A prominent liberal journal that spoke out against the Nazi genocide has published an article accusing Israel of genocide, justifying the Hamas pogrom, and denying the Jewish state’s right to exist.
Irony? Tragedy? Perhaps both.
In its October 9 issue, The Nation featured an essay by Mohammed R. Mhawish, a writer in Gaza, claiming that “Israel has been slowly killing all 2.3 million people in Gaza for the past 16 years.”
Raphael Lemkin, the Polish Jewish scholar who coined the term “genocide” in 1944, would have been surprised by this novel concept of a genocide which kills people so slowly that they do not actually die. The population growth rate of Gaza is more than 2% annually; by comparison, the U.S. rate is half of one percent.
Mhawish also rationalized the Hamas massacres (or “resistance,” as he called them) on the grounds that “No people can be expected to endure the kind of oppression and discrimination that Palestinians face at the hands of the Israeli government forever without any kind of response.”
The decision to print Mhawish’s article is consistent with the views of The Nation’s publisher, Katrina vanden Heuvel. She responded to the Hamas massacres by retweeting commentary from Jeremy Corbyn and Ilhan Omar. On the fifth day of the war, Prof. Matt Schneirov of Duquesne University publicly asked vanden Heuvel on X (Twitter), “Any thoughts about the brutal murder of 1000 Jews in one day?” She replied by accusing Israel of “dispossession of Palestinians.”
Founded in 1865, The Nation is America’s longest continuously-published political affairs weekly. During the Holocaust years, it was respected and influential, and it used its prominence to speak out, early and vigorously, for U.S. action to rescue Europe’s Jews.
After the 1938 Kristallnacht pogrom in Germany, the journal called for admission to the U.S. of at least 15,000 German Jewish refugee children. The Roosevelt administration’s refugee policy “is one which must sicken any person of ordinarily humane instinct,” editor-in-chief Freda Kirchwey wrote in 1940. “It is as if we were to examine laboriously the curriculum vitae of flood victims clinging to a piece of floating wreckage and finally to decide that no matter what their virtues, all but a few had better be allowed to drown.”
In 1941, the Roosevelt administration devised a new immigration regulation that barred the admission of anyone with close relatives in Europe, on the grounds that the Nazis might compel them to spy for Hitler by threatening their relatives. The Nation‘s editors denounced that theory as “reckless and ridiculous.” Kirchwey blasted the espionage claim as “an excuse concocted by the [State Department]” to keep refugees out and “a good story with which to win popular support for a brutal and unjust restriction.”
In early 1943, at the height of the Holocaust, a Kirchwey editorial denounced President Franklin Roosevelt’s response to the mass murder in particularly strong terms.
“You and I and the President and the Congress and the State Department are accessories to the crime and share Hitler’s guilt,” she wrote. “If we had behaved like humane and generous people instead of complacent, cowardly ones, the two million Jews lying today in the earth of Poland and Hitler’s other crowded graveyards would be alive and safe. And other millions yet to die would have found sanctuary. We had it in our power to rescue this doomed people and we did not lift a hand to do it—or perhaps it would be fairer to say that we lifted just one cautious hand, encased in a tight-fitting glove of quotas and visas and affidavits, and a thick layer of prejudice.”
In 1944, Kirchwey authored a moving appeal for U.S. action against the deportation of Hungary’s Jews to Auschwitz. The millions of European Jews already killed were victims of both “Nazi ferocity and Allied indifference,” she wrote. “It is untrue to say that little could have been done, once the war was started, to save the Jews of Europe. Much could have been done. At most stages Hitler was willing to permit his Jewish victims to substitute migration for deportation and death. But the other countries refused to take in refugees in sufficient numbers to reduce by more than a fraction the roll of those destined to die.”
The Roosevelt administration’s claims that it was impossible to rescue the Jews was just a flimsy excuse, Kirchwey emphasized. “[U.S.] troopships which have delivered their loads at Mediterranean ports could be diverted for a single errand of mercy. Transport planes returning from India or the Eastern Mediterranean could carry out of Hungary the 10,000 children to whom Sweden has offered shelter….The last opportunity to save half a million more lives cannot be treated as a matter of minor concern…[W]e must hurry, hurry!”
The Nation has fallen from those days, not only in circulation (today it’s under 100,000 and dropping) but, especially, in moral stature. For a magazine that once forthrightly spoke out against actual genocide to feature an article falsely accusing the Jews of genocide represents a new low.
Dr. Medoff is founding director of The David S. Wyman Institute for Holocaust Studies and author of more than 20 books about Jewish history and the Holocaust. His latest is America and the Holocaust: A Documentary History, published by the Jewish Publication Society & University of Nebraska Press.
