because while many members of our national Jewish community have come to perceive the potential election of a mayor who is critical of Israel as one of the greatest threats to our future in this country, the hate speech that fueled those two killers continues to be not just normalized on the right, but turned into a central element of its political platform.
It is this reality that makes the rabbinic letter about Mamdani heartbreaking. At a moment of increasing threats to the safety of all marginalized communities in this country, my colleagues have targeted the wrong person and the wrong movement.
In a democratic society, the candidacy of a young mayoral candidate who challenges the righteousness of Israeli actions is not a threat to the “Jewish future.” It is an invitation to engage in discussion about those actions.
By contrast, the rise of the “great replacement” theory and its ilk — baseless claims of “white replacement” or “white genocide” — is a threat to the future of all minorities, including Jews. This awful movement, which has led to violence against Jews, immigrants of color, Muslims, and trans people, has found a home in mainstream Republican politics. The Department of Homeland Security increasingly utilizes white supremacist language in recruiting new employees and arresting immigrants including phrases like “report all foreign invaders” and “defend your culture!”
Frighteningly similar language has been used by those who have Jewish blood on their hands.
Ironically, the right’s willingness to indulge in open Jew-hatred has shown up even in arguments about Israel. Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene recently criticized lobbying efforts by AIPAC, invoking classic antisemitism: “I’ll never take 30 shekels,” she wrote on X earlier this month, “I’m America only! And Christ is King!”
At least as troubling is the revelation that Republican operatives regularly engage in racist, sexist and antisemitic discourse, as was recently reported by Politico. These messages illustrate all too clearly the MAGA movement’s descent into bigotry. They include praise of Hitler, white supremacist shorthand, jokes about gas chambers, and one claim that it’s a mistake to “expect… the Jew to be honest.” Together, these messages offer a chilling glimpse into the mindset currently ruling the Republican Party.
Vice-President JD Vance dismissed “pearl clutching” over those texts — a choice in keeping with others made by President Donald Trump’s administration. Trump nominated Paul Ingrassia to the position of White House Special Counsel; Ingrassia was recently revealed to have said he had a “Nazi streak.”(He also said that all of Africa is a “shithole.”) Ingrassia withdrew his name from consideration for that position, but his “punishment” has been to instead remain in his job as White House Liaison to the Department of Justice. Department of Defense spokesperson Kingsley Wilson has posted antisemitic conspiracy theories, featuring references to the “great replacement” theory and the lynching of Leo Frank in 1915. She remains in her job as well, as does the most prominent law enforcement official in the nation, FBI Director Kash Patel, who regularly appeared on the podcast of notorious Jew-hater Stew Peters.
Where is the rabbinic outrage about this spate of antisemitism in the highest levels of power in this country?
That rabbis composed and distributed a letter condemning a single candidate for mayor in one city, while too often remaining silent regarding the explicit hate speech that now runs through the Republican party, is embarrassing and shameful. The Trump administration recently scrubbed a report from the Department of Justice website showing that right-wing extremism is far and away the most prevalent threat to marginalized communities in this country. For more than 1,000 rabbis to treat this reality as less serious a threat than Mamdani, in itself, a threat to Jewish safety.
Perhaps our rabbinic colleagues feel it is too dangerous to confront the party in power in this country. Perhaps they are afraid of losing access, or funding, or alienating donors. But Jewish history is replete with examples showing that appeasement of Jew-haters never makes Jews safe.
What has helped cultivate Jewish safety has been the work of solidarity. Building genuine investment in relationships across lines of difference — the kind of relationship-building that Mamdani himself has modeled with Jewish New Yorkers — is the best kind of investment in a secure Jewish future. For the sake of the safety of Jews from Poway to Park Avenue, I pray that my colleagues might begin to understand this.
The post Why are we so focused on Mamdani — not Nazi-inspired ideas proliferating on the right? appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
I won’t vote for Democrats who backed Mamdani. I know I’m not the only one.
(JTA) — There must be consequences when politicians endorse and campaign for unpalatable candidates for public office in order to court that candidate’s political base. I am just one voter, but I am ready to commit to issuing some.
