Connect with us

Uncategorized

Paraguay’s election has implications for its Israeli embassy — and its relationship with Jerusalem

(JTA) — The question of where countries keep their embassies in Israel has become a debate that perpetually attracts controversy around the globe. In Paraguay, ahead of a national election on Sunday, the question is far from decided.

Since former President Donald Trump moved the U.S. embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem in 2018, a few other countries have followed suit, agreeing with much of Israel’s political establishment that the latter city, despite international and Palestinian opposition, is Israel’s sole capital. Israeli conservatives, such as those currently in power, have looked to court more countries to move their embassies and have counted each example as a historic victory.

The government of Paraguay, a country of around seven million people sandwiched in between Brazil and Argentina, has been back and forth on the Israel embassy issue. Shortly after Trump’s move, Paraguay’s president at the time, Horacio Cartes, moved his embassy as well. That year Guatemala did the same, and a few years later, Honduras and Kosovo followed suit. 

But only one month after being elected, in September 2018, Cartes’ successor Mario Abdo announced he would be moving the country’s embassy back to Tel Aviv. Despite being a member of the same conservative party as Cartes, Abdo felt that for “broad, lasting and just peace” among Israelis and Palestinians, Paraguay’s embassy should be in Tel Aviv. Critics of Trump’s decision say declaring Jerusalem as Israel’s sole capital hurts the chances of a two-state solution, as the Palestinians would look to claim part of Jerusalem as their future state capital.

Abdo’s move quickly resulted in pushback. In Paraguay, pro-Israel protesters demonstrated outside the president’s residence in Asuncion. Former U.S. Vice President Mike Pence “strongly encouraged” Abdo to reconsider his decision, and Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu went beyond rhetoric: he closed Israel’s embassy in Paraguay. It hasn’t reopened since.

Election day on Sunday could bring the debate back to the fore. 

One of the two leading presidential candidates is 44-year-old economist Santiago Peña of the Colorado Party, Paraguay’s right-wing political party which has ruled the country for nearly 80 consecutive years (save for the period between 2008 and 2013). The party has been plagued by corruption allegations, and Peña has been tied to these scandals: he was finance minister under Cartes, who was recently sanctioned by the United States for undermining Paraguay’s democracy by “making cash payments to officials in exchange for their loyalty and support.”

Thanks in part to those corruption allegations, a non-Colorado candidate now has a serious shot of winning the presidency this year. Efraín Alegre is a more centrist candidate from Concertación, a coalition of political parties who came together to oppose Colorado’s domination. Earlier this month, polling from Encuesta Atlas had Alegre leading by a few percentage points, though other polling has found Peña in the lead.

In March, in a meeting with the Paraguayan-Israeli chamber of commerce, Peña announced that if he wins the election, one of his first actions as president will be to order the move of the Paraguayan embassy to Jerusalem. He said that Paraguay “recognizes that city as the capital of the State of Israel.” 

Efraín Alegre’s last statement on the issue of Paraguay’s embassy came in 2018, shortly after Paraguay initially moved its embassy to Jerusalem. Alegre argued that the move would fuel the conflict

In a statement provided exclusively to the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, Alegre confirmed that he would keep Paraguay’s embassy in Tel Aviv.

“Fundamentally, Paraguay is a country that respects international law. In its resolutions 181 of 1947, 478 of 1980, and 2334 of 2016, the United Nations Security Council has made clear the status of Jerusalem, not accepting its annexation or its declaration as the capital of Israel. This position is shared by all nations with only a few exceptions,” he wrote. “There is great potential for exchange and cooperation between Paraguay and Israel, and Paraguay will continue to defend Israel’s right to a peaceful existence. In fact, there is a long relationship of friendship between our nations. Paraguay’s vote at the United Nations in 1947 was the one that gave the majority for the recognition of Israel as an independent state. These close ties were not, nor are they now, subject to the status of Jerusalem.”

The Comunidad Judía del Paraguay, an organization which encompasses all the Jewish institutions in the country , remains apolitical but fervently Zionist, similar to Jewish organizations in other Latin American countries. The community of around 1,000 Jews is mostly affiliated with the Conservative movement and is concentrated in Paraguay’s capital of Asuncion. The city contains a local chapter of the Chabad-Lubavitch Hasidic movement, a Jewish day school and a Hebrew Union that organizes religious and athletic activities.

