Connect with us

Uncategorized

Scott Wiener, Spencer Pratt and Eric Swalwell’s replacement: 5 primaries Jews are watching in California

(JTA) — Jews in the Golden State head into Tuesday’s primaries grappling with a host of weighty questions.

Can a Jewish progressive who believes Israel committed genocide still earn the support of his local Jewish community? Can an ardent critic of Israel be dethroned in Silicon Valley? And is a trollish Los Angeles mayoral candidate from reality TV preferable to a Mamdani-esque progressive?

For many of these races, the primaries won’t be the end of the story: State law mandates that the top two vote-getters, regardless of party, will move on to November’s general election. But the dynamics of several races ensure they will be seen as the latest bellwether for progressive political voters’ views on Israel, and local Jewish groups have compiled a voter guide specifically tailored to their concerns.

Here are five California races of particular interest to Jews.

A tight 3-way Los Angeles mayoral race

Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass is facing a tough bid for her reelection, and one of her challengers — L.A. City Council member Nithya Raman — has appeared with left-wing anti-Israel streamer Hasan Piker and drawn comparisons to New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani. Raman made a last-minute filing to challenge Bass not long after endorsing her for reelection.

For some Jewish Angelenos, the prospect of a mayor who has vocally criticized Israel is enough of a concern to instead back Spencer Pratt — a reality-TV star with links to conspiracy theorist Alex Jones. While Pratt has distanced himself from some of his past beliefs, including that the 9/11 attacks were an inside job, he has dodged questions about his friendship with Jones. (The mayoralty is officially a nonpartisan position.)

“A Raman mayorship would make every Jewish Angeleno less safe,” Sam Yebri, a local political activist with the centrist group Thrive LA who is also involved with pro-Israel lobbying group AIPAC, told JTA. The candidate’s Piker appearance was central to Yebri’s objections, and has also been a target from Pratt: “I would never sit next to somebody who has no problems with Jews getting attacked,” he told a local TV station.

Other Jews pointed to Raman’s absence at a recent City Council meeting marking Jewish American Heritage Month as a reason for their negative feelings toward her.

There are some key differences between Raman and her East Coast counterpart when it comes to Israel and Jews.

While Mamdani is an anti-Zionist aligned with the Democratic Socialists of America, Raman says she supports Israel’s right to exist and opposes the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement against Israel.

The local DSA chapter, after endorsing Raman for council in 2024, has since condemned her for her more moderate stances on Israel. Her constituents include large Jewish and Israeli neighborhoods; and Jewish leaders in the area have told the Forward they trust her and have had good conversations with her. She has attended services at local synagogues. (A local pro-Israel group also endorsed Raman in 2024.)

Yebri is instead encouraging voters to vote either for Bass or Pratt. Both of them, he said, “have made significant efforts to listen to the concerns of the Jewish community and have committed to protecting houses of worship and supporting LAPD funding.”

Pratt, a former star of “The Hills,” has focused much of his campaign on the city’s response to the 2025 Pacific Palisades fire (he lost his own house in the blaze). He has not made Jewish issues a centerpiece of his campaign, though he told CNBC last week that “all of my best friends since kindergarten are Jewish” and that he opposes antisemitism. “I want Jewish moms to feel safe for their kids to go to the temple or … to class at UCLA,” he said.

Yebri is not the only Jew backing Pratt. According to a report in the Jewish magazine Tablet, Ashley Underwood, a producer for Jewish comedian Sacha Baron Cohen and wife of Jewish comedian Larry David, hosted a fundraiser for the candidate that was attended by producer Hilary Shor and philanthropist Irene Medavoy. Shor then wrote on social media that she and others were “transfixed by the power of his message, which hopefully will help save our town.”

In the event no candidate secures above 50% of the vote (a likely outcome), the election will head to a November runoff.

Will Pelosi’s replacement be a ‘lefty Jew,’ or a Piker-backed leftist?

Perhaps no congressional race is being watched more closely than the bid in San Francisco to succeed retiring former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

California state Sen. Scott Wiener, a Jewish progressive with a growing national profile, is mounting a spirited bid for the 11th District seat and leading in the polls. But Wiener, who did not return a JTA request for comment, alienated many in the local Jewish community when he said he believed Israel had committed genocide in Gaza.