I am a lifelong Democrat and consider myself a centrist liberal on most issues. The last times I recall voting for a Republican were in 1992 — 33 years ago! — when I supported Bill Green in his unsuccessful campaign for reelection as the U.S. representative from New York City’s largely Upper East Side congressional district, and then in 2001 when I voted for Mike Bloomberg for mayor of New York City.
But, like many other centrist Democrats, I have been watching with ever-increasing concern as the party I once considered my political home has moved further and further away to the left — indeed, often to the extremist far-left — on an issue I care about deeply.
The fundamental right of the State of Israel to exist — its geopolitical and moral legitimacy, as it were — is one such pivotal issue. Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, Mario and Andrew Cuomo, Chuck Schumer, and Kirsten Gillibrand all identified and identify as supporters of Israel even while they may have criticized particular policies of one Israeli government or other.
This is not true of Zohran Mamdani. The Democratic candidate for mayor of New York City is a declared and uncompromising anti-Zionist. He comes by his inflexible antagonism toward the Jewish homeland honestly — his father, Mahmood Mamdani, Columbia University’s Herbert Lehman professor of government, has demanded for years that Columbia divest its endowment from companies that invest in Israel, and his mother, filmmaker Mira Nair, pointedly refuses to attend Israeli film festivals.
Zohran Mamdani considers the likes of the anti-Zionist academics Edward Said and Rashid Khalidi as his intellectual mentors. While at college, he founded the Bowdoin chapter of the radical Students for Justice in Palestine.
All this is known. Mamdani never made a secret of his hatred of — as opposed to disagreement, even harsh disagreement, with — Israel and Zionism. As a result, he engages in some of the most extreme, bordering on the absurd, antisemitic conspiracy theories imaginable. In 2023, we learned this week, he told a far-left group that alleged violence on the part of New York police officers is somehow masterminded by the Israel armed forces: “We have to make clear that when the boot of the NYPD is on your neck, it’s been laced by the IDF.”
If ever there was a clear incitement to antisemitic violence, violence against Jews, this is it. And yet a host of prominent New York Democrats, rather than distancing themselves from if not affirmatively repudiating Mamdani, have not only endorsed him but are actively campaigning for him.
Among this lot are New York Gov. Kathy Hochul, State Attorney General Letitia James, U.S. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, Rep. Jerrold Nadler, and State Sen. Liz Krueger. All of them purport to be appalled by the surging antisemitism around them, and yet they stand by their candidate.
Mamdani claims not to be antisemitic, only pro-Palestinian and anti-Israel, and his above-listed supporters assist him in threading this particular noxious needle.
I’m not the first Jewish voice to say they’re attempting an impossible task. “Mamdani’s distinction between accepting Jews and denying a Jewish state is not merely a rhetorical sleight of hand or political naivete — though it is, to be clear, both of these,” warned Rabbi Elliot Cosgrove in his courageous sermon. “He is doing so to traffic in the most dangerous of tropes, an anti-Zionist rhetoric.”
But I might be the first Jewish voice to say publicly that I will never again cast a vote for any of the Democrats who have endorsed Mamdani. For me, at least, his supporters have crossed a moral and ideological Rubicon, and they have forced me, with not inconsiderable trepidation and reluctance, to do the same.
While Nadler, who announced that he will not seek reelection in 2026, is a lame duck, many of Mamdani’s other acolytes appear to still want to have a political future beyond Nov. 4. I will not countenance that.
Politicians by definition tend to make strategic decisions they deem to be in their self-interest. The more high-minded, not to say ethical, ones among them draw the line when it comes to issues of principle. More likely, or perhaps, more frequently, they will balance competing considerations and opt for what they consider to be their most advantageous pragmatic option.
It’s true that supporting Mamdani may seem like a rational, if not especially ethical, choice. Numerous polls have shown that support for Israel has diminished, especially among younger voters. Thus, the cynical calculation behind some of the Mamdani endorsements may well have been that the future support of such anti-Israel, pro-Palestinian voters would more than make up for any loss of disaffected pro-Israel Democrats like me.
