Connect with us

Uncategorized

Netanyahu’s new government could lose a critical constituency: American conservatives

WASHINGTON (JTA) — The op-ed was typical of the Wall Street Journal’s conservative editorial page, extolling the virtues of moderation in all things.

The difference was that the author of the piece published Wednesday, Bezalel Smotrich, has a reputation for extremism, and the political landscape he was imagining is in Israel, not America.

Experts who track the U.S.-Israel relationship say the op-ed had a clear purpose: to quell the fears of American conservatives whom Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has long cultivated as allies and who may be rattled by his new extremist partners in governing Israel. 

Those partners include Smotrich, the Religious Zionist bloc leader and self-described “proud homophobe” whom Israeli intelligence officials have accused of planning terrorist attacks — and who was sworn in as finance minister in Netanyahu’s new government Thursday. They also include Itamar Ben-Gvir, who has been convicted of incitement for his past support of Jewish terrorists, who will oversee Israel’s police.

The presence of Smotrich, Ben-Gvir and their parties in Netanyahu’s governing coalition has alarmed American liberals, including some in the Biden administration. But insiders say conservatives are feeling spooked, too.

“The conservative right was with [Netanyahu] and now he seems to be riding the tiger of the radical right,” said David Makovsky, a fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy who just returned from a tour of Israel where he met with senior officials of both the outgoing and incoming governments. “And I think that is bound to alienate the very people who counted on him being risk-averse and to focus on the economy.”

In his op-ed published on Tuesday, two days before the new Israeli government was sworn in, Smotrich sought to persuade Americans that the new government is not the hotbed of ultranationalist and religious extremism it has been made out to be in the American press.

“The U.S. media has vilified me and the traditionalist bloc to which I belong since our success in Israel’s November elections,” he wrote. “They say I am a right-wing extremist and that our bloc will usher in a ‘halachic state’ in which Jewish law governs. In reality, we seek to strengthen every citizen’s freedoms and the country’s democratic institutions, bringing Israel more closely in line with the liberal American model.”

The op-ed is at odds with the stated aims of the coalition agreements; whereas Smotrich says there will be no legal changes to disputed areas in the West Bank, the agreements include a pledge to annex areas at an unspecified time, and to legalize outposts deemed illegal even under Israeli law. He says changes to religious practice will not involve coercion, but the agreement allows businesses to decline service “because of a religious belief,” which a member of his party has anticipated could extend to declining service to LGBTQ people.

Netanyahu has alienated the American left with his relentless attacks on its preference for a two-state outcome to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which he perceives as dangerous and naive. (He also differs from them on how to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons.) He has instead cultivated a base on the right through close ties with the Republican Party and among evangelicals, made possible in part because he has long espoused the values traditional conservatives hold dear, including free markets and a united robust Western stance against extremism and terrorism.

But his alliance with Smotrich and others perceived as theocratic extremists may be a bridge too far even for Netanyahu’s conservative friends, who champion democratic values overseas, said Dov Zakheim, a veteran defense official in multiple Republican administrations.

“Traditional conservatives are much closer to the Bushes, and Jim Baker and those sorts of folks,” he said, referring to the two former presidents and the secretary of state under the late George H. W. Bush.

Jonathan Schanzer, a vice president of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said the op-ed was likely written at Netanyahu’s behest with those conservatives in mind. 

“The Wall Street Journal piece was designed to appeal to traditional conservatives,” he said. “It was designed to send a message to the American public writ large that the way in which Smotrich and perhaps [Itamar] Ben Gvir have been described is based on past utterances and not necessarily their forward-looking policies.”

The immediate predicate for the op-ed, insiders say, was likely a New York Times editorial on Dec. 17 that called the incoming government “a significant threat to the future of Israel” because of the extremist positions Smotrich and other partners have embraced, including the annexation of the West Bank, restrictions on non-Orthodox and non-Jewish citizens, diminishing the independence of the courts, reforming the Law of Return that would render ineligible huge chunks of Diaspora Jewry, and anti-LGBTQ measures.

