Uncategorized
Universities Must Be Forced to Address Antisemitism
University of California, Santa Barbara student body president Tessa Veksler on Feb. 26, 2024. Photo: Instagram
JNS.org – “Never would I have imagined that I’d need to fight for my right to exist on campus,” laments Shabbos Kestenbaum, a student at Harvard University who is suing the school because “antisemitism is out of control.”
Jewish students have suffered an unrelenting explosion of hate on American higher education campuses—so far with little relief. They have endured antisemitic rhetoric, intimidation, cancellation and violence. But those charged with keeping campuses safe—whether administrators who govern student and faculty behavior or federal agencies responsible for ensuring that schools adhere to civil rights protections—are failing in their jobs.
Many Jewish students have complained to their colleges’ administrators about the injustices. But instead of responding with measures to ensure Jewish students’ safety—like stopping pro-Hamas protestors from hijacking campuses or expelling militants who incite Jew-hatred— administrators have largely shown indifference. In some cases, college authorities have made things worse for Jewish students by appeasing the riotous, pro-Hamas mobs who have been primary perpetrators of Jew-hatred on campus.
Snubbed by college administrators, Jewish students and their supporters have appealed for federal protection, filing Title VI complaints with the US Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights (OCR), the body tasked with enforcing protections under the Civil Rights Act. Unfortunately, the OCR, which has the power to levy severe financial punishments against colleges that neglect students’ Title VI rights, has so far rewarded negligent universities with little more than slaps on the wrist.
Until college and university boards of trustees begin hiring administrators committed to Jewish students’ safety—and until the OCR begins seriously punishing antisemitic perpetrators—we can expect no respite. Safe to say, colleges and universities run by arrogant, apathetic administrators will not change until their jobs and schools’ survival are threatened.
College/university administrators don’t take antisemitism seriously. Their reactions to Jewish students raising concerns about Jew-hatred range from indifference to outright hostility. For example, when Mohammed Al-Kurd, who the Anti-Defamation League says has a record of “unvarnished, vicious antisemitism,” came to speak at Harvard, Shabbos Kestenbaum and other Jewish students complained to administrators.
Rather than cancel Al-Kurd’s appearance, which would have been the appropriate action, the administrators ignored the students’ complaints. “Harvard’s silence was deafening,” Kestenbaum wrote in Newsweek. Kestenbaum said he “repeatedly” expressed concerns to administrators about the antisemitism he experienced, but as his lawsuit alleges, “evidence of uncontrolled discrimination and harassment fell on deaf ears.”
Administrators at Columbia University reacted to Jewish students’ complaints about antisemitism even more cynically. In fact, during an alumni event, several administrators exchanged text messages mocking Jewish students, calling them “privileged” and “difficult to listen to.”
When Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) asked the presidents of Harvard, MIT and the University of Pennsylvania if calling for genocide against Jews violated their schools’ codes of conduct, none could say “yes.” The presidents of Harvard and UPenn have since resigned. Good riddance.
Some college/university administrators have outrageously granted concessions to pro-Hamas students. For instance, Northwestern University agreed to contact potential employers of students who caused campus disruptions to insist they be hired, create a segregated dormitory hall exclusively for Middle Eastern, North African and Muslim students, and form a new investment committee in which anti-Zionists could wield undue influence. Brown University agreed to hold a referendum on divestment from Israel in October.
Similar appeasements were announced at other colleges and universities, including Rutgers, Johns Hopkins, the University of Minnesota and the University of California Riverside.
So far, OCR has failed to take concrete action against antisemitism on campus. This is evident in recent decisions involving the City University of New York (CUNY) and the University of Michigan. CUNY was ordered to conduct more investigations into Title VI complaints and report further developments to Washington, provide more employee and campus security officer training, and issue “climate surveys” to students.
The University of Michigan also committed to a “climate survey,” as well as to reviewing its case files for each report of discrimination covered by Title VI during the 2023-2024 school year and reporting to the OCR on its responses to reports of discrimination for the next two school years.
Neither institution was penalized financially, even though the Department of Education has the power to withhold federal funds, which most colleges and universities depend on. There are now 149 pending investigations into campus antisemitism at OCR. If these investigations yield toothless results similar to those of CUNY and Michigan, it is highly unlikely that colleges and universities will improve how they deal with antisemitism.