Still, Hochul’s early endorsement of Mamdani’s candidacy could well end up being an albatross around her neck next year when she seeks reelection. Especially if the now prevailing anti-Israel sentiment recedes once the Israel-Hamas war is in the rearview mirror. The same goes for Mamdani’s other cheerleaders. Pendulums have a way of swinging back toward the center.
I, for one, will not vote for Hochul again. And yes, that means that I am open to supporting a palatable Republican nominee for New York governor. It’s not an easy conclusion for me to reach or decision to make, but I don’t see how I can do otherwise — and while I might be the early in declaring it publicly, I hardly think I will be alone.
I am writing in advance of the Tuesday’s election, which I hope may yet turn out to be a surprise, come-from-behind win for Andrew Cuomo. I am also doing so in advance of the inevitable attempts at fence-mending that will follow, regardless of the result.
I know New York’s centrist Democrats will try to win me back, and I know that the forces acting on Republicans may well make a return attractive. But I am making this vow now because I am distressed that while Mamdani’s mainstream allies may not have consciously written off the New York Jewish community, they are hoping for collective short memories on our part. I know, even if they do not, that Jewish security and survival have always depended on remembering.
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of JTA or its parent company, 70 Faces Media.
The post I won’t vote for Democrats who backed Mamdani. I know I’m not the only one. appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Turkey Expands Regional and Global Ambitions, Raising Alarm Bells in Israel
Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan speaks during a joint statement to the media in Baghdad, Iraq, April 22, 2024. Photo: AHMAD AL-RUBAYE/Pool via REUTERS
Turkey is rapidly expanding its regional and global influence — strengthening ties with Syria, Lebanon, Iran, and the Gulf states, while pressing for a role in post-war Gaza — a trend that is raising alarm bells in Israel and the broader region amid shifting Middle East power dynamics.
As part of its push to expand regional influence and strengthen strategic partnerships, Turkey has recently signed a memorandum of understanding with Syria, expanding their military cooperation to cover training, advisory support, and access to weapons systems and logistics.
On Thursday, Turkey’s Defense Ministry announced that Syrian armed forces have begun training at Turkish facilities and will also attend the country’s military academies, as both nations seek to deepen their defense ties.
Turkey’s push to expand its ties with Syria comes as the latter is reportedly in the final stages of negotiations with Israel over a security agreement that could establish a joint Israeli–Syrian–American committee to oversee developments along their shared border and uphold the terms of a proposed deal.
Ankara has also been working to establish closer diplomatic and military relations with Israel’s other northern neighbor, Lebanon, at a time when the country stands on the brink of renewed conflict with the Jewish state.
Amid mounting international pressure, the Lebanese government is intensifying efforts to meet the ceasefire deadline to disarm the terrorist group Hezbollah, while trying to avoid plunging the nation into a civil war.
As the Iran-backed terrorist group continues to refuse disarmament, Turkey is leveraging the opportunity to bolster its regional influence and expand its alliances.
Last week, Turkey’s Defense Ministry confirmed that the country’s peacekeeping forces would continue to support the Lebanese army in its mission to restore stability and peace.
“Ongoing efforts will focus on enhancing security in the region, promoting stability, and supporting the development of the Lebanese armed forces, with the goal of fostering and sustaining peace in Lebanon,” Turkish officials announced, following the approval of a two-year extension to their mission in Beirut.
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan – who has been openly hostile toward the Jewish state for years – has repeatedly condemned Israeli offensives targeting the Iranian proxy and its terrorist operations in Lebanon.
He has previously said that Israel’s “genocidal” and “expansionist” policies remain the biggest threat to regional peace.
Ankara has also been working to expand its regional influence in the Gaza Strip, which borders Israel to the south, positioning itself to play a pivotal role in post-war developments under the US-backed peace plan.
However, experts warn that Turkey’s growing involvement in the enclave’s reconstruction efforts could potentially strengthen Hamas’s terrorist infrastructure and undermine the fragile ceasefire.
As one of the biggest backers of Hamas, Turkey could potentially shield the Islamist movement in Gaza or even bolster its power, especially as the Palestinian terrorist group continues to reject disarmament — a key element of US President Donald Trump’s peace plan.