San Francisco Jewish groups condemned his comments, and the blowback caused him to step down from his role as the head of the state’s Jewish Democratic caucus.

“It is a hard year to be a lefty Jew running for Congress,” he told Politico, suggesting he believes, on the one hand, that “Israel’s existence is critically important, it is home to half of the Jews on Earth,” and on the other hand that “the Israeli government is an abomination, the Israeli government is engaged in an effort to destroy Palestinian communities.”

Complicating matters further for Wiener is the fact that one of his opponents, Saikat Chakrabarti, is running further to his left on Israel. A former chief of staff for Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez who also worked on one of Jewish progressive Sen. Bernie Sanders’ presidential campaigns, Chakrabarti backs a full stop of weapons sales to Israel and has campaigned with Piker.

Chakrabarti has also opposed a local measure intended to combat antisemitism in public schools, which Wiener spearheaded. The law creates new enforcement mechanisms to address antisemitism in schools, which critics have argued would amount to surveilling teachers. Wiener spearheaded the bill; Chakrabarti has called it “a censorship bill,” while a top aide of his has called it “harmful.”

Yet Ocasio-Cortez herself has not endorsed Chakrabarti, which has become a sore spot in his campaign. Meanwhile, Pelosi’s endorsement went to a third candidate, San Francisco supervisor Connie Chan — who also said she believes Israel committed genocide, and has proposed pairing U.S. funding for Israeli defensive systems with aid packages for Gaza.

In a last-minute shakeup to the race, some pro-Palestinian sites and accounts claimed over the weekend that AIPAC-aligned donors had funneled money to Chan’s campaign via a series of other PACs. The allegations, which JTA has not verified, prompted Chan’s campaign to issue a statement urging “any organization supporting Connie to respect the very clear values she has laid out not to accept donations from AIPAC.”

A spokesperson for AIPAC did not immediately respond to a JTA request for comment on the claims, which if true would mark an almost unheard-of instance of AIPAC funding a candidate who has accused Israel of genocide. Chakrabarti, a centimillionaire who has self-funded much of his campaign, mused that  “AIPAC wants to keep me out of the top two.”

Local Jewish voters, who have contended many times with area activism targeting Israel on a range of fronts, have agonized over whether to back Wiener. Some communal leaders are now arguing that they should — even if they disagree with his “genocide” comments.

“There is a version of Jewish political engagement that seeks to punish anyone who uses the word genocide, regardless of their record, regardless of their opponents,” Jewish organizers Arthur Slepian and Jan Reicher wrote in the Jewish News of Northern California. This position, they argued, is “self-defeating.”

“Wiener made a statement that many in the community found painful,” they continued. “But he did not abandon his commitment to Jewish security, Jewish education or the physical safety of Jewish institutions. He did not endorse the groups that chant for the elimination of the Jewish state. He did not cast Israel’s existence as a ‘colonial project’ that needs dismantling.”

Some Silicon Valley Jews hope to take down Ro Khanna

If Jews in San Francisco are largely conflicted on Wiener, their counterparts in Silicon Valley are much more unified — against their district’s outspoken pro-Palestinian incumbent.

Rep. Ro Khanna is one of Israel’s fiercest critics in Congress and has even made common cause with far-right Republicans, including Rep. Thomas Massie, over the issue. Khanna has also made no secret of his 2028 ambitions for higher office. Disaffected Jews and Israeli Americans in the 17th District are hoping to use this primary to send a message to Khanna by backing tech entrepreneur Ethan Agarwal, who has positioned himself as the congressman’s pro-Israel challenger.

“We have lost trust in his ability to represent us, and will not accept empty condemnations of antisemitism while he amplifies radical antisemitic messages at every possible turn,” Tali Klima of Bay Area Jewish Coalition-Action recently said about Khanna.

Of particular concern was Khanna’s appearance in a documentary about Israel also featuring YouTuber Ian Carroll, who has claimed that a “modern Jewish mafia” controls the United States. (Khanna distanced himself from Carroll after criticism.) The congressman has also appeared multiple times on Hasan Piker’s stream.