Putting an end to skyrocketing antisemitism on campus involves three things.
First, donors and governments at every level should withhold funds from colleges that fail to hire administrators who will take antisemitism as seriously as they take pronoun offenses or racism directed at people of color.
Second, the OCR must mete out serious consequences to Title VI violators in the form of funding cuts. This may require legislation that specifically mandates withdrawing funding from offending parties. A bill recently introduced by Rep. Nicole Malliotakis (R-N.Y.)—the University Accountability Act—may be ideal, as it is designed to financially penalize institutions that don’t crack down on antisemitism.
Third, if OCR won’t act, Jewish students and their supporters should turn to the courts. Lori Lowenthal Marcus, the legal director of the Deborah Project, a public-interest Jewish law firm, argues that the CUNY settlement demonstrates the futility of going to OCR and that going to court is more likely to produce “a clearly delineated and productive result,” such as punitive and compensatory fines. As of late May, at least 14 colleges and universities are facing lawsuits over their handling of antisemitism on campus since Hamas’s Oct. 7 massacre.
As long as college administrators are allowed to ignore antisemitism on campus and as long as OCR and other government institutions fall short in punishing Jew-hatred, antisemitism will continue to plague Jewish students.
The post Universities Must Be Forced to Address Antisemitism first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
Uncategorized
Dismantling the Iranian Zombie State: Washington’s Strategic Imperative
Smoke rises as protesters gather amid evolving anti-government unrest in Mashhad, Razavi Khorasan province, Iran, released on Jan. 10, 2026, in this screen grab obtained from a social media video. Photo: SOCIAL MEDIA/via REUTERS
The statement delivered by President Donald Trump this week, was more than just another warning to a rogue state. By declaring that the Iranian regime had finally begun to cross “very strong” red lines, and noting that “people are being killed who aren’t supposed to be killed,” the administration signaled the end of a long, failed experiment in managed containment.
We are no longer witnessing a typical cycle of civil unrest in the Middle East. Instead, we are watching the mechanical, violent twitching of what can only be described as a “zombie state” — a clerical establishment that died economically and morally years ago, but continues to walk, fueled only by the survival instincts of its security apparatus and the blood of its own citizens.
To understand why Washington must now move from rhetoric to reality, one must look past the regime’s propaganda and into the overwhelmed wards of Tehran’s hospitals.
On the night of January 8, 2026, as the regime pulled the “kill-switch” on the nation’s Internet, reducing connectivity to a mere one percent, a concentrated slaughter was unleashed in the capital. Reports from medical professionals, risking their lives to smuggle out data, confirm a horrific tally: 217 deaths across just six hospitals in a single night. At Milad and Imam Hossein hospitals, doctors counted 70 bodies each, many arriving with gunshot wounds to the head and eyes — the unmistakable signature of a deliberate shoot-to-kill policy. These victims were not collateral damage in a riot; they were targets of a state that has forgotten how to lead and only knows how to execute.
This “zombie” nature of the Iranian government is not just a metaphor. It is a structural reality. In political analysis, a zombie institution is one that persists long after its social utility has vanished, now driven solely by the primary motivation to survive regardless of the cost to the world. Since the brief but intense “12-Day War” in June 2025, which saw the US and Israel puncture Iran’s aura of deterrence by striking nuclear and military sites, the regime has been in a terminal tailspin. The economy is in a “survival phase,” marked by a currency collapse and a banking system so hollowed by corruption that Bank Melli, the nation’s largest lender, recently faced a massive bank run and suspended cash withdrawals.
Rather than addressing these failures, the clerical elite has retreated into a bunker mentality, labeling every protester a “terrorist” and an “enemy of God” — a charge that carries the mandatory death penalty in their warped legal system. Sensing that the local Law Enforcement Command was “balking” at the order to massacre their own neighbors, the regime has now unleashed the IRGC Ground Forces. Even more telling is the regime’s reliance on foreign muscle; approximately 800 fighters from Iraqi Shiite militias, including Kataib Hezbollah, have been flown in to do the work that even some Iranian soldiers are refusing to do. A regime that must hire foreign mercenaries to kill its own people is a regime that has already lost its soul.