In the past, Ankara has provided refuge to Hamas leaders, granted diplomatic access, and allowed the group to fundraise, recruit, and plan attacks from Turkish territory.
Under Trump’s plan, Turkey has sought to join a multinational task force responsible for overseeing the ceasefire and training local security forces.
Erdogan declared that the country is “ready to provide all kinds of support to Gaza,” and insisted that the Turkish Armed Forces “could serve in a military or civilian capacity as needed.”
However, Israeli officials have repeatedly rejected any involvement of Turkish security forces in post-war Gaza.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has stated that Turkey’s participation in the International Stabilization Force would be out of the question, labeling it a “red line.”
Gulf states have also raised concerns about Turkish and Qatari involvement in Gaza’s post-war reconstruction and governance efforts.
While the Trump administration has ruled out sending US soldiers into the war-torn enclave, Washington has also considered involving Indonesia, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt, and Azerbaijan in the international peacekeeping efforts.
US officials have confirmed that any participating countries in the international task force will be selected in close coordination with Israel, ensuring that no foreign troops will be included without Israel’s consent.
Despite Turkey’s efforts to advance its regional ambitions in the enclave and secure a role in post-war Gaza, Erdogan continues to attack Israel while defending the Palestinian terrorist group, as he has repeatedly in the past.
He has frequently defended Hamas terrorists as “resistance fighters” against what he describes as Israeli occupation of Palestinian land. He has even gone so far as to threaten an invasion of the Jewish state and called on the United Nations to use force if Jerusalem fails to halt its military campaign against Hamas.
On Thursday, Erdogan reiterated his anti-Israel rhetoric, targeting Germany for its alleged indifference to what he called Israel’s “genocide, famine, and attacks” in Gaza.
In a joint press conference with his German counterpart, the Turkish leader said that it is the international community’s duty to end what he described as famine and massacres in Gaza.
ERDOĞAN: “HAMAS HAS NO BOMBS – ALL THESE WEAPONS ARE IN ISRAEL’S HANDS”
“Hamas has no bombs, no nuclear weapons. But all these weapons are in Israel’s hands.
And Israel, using these weapons, for example just last night, again struck Gaza with these bombs.
Don’t you see… https://t.co/Z5eDHq1exW pic.twitter.com/LoKHNHUIvC
— Mario Nawfal (@MarioNawfal) October 30, 2025
Ankara’s regional ambitions have led the country to expand bilateral ties with Iran, seeking closer cooperation on political, economic, and security matters.
This week, Iranian and Turkish officials pledged to deepen their ties during high-level talks in Tehran — a move likely to raise further alarm bells, given both countries’ longstanding role of supporting Islamist terrorists and their hostile stance toward the West.
In a message to his Turkish counterpart, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian stressed the importance of deepening mutual cooperation to strengthen security, development, and stability for both countries and the region.
Ankara has also engaged with Saudi Arabia in an effort to strengthen bilateral ties and secure Riyadh as a regional partner amid shifting power dynamics in the Middle East.
On Wednesday, Turkey’s ambassador to Saudi Arabia, Emrullah Isler, praised the growing defense cooperation between the two countries, including joint training and other initiatives, amid the signing of new agreements.
Turkey and Saudi Arabia “are key regional actors that share a commitment to peace, stability, and international law,” Isler wrote in a post on X.
“As reaffirmed by both countries during various high-level meetings, we are confident that our military cooperation will continue to grow in terms of both scope and depth,” he continued.
As part of Turkey’s push to expand its influence across the Middle East, Erdogan set out last week on a diplomatic tour to Qatar, Kuwait, and Oman.
During this official tour, he aimed to secure new trade, investment, energy, and defense deals, while also seeking regional support for his proposal to deploy Turkish troops in Gaza.
But Turkey’s efforts to boost its regional influence have also extended beyond the Middle East.
On Thursday, when Erdogan met with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, they discussed regional developments and exploring opportunities to strengthen their bilateral cooperation.
At a joint press conference, Merz described Turkey as a key partner for the European Union, noting that Berlin aims to help Ankara expand its relationships with other EU member states.
“I personally, and the German government, see Turkey as a close partner of the European Union. We want to continue smoothing the way to Europe,” the German leader said.