Smotrich in his op-ed casts the changes not as radical departures from democratic norms but as tweaks that would align Israel more with U.S. values. He said he would pursue a “broad free-market policy” as finance minister. He likened religious reforms to the Supreme Court decision that allowed Christian service providers to decline work from LGBTQ couples. 

“For example, arranging for a minuscule number of sex-separated beaches, as we propose, scarcely limits the choices of the majority of Israelis who prefer mixed beaches,” Smotrich wrote. “It simply offers an option to others.”

In the West Bank, Smotrich said, his finance ministry would promote the building of infrastructure and employment which would benefit Israeli Jewish settlers and Palestinians alike. “This doesn’t entail changing the political or legal status of the area.”

Such salves contradict the stated aims of the new government’s coalition agreement, Anshel Pfeffer, a Netanyahu biographer and analyst for Haaretz said in a Twitter thread picking apart Smotrich’s op-ed.

“Smotrich says his policy doesn’t mean changing the political or legal status of the occupied territories while annexation actually appears in the coalition agreement and his plans certainly change the legal status of the settlements,” Pfeffer said.

Danielle Pletka, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, said foreign media alarm at the composition of the incoming government was premature.

“I suspect that the vast mass of people will maintain the support that they have for Israel because it hasn’t got anything to do with the passing of one government to another and has everything to do with the principle that Israel is a pro-American democracy in a region that’s pretty important,” she said.

That said, Pletka said, the changes in policy embraced by Smotrich and his cohort could alienate Americans should they become policy.

“I think a lot of things can change if the rhetoric from Netanyahu’s government becomes policy, but right now, it’s rhetoric,” she said. “What you tend to see in normal governments is that they need to make a series of compromises between rhetoric that  plays to their base and governance.”

Pletka said Netanyahuu’s stated ambition to expand the 2020 Abraham Accords to peace with Saudi Arabia would likely inhibit plans by Smotrich to annex the West Bank. In the summer of 2020, the last time Netanyahu planned annexation, the United Arab Emirates, one of the four Arab Parties to the Abraham Accords, threatened to pull out unless Netanyahu pulled back — which he did.

“It’s not just the relationship with the United States,” she said. “This might alienate their new friends in the Gulf, which, at the end of the day, may actually have more serious consequences.”

Netanyahu has repeatedly sought to relay the impression that he will keep his coalition partners on a short leash.

“They’re joining me, I’m not joining them,” he said earlier this month. “I’ll have two hands firmly on the steering wheel. I won’t let anybody do anything to LGBT [people] or to deny our Arab citizens their rights or anything like that.”

Zakheim said that Netanyahu, who is Israel’s longest-serving prime minister, from 1996 to 1999 and then from 2009 to 2021, has proven chops at steering rangy coalitions — but there are two key differences now. 

Netanyahu wants his coalition partners to pass a law that would effectively end his trial for criminal fraud, and so they exercise unprecedented leverage over him. Additionally, Netanyahu in the past has faced the greatest pressure from haredi Orthodox parties, who are susceptible to suasion by funding their impoverished sector. That’s not true of his new ideologically driven partners.

“If you look at his past governments, he has really never been forced into real policy decisions  by those to the right of him,” Zekheim said. “Now he’s got a problem because these 15 or so seats of those to his right are interested in policy, not just in money.”

Makovsky said Netanyahu appears to be leaving behind a conservatism that was sympathetic to the outlook of its American counterpart.

“His success has been that he’s a stabilizer. He’s risk-averse. He’s focused on the prosperity of the country, with high-tech success. He’s the one to be seen as the tenacious guardian against Iranian nuclear influence,” he said. “And those are things people could relate to. Now,  it just seems like he’s just throwing the playbook out the window.”


