Uncategorized
Moscow’s former chief rabbi: ‘The best option for Russian Jews is to leave’
(JTA) — Pinchas Goldshmidt, the former chief rabbi of Moscow who fled the country earlier this year, said other Russian Jews should leave before it’s too late in an interview with the Guardian.
“When we look back over Russian history, whenever the political system was in danger you saw the government trying to redirect the anger and discontent of the masses towards the Jewish community,” Goldschmidt told the Guardian. “We saw this in tsarist times and at the end of the Stalinist regime.”
He argued that Russia’s floundering invasion of Ukraine is starting to foster a similar environment.
“We’re seeing rising antisemitism while Russia is going back to a new kind of Soviet Union, and step by step the Iron Curtain is coming down again. This is why I believe the best option for Russian Jews is to leave,” Goldschmidt said.
Goldschmidt, who was born in Switzerland but has been serving Russian Jewry since 1989, left the country in June, nearly four months after Russia began its invasion. He said that he was being pressured to support the invasion and feared the impact his refusal might have on Moscow’s Jewish community.
“Pressure was put on community leaders to support the war and I refused to do so. I resigned because to continue as chief rabbi of Moscow would be a problem for the community because of the repressive measures taken against dissidents,” he said.
However, others in Russia have denied that claim, including the director of Moscow’s Choral Synagogue which reelected him chief rabbi almost immediately after he left.
Other Jewish leaders in Russia have remained in the country, such as Berel Lazar, a rabbi affiliated with the Hasidic Chabad-Lubavitch movement who despite long being seen as close to Putin has spoken out against the war.
But Jews, like Russians of all ethnicities, have been fleeing Russia en masse since the war began in late February. In August, it was estimated that more than 20,000 of Russia’s 165,000 Jews had fled the country.
“There’s a section of Russian society called the creacle, the creative class of business and cultural leaders, intellectuals and artists,” Goldschmidt said, “and I think it’s safe to say a great percentage of those people have left Russia, which is and will be very detrimental to Russian society.”
During the interview with the Guardian, Goldschmidt, who is also the president of the Conference of European rabbis, additionally discussed other issues facing European Jewry, such as rising antisemitism around the world, and how the state of European Jewry compares to the situation for Jews in the United States.
“For many years, Jews in the U.S. believed that it was an exception, that whatever happened in Europe and other countries could never happen there,” Goldschmidt said. “But over the past three years there have been more attacks on Jews there than in Europe.
“What is changing is the political system is much more polarized but also the discourse has been upended by social media. The polarization we’re seeing has made antisemitism much more acceptable.”
During the interview, Goldschmit also praised Ukraine’s Jewish community, denying Putin’s line that it is Nazi state.
“Show me another country that is in the grip of Nazis where the Jewish community is thriving,” Goldschmidt said.
—
The post Moscow’s former chief rabbi: ‘The best option for Russian Jews is to leave’ appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
NYC Mayor Mamdani Unveils Major Tax Hike on Unoccupied Luxury Real Estate
New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani holds a press conference at the New York City Office of Emergency Management, as a major winter storm spreads across a large swath of the United States, in Brooklyn, New York City, US, Jan. 25, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Bing Guan
i24 News – NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani has officially introduced a controversial new tax targeting secondary residences valued at over $5 million.
The measure, designed to tap into the city’s vast concentration of unoccupied luxury wealth, is projected to generate roughly $500 million annually for the municipal budget.
“This tax is specifically aimed at the ultra-rich,” Mamdani stated, highlighting high-profile examples such as Ken Griffin’s $238 million Midtown penthouse and Alexander Varshavsky’s $20.5 million Columbus Circle residence.
While the city has yet to finalize specific evaluation criteria or the methods for distinguishing primary from secondary homes, the proposal has already become a flashpoint for economic debate.
The move has drawn sharp condemnation from billionaire investor Bill Ackman, who argued that the policy is fundamentally flawed.
Ackman contended that owners of luxury secondary residences contribute significant capital to the local economy without utilizing costly municipal services. He warned that the tax would likely trigger a corporate and high-net-worth exodus to low-tax jurisdictions like Miami, ultimately harming the city’s tax base.
President Donald Trump also entered the fray, denouncing the policy as “totally misguided” and claiming it is “destroying New York.” Trump, whose own extensive real estate holdings in the city could be impacted, argued that such taxation serves only to drive away the international investors who fuel New York’s development.