They Once Protested Genocide, Now They Accuse Israel of Genocide
Rafael Medoff
A prominent liberal journal that spoke out against the Nazi genocide has published an article accusing Israel of genocide, justifying the Hamas pogrom, and denying the Jewish state’s right to exist.
Irony? Tragedy? Perhaps both.
In its October 9 issue, The Nation featured an essay by Mohammed R. Mhawish, a writer in Gaza, claiming that “Israel has been slowly killing all 2.3 million people in Gaza for the past 16 years.”
Raphael Lemkin, the Polish Jewish scholar who coined the term “genocide” in 1944, would have been surprised by this novel concept of a genocide which kills people so slowly that they do not actually die. The population growth rate of Gaza is more than 2% annually; by comparison, the U.S. rate is half of one percent.
Mhawish also rationalized the Hamas massacres (or “resistance,” as he called them) on the grounds that “No people can be expected to endure the kind of oppression and discrimination that Palestinians face at the hands of the Israeli government forever without any kind of response.”
The decision to print Mhawish’s article is consistent with the views of The Nation’s publisher, Katrina vanden Heuvel. She responded to the Hamas massacres by retweeting commentary from Jeremy Corbyn and Ilhan Omar. On the fifth day of the war, Prof. Matt Schneirov of Duquesne University publicly asked vanden Heuvel on X (Twitter), “Any thoughts about the brutal murder of 1000 Jews in one day?” She replied by accusing Israel of “dispossession of Palestinians.”
Founded in 1865, The Nation is America’s longest continuously-published political affairs weekly. During the Holocaust years, it was respected and influential, and it used its prominence to speak out, early and vigorously, for U.S. action to rescue Europe’s Jews.
After the 1938 Kristallnacht pogrom in Germany, the journal called for admission to the U.S. of at least 15,000 German Jewish refugee children. The Roosevelt administration’s refugee policy “is one which must sicken any person of ordinarily humane instinct,” editor-in-chief Freda Kirchwey wrote in 1940. “It is as if we were to examine laboriously the curriculum vitae of flood victims clinging to a piece of floating wreckage and finally to decide that no matter what their virtues, all but a few had better be allowed to drown.”
In 1941, the Roosevelt administration devised a new immigration regulation that barred the admission of anyone with close relatives in Europe, on the grounds that the Nazis might compel them to spy for Hitler by threatening their relatives. The Nation‘s editors denounced that theory as “reckless and ridiculous.” Kirchwey blasted the espionage claim as “an excuse concocted by the [State Department]” to keep refugees out and “a good story with which to win popular support for a brutal and unjust restriction.”
In early 1943, at the height of the Holocaust, a Kirchwey editorial denounced President Franklin Roosevelt’s response to the mass murder in particularly strong terms.
“You and I and the President and the Congress and the State Department are accessories to the crime and share Hitler’s guilt,” she wrote. “If we had behaved like humane and generous people instead of complacent, cowardly ones, the two million Jews lying today in the earth of Poland and Hitler’s other crowded graveyards would be alive and safe. And other millions yet to die would have found sanctuary. We had it in our power to rescue this doomed people and we did not lift a hand to do it—or perhaps it would be fairer to say that we lifted just one cautious hand, encased in a tight-fitting glove of quotas and visas and affidavits, and a thick layer of prejudice.”
In 1944, Kirchwey authored a moving appeal for U.S. action against the deportation of Hungary’s Jews to Auschwitz. The millions of European Jews already killed were victims of both “Nazi ferocity and Allied indifference,” she wrote. “It is untrue to say that little could have been done, once the war was started, to save the Jews of Europe. Much could have been done. At most stages Hitler was willing to permit his Jewish victims to substitute migration for deportation and death. But the other countries refused to take in refugees in sufficient numbers to reduce by more than a fraction the roll of those destined to die.”
The Roosevelt administration’s claims that it was impossible to rescue the Jews was just a flimsy excuse, Kirchwey emphasized. “[U.S.] troopships which have delivered their loads at Mediterranean ports could be diverted for a single errand of mercy. Transport planes returning from India or the Eastern Mediterranean could carry out of Hungary the 10,000 children to whom Sweden has offered shelter….The last opportunity to save half a million more lives cannot be treated as a matter of minor concern…[W]e must hurry, hurry!”
The Nation has fallen from those days, not only in circulation (today it’s under 100,000 and dropping) but, especially, in moral stature. For a magazine that once forthrightly spoke out against actual genocide to feature an article falsely accusing the Jews of genocide represents a new low.