The post Netanyahu’s new government could lose a critical constituency: American conservatives appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Two Men Spit, Say ‘Free Palestine’ as They Attempt to Gain Access to Jewish Center in Dallas

Two young men who attempted to gain entry to a Jewish life center in Dallas by claiming to be window cleaners. Photo: Screenshot

Jewish community leaders on Monday denounced an antisemitic incident in which two men trespassed the grounds of the Olami Dallas Center in Texas and demanded entry to the home of its rabbi by claiming to be window cleaners.

According to StandWithUs, the perpetrators rang the doorbell of Rabbi Yaakov Rubin, who refused to let them, in response to which one of the men spat on the property as the other said “Free Palestine.” StandWithUs added that they also said “fake Jews” during their attempt to gain access to the building.

However, after realizing they were caught on camera, one of the perpetrators then yelled: “I love the Jews.”

StandWithUs shared video footage of the incident.

“There’s much brazenness required to walk up to a house, in an attempt to intimidate a Jewish Life center, and its host family, ring the doorbell, and say, ‘Free Palestine,’” Rubin said in a statement included in a press release StandWithUs issued following the incident. “This requires us to be that much bolder and proud of our Jewishness and Israel, through open pride, a strong sense of identity and nurturing our mission from G-d. We don’t run, won’t hide, we will be a light to the world.”

The incident at the Olami center comes amid a period of anti-Jewish violence in the US that is unprecedented in the country’s history. Since the Hamas-led Oct. 7, 2023, massacre across southern Israel, Jews have been murdered on the streets of Washington D.C., firebombed in Colorado with Molotov cocktails, and gang assaulted. In a recent incident just last month, a young man apparently radicalized by the far right set the Beth Israel Congregation on fire over its “Jewish ties,” a catastrophic event which has shut down the Jewish house of worship for the foreseeable future. Another arsonist struck the San Francisco Hillel building in December.

In Monday’s press release, Jordan Cope, director for policy and education at StandWithUs, said this latest incident is a reminder of the degree to which antisemitism is coupled with anti-Zionism.

“The youth’s mention of ‘fake Jews’ before his subsequent ‘free Palestine’ assertion followed by his ‘I love the Jews’ comments, is a clear reminder of how bigots all too often disingenuously disguise their antisemitism as a matter of Middle Eastern politics,” Cope said. “Efforts to intimidate the Jewish people into abandoning their pride of their indigenous homeless ultimately seek to intimidate Jews into silence and submission at a time where antisemitism continues to run rife throughout the West.”

He added, “Antisemitism is an age-old hatred. Anti-Israel sentiment is its newest spear.”

For several consecutive years, antisemitism in the US has surged to break “all previous annual records,” according to a series of reports issued by the ADL since it began recording data on antisemitic incidents.

The FBI disclosed similar numbers, showing that even as hate crimes across the US decreased overall, those perpetrated against Jews increased by 5.8 percent in 2024 to 1,938, the largest total recorded in over 30 years of the FBI’s counting them. Jewish American groups have noted that this rise in antisemitic hate crimes, which included 178 assaults, is being experienced by a demographic group which constitutes just 2 percent of the US population.

The wave of hatred has changed how American Jews perceive their status in America.

According to the results of a new survey commissioned by the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) and the Jewish Federations of North America, a majority of American Jews now consider antisemitism to be a normal and endemic aspect of life in the US.

A striking 57 percent reported believing “that antisemitism is now a normal Jewish experience,” the organizations disclosed, while 55 percent said they have personally witnessed or been subjected to antisemitic hatred, including physical assaults, threats, and harassment, in the past year.

The survey results revealed other disturbing trends: Jewish victims are internalizing their experiences, as 74 percent did not report what happened to them to “any institution or organization”; Jewish youth are bearing the brunt of antisemitism, having faced communications which aim to exclude Jews or delegitimize their concerns about rising hate; roughly a third of survey respondents show symptoms of anxiety; and the cultural climate has fostered a sense in the Jewish community that the non-Jewish community would not act as a moral guardrail against violence and threats.

Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

In JFNA’s first ‘State of the Jewish Union’ address, security and antisemitism loom large

(JTA) — Speaking from Washington, D.C., on Thursday, the president and CEO of the Jewish Federations of North America, Eric Fingerhut, laid out his assessment of the state of Jewish life in America.

“The state of the Jewish union in America is strong, but it is being tested,” said Fingerhut. “We are united in our commitment to America and to Jewish life, even as we worry about the real threats of violence and the growing acceptance of antisemitic rhetoric.”

During his remarks, which was billed as JFNA’s inaugural “State of the Jewish Union” address ahead of President Donald Trump’s State of the Union address next week, Fingerhut issued six recommendations to Congress which centered on increasing security for Jewish communities.

They included providing federal support for security personnel, expanding FBI capabilities to counter domestic terrorism, increasing support for local and state law enforcement, prosecuting hate crimes aggressively and holding social media companies accountable for amplifying antisemitic rhetoric.

“Jewish children and teens are facing growing risks online, including antisemitic harassment, bullying and extremist content,” said Fingerhut. “We recognize the difficulty of legislating in this field, but states are moving forward, and it’s time for Congress to move forward as well.”

Fingerhut also called on Congress to increase funding for the Nonprofit Security Grant Program to $1 billion annually, and “make the program more flexible and simpler to use.” (This year, the program is requiring recipients to support federal immigration enforcement and avoid programs advancing diversity, raising concern among many Jewish groups, including JFNA.)

At the beginning of his address, Fingerhut also emphasized the ties between the American Jewish community and Israel, which have come under scrutiny since JFNA published a survey earlier this month which found that only one-third of American Jews say they identify as Zionist.

“The focus of today’s talk will be about the state of Jews in America, but it is not possible to have that conversation without acknowledging and addressing the emotional, familial and religious connection between the American Jewish community and the people of Israel,” said Fingerhut.

Fingerhut’s remarks come shortly after Bret Stephens, the right-leaning Jewish New York Times columnist, argued during his 92NY’s annual “The State of World Jewry” speech that groups devoted to combating antisemitism, including the Anti-Defamation League, should abandon their strategy and instead focus on bolstering Jewish education and communal infrastructure.

During Fingerhut’s address, which largely centered on the security burdens placed on Jewish communities and concern for changes to social services funding, he also pivoted to a broader vision of Jewish life beyond the need for protection alone.

“It is important for the Congress to know that Jewish life is not only what we are protecting, but what we are building,” said Fingerhut. “It is Jewish education and Jewish experiences, but it is also human services, dignity and belonging.”

The post In JFNA’s first ‘State of the Jewish Union’ address, security and antisemitism loom large appeared first on The Forward.

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Trump and Biden officials clash over campus antisemitism actions as federal investigation kicks off

The first hearing held as part of a federal investigation into how the Trump administration has sought to counter campus antisemitism turned into a showdown between Democratic and Republican officials over how civil rights laws are being enforced.

Craig Trainor, who ran civil rights investigations at the Education Department for most of last year, described his predecessors in the Biden administration as unable to stop what he called “coordinated harassment and violence against Jewish students” and said its approach had been “equivocal, craven and pathetic.”

Matt Nosanchuk, who worked in same department under former President Joe Biden, defended his team’s work and said the White House under Trump is no longer concerned with helping Jewish students: “In the name of combating antisemitism, the current administration has built a Trojan horse to unleash a frontal, ideological attack on higher education.”

And Mondaire Jones, a former Democratic congressman from New York and current member of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, which is conducting the federal probe, accused the Trump officials who testified of violating federal law by refusing to turn over documents the commission requested as part of its inquiry. “You have a statutory obligation to comply,” Jones said.

The all-day hearing, which also included dueling analyses of civil rights law from academics and testimony from Jewish college students, is part of the first independent federal investigation into how the government has responded to allegations of antisemitism on college campuses. The bipartisan commission, whose members are appointed by Congress and the president, currently has a narrow Democratic majority and chair.

