December 6, 2023

With so much dangerous antisemitism taking hold around the globe, Jewish institutions are critical for the safety and continuity of the Jewish community as threats continue to grow. Regrettably, there are significant numbers of Jewish institutions and groups that have succumbed to progressive forces similar to those found in the mass media and on college campuses and have not been steadfast in supporting Israel since the tragic and horrific behavior of Hamas on Oct. 7th. As such, I am truly pleased to be able to write that New York City’s historic 92nd Street Y on the Upper East Side of Manhattan was and now appears again to be a place “founded nearly 150 years ago to serve the Jewish people” and become a center anchored on “Jewish values and American pluralism” and has firmed demonstrated this position since the Israel-Hamas war. 

While the statement that the 92nd Street Y is a Jewish institution may not initially seem noteworthy, it is critically important to understand the recent history of the Y, the behavior of its leadership, which I saw firsthand, and its recent and crucially important change in institutional position.  

Specifically, when I moved to New York some years ago, I was thrilled by the chance to become part of the many New York institutions and traditions, particularly the 92nd Street Y. The Y was a nationally renowned center of Jewish culture and education; nearly every day the Y would host events and classes to fulfill their mission. But within the last five years, I became a more active participant at the Y and I noticed a problem; being overtly Jewish was not encouraged in the name of inclusivity and diversity. While all are welcome at the Y, there was a clear effort to downplay and minimize Jewish traditions and ideas and a mention of celebrating the Sabbath or other Jewish rituals was often met with glares and unwelcoming remarks.

After more than a handful of these experiences, my feelings were hard to describe and jumping all over the place. I was moving from anger to shock, from embarrassment to shame, and from empathy to rage. I essentially had to apologize for being Jewish and self-censor my ideas; I felt judgment and guilt for wanting to discuss and share my ideas and values about community, family and faith, which have been deeply influenced and informed by decades of Jewish learning in what was supposedly a Jewish center.

It turned out that I was not alone. Many young Jewish families told me that they felt unwelcome as the Y lost its reputation for cultivating Jewish values and community. The Y’s seeming progressive shift mirrored what had been happening on college campuses and across numerous industries. The idea that being Jewish was in and of itself problematic had gained traction. Some told me they thought that the Y was effectively gone as a central Jewish institution. 

These strange times coincided with the Y having its first non-Jewish CEO, Henry Timms. This is not to cast doubt on the qualifications of a non-Jewish CEO. But a non-Jew leading a major Jewish institution raises legitimate questions about the character and mission of the Y. When Timms won a “disruptor award,” it was not mentioned that the Y was a Jewish organization. For the Aspen Ideas Festival, the former CEO was mentioned as the executive director of a “cultural and community center in New York City that creates programs and movements fostering learning and civic engagement.” This is despite the fact that the official government filings note that the Y’s explicit mission is to “serve the Jewish people … within the context of Jewish values.” While the former CEO was a visionary and worthy of praise in many respects, where was his focus on the Y’s central mission of serving the Jewish community? The erasure of the Y’s Jewish mission is hard to swallow. 

Culture comes from the top. It should have been clear that Judaism was not as central to the Y as enumerated. A non-Jewish leader is not the issue. Organizations are right to bring in whoever is the best fit. Instead, it is the retreat from its core mission that is the Y’s problem. In a pluralistic world with many cultural or faith-centric institutions, having a CEO who deeply shares in the particular culture and history of the organization should not be a problem; it should be a virtue. So many American Jews are not only connected to Israel but also the lessons and legacy of the Holocaust; we share collective rituals and a deep understanding of life-cycle events; we all mourned the Tree of Life massacre in 2018; and we have a pintele yid—a common thread that ties Jews together even when we are quarrelsome, fractious and divided. Not only did the former CEO not share in this history and culture, but also he did not regularly celebrate it or even note it in his public biographies, and this speaks to the larger culture of the Y under his leadership and the minimization of Judaism itself within the organization.

The recent actions and appointment of the new CEO, Seth Pinsky, give me great hope for the future of the Y and Jewish life in New York.

Thus, the recent actions and appointment of the new CEO, Seth Pinsky, give me great hope for the future of the Y and for Jewish life in New York. In response to the October massacre in Israel by Hamas and rising antisemitism, Pinsky made it clear that the Y is indeed a “Jewish institution” that embraces Jewish values. This is a bold and positive step forward considering the Y’s very recent past. Pinsky asserted that the Y will continue to welcome a diverse set of perspectives to its campus, including those who are critical of Israel. However, there is a red line: “If you actively call for the destruction of the State of Israel, or question its legitimacy, then you’re welcome to have that opinion in the world, but we’re not going to give it a platform.” Jews participating in the Y’s varied events should not have to worry about blowback for supporting Israel and its right to exist; this should be a foundational truth and position in a Jewish space. 

