Uncategorized
I’m Palestinian. Here’s why Trump’s Gaza gambit might just work
It could also be just what the Middle East needs
After a century of Palestinian leaders rejecting a two-state-solution, Trump’s proposal could be a wakeup call that peace is the only solution
By DAOUD KUTTAB (February 21, 2025) This story was originally published in the Forward (https://forward.com/opinion/698785/gaza-palestine-israel-trump/). Click here to get the Forward’s free email newsletters delivered to your inbox.
One of the biggest obstacles to finding a peaceful solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has been an overwhelming imbalance in direct international support. Armed with extensive international resources, especially from the United States, Israel has long been able to reject logical solutions while presenting the minimum justifications to placate international sponsors. Over time, this has led to resistance from Palestinians, which has produced an even more radical Israeli position, leading, after the horrific Oct. 7 attack, to the devastating violence of Israel’s war in Gaza.
Now, President Donald Trump’s administration has been called to help Israel out of the jam it finds itself in. Trump has, in classic fashion, delivered bombastic promises of peace and prosperity, much to the delight of Israelis, who have largely embraced his proposals for a mass relocation of Palestinians in Gaza and a U.S. takeover of the embattled strip.
But as the saying goes, be careful what you wish for. Once Washington finds itself more involved in the day-to-day management of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, Trump might find that the result that will guarantee peace and tranquility is not necessarily that which Israelis — and certainly the Israeli right — are expecting.
That’s because Trump, who has a history of making grand promises and not fulfilling them, may find that it is easier to create a buffer between Israelis and Palestinians than to organize the displacement of an entire population and redevelopment of an area destroyed to rubble. And that kind of buffer, between a powerful militaristic occupier and a weak but resilient occupied, is exactly what the region needs.
And the U.S. is the ideal party to create that buffer, for two reasons.
First, it can provide what no other state in the world is able to: the security assurances that Israel and the Israeli people badly need. And second, whenever Israelis engage with Palestinians, they use their superior military and political power to insist on exaggerated demands. But when the U.S. is in the room — represented by officials not afraid to deploy their power — a more logical conversation takes place.
Security guarantees from the U.S. could go a long way in removing a major obstacle Israel has continuously presented in justifying its hesitancy about finding a long-term strategy to create a permanent peace solution and a Palestinian state. Past peace ideas have failed because the balance of power was always on the Israeli side, and despite its claims to want peace, Israel has never truly been willing to pay the price of that outcome — land — using security as an excuse. Providing Israelis with an iron-clad guarantee of security, possible with the deployment of U.S. or NATO forces, could finally shift the balance.
Successive U.S. presidents have failed to help Palestinians and Israelis reach peace, because they have refused to take the bold steps needed to act as honest brokers, and rejected the idea of acting as a temporary buffer and an insurer between the occupier and the occupied.
Trump has shown that an excess of restraint will not be his administration’s problem. When months of indirect negotiations between Israel and Hamas, with the engagement of former President Joe Biden’s administration, repeatedly failed to produce a ceasefire, the intervention of Trump’s incoming administration brought the deal to fruition. I do not doubt that continued U.S. engagement will also produce agreement on the critical second and third phases of the ceasefire deal, which will involve the release of all remaining hostages in Gaza — dead and alive — and end the 15-month war.
Yes, Trump has proclaimed a vision for the future of the region that is notably free of a Palestinian presence, let alone leadership. But once the leader of the U.S. and his aides roll up their sleeves and begin the nitty gritty process of trying to achieve peace in the Middle East, they will run into a truth that all others who have tried the same have faced, which is that to get anything done in the region, one must apply tough love policies to all sides — not just one.
For Palestinians, like me, inviting this intervention means making a bet: That Trump, once on the ground, will find it more expedient to scale back his plans. The president’s history of bluster — and of making big threats, but strategically accepting much smaller gains — makes that bet worthwhile.