“We as a community have maintained very good relations with all governments and we will continue to work with whoever is elected,” said Mariano Mirelman, executive director of the Comunidad Judía del Paraguay.

But it is possible that if Peña is elected and moves the embassy, the topic of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will re-enter public discourse in Paraguay. And this has the potential to fuel antisemitic attitudes, according to research by the Latin American Jewish Congress (or LAJC), an arm of the World Jewish Congress. 

In Paraguay, serious antisemitism incidents are rare, but according to the LAJC, antisemitism in Paraguay does appear online, especially related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

In a yet-to-be- released 2022 study by the LAJC’s Observatorio Web program of more than 42,000 tweets in Paraguay related to Jews, Israel or the Holocaust, 6.45% of them were antisemitic and included making comparisons between Israel and Nazi Germany, which constitutes antisemitism according to the LAJC. 

If Paraguay’s embassy does move back to Jerusalem, that would mean that more than half of the embassies in Jerusalem are from Latin America, joining Honduras and Guatemala. 

According to Bishara Bahbah, author of “Israel and Latin America: The Military Connection,” it’s not an accident that the majority of these countries are from Central and South America. Although ideologically they may not feel strongly about the embassy issue, they know they can curry favor with the United States by strongly supporting Israel. 

“Latin American countries view Israel’s special relationship with the United States as a critical element of their relationship with Israel,” Bahbah tells JTA. “Because if they are in need of U.S. support in one or two or three areas, they tend to lean on Israel to convince the U.S. government to provide them whatever they are seeking.”

Due to its size and lack of regional power, Paraguay’s potential decision to move its embassy to Jerusalem will likely not have a domino effect, Bahbah said. Further, although the Biden administration has left the U.S. embassy in Jerusalem, it has shown no signs of pressuring Latin American countries to move their embassies the way the Trump administration did.

Regardless of what happens with Paraguay, Netanyahu has not given up in his fight to have Jerusalem recognized as Israel’s capital worldwide. As he said while visiting Italy last month: “I believe the time has come for Rome to recognize Jerusalem as the ancestral capital of the Jewish people for three thousand years, as the United States did with a gesture of great friendship.”


The post Paraguay’s election has implications for its Israeli embassy — and its relationship with Jerusalem appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

The Gaza hostage crisis could forever change how American Jews relate to Israel — but it’s not too late to fix that

In the aftermath of the deadly terror attack at a Hanukkah party on Australia’s Bondi Beach, Jews who have watched the global surge in antisemitism with growing dread are once again considering the need to seek refuge in the Jewish state.

It’s a conclusion many native Israelis find bewildering. Oct. 7 and everything that followed has left them feeling deeply abandoned by a government they no longer trust to protect – or rescue – them. In the past two years, they are quick to note, more Jewish lives have been lost in Israel than anywhere else in the world. This disconnect over Jewish safety was shaped in no small part by the 251 men, women, and children taken hostage on Oct. 7 — and, perhaps even more profoundly, by the long, agonizing struggle to bring them back.

What began as a unified call to “Bring Them Home” soon split into two very different narratives. In Israel, public consensus collapsed as families increasingly blamed the government for sacrificing their loved ones on the altar of political survival, creating rifts that would eventually splinter not only the hostage movement but Israeli society itself.

In the United States, that dynamic played out very differently. Amidst rising hostilities coming from outside the Jewish community and deepening divisions forming within, the hostage rallies remained a source of solidarity, a respite from conflict rather than the source. But it also left many with a distorted view of events, further widening the already-existing gap between how American Jews relate to Israel and how Israelis understand themselves.

Few people are better positioned to explain that gap than one of the people who helped create it. Israeli-born Shany Granot-Lubaton is a longtime pro-democracy activist. After moving to New York City three years ago, she led protests there against the Israeli government’s 2023 judicial overhaul. On Oct. 7, Granot-Lubaton pivoted abruptly to hostage advocacy, eventually co-founding the American version of Israel’s Hostages and Missing Families Forum.

“Right away, I understood we would need a different approach from the way we spoke during the judicial overhaul protests,” Granot-Lubaton told the Forward. Her first priority, she said, was honoring the wishes of the families themselves. While far from a monolith, the majority believed messaging outside Israel should avoid overt confrontation with the government, even as some of those same family members were among its fiercest critics at home.

One of them was Udi Goren, whose cousin Tal Haimi was killed defending Kibbutz Nir Yitzhak on Oct. 7, his body abducted to Gaza. In Israel, Goren became one of the most active figures in the struggle, managing the Forum’s Knesset operations and confronting lawmakers directly. However, he fully supported taking a more restrained approach abroad.