Dr. Medoff is founding director of The David S. Wyman Institute for Holocaust Studies and author of more than 20 books about Jewish history and the Holocaust. His latest is America and the Holocaust: A Documentary History, published by the Jewish Publication Society & University of Nebraska Press.
Did you enjoy this article?
You'll love our roundtable.
Editor's Picks
Israel and the Internet Wars – A Professional Social Media Review
The Invisible Student: A Tale of Homelessness at UCLA and USC
What Ever Happened to the LA Times?
Who Are the Jews On Joe Biden’s Cabinet?
You’re Not a Bad Jewish Mom If Your Kid Wants Santa Claus to Come to Your House
No Labels: The Group Fighting for the Political Center
Latest Articles
The Pinchas Vigilante Roll Call — A poem for Parsha Pinchas
A Moment in Time: What We Cannot See
Why Is it that the Better We Diagnose Anti-Semitism, the Worse it Gets?
A Bisl Torah — Go Out Before Them
Balaam’s Metaphorical Ass
For America’s 250th Birthday, Jewish Journal Launches E-book “250 Reasons to Thank America”
Print Issue: What Happened to Loving Our Country? | July 3, 2026
What a gangbuster quarter millennium of a résumé America has assembled. Much to be proud of, and, yet… far too few Americans are lining up to blow out the candles.
From Los Angeles to Jerusalem: Dorraine Weiss Built a New Life in Israel at 62
Today, with several of her grandsons serving in the IDF, she believes there is no other place she would rather be.
A Baharat Scented T’bit
This recipe is traditional and personal at the same time, which feels fitting.
Red, White and Blue Dairy Treats for Your Fourth of July Celebration
These delicious red, white and blue dairy desserts make it worth going parve for your Independence Day barbecue or picnic.
Table for Five: Pinchas
Women’s Rights
Mel Brooks Turns 100, AFI Bumps ‘Blazing Saddles’ to Top of Comedy List
Brooks has spent his career making large targets look small: Nazis, tyrants, bigots, Hollywood annoyances, studio logic, bad taste, good taste and, now, age.
The Limitations of a Housing Act and Two Practical Solutions
America’s housing crisis demands more than incremental turns. By doubling capital gains relief and launching the T.E.A.C.H. Homes Program, policymakers can inject immediate momentum into a market desperately needing it.
What Does the Rise of Democratic Socialists Mean for Jews and Democrats?
The DSA has shown that being anti-Israel, even if a candidate lacks experience, is enough to win.
Remembering Little Big Horn 150 Years Later as Historians, not Prosecutors or Priests
Today, for Americans and Jews, the Battle of Little Big Horn has relevance and resonance.
Rosner’s Domain | Savior No More
The greater the expectation, the sharper the disappointment.
Hineni: Choosing Torah
As always, we each have the power to choose to listen, to learn, and to grow, or we can shut our ears to that still, small voice. Are you listening? Are you willing? Are you here?
The Agreement with Iran: This Lemon Is Sour, but Israel Can – and Must –Make Lemonade
If Israel can help ensure that the enriched uranium leaves Iran, and if it can use this moment to push Iran and its money out of Lebanon, then a damaging agreement can still be turned into a strategic opening.
Doubling Down on Who We Are
The work, the ancient, urgent, irreplaceable work of Jewish community, is the answer. Not as retreat. Not as consolation. But as the most powerful response available to us.
I Chose Judaism
I was born Jewish, but I chose Judaism in the sense that I came to understand what Judaism represents, how it gives meaning and purpose to my life and how important it is for the world.
Did Netanyahu Undermine Israel’s Most Valuable Asset?
For 75 years, Israeli prime ministers, left and right, kept American politics out of their statecraft. Netanyahu ended that tradition. The bill is coming due.
The Life and Times of Zeda Max – Part 2
Lincoln’s Fast and Moses’ Faith: A July Fourth Reflection
Lincoln’s covenantally-minded republic, what he called God’s “almost chosen people,” would emerge from the conflict victorious, just as Moses’ would eventually return to the Promised Land after their fracture and resulting exile.
We Are Grieving: A Lament
I am grieving the loss of an illusion, that we had finally outgrown this ancient poison, that education and progress had cured a sickness older than our temples’ ruins.
On Wholeness
This, I think, is belonging. And belonging is always to play a part in something larger than oneself.
It’s Really a Wonderful Life
Like George Bailey, Moses felt he could not carry this burden alone and did not want to live. Even Moses could not see all the good that he had done in this life. Little did he know that thousands of years later, we would still be thankful for his leadership.
More news and opinions than at a Shabbat dinner, right in your inbox.