Palestinians have seen in the Israeli settlement enterprise the best proof that Israel is not willing to relinquish land for peace — just the opposite. A shake-up is needed. And Palestinians have previously hoped that an international presence could provide that adjustment: As part of previous peace negotiations, some past Palestinian leaders, including President Mahmoud Abbas, have suggested stationing NATO troops in a future Palestinian state to reassure Israel. But those proposals, like so many others in this process, stalled.
If Trump is willing to genuinely engage, in a way that his predecessors were not, it might mean a major breakthrough that will change our region. The Trump administration can end this occupation and can bring peace through security if it wishes, and the world will applaud them if they do.
Daoud Kuttab is an award-winning Palestinian journalist and former Ferris Professor of journalism at Princeton University. His twitter handle is @daoudkuttab
The views and opinions expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect those of the Forward. Discover more perspectives in Opinion. To contact Opinion authors, email opinion@forward.com.
Uncategorized
Anti-Israel Streamer Hasan Piker Reaffirms Hamas Support
Hasan Piker. Photo: Wikimedia Commons
Controversial streamer Hasan Piker raised eyebrows Monday after reaffirming his support for the Hamas terrorist group during an interview on the popular left-wing podcast “Pod Save America.”
While speaking with Jon Favreau, former speechwriter to US President Barack Obama, Piker doubled down on his assertion that Hamas is a preferable governing entity compared to Israel.
“This [quote] is from January,” Favreau said while reflecting on previous comments made by the streamer. “‘Hamas is a thousand times better than a fascist settler colonial apartheid state.”
“I stand by that,” Piker responded.
Favreau then asked Piker to clarify whether his comments were genuine or hyperbolic.
“[T]his is the one that bothered me most when I first heard it …. Even if you believe what happened in Gaza is genocide and what’s happening in the West Bank is apartheid, those are different claims from ‘Hamas is a thousand times better,’ because Hamas is an organization that has massacred, raped, kidnapped civilians on Oct. 7,” the former Obama speechwriter said, referring to Hamas’s invasion of and massacre across southern Israel in 2023. “They’ve also been catastrophic for Palestinians by almost every measure … Do you actually mean that or is that a rhetorical move or like a solidarity signal?”
“I mean, it’s all of the above. I do mean it,” Piker affirmed. “I’m a lesser-evil voter and therefore I would vote for Hamas over Israel every single time.”
Jon Favreau: “When you say Hamas is a thousand times better, do you mean that?”
Hasan Piker: “I do mean it … I would vote for Hamas over Israel every single time.” pic.twitter.com/1dNxvOGslo
— Shannon Watts (@shannonrwatts) April 13, 2026
Hamas, which openly calls for the destruction of Israel and the murder of Jews, has launched a brutal crackdown on dissent among fellow Palestinians in recent months. Social media videos widely circulated online show Hamas members brutally beating Palestinians and carrying out public executions of alleged collaborators with Israel and rival militia members.
Piker also suggested that Hamas is “entirely comprised” of orphaned children whose parents were killed in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict — remarks that critics say distort reality and risk minimizing the group’s violent actions. He framed Hamas as a product of trauma, arguing that many of its members are driven by personal loss tied to Israeli military operations. The comments quickly drew backlash from analysts, policymakers, and pro-Israel advocates, who say the characterization is both factually inaccurate and morally problematic.
Piker continued, comparing Israel to Nazi Germany and repudiating Zionism as “an ethno-religious supremacist ideology that is exterminationist.”
The US and several countries around the world designate Hamas as a terrorist organization. On Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas-led Palestinian terrorists murdered 1,200 people, kidnapped 251 hostages, and perpetrated widespread sexual violence during their rampage
Piker’s remarks are the latest in a series of contentious statements on Israel and the broader Middle East, which have drawn scrutiny from both media watchdogs and political figures. His large online following has amplified the impact of his commentary, fueling debate over the responsibility of digital influencers in shaping public understanding of global conflicts.
Piker has drawn immense scrutiny in recent months as his popularity has surged and mainstream Democratic politicians have increasingly appeared on his livestream show.
Beyond Hamas, Piker has also expressed support for authoritarian regimes in China, Russia, and Iran.
