I have always worn my Judaism loudly and proudly, but now I find myself messaging family and friends to beg them to stay safe, asking them to avoid public Chanukah events, and hearing friends seriously contemplate pulling their children out of Jewish schools. That reality tells you everything about the world we live in today. It is open season on Jewish people.

On the first night of Chanukah, as Jews around the world prepared to light candles symbolizing resilience, victory over persecution, and the miracle of a small amount of oil that burned for eight days, we were forced instead to usher in the holiday in mourning. A Chanukah celebration at Bondi Beach in Sydney became a scene of terror.

In response, a vigil was organized spontaneously in Tel Aviv to honor the victims. Despite the last-minute notice, hundreds of Israelis showed up, many of them young olim who had uprooted their lives from diaspora communities to build new lives in Israel. Among them were Australians, some who had made aliyah and now live in Israel, and others who were visiting when the attack occurred and were suddenly confronted with the horror unfolding back home, where their families and friends lived.

It was clear from how they spoke that Bondi Beach was not chosen at random. For most Jews in diaspora communities, Chanukah falls in the winter, when we light candles and celebrate indoors with family and friends. But for Australian Jews, since Chanukah falls in the summer, Jewish celebrations move outdoors—into parks, beaches, and public squares. Over the years, Bondi Beach became an iconic place for these celebrations, synonymous with Australian Jewish communal life. It was a place where families gathered openly and proudly, where Judaism was visible, joyful, and unafraid.

That is precisely what made the attack so violating. The terrorists did not just target people; they targeted an identity and a community's sense of safety and belonging in Australia. They targeted the idea that Jews could exist publicly, confidently, and unhidden.

Even through grief, many Australians spoke with a profound sense of gratitude. Again and again, through tears and trembling voices, they said the same thing: "thank God we have the State of Israel." They said it while mourning the dead, while worrying about loved ones thousands of miles away, and while absorbing the trauma of what had happened. Their instinct was not despair, but relief that Israel exists.

One father from Bondi Beach, who was visiting Israel when the attack occurred, spoke at the vigil and broke down as he confirmed that his wife and children were safe. His tears were not only for fear and loss but for what he was witnessing: Jews from across the world standing with his community, showing that they were not alone. He saw that there is now a place where Jews instinctively gather in moments like this, a Jewish state that understands Jewish pain without explanation.

That reaction speaks volumes.

For generations, Jews who were massacred in pogroms, exiled from cities, or hunted across continents had nowhere to turn. There was no address for Jewish suffering, no army sworn to protect Jewish lives, and no state that viewed attacks on Jews anywhere as part of a broader threat to Jews everywhere. Today, that reality has changed.

Israel's enemies understand this clearly. Jewish institutions and places of worship worldwide often fall under the protective reach of Israel's security services, and Israel's National Security Council repeatedly warns Jews and Israelis abroad to exercise caution, particularly at unsecured public gatherings. To those who wage violence, this is not a war against a country, but a war against a people. Global terror attacks orchestrated by Iran, from Buenos Aires to Amsterdam, and the attacks in Australia in 2024, underscore this truth.

Australian Jews understood this instinctively, and in the aftermath of Bondi Beach, they responded not