A PLO member’s grandson runs for Congress, again

Democrats are hoping to flip a San Diego-area district held by retiring Republican Rep. Darrell Issa. But to do that, they may have to back a candidate with an unusual pedigree.

Ammar Campa-Najjar, a former Obama staffer and U.S. Navy Reserve officer of Mexican and Palestinian descent, is putting his Palestinian identity front and center in his pitch for the seat. Campa-Najjar spent part of his childhood in Gaza, where his family moved after the Oslo Accords “to help build a secular Palestinian government and foster economic cooperation with Israel,” his campaign biography says.

Another part of his family story: His grandfather, Muhammad Yusuf al-Najjar, was a top figure in the Palestine Liberation Organization who was targeted by the Mossad for what they alleged was his role in the 1972 Munich Olympics massacre of Israeli athletes.

This became a sticking point for Campa-Najjar during a failed 2018 congressional run in a different district, when his Republican opponent said his background made him “a national security risk.” At the time, local Jewish leaders came to Campa-Najjar’s defense.

Also at the time, Campa-Najjar had condemned what he believed to be his grandfather’s role in planning Munich. But after an Israeli investigative journalist in 2019 questioned al-Najjar’s role, his grandson said he had “renewed skepticism” about the allegations that he was descended from a terrorist.

Last month, in response to a claim from far-right Jewish activist Laura Loomer that he was “Palestinian terrorist spawn,” Campa-Najjar wrote, “My grandmother was a Palestinian mother raising children, she was unjustly killed in her home. I never met my grandfather, I knew him as much as you do. What happened is a matter of disputed history.”

Campa-Najjar has also met with former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, who was part of the commando unit that killed his grandfather.

This is Campa-Najjar’s third congressional run, but the aftermath of Oct. 7 and the Gaza war puts his background in a new context — as does the recent mass shooting at a San Diego mosque (the candidate himself is a Christian convert from Islam). At the same time, some progressives have cooled on him, accusing him of having moderated his stances on a range of issues across his different campaigns.

One Jew in his corner: Democratic Rep. Sara Jacobs, who represents a neighboring district and is Campa-Najjar’s longtime girlfriend. A super PAC backed by Jacobs’ grandfather Irwin Jacobs, a billionaire and business entrepreneur, has spent heavily for Campa-Najjar. (Neither Campa-Najjar nor Jacobs returned JTA requests for comment.)

J Street is also backing his candidacy, while Democratic Majority for Israel is spending heavily on his primary opponent, San Diego city council member Marni von Wilpert. A Republican also running in the district means that only one Democrat is likely to advance to the general election.

Will Swalwell’s replacement make noise about Israel?

Rep. Eric Swalwell was among the most resolutely pro-Israel Democrats in Congress. He was also accused of sexual misconduct by multiple former staffers. Swalwell has called the allegations “false,” but resigned from his seat — and bowed out of the governors’ race — opening a vacancy in the state’s 14th District.

Hoping to step into his shoes is state Sen. Aisha Wahab, who is leading in a poll commissioned by the left-wing Working Families Party PAC. A child of Afghan refugees, Wahab has collaborated with local Jewish leaders before on refugee-related issues, including on a 2021 fundraiser for Afghan refugee resettlement in the aftermath of the U.S. pullout from the country. That fundraiser was held at Manny’s, a San Francisco deli owned by an Afghani Jew that has been targeted multiple times — both before and after Oct. 7 — by anti-Zionist vandals.

But East Bay Jews hoping that Swalwell’s replacement might match his pro-Israel record will likely be disappointed. Wahab, like most of her Democratic opponents in the primary, has said that Israel committed genocide in Gaza after the Oct. 7 attacks.

At the same time, she has shown a willingness to work with Jews on Israel-related matters. In the California state Senate in fall 2025, Wahab coauthored a resolution to “call for the end to the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza and the immediate release of all hostages.” Notably, her coauthor was Wiener, the self-proclaimed “lefty Jew” state senator who is also running for Congress in the nearby 11th District.