“An effective public campaign is about leverage,” Goren said, in an interview with the Forward. “I didn’t see how attacking the Israeli government in the U.S. would motivate anyone with power to secure a deal to do it faster.”

With American politics becoming more polarized and the prospect of a second Trump term looming, the goal was to keep the tent wide and bipartisan — without completely absolving Netanyahu of responsibility.

“It was a fine line,” Granot-Lubaton recalled. “At every rally, we made sure to say — from the stage — that the Israeli government must do everything they can to bring  them home. But we didn’t want to delve too deeply into accusations.”

There were other challenges as well. An open-tent structure inevitably included voices whose priorities did not fully align with the organizers’ carefully calibrated messaging. This included a new crop of influencers who positioned themselves as champions of the hostage cause, filling their feeds with “on-the-ground reporting” from rallies, vigils, and reunions. But their content also reflected personal worldviews and financial interests, dictating which parts of the story were amplified and which were left out. While some managed to remain politically neutral, others co-opted the cause to advance their own agendas.

For Goren, those tensions mattered less than the mission. Anyone advocating for the hostages was an ally — with one red line. “If you’re using this to spread Islamophobia or hatred against Arabs, you’re damaging the cause,” he said. “But beyond that, even if you were very conservative or right-wing — as long as your priority was bringing the hostages home — then for this campaign, you and I were in the same camp.”

The approach appeared to have worked. In the United States and across much of the diaspora, the hostage campaign remained unified.

But when Granot-Lubaton moved back to Israel with her family in 2024, she came face to face with a very different reality. Unlike the apolitical movement she and others had carefully cultivated back in the States, here the hostage struggle had become deeply politicized. Netanyahu and his allies, aided by sympathetic media outlets and an ideologically entrenched base, managed to paint the Bring Them Home campaign as a “leftist” project.

Families were forcibly removed from Knesset meetings, publicly attacked and delegitimized by ministers, harassed online and confronted in the streets; some were manhandled by police or even arrested. Conspiracy theories proliferated — including claims that some families were paid agents of the anti-government movement. In one particularly bizarre case, rumors circulated that hostage Matan Zangauker was not in captivity, but hiding out in Egypt.

On Oct. 13, 2025, the infighting briefly gave way to collective joy, as Israel welcomed home the last 20 living hostages. But the unity did not last. Before the hostages had even been released from the hospital, they and their families came under renewed vitriol — criticized for speaking against Netanyahu, for failing to sufficiently praise the IDF, and for asking the public for financial assistance.

It was a bitter twist of irony. The same acts that had come to symbolize anti-Israel extremism abroad — tearing down hostage posters, accusing hostages of lying — were now being carried out by Israelis themselves. And yet, so much of that derision has remained largely unacknowledged outside of Israel.

While Hamas is still holding the body of Master Sgt. Ran Gvili, the official campaign is over. Hostage Square has been dismantled. The Forum has shuttered its Tel Aviv headquarters and ended the weekly rallies. Goren, finally able to bury his beloved cousin, and Granot-Lubaton, now resettled in Israel, have begun new chapters in their lives.

Both stand by the strategy that shaped the movement abroad — but agree that what comes next must look different. The version of Israel that proved effective in mobilizing support overseas during the crisis now risks reinforcing a status quo many inside the country are fighting to change. And they are asking the same communities that rallied so powerfully for the hostages to engage just as seriously with the struggle over Israel’s future.

For Goren, that means pushing progressive Jews past their long-standing reluctance to “get their hands dirty” with Israeli politics. “Conservative and right-wing American Jews don’t hesitate for a second to get involved,” he asserted. “They get close to the government and the people in power. And they put their money where their mouth is.” He points to the Kohelet Policy Forum, whose American donors helped drive the judicial overhaul in Israel. “These are people that never lived in Israel a day in their lives, pushing the country towards a judicial coup,” he said. “We cannot afford to have Jews who care about Israeli democracy sit this one out.”

Granot-Lubaton shares the urgency, albeit with added empathy. “I don’t judge anyone who is uncomfortable speaking out loudly right now,” she noted. “You don’t need to be protesting in the streets. But you have to educate yourself. You have to talk to one another. Reach out to people who understand what’s happening here, invite them to speak in your synagogues.”