Uncategorized
Iran Executed More People in 2025 Than Any Year in Nearly Four Decades, NGOs Find
A February 2023 protest in Washington, DC calling for an end to executions and human rights violations in Iran. Photo: Reuters/ Bryan Olin Dozier
The Islamic regime in Iran has continued to accelerate its execution machine into a steady grind of state-ordered killings, now rising again to a peak unseen since 1989.
According to a joint-annual report released by the European groups Iran Human Rights (IHR) in Norway and Together Against the Death Penalty (ECPM) in France, Iran executed at least 1,639 people in 2025, a 68 percent leap from the 975 killed in 2024 and the highest seen since tracking began in 2008. All known executions were reportedly conducted by hanging.
The number of executed women also rose to 48, a jump from 31 in 2024. Courts convicted 21 of these women for murdering their husbands or fiancés.
The figure of 1,639 human beings represents an average of four executions each day; however, IHR warns that the full body count is likely much higher, as the group requires two sources to confirm an execution.
“By creating fear through an average of four to five executions per day in 2025, authorities tried to prevent new protests and prolong their crumbling rule,” IHR director Mahmood Amiry-Moghaddam said in a statement.
“The death penalty in Iran is used as a political tool of oppression and repression, with ethnic minorities and other marginalized groups disproportionately represented among those executed,” added Raphaël Chenuil-Hazan, executive director of ECPM.
The report cites the higher levels of executions targeting Sunni Muslims such as Kurds in the west and Baluch in the southeast.
A significant number of executions involved non-lethal offenses, with nearly half of documented executions – 747 people – convicted of drug crimes. While most executions took place inside prisons, the number of public hangings more than tripled to 11.
The report begins with a foreword written on Feb. 20 by human rights lawyer Nasrin Sotoudeh. On April 1, Iranian police arrested her and today her whereabouts remain unknown.
Beginning by noting that Iran has ranked highest in executions per capita for many years and remains one of the highest for total killings, Sotoudeh writes that “the reasons for opposing the inhuman punishment of execution are so clear that they hardly require repetition. Nevertheless, governments such as the Islamic Republic of Iran often invoke public opinion to justify this inhuman punishment.”
Sotoudeh explains that the regime justifies executing murderers and drug traffickers because of a supposed public demand, “as though that settles the matter.” She points out that historically executions can rise after revolutions following dictatorships.
“We experienced this ourselves within the past half-century. After the 1979 Revolution, many officers and senior officials of the monarchy were executed without fair trials,” Sotoudeh writes. “Yet the cycle of violence did not end, and the execution machine went on to claim the lives of others, including those who had contributed to the revolution’s victory. This cycle has not ceased to this day, nearly half a century later, and has in fact accelerated.”
Invoking one of history’s most famous victims of unjust execution, Sotoudeh adds, “This is precisely why death sentences should never be issued under the influence of public opinion. Socrates, too, was sentenced to death at the age of 70 by a vote of the Athenian majority and chose to drink the cup of poison rather than leave Athens.”
The report reveals the extent to which the regime has sought to conceal its bloody hands. Official government sources only announced 113 executions (less than 7 percent), down from 9.7 percent in 2024 and 15 percent in 2023.
Rape is a capital offense in Iran, with 37 people killed after convictions. The report notes that “as in previous years, people accused of crimes were tortured and forced to confess. Criminal convictions are frequently based on information extracted under torture.”
The execution increase established in 2025 appears to have continued into 2026.
On Monday, for example, the Human Rights Activist News Agency announced that Judge Iman Afshari of the Tehran Revolutionary Court had sentenced to death protesters Mohammadreza Majidi-Asl, Bita Hemmati, Behrouz Zamaninejad, and Kourosh Zamaninejad.
The charges which Afshari judged as worthy of execution included “destruction of public property,” “chanting protest slogans,” “throwing objects including bottles, concrete blocks, and incendiary materials from rooftops,” and “participation in protest gatherings on Jan. 8 and 9, 2026.”