One prominent local Jewish leader has endorsed a different Democrat. Santa Clara County District Attorney Jeff Rosen, whose court-ordered removal from a case involving Stanford pro-Palestinian protesters has triggered allegations of antisemitism, is backing entrepreneur Rakhi Israni.

In 2024, Israni also appeared alongside local Jewish leaders on a panel discussing links between antisemitism and “Hinduphobia.” Some of Israni’s associations with more conservative Jewish and pro-Israel causes, including reported past personal donations to political campaigns for far-right Jewish pundit Laura Loomer and Christians United For Israel director David Brog, have further raised eyebrows among progressives. Israni is so far the leader in fundraising among the candidates.

“In a few instances, I financially contributed to candidates who later took positions that I strongly oppose, including one whose views I find abhorrent and incompatible with my own,” Israni, who did not immediately respond to a JTA request for comment, said in a statement last month in response to a report on her spending by the San Jose Mercury News. “But highlighting a handful of past donations without acknowledging years of overwhelmingly supporting Democratic candidates creates a misleading picture.” Israni did not name specific candidates in her statement.

Due to the circumstances of Swalwell’s resignation, the district is facing several different rounds of voting. Tuesday’s primary is for November’s general election, while a subsequent primary on June 16 will determine the top two contenders to fill the remainder of the current term, which will be voted on in August.

Other Jewish stories to watch on the ballot

  • In the crowded 16-person field for lieutenant governor, two of the candidates are Jewish, and both have been endorsed by a range of leading state Jewish groups. Whoever wins will sit on the boards of the state’s public university systems, including the University of California, whose campuses have been wracked by tensions over Israel and antisemitism since Oct. 7.
  • Campus Israel politics have also rocked a district attorney race. Santa Clara County DA Jeff Rosen, who is Jewish, has sought to prosecute a group of pro-Palestinian vandals at Stanford University who destroyed campus property, and had used the case in his campaign literature to claim that he was fighting antisemitism. That led a judge to recently remove Rosen from his effort to retry the case. Another Jewish DA in the state has since accused the judge of antisemitism. All this could upend Rosen’s bid for reelection as he faces a challenger, Daniel Chung, who used to be his subordinate. Chung has led protests against Rosen tied to the Stanford case.
  • In a repeat of primary dynamics in other states, a pro-Israel group is spending heavily in a U.S. House race in a district without a large Jewish constituency. Democratic Majority For Israel is pouring $500,000 into TV ads in the Bakersfield-area 22nd District, which is conservative-leaning and majority Latino. The ads target progressive school board member Randy Villegas, who is backed by Bernie Sanders and other left-wing figureheads. Villegas has opposed continued U.S. military aid to Israel — though his opponent, moderate state Assemblymember Jasmeet Bains, also previously said Israel had committed genocide in Gaza (she has since walked it back). National Democratic groups are also backing Bains as the party hopes to flip the district.

The post Scott Wiener, Spencer Pratt and Eric Swalwell’s replacement: 5 primaries Jews are watching in California appeared first on The Forward.

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

I was born after 9/11. I still carry the memories of that day.

Earlier this week, I was talking with my mother over the phone about her experience on 9/11. She walked me through the familiar parts — how she was in our Upper West Side apartment when she learned about the attacks from a relative, how she went to the garage to get the car so they could drive to a friend’s house upstate once she realized the attacks were acts of terror. There were still hijacked planes in the air, and she worried New York City might be targeted again. Then, she said, “This part is going to make me cry.”

I hadn’t remembered what came next, but suddenly it came back to me. “Oh no, me too,” I said.

While she waited for my father to come back uptown from his office in the Financial District, she stopped inside a fire station across from the garage. Inside was a lone firefighter, who’d stayed behind to man the station while the rest of his company was inside the towers. He was watching the news on television, and my mom stood next to him, watching too, when the towers fell.

“We just lost so many men,” he said.

I wasn’t there when it happened; I wasn’t even alive. But I’d heard this story before, I’d walked dozens of times past that same fire station, which now has a plaque commemorating the seven firefighters who died on 9/11. Hearing the story again on the phone, I found myself walking down the streets of Washington D.C., bawling.

I’m 23, born a year-and-a-half after 9/11. Most Americans my age learned about the attacks in school, as history. I’m part of the 16% who learned through family or friends.