Fortunately, the Y has stood by this position despite public criticism and resignations and, as a consequence of its recent rebrand, the Y now proclaims that “As a proudly Jewish organization, 92NY creates meaningful, relevant, and joyous Jewish experiences for all those who want to connect with Jewish life and finds new ways to bring our rich tradition into dialogue with the modern world.” Pinsky affirmed that the Y is indeed genuinely a place that supports Jews and Judaism in a host of ways. Another top leader at the Y echoed this sentiment by noting, “We actually consider it a win if someone comes to us to explore their Jewish identity, feels affirmed and confident and authentic in their Judaism.” This is a palpable shift in just a few short years.

The 92nd Street Y looks like it is finally on the right track. With a new leader, the Y appears to be genuinely embracing its mission to serve as a cultural and social center open to all but anchored on Jewish values and identity. More importantly, in today’s world of so much antisemitism, the Jewish community needs its institutions to gather, process, mourn and share its collective stories and shared histories. The Y was founded to serve the Jewish community at a time when the Jewish minority had few places to turn. We are living in a similar time. The Jewish community needs its institutions now. While they can be open and welcoming to all, they must remain deeply informed and committed to supporting the Jewish community.

Samuel J. Abrams is a professor of politics at Sarah Lawrence College and a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.

As Israel battles Hamas U.S. Jews are experiencing an alarming rise in antisemitism. On college campuses, students have been shocked by the hatred that has been unleashed, some are afraid to wear Jewish stars. A local rabbi who has been active in human rights campaigns over the years told me, “I don’t know who my friends are any more.” Here in Orange County, Jewish leaders have been battling with progressive activists in the Democratic party who have been promoting anti-Israel resolutions.   

American Jews feel a sense of unease, but there is also good news.  Compare the response of U.S. Jews in the Holocaust to today. Despite reports of death camps in Europe the Jewish establishment led by Rabbi Stephen S. Wise refused to protest. They feared that demanding President Roosevelt act to protect European Jews would spark antisemitism in the U.S. Finally in 1943, four years after the war’s onset, 400 bearded orthodox rabbis marched on Washington, D.C. a few days before Yom Kippur.  Establishment Jewish leaders convinced  President Roosevelt not to meet the delegation, telling him  “these rabbis are irrelevant.”  Today, Jews are not being silent. Two weeks ago, there was a wall-to-wall coalition of 300,000 Jews standing proud in the National Mall, telling the world that American Jewry supports Israel.

In the grassroots there is a great Jewish awakening, akin to the burst of Jewish pride after the Six-Day War. A survey of Chabad rabbis reports an explosion of Jewish commitment. Jews are coming out of the woodwork, synagogues are seeing a rise in attendance. According to Merkaz Stam, a tefillin seller in New York, sales are up by 60%.

Hanukkah will be the test for U.S. Jews anguishing over a rise of antisemitism. Is this the time to hunker down or is this the moment to show Jewish pride? 

Hanukkah will be the test for U.S. Jews anguishing over a rise of antisemitism. Is this the time to hunker down or is this the moment to show Jewish pride? The city council of Moncton, New Brunswick, banned the Menorah because of the war in Gaza. Public uproar prompted them to recall that decision.  The local rabbi, Yitzchok Yagod, reports that  many Jews not involved in the  community woke up and protested.  In Williamsburg, Virginia, the 2nd Sundays Art Festival canceled the menorah lighting.  In response, Mendy Heber, the local Chabad rabbi, plans on increasing activities.   

In the ’70s, when Chabad began to put up menorahs in public places, many liberal Jewish groups reacted with angst. They cajoled, criticized and eventually began to sue. “It’s a violation of church and state, Menorahs belong at home not at City Hall,” they claimed. The real clash, however, was not over church and state. That was a ruse for something deeper—whether we should subdue our Jewish identity in the public, or as Chabad argued, act with Jewish pride. As the great Professor Arthur Hertzberg, who headed the American Jewish Congress that  battled Chabad  in court over Menorahs, told me before his passing, “We believed you should be a Jew at home and a citizen on the street.“ The Rebbe [the Lubavitcher Rebbe Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson], he added “believed that if we would be Jews on the street we will be a better Jews at home. The Rebbe was right and we were wrong.”

The same holds true today. The answer to antisemitism is not to remove your mezuzah and hide your chai. It’s to stand strong  and proud. Yes, some have withdrawn behind locked doors and armed guards. Chabad rejects this agenda. This should be the moment for the Jewish community to stand up with a positive message of self-esteem.  Instead of reducing  Menorah lightings, we need to  make more. Thousands of celebrations will be held., in shopping malls, city halls and sports stadiums. 