Responsibility, she added, cuts both ways. Israel’s pro-democracy movement must do more to meet American Jews where they are. “It’s not just translating content into English,” she said. “It’s understanding what Jewish communities are experiencing — and why challenging Israel feels so risky.”

But she categorically rejects the idea that Zionism and criticism are at odds. “I chose to come back and raise my children here,” she said. “Clearly I believe in this place. But the only way we can truly flourish is if we’re honest about what we’ve done and what we’re doing. I hope American Jews will join that movement. Unconditional love and support are no longer enough.”

The post The Gaza hostage crisis could forever change how American Jews relate to Israel — but it’s not too late to fix that appeared first on The Forward.

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

VIDEO: Historian Vivi Laks tells history of the London Yiddish Press

די ייִדיש־ליגע האָט לעצטנס אַרויפֿגעשטעלט אַ ווידעאָ, וווּ די היסטאָריקערין וויווי לאַקס דערציילט וועגן דער אַמאָליקער ייִדישער פּרעסע אין לאָנדאָן.

צ‫ווישן 1884 און 1954 האָט די לאָנדאָנער פּרעסע אַרויסגעגעבן הונדערטער פֿעליעטאָנען פֿון אָרטיקע שרײַבערס וועגן אָרטיקן ייִדישן לעבן.

די קורצע דערציילונגען זענען סאַטיריש, קאָמיש און רירנדיק, אויף טשיקאַווע טעמעס ווי למשל קאַמפֿן אין דער היים צווישן די מינים; פּאָליטיק אין די קאַפֿעען, און ספֿרי־תּורה אויף די גאַסן. די דערציילונגען האָבן געשריבן סײַ גוט באַקאַנטע שרײַבער (למשל, מאָריס ווינטשעווסקי, יוסף־חיים ברענער און אסתּר קרייטמאַן), סײַ היפּש ווייניקער באַקאַנטע.

שבֿע צוקער, די ייִדיש־לערערין און מחבר פֿון אַ ייִדישן לערנבוך, פֿירט דעם שמועס מיט וו‫יווי לאַקס. זיי וועלן פֿאָרלייענען אַ טייל פֿון די פֿעליעטאָנען אויף ענגליש און ייִדיש, און אַרומרעדן די טעמעס וואָס די פּרעסע האָט אַרויסגעהויבן.

וו‫יווי לאַקס איז אַ היסטאָריקערין פֿון לאָנדאָנס ייִדישן „איסט־ענד“, ווי אויך אַן איבערזעצער און זינגערין. זי איז די מחברטע פֿון Whitechapel Noise און London Yiddishtown, ווי אויך אַקאַדעמישע און פּאָפּולערע אַרטיקלען. זי איז אַ קולטור־טוערין אין לאָנדאָן און האָט מיטאָרגאַניזירט סײַ דעם גרויסן ייִדישן פּאַראַד, סײַ דעם Yiddish Café Trust. זי זינגט פּאָפּולערע לידער אויפֿן „קאָקני־ייִדיש“ מיט די גרופּעס קלעזמער־קלאָב און קאַטשאַנעס, און פֿירט שפּאַצירטורן איבער דעם „איסט־ענד“.

The post VIDEO: Historian Vivi Laks tells history of the London Yiddish Press appeared first on The Forward.

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Puppet Monty Pickle is guest on the Forward’s ‘Yiddish Word of the Day’ 

It’s not every day that a kosher dill pickle puppet gets a chance to learn some Yiddish.

Monty Pickle, star of the children’s series The Monty Pickle Show, recently joined Rukhl Schaechter, host of the Forward’s YouTube series Yiddish Word of the Day, for an episode teaching viewers the Yiddish words for various wild animals.

Or as they’re called in Yiddish: vilde khayes.

The Monty Pickle Show, a puppet comedy on YouTube and TikTok, aims to show young viewers what it means to be Jewish in a fun, lively way. The series was created by the Emmy Award-winning producers of Sesame Street and Fraggle Rock.

So far, he’s met a number of Jewish personalities, including rabbis, musicians and chefs, and explored holidays like Rosh Hashanah, Hanukkah and Passover.

Sitting alongside Rukhl during the lesson, Monty eagerly tries to guess what each word means, providing for some very funny moments.

 

The post Puppet Monty Pickle is guest on the Forward’s ‘Yiddish Word of the Day’  appeared first on The Forward.

Continue Reading

Copyright © 2017 - 2023 Jewish Post & News