“When we started this project I thought there was no chance this could be anything other than bipartisan and free from sniping and partisanship about who did a better job,” J. Christian Adams, a Republican member of the commission, said at one point. “Alas, like everything else around here, that dream has died.”

The civil rights commission said it expects to release its findings and potential recommendations in the fall, although by that point it may be deadlocked between Democratic and Republican appointees and unable to reach agreement. Trump has unsuccessfully sought to remove its Democratic chair, Rochelle Garza.

Dueling views of federal actions

Several of the witnesses at the hearing focused on the Trump administration’s diminishment of the federal government’s capacity to investigate claims of antisemitism through its mass layoffs, which took a heavy toll at the departments of education and justice. The Education Department has closed 7 of its 12 regional offices and laid off around half of the employees tasked with enforcing civil rights laws before bringing many of them back to work in January.

Alyssa Lareau, a 16-year veteran of the civil rights division at the Justice Department who left last March, told the commission that the Trump administration appeared to violate federal law by freezing billions of dollars in grants to universities accused of tolerating antisemitism without following the rigorous process required and that courts had ruled several of the freezes to be illegal.

“Title XI has a detailed process for terminating federal funding,” said Lareau, referring to the section of civil rights law that applies to most antisemitism claims. “DOJ appears to not have adhered to the procedures mandated by Title XI or its own Title XI regulations.”

But Trainor argued that the Biden administration had let bureaucracy serve as an excuse for not taking sufficient action against the “mobs” and “hateful hordes” he described as brutalizing Jewish students on campus following the Oct. 7 Hamas attack in Israel and subsequent Gaza war.

“The president, when he was campaigning to Make America Great Again in 2024, promised to put an end to this,” Trainor said. “And he did.”

Participants at a rally against antisemitism on George Washington University’s campus in May 2024 wave large Israeli flags. Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

The Trump administration has made countering what it has described as antisemitism on the political left, and especially on college campuses, a top priority. That has included creating a special task force of its own to address it and reaching unprecedented settlements with elite schools that include Columbia, Brown, Cornell and the University of California, Los Angeles.

Some Jewish students have credited the Trump administration for lighting a fire under university administrations they felt had been reluctant to crack down on campus activism they felt created an antisemitic environment on their campuses. Others have described feeling like political pawns.

Sarah Silverman, a Jewish sophomore at Harvard, told the commission that the Justice Department had used the story of a mezuzah being removed from her doorframe as evidence in its attempt to strip research funding from the university and make its students ineligible to receive federal financial aid.

“How does destroying and discrediting educational institutions fight antisemitism?” she asked.

Most American Jews have also expressed skepticism of the White House’s approach. None of its main tactics — including attempting to deport international students who spoke out against Israel during the Gaza war — have received majority approval in surveys of the Jewish community, even as Jews remain alarmed by the level of domestic antisemitism.

Early in the panel, several legal scholars and activists voiced opposite views on whether strident anti-Zionist activism could create the kind of hostile environment for Jewish students that schools are required by law to prevent.

Benjamin Eidelson, an expert in anti-discrimination at Harvard Law School, argued that anti-Zionism could not be treated as a de facto form of antisemitism because “no views about Zionism or Israel are inherent in anyone’s ancestry.”

Eidelson said he was sympathetic to Jewish students who felt alienated by campus protests but “not everything that’s bad is a violation of Title XI.”

Mark Goldfeder, director of the pro-Israel National Jewish Advocacy Center, took the opposite tack. He brought a rock from Mount Zion in Jerusalem to demonstrate that Zionism was linked to the ancestral Jewish connection to Israel.

“Excluding someone based on where their ancestors are from — or based on an identity rooted in where they’re from — is not only wrong, it’s national origin discrimination and civil rights law forbids it,” he said.

The post Trump and Biden officials clash over campus antisemitism actions as federal investigation kicks off appeared first on The Forward.

Continue Reading

Copyright © 2017 - 2023 Jewish Post & News