A few days ago, the first Menorah was erected in Gaza. Soldiers pushed aside the rubble in the former Hamas stronghold in Bet Lahiya and lifted up the Menorah for all to see. Chabad is putting up another 30 Menorahs in Gaza, to ensure that soldiers spread all over can participate in the holiday celebrations. In addition,  tens of thousands of kits will be handed out to soldiers on the front lines.

If they have the courage to light a Menorah in Gaza, it behooves us to show our solidarity with them.  Join a celebration, be it  at the National Menorah opposite the White House, or one of the thousands of others in cities and towns all over the country. Light your Menorah in doorways and windows. Jewish pride is the greatest response to antisemitism.

Rabbi David Eliezrie is the president of the Rabbinical Council of Orange County, author of “The Secret of Chabad” and the upcoming “Undaunted: The story Rabbi Yosef Yitchchak Schneerson.” 

Following the Holocaust, the International Committee of the Red Cross openly admitted they failed to help and protect Jews from extermination by the Nazis.

On October 7^th, as Hamas terrorists massacred 1,400 people in southern Israel and took at least 240 hostages, the Red Cross is – yet again – missing in action.

It should not go unnoticed that the barbaric October 7 massacre was the single largest mass murder of Jews since the Holocaust. Today, the perpetrators might be different, but Hamas is just like the Nazis, in both their agenda and brutality. Perhaps the only difference is, whereas the Nazis sought to cover up their heinous crimes, Hamas was doing so gleefully, using ‘go-pro’ cameras and streaming theirs on the internet in real time.

Of the 240 hostages Hamas kidnapped into the dungeons of Gaza, at least 40 were children, many mercilessly torn apart from the clutches of their parents’ arms, like Ela and Dafna Ziv, 8 and 15, who were abducted from Nahal Oz and pulled from their beds in pajamas, but not before first witnessing their father being executed.

The youngest captive is Kfir Bibas, who was a mere 9-months-old when he was taken from his home. Together with his brother Ariel, 4-years-old, they remain the only children left in captivity, their fate, including that of their mother Shiri, still unknown.

Many of the hostages are also elderly, and sick, in need of urgent medical attention, while at least 10 have been reported executed in captivity.

For the abundance of clarity, if it still needs to be reiterated, babies and grandmothers, are not prisoners of war, but hostages, and that the taking of hostages is a grave war crime and gross violation of international humanitarian law (IHL), including under Article 8(2) of the Rome Statute, the International Convention Against the Taking of Hostages (1979), as well as the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1979.

Under IHL, pending the release of the hostages, Hamas must treat each one with dignity, provide necessary medical care and information as to their whereabouts and condition. They have violated every single one of these obligations, while further engaging in psychological warfare and torture, through their degrading propaganda videos.

Although the Red Cross has condemned the taking of the hostages and called for their release, the stark reality is they have absolutely nothing to show for it.

They have not seen a single hostage in captivity, have not obtained any proof of life, cannot tell us where they are located, the condition they are in, or if they need medical assistance. The Red Cross’s role has effectively been relegated to no more than a glorified Uber driver.

Although about 100 hostages have now been released (with at least another 137 remaining), it has not been because of the Red Cross, but in spite of their absence and utter ineffectiveness.

One of the released hostages, Elma Avraham, 84, is now fighting for her life. At a press conference following her return, her children heartbreakingly described how the Red Cross abandoned their mother, saying how the family even traveled to the Red Cross office to provide them with her mother’s medicine, but the Red Cross refused to take it. Elma’s children said the Red Cross “did nothing” to help their mother, asking “Why are they even there if they don’t do anything?”

The fact that the Red Cross is dealing with a ruthless enemy that does not abide by any rules or norms of international law is not an excuse and does absolve them of their mandate to provide “humanitarian protection and assistance for victims of armed conflict.” Nor is it enough to merely politely ‘call’ for their release.

The Red Cross still has nothing to show as Hamas have been cruelly holding the bodies of IDF soldiers Hadar Goldin and Oron Shaul, taken captive during a humanitarian ceasefire in the 2014 war with Israel.

It has nothing to show as Avner Mengistu, a 37-year-old Israeli civilian with mental health issues, has been held hostage by Hamas also since 2014, or Hisham al-Sayed, a Bedouin Israeli, who is seriously ill and has been held hostage in Gaza since 2015.

And the Red Cross had nothing to show the entire time IDF soldier Gilad Shalit, was held captive in Gaza for almost 6 years, until finally his release in 2011.

The reality is, when it comes to Israeli lives, the Red Cross has embarrasingly little to show, full stop.

Of the 240 hostages Hamas took captive, following the October 7^th massacre, at least ten are believed to have been also American nationals.

The United States is by far the single largest state donor to the Red Cross, in 2022, contributing almost $700 million.