The Iranian regime unleashed a brutal, nationwide crackdown on anti-government protesters in January, resulting in the deaths and arrests of tens of thousands of people. Activists fear that many of those detained will be executed.
The report cites Max du Plessis, a UN Fact-Finding Mission expert, who said in October after observing the increase in killings, “if executions form part of a widespread and systemic attack against a civilian population, as a matter of policy, then those responsible – including the judges who impose capital punishment – may be held accountable for crimes against humanity.”
Uncategorized
Hampshire College closure reverberates for alumni who treasured a Yiddishist hub
Hampshire College, once a hub for Yiddish scholarship thanks to its proximity to the Yiddish Book Center, will close by the end of the year amid financial challenges.
The Yiddish Book Center will not be affected by the closure, said spokesperson Rebecka McDougall, noting that the Yiddish Book Center owns its land and building, located adjacent to campus.
Even so, the closure signals the end of an era for Yiddishists who found their footing at Hampshire. Among its alumni are Yiddish singer Miryem-Khaye Seigel, the Yiddish Book Center’s academic director Madeleine (Mindl) Cohen, and the Forward’s archivist, Chana Pollack.
“It connected me to other people that were very instrumental to my broader Yiddish interests,” said Lana Adler, a 2013 Hampshire graduate who went on to work at the YIVO Institute for Jewish Research, which houses the largest collection of Yiddish-language works in the world. “It was an incredibly important space for Yiddish.”
Hampshire and Yiddish
Founded in 1970 in Amherst, Massachusetts, Hampshire College was conceived as an experiment in alternative education, offering self-designed concentrations instead of traditional majors and “narrative evaluations” rather than grades.
A decade later, it became home to a major Yiddish revival effort when alum Aaron Lansky returned to found the Yiddish Book Center. Alarmed that American Jews were discarding irreplaceable Yiddish books, Lansky set out to save them.
New York City seemed the obvious base. But mentors warned he might “get swallowed up” among the city’s many Jewish institutions, recalled Penina Migdal Glazer, a former Hampshire professor, in a 2024 interview.
Instead, Lansky chose Amherst — a place he knew from his college years, with faculty mentors who could support the project, and more affordable land. He purchased 10 acres on an apple orchard next to the Hampshire campus and, in 1997, built the Harry and Jeanette Weinberg Building, designed to evoke an Eastern European shtetl.
In the years that followed, the Yiddish Book Center and Hampshire College became a magnet for students interested in Yiddish. The two partnered to host Yiddish language classes and programs like the Yiddish Book Center’s Steiner Summer Yiddish Program, where participants immerse themselves in seven weeks of Yiddish language and culture while staying in Hampshire College dorms.
The closure’s impact
Facing declining enrollment and mounting debt, Hampshire College’s Board of Trustees voted to permanently close the school following the fall 2026 semester, president Jennifer Chrisler announced Tuesday.
McDougall told the Forward that the Yiddish Book Center’s summer residential programs are independent of Hampshire College and will continue, adding, “There is currently no programmatic partnership with Hampshire College.”
“We are saddened by Hampshire College’s announcement,” Susan Bronsin, president of the Yiddish Book Center, said in a statement. “Hampshire has been a valued neighbor for many years, and we recognize the significance of this moment for its community.”
For Aleks Ritter, co-founder of the student group Hampshire Jewish Life, the campus’ proximity to the Yiddish Book Center was a large part of the school’s appeal when he first applied. Ritter had studied Yiddish through YIVO in high school and hoped to continue in college.
He and his friends would often go to the Yiddish Book Center to study and hang out, and several of his friends worked part-time jobs there.
“The school has been really wonderful for Jewish students,” Ritter said.
Now, Ritter will have to transfer to another college in the area.
For alumni like Adler, the loss also feels personal. Hampshire was the first time she had formally studied Yiddish — an experience that shaped her career.
“There was something special happening at Hampshire,” Adler said. “It was very important to me and to a lot of other people. I’m just so sad. I can’t believe it’s closing.”
The post Hampshire College closure reverberates for alumni who treasured a Yiddishist hub appeared first on The Forward.