For Washington, the strategic interest is clear: a nuclear-armed zombie is a threat to the world. President Trump’s “very strong options” must address the current “deterrence gap” in the Persian Gulf, where the absence of a US carrier strike group has encouraged Tehran to test American resolve. But the true solution lies in empowering the living movement that is already challenging the dead regime. The Iranian people are no longer asking for reform; they are flying the pre-1979 flag and calling for the return of the Pahlavi dynasty to restore their national identity.
Washington should immediately move to provide the material tools of resistance. This means bypassing the regime’s digital iron curtain with “direct-to-cell” technologies and thousands of additional Starlink terminals, ensuring the next Internet blackout fails to hide the regime’s crimes. It means facilitating financial channels that allow the global diaspora to fund nationwide strikes, effectively starving the zombie state of the resources it uses to fuel its machines of war. If military force is used, it must be surgical, targeting the specific IRGC units responsible for the hospital massacres, thereby providing the Iranian people the breathing room they need to reclaim their sovereignty.
The 217 martyrs of Tehran’s hospitals — and the many others that have since joined them — have already paid the entry fee for a new Iran. They have proven that the clerical establishment rules only through violence, an observation President Trump echoed on his return from Mar-a-Lago. The time for bargaining with a corpse is over. The “Greatest Peace” the Middle East has ever seen will not come through negotiations with a criminal regime; it will come when the Iranian people are given the support to finally bury the zombie state and build a free, stable, and democratic future.
Amine Ayoub, a fellow at the Middle East Forum, is a policy analyst and writer based in Morocco. Follow him on X: @amineayoubx
Uncategorized
Israel to Compete in First Semifinal of 2026 Eurovision Song Contest, Organizers Announce
Israel’s representative to the Eurovision Song Contest, Yuval Raphael, a survivor of the deadly Oct. 7 2023, attack by Hamas on the Nova festival in Israel’s south, holds an Israeli flag in this handout photo obtained by Reuters on Jan. 23, 2025. Photo: “The Rising Star,” Channel Keshet 12/Handout via REUTERS
Israel will participate in the first semifinal of the 2026 Eurovision Song Contest in Vienna, Austria, in May and will perform during the second half of the competition, the European Broadcasting Union announced on Monday.
The first semifinal will be held on May 12, followed by the second semifinal on May 14. Based on the results of the audience and jury vote, the top 10 countries from each semifinal will move on to compete in the grand final on May 16. All portions of the 2026 Eurovision will take place at the Wien Stadthalle in Vienna. The lineup for the semifinals was decided by a draw, conducted during a live broadcast by the Austrian broadcaster ORF and on the official Eurovision Song Contest YouTube channel.
The countries competing in the first half of the semifinal on May 12 are Georgia, Portugal, Croatia, Sweden, Finland, Moldova, and Greece. Israel is competing in the second half along with Montenegro, Estonia, San Marino, Poland, Belgium, Lithuania, and Serbia. The order of performances for the two semifinals will be announced by the end of March, according to the EBU.
A total of 35 countries will participate in the 70th Eurovision Song Contest, but only 30 will compete in the semifinals because five countries are pre-qualified for the grand final on May 16. France, Germany, Italy, the United Kingdom, and last year’s winner Austria automatically qualify for the grand final, but are still required to broadcast and vote in one of the semifinals. Germany and Italy will perform and vote in the first semifinal.
“The Eurovision Village at Rathausplatz – in the heart of our city – will send a visible message of unity to the world – something very important in these turbulent times,” said Vienna Mayor Michael Ludwig in a released statement. “Vienna will become the world stage of entertainment once more and do everything possible to ensure that all visitors can celebrate a wonderful and safe festival together. Vienna will once again show that it is a great host for people from all over the world, where everyone can feel welcome and safe.”
“Together with ORF, Vienna is ready to welcome Europe and the world for the 70th Contest to celebrate music, creativity and connection,” said Martin Green CBE, director of the Eurovision Song Contest. “With broadcasters from across Europe and beyond taking part, and a global audience that continues to grow, the Eurovision Song Contest remains a truly unique live event. We can’t wait to see the stage come alive in May and to share an extraordinary celebration of 70 years of international music and creativity with hundreds of millions of viewers worldwide.”