Perhaps Congress ought to be asking where that tax money is going, why the Red Cross been unable to see even a single hostage, or, for that matter, why they ignored the irrefutable evidence right under their noses that Hamas was using Shifa hospital in Gaza as their terrorist headquarters.

Almost eight weeks after the October atrocity, they are unable to even provide proof of life of the youngest of the hostages, 10-month-old Kfir Bibas.

The Red Cross prides itself on being unwaveringly neutral, but when it comes to Israeli lives, the Red Cross are unwaveringly absent.

Arsen Ostrovsky is a human rights attorney and CEO of the International Legal Forum. You can follow him on Twitter (‘X’) at: @Ostrov_A.

During my years as an undergraduate in Montreal, a time that coincided with the peak of the folk revival era, I was drawn to Irish music and songs such as “Black Velvet Band” and “Down by the Sally Gardens” and singers like Tommy Makem and the Clancy Brothers. I am sure that it was affinity-based, at least in part, on my appreciation for the struggles for national survival experienced by both the Jewish people and the people of Ireland.

It is therefore with dismay that I have witnessed the growing antipathy toward Israel expressed by the Irish media and the Irish government in recent years. Articles with titles such as “Why Ireland hates Israel” (Jerusalem Post, 2022) and “Ireland’s criticism of Israel has made it an outlier in the EU. What lies behind it?” (The Guardian, 2023) are common. On November 15th, after the October 7 Hamas massacre and the Israeli reaction, the Irish legislature narrowly defeated a motion to expel the Israel ambassador, as well as a motion to refer Israel to the International Criminal Court.

A recent article by Terry Glavin in the National Post quotes Niall Holohan, a retired Irish diplomat, saying in an interview published in The Guardian, that it is in the Irish psyche to side with the underdog. However, Glavin sees that there is something else going on: the long history of antisemitism in Ireland.

As if to prove Glavin’s point, in the same interview Holohan refers to the small size of Ireland’s Jewish population, stating that the lack of Jewish influence, “has given us a freer hand to take a more principled position.” In other words, too many Jews prevents a government from acting with principles. Holohan’s remarks aroused outrage and accusations of antisemitism.

My interest was piqued. Why does Ireland have such a small Jewish population? According Avi Kumar (JNS, 2023), the Jewish community in Ireland is declining, numbering only 800 in a total population of 5.3 million. (The number increases to about 2500 if Jewish expats—temporary residents, mainly Israelis working in the technology sector—are added.

Antisemitism likely has something to do with the low numbers. At an early point in James Joyce’s novel “Ulysses,” Garrett Deasy (a minor character and headmaster of the school where Stephen Dedalus, a main character, teaches) jokes to Dedalus that Ireland is the only country that has not persecuted the Jews. Why? Because they never let them in!

Obviously, some Jews did get in, particularly in the late 1800s, after Russian pogroms. Some, such as Robert Briscoe (Lord Mayor of Dublin) and Chaim Herzog (sixth President of Israel) became prominent figures. But when times were most desperate for the Jews of Europe, Ireland`s response was a shameful one.

In 1938, representatives of 32 countries met in the French spa town of Ēvian-les-Bains to find a solution to the Jewish refugee crisis precipitated by the antisemitism unleashed in Germany in 1933 and in Austria in 1938. Hundreds of thousands of Jews were stateless. The conference, an initiative by President Roosevelt, was an abject failure. With the exception of the Dominican Republic (in the end only 700 Jewish refugees found sanctuary there), no country agreed to accept Jewish refugees.

Ireland, a British Dominion until 1949, was not initially invited to the Ēvian conference, but asked to attend, not with the intent of helping to solve the problem, but solely to exercise its independence in foreign affairs. The Irish representative, Francis Thomas Cremins, referring to the refugees as unfortunate creatures, stated bluntly that the Irish were content to have been invited, but were not able to help alleviate the crisis (see “The Jewish Trail of Tears”).

His efforts to save Jews were contrary to official Irish policy.

Robert Philpot (The Irish Times, 2017) describes the efforts of the Irish essayist Hubert Butler to bring Jewish refugees to Ireland during World War II. Butler attended the Ēvian conference and what he witnessed disgusted him. His efforts to save Jews were contrary to official Irish policy. Some of the refugees went on to other destinations, so the number saved is uncertain, but estimates range from 100 to 300.

To Philpot, Butler`s actions, at least to some extent, rescued Ireland from eternal shame. But another, and more important message, is that before condemning Israel, the Irish government should reflect on the role Ireland played, along with many others, in convincing the Jewish people of the need for an independent Jewish state.

Jacob Sivak, a Fellow of the Royal Society of Canada, is a retired professor, who taught at the University of Waterloo.