The discovery happened by accident, when I was in kindergarten. My mom and I were in a children’s store on the Upper West Side, when we started flipping through a picture book about the history of New York City. Most of the book was unremarkable, but the end was unexpected: a scene of the smoldering twin towers.

I forget what exactly happened next, but here’s what I do remember: My mom was upset that the shop hadn’t provided a warning about the book’s end, and I was confused about why she was upset. I was five, too young to understand the image and never one to let a question go unanswered; I must have pestered her until she offered up an explanation.

The author, as a five-year-old. Photo by Sage Lattman

She hadn’t been prepared to tell me about terrorism. She’d been evading the topic for some time, telling half-truths to avoid it. When I’d ask her why we had to take our shoes off in line at the airport, she’d just say it was to make sure no one had anything dangerous, leaving out the part about how a man had tried to get on a flight with bombs hidden in his shoes.

“9/11 is a huge thing for a parent to have to tell a kid about,” my mom told me this week. “You were a happy kid, and I didn’t want you to get scared or traumatized.”

The events, and impacts, of that day slowly unfolded for me as the years passed. I learned that my father had watched from Battery Park as the South Tower fell; he ran westward as plumes of smoke billowed toward him. I learned that my parents had friends who’d died in the towers, one of whom was the father of a boy I grew up with. I remember going to the 9/11 Memorial and Museum when it opened in 2014, feeling sick as I watched footage of people jumping out of the towers.

The New York Times recently interviewed dozens of Gen Z Americans about 9/11. I was struck by how disconnected many felt from the event. “It’s hard to feel sad about something that you don’t remember,” said Annika Heegaard, a 25-year-old now living in New York.

But for me, 9/11 doesn’t feel quite so far away. By now I’ve lived through other mass casualty events, like the Parkland shooting and the Oct. 7 Hamas attacks. But 9/11 is the only tragedy that my family members had such a direct connection to. “It was devastating,” my mom said.

I think the reason I can remember the exact moment I found out about 9/11 is because it changed my view of the world. I remember being almost unable to comprehend that anyone would do what the hijackers did. I wasn’t, as my mom feared, traumatized by learning about the attacks; I didn’t fear for my safety each day. But the knowledge was in some ways a loss of innocence — a discovery that people could do awful things and that the world wasn’t as safe a place as I had assumed.

The post I was born after 9/11. I still carry the memories of that day. appeared first on The Forward.

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

The DSA’s latest win was not about Israel — and it hurts the Jewish community to insist it was

When Democratic socialist David Morales defeated the incumbent mayor of Providence, Brett Smiley, in a historic primary win this week in Rhode Island, the election quickly became part of a narrative that has been coalescing around progressive political wins in the last year — the election of Zohran Mamdani as mayor of New York City, Abdul El-Sayed’s primary win in Michigan, the sweep of DSA-backed candidates in New York City’s recent primaries. The idea is that  this race was all about Israel — that it turned on a struggle between Zionists and pro-Palestinian activists.

A Jewish Telegraphic Agency story on Morales’s win features a quote from the founder of the Rhode Island-Israel Collaborative that Morales’s campaign was “fueled by pro-Palestinians and Israeli haters.” The founder of the far-right Rhode Island Coalition for Israel called some of Morales’ stances “anti-Israel and anti-Jewish.” Jewish Insider published a story the day before the primary headlined, “Antisemitism roils Providence mayoral race.” The Times of Israel’s story on the election is titled, “Jewish mayor of Providence loses Democratic primary to anti-Israel challenger.” (Smiley converted to Judaism in 2024, and made a controversial visit to Israel in 2025.)

But this narrative is false: Israel did not play a decisive role in this election. In reality, Morales was laser-focused on affordability, and — like most progressive candidates this year — rarely, if ever, brought up Israel unprompted. Indeed, the defining issue for the Morales campaign was not Israel, but rent stabilization.

Last April, Smiley vetoed legislation passed by Providence’s City Council to cap annual rent hikes at 4%. This ordinance is desperately needed: A recent study found that Providence is the least affordable city for renters in the country. Longtime residents are getting priced out, and essentially everyone who rents — and renters comprise 59% of the households in the city — understands that our trajectory is simply not sustainable.

By vetoing the most significant-ever attempt to bring this crisis under control, Smiley made this a race about a challenger fighting to make Providence affordable and an incumbent prioritizing his corporate donors, who gave Smiley a historically large $1.3 war chest for his campaign. (Morales had less than $300,000, largely from individual donors.)

This issue served as precisely the kind of defining contrast that pro-Israel Super PAC spending became in recent congressional elections elsewhere. Support from AIPAC has provided an impossible-to-obscure contrast to Democratic primary voters in races such as Illinois’s 9th Congressional District, New York’s 10th Congressional District, and Michigan’s Senate primary. But in Providence, the scandal wasn’t AIPAC donors — it was the wealthy developers and corporate landlords who funded Smiley’s campaign.

It is true that Morales criticized Smiley’s active participation in the Combat Antisemitism Movement, a project so Trumpian that the Jewish Federations of North America and Jewish Council for Public Affairs both left the group after it released a video claiming that diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts are antisemitic. Morales also came out in support of a ballot initiative that would require the City of Providence to divest from the debt of foreign countries “conducting ethnic cleansing, apartheid, illegal military occupation, or genocide,” as determined by U.S. and international law. Some of Morales’s supporters — and in particular some portion of his army of campaign volunteers — were undoubtedly motivated by an appreciation for Morales’s willingness to take a moral stance. But it simply wasn’t a top five, or even (by my estimation) a top 10 issue in this race.

And I don’t understand the inclination to claim otherwise. Certainly it doesn’t make sense for members of the Israel lobby; after all, having another election be lost due to voters’ anger over a politician’s fealty to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is not good for their political project. But more importantly, these allegations — particularly the false claim that this race was somehow “roiled” by antisemitism — are harmful to Rhode Island’s Jewish community as a whole.

Take, for example, the “antisemitism” referenced by Jewish Insider, which consisted, in total, of a few instances in which a Hitler mustache and devil horns were drawn on Smiley’s campaign signs. Of course, defacing political signs is never good, and Morales immediately condemned the vandalism. But as a Jewish former elected official who experienced actual antisemitism over the course of my time in Rhode Island politics, I have to laugh at the idea that this graffiti was antisemitic.

To compare someone to Hitler is basically to say they’re the worst person ever. It’s often a problematic comparison (because almost nobody is actually as evil as Hitler), but it’s not antisemitic to say, in effect, “Hitler was bad, and so is this other guy.” And vandals were drawing devil’s horns on pictures of Smiley years before he converted. In fact, I don’t think the average Providence voter even knows Smiley is Jewish; it’s certainly not an important part of his political identity, given that he literally wasn’t yet Jewish when he first won election to the mayor’s office in 2022, or during his prior run for the seat in 2014.

Antisemitism is a real and growing problem — in our country, and here in Rhode Island. Just a few years ago, dozens of swastika-brandishing neo-Nazis rallied a block from my home. Every time that cynical politicians cry wolf on this threat, they are minimizing its danger in the eyes of most people, making our community less prepared to respond to actual incidents of antisemitism when they occur.

Even worse, when some partisans of Israel claim that everyone who dares to say Israel is committing genocide and apartheid is an antisemite — that is, someone who hates all Jews — the implication is that Israel’s wars and violence against Palestinians are somehow projects undertaken by all Jews, rather than the crimes of a specific far-right government and its supporters. And if you repeat that message often enough, some people are going to start believing it — which certainly does not make me or my young Jewish sons safer.

David Morales ran on a pledge to build a Providence for all. “All” includes members of the Jewish community, many of whom — including myself, and Morales’s campaign manager and field director, to name just a few — are excited to support his vision. It is to no one’s benefit — least of all Providence’s Jews — to try to seed conflict and distrust in what should be a moment of profound hope and possibility for our whole city.

The post The DSA’s latest win was not about Israel — and it hurts the Jewish community to insist it was appeared first on The Forward.

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Jewish and Muslim leaders avoided the hardest interfaith topic for years, and now face a ‘massive fault line’

It’s been a quarter century since a wave of distrust and violence against Muslims swept across America in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attacks. But in some pockets of New York City and across the U.S., Jewish neighbors extended a hand of friendship and an interfaith movement was reborn.

Dialogues turned into dinners. Dinners spawned theatrical collaborations. Collaborations turned out volunteers to feed the homeless and sent interfaith teams to Capitol Hill.

Still, as the Palestinian uprising known as the Second Intifada continued to unfold in the Middle East, even the most promising partnerships avoided the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

“We deliberately parked it on the side,” said Daisy Khan, the former executive director of American Society for Muslim Advancement and founder of the Women’s Islamic Initiative. “We called it the elephant in the room that none of us could handle.”

Now, 25 years after the terrorist attacks that inspired a movement, leaders realize that silence was a critical mistake.

As this year’s Jewish High Holidays, a time of remembrance and repentance, begin at sundown on the 25th anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks, American Jewish leaders are reflecting on mistakes made and words they wish they could take back, confronting rising antisemitism, and along with their longtime Muslim partners, asking: Where do we go from here?

“Rosh Hashanah is known as Yom Hazikaron, the day of remembrance,” said Rabbi Joshua Davidson of Manhattan’s Temple Emanu-El, adding that remembrance usually refers to the hope that God will remember the covenant with the Jewish people. “When you talk about a day of remembrance, you also talk about the experiences that have shaped us into who we are. 9/11 certainly is an experience that has shaped us into who we are. Anyone who lived in New York is forever changed by that day.”

Interfaith bridge-building

On Sept. 11, 2001, Davidson was a young associate rabbi at another Manhattan institution, Central Synagogue. Feeling otherwise helpless that morning as the towers fell, he headed straight to the nearby mosque on 55th Street to assure his Muslim neighbors that they would not be judged by the actions of the terrorists – his instinct born from years of interfaith dialogue already underway.

The same instinct led President George W. Bush to the Islamic Center of Washington D.C., a week later to proclaim, “Islam is peace.” But that perspective did not prevail in all corners.

Prominent evangelical figures condemned Islam as “evil and wicked.” Mosques were set ablaze, and the Justice Department in the three months after the attacks labeled nine murders as “possible hate crimes.” Despite the community’s fear, the term “Islamophobia” was not widely embraced, as if it was a product of Muslims’ imaginations.

“So many American Muslims were experiencing the anxiety that President Bush recognized right away,” Davidson told the Forward. “So 9/11 crystallized for many the importance of the work of interfaith bridge building … We can learn from one another. When the world becomes complicated and your own community is in jeopardy or is being targeted, you realize how valuable it is to have those friendships.”

Those existing friendships and the ground rules that had sustained them laid the foundation for the aftermath of Sept. 11 and propelled many individuals and groups working behind the scenes to publicly counter what seemed to be an anti-Muslim zeitgeist. While the previous approach to interfaith work had been intimate Shabbat dinners, Ramadan iftars, and discussion groups, the new approach involved rallies, live performances and large-scale programs.

On the morning of Sept. 12, Israeli cellist Udi Bar-David called someone with whom he had collaborated a few times – Majid Alsayegh, an Iraqi-born Muslim engineer and architect in Philadelphia. Determined to offer a constructive response, they formed a team and in Spring 2002 launched a nonprofit for creative intercultural exchanges.

“Because of the tensions of Muslim and Jewish, Arabic and Jewish communities, because of the violence, we felt we needed to speak up and do more,” Alsayegh told the Forward, “to help them understand that dialogue in many forms, including music, is much more powerful than shooting each other.”

Seeking to help audiences listen with less anger, more empathy, artists from B’nai Jeshurun, a synagogue on New York’s Upper West Side, teamed up with Methodists and Muslims to present hard truths gathered from more than 100 New Yorkers. The project titled “Same Difference” later became a documentary.

In the years that followed, connections became more purposeful and direct. In 2008, Rabbi Marc Schneier’s Foundation for Ethnic Understanding launched an annual Weekend of Twinning, which paired scores of synagogues and mosques to explore the parallels and similarities within their traditions. It also enabled them to compare notes about the discrimination each faced as religious minorities and band together to fight the hatred that targeted both.

Khan cherishes the time she spent in synagogues and the friendships she formed there.

“We had such deep ties and such deep relations we weren’t afraid to go to bat for one another,” Khan said. “I think those relationships have even served us to this day.”

‘A massive fault line’

Still, cracks began to show. In 2010, Khan and her husband at the time, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, proposed Cordoba House, a mosque and community center in Lower Manhattan. Modeled after JCCs across the country and named for a city in Spain that once had been a center of peaceful coexistence, the proposed facility would offer prayer space, a wedding venue and a swimming pool.

Opponents focused on the location: two blocks from Ground Zero. Many Jewish leaders endorsed the project. Abe Foxman, longtime leader of the Anti-Defamation League, did not.

“We believe that in this place of tragedy and pain and anguish … if you want to heal, the best way to heal is not to do it in your face.”

Foxman, who died in May, never apologized for his remarks, but his successor Jonathan Greenblatt later acknowledged “we were wrong, plain and simple.”

In 2011, when U.S. Congressman Peter King of New York, then-chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, held hearings on Capitol Hill denouncing the radicalization inside American mosques, Jewish friends showed their support by helping to organize a “Today, I am Muslim too” rally in Times Square.

Those shows of solidarity grew throughout the years. Jewish partners joined crowds at airports to protest the Trump administration’s executive order on immigration. Congregations helped each other pick up the pieces when their houses of worship or sacred sites came under assault. But the tougher conversation, probing where people stood on the Middle East conflict and why, remained largely untouched.

As anyone  in interfaith relations or diplomacy of any kind will tell you, constructive conversations are best had before there’s a crisis. That crisis arrived on Oct. 7, 2023, when Hamas attacked Israel, murdering more than 1,200 and taking 250 hostages. The war that followed in Gaza sparked virulent protests on college campuses and in public squares and a spike in antisemitic incidents. It also created a chasm of grief too deep and wide for many partnerships to survive.

“When Gaza happened, it created a massive fault line,” Khan said. “For Jews it reinforced existential fears about Jewish safety. For the Palestinians: ‘It’s our existential thing too. We feel we’re getting wiped out.’”

But because many conversation partners had for years avoided the hardest topic of all, they missed the opportunity to feel the emotional weight carried on both sides and hold that tension. When the grief, trauma and fear of Oct. 7  was thrust upon them, leaders could not adequately navigate the emotional landscape to offer moral clarity or comfort, Khan said.

“We could have called for calm,” she said. “We could’ve said that human loss is terrible. We could’ve said a lot of things that calmed people down. None of that happened. It became very tribal.”

Laboratory phase

Dr. Ari Gordon, director of Muslim Jewish Relations for American Jewish Committee, said while some Muslim partners have walked away from their joint advocacy work, some have stayed in touch. Khan and Alsayegh remain committed and hold out hope that their Muslim peers will return and give it another try.

“Everyone in this space has had the hits they’ve taken after Oct. 7,” Gordon said. “Relationships are a long-term investment. They can take dips and turns, peaks and valleys. On a personal level, as a friend, you have the right to say I want to engage with a person. I don’t want to. As a Jewish community we have a responsibility to keep our doors open.”

But it’s also important to keep the trajectory and time frame in perspective. The transformation of Christian-Jewish relations offers a lesson in that regard.

“The idea that a relationship can be beset by conflict and challenges for centuries and undergo transformation,” he said, “is one that I carry in my mind all the time.”

Gordon calls the past 25 years a “laboratory phase of Muslim-Jewish relations.” The Shabbat dinners, iftars, dialogue groups, coalitions, concerts – they all have fortified a connective tissue between American Muslims and Jews that did not exist 25 years ago.

“That trust may not have been sufficient to meet the stress test of October 7 and the continued war but it was definitely there and it didn’t go away,” he said. “After October 7 we entered a new phase and it’s one where we’re not going to go back to the way it used to be, but build something new.”

The post Jewish and Muslim leaders avoided the hardest interfaith topic for years, and now face a ‘massive fault line’ appeared first on The Forward.

Continue Reading

Copyright © 2017 - 2023 Jewish Post & News