Spain, Ireland, Iceland, the Netherlands, and Slovenia announced they will not compete in the 2026 Eurovision after it was ruled in early December that Israel is allowed to participate. The countries are protesting Israel’s military actions in the Gaza Strip during the Israel-Hamas war. Other countries, like Belgium and Italy, have been facing pressure to withdraw from the song contest because of Israel’s involvement. Two previous Eurovision winners also returned their trophies to the EBU in protest of Israel’s participation in the 2026 Eurovision: 2024 Swiss winner Nemo and Charlie McGettigan, who won the 1994 Eurovision with fellow Irish singer Paul Harrington.
Austria’s broadcaster ORF said last month it will not ban Palestinian flags from the audience or drown out booing during Israel’s performance in the Eurovision this year.
Uncategorized
Trump’s Iran Tariff Threat Risks Reopening China Rift
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping react as they hold a bilateral meeting at Gimhae International Airport, on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit, in Busan, South Korea, Oct. 30, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Evelyn Hockstein
US President Donald Trump’s threat to slap a 25% tariff on countries that trade with Iran risks reopening old wounds with Beijing, Tehran’s biggest trading partner.
Iran became a flashpoint in US-China ties during Trump’s 2017-21 first term as president as Washington tightened sanctions on Tehran and put China‘s Huawei, accused of selling technology to the Islamic Republic, in its crosshairs.
The arrest of Meng Wenzhou, the daughter of Huawei’s founder, in Canada at Washington’s request sparked retaliation and a hostage crisis, with bitter recriminations lingering for the remainder of Trump’s first administration.
With Iran in his sights once again, the duty would see Chinese shipments to the US incurring levies exceeding 70%, higher than the effective 57.5% tariffs in place before Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping struck a deal in October to de-escalate their trade war.
It remains unclear which countries with Iranian business links Trump might target, and he has not named China. The US president has also made offhand remarks that threatened to upend US foreign policy without acting on them before.
“China will call [Trump’s] bluff. I can assure you that Trump has no guts to impose the extra 25% tariffs on China, and if he does, China will retaliate and he will be punished,” said Wu Xinbo, dean of the Institute of International Studies at Fudan University, “just like in Meng Wenzhou’s case.”
BACK TO THE FUTURE
Some Chinese experts questioned why Trump seemed intent on revisiting one of the most contentious foreign policy issues from his first term, despite having already made Beijing think twice about providing economic support to Tehran.
“China and Iran are not as close as in the public imagination,” said a Beijing-based Chinese academic who advises the foreign ministry on Iran policy, and requested anonymity as they were not authorized to speak to media.
China has sharply reduced Iranian imports in recent years, according to Chinese customs data, with Chinese companies wary of being sanctioned by the US government. China bought just $2.9 billion of Iranian goods in the first 11 months of last year, the latest customs figures show, compared with a peak of $21 billion in 2018 during Trump’s first presidency.
That said, Beijing moves around 80% of Iran‘s shipped oil through small independent refiners trading off the books to skirt US sanctions over the country’s nuclear ambitions.
China‘s state-backed oil majors have not done any business with Iran since 2022. Some analysts say the independents’ shipments means the total value of China‘s purchases remains in the tens of billions of dollars.
“China is just an excuse, a kind of disguise for the Trump administration, to impose new pressure [on] Iran,” said Wang Jin at the Beijing Club for International Dialogue think tank.
When asked at Tuesday’s regular press conference on Trump’s tariff threat, China‘s foreign ministry said that Beijing would “resolutely safeguard its legitimate rights and interests.”
HIGH STAKES
Still, Iran remains substantially bigger business for China than Venezuela, where Trump acted to curb Beijing’s stake with a commando raid to capture President Nicolas Maduro to face drug charges in the United States.
Analysts said Trump’s renewed push to cut off Iran from global trade flows is likely to deepen scrutiny of Xi’s flagship Belt and Road Initiative, where Iran is a strategic hub for the passage of Chinese goods to the Middle East.
It also raises uncertainty over whether Trump will visit Beijing in April as expected, with analysts anticipating the announcement of a sweeping trade agreement with Xi.
“Whether Trump’s tariffs are enforceable remains a question,” said Xu Tianchen, a Beijing-based analyst at the Economist Intelligence Unit.
“Last year he announced tariffs related to ‘illicit’ Russian oil trade, but their implementation was patchy.”
“Trump is also the kind of person who likes bullying the weak,” Xu said. “He should manage his actions to avoid these tariffs escalating into direct confrontation with China.”