Implementation remains a significant question mark, as the tax could potentially affect nearly 13,000 property owners, including major figures like Jeff Bezos. Financial analysts point out that many of the city’s most expensive apartments are held through complex offshore structures and shell companies, making the identification and appraisal of these properties an immense administrative challenge for the city.
As the debate intensifies, the Mamdani administration faces a difficult path ahead in balancing its “tax the rich” mandate with the practical realities of New York’s competitive global real estate market.
Uncategorized
Iran Rebuffs Trump Announcement of New Peace Talks, State News Agency Reports
Iran rejected new peace talks with the United States, its state news agency reported on Sunday, hours after US President Donald Trump said he was sending envoys for talks in Pakistan and would launch new strikes on Iran unless it accepts his terms.
Trump posted on Truth Social that his envoys would arrive in Pakistan on Monday evening for negotiations, a timetable that would leave only a day for talks to make progress before a two-week ceasefire ends.
“We’re offering a very fair and reasonable DEAL, and I hope they take it because, if they don’t, the United States is going to knock out every single Power Plant, and every single Bridge, in Iran,” he wrote. “NO MORE MR. NICE GUY!”
Iran’s official IRNA news agency cited no specific source in its report that Iran had rejected the talks.
“Iran stated that its absence from the second round of talks stems from what it called Washington’s excessive demands, unrealistic expectations, constant shifts in stance, repeated contradictions, and the ongoing naval blockade, which it considers a breach of the ceasefire,” IRNA wrote.
The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Iran’s rejection of the talks.
Earlier, a White House official said the US delegation would be headed by Vice President JD Vance, who led the war’s first peace talks a week ago, and also include Trump’s envoy Steven Witkoff and son-in-law Jared Kushner. Trump had initially told ABC News and MS Now that Vance would not go.
Uncategorized
Israel Confronted White House After Trump’s Harsh Posts Against Israel About Lebanon Strikes
US Vice President JD Vance is welcomed by Israeli Ambassador to the US Yechiel Leiter and US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee upon his arrival at Ben Gurion airport in Lod, Israel, Oct. 21, 2025. Photo: Nathan Howard/Pool via REUTERS
i24 News – Behind the scenes of a fragile regional peace, a series of blunt social media posts and urgent diplomatic calls have revealed deep tensions between the Trump administration and the Israeli government regarding the scope of the ceasefire in Lebanon.
The friction began hours after the cessation of hostilities was announced, when President Trump issued an unusually sharp directive on social media, catching Jerusalem by surprise. “Israel will not be bombing Lebanon any longer. They are PROHIBITED from doing so by the U.S.A. Enough is enough!!!”
The post sparked uproar within the Prime Minister’s Office. According to sources directly to i24NEWS, the concern was twofold: the rhetoric appeared to undermine signed agreements regarding Israel’s “freedom of action” against Hezbollah, and the blunt, authoritative language was viewed as exceptionally harsh for a close ally.
Following a round of emergency consultations, the Prime Minister’s Office dispatched Israel’s Ambassador to Washington, Yechiel Leiter, to contact the White House. Leiter reportedly conveyed Israel’s deep dissatisfaction with the implied restrictions on its security operations and the public tone of the directive.
In the wake of the Israeli protest, US officials moved quickly to de-escalate. A spokesperson issued a clarification to reporters, framing the President’s stance within the technicalities of the agreement:
“The President’s ceasefire agreement between Lebanon and Israel clearly states that Israel will not carry out any offensive military operations against Lebanese targets but preserves its right to self-defense against planned, imminent, or ongoing attacks.”
By overnight, President Trump appeared to shift his tone significantly, praising Israel’s military prowess amidst the ongoing broader conflict with Iran. “Whether people like Israel or not, they have proven to be a GREAT Ally,” Trump wrote, describing the nation as “Courageous, Bold, Loyal, and Smart.”
Despite the digital firestorm, the tactical reality remains nuanced. Over the weekend, the IDF acted several times to neutralize Hezbollah threats before they could be executed against Israeli forces.
However, in a notable sign of restraint aimed at preserving the truce, Israel elected not to respond to the recent deaths of two of its troops in separate incidents. Israeli officials maintained that the explosive devices responsible for the casualties had been planted prior to the ceasefire taking effect, choosing to categorize the events as legacy threats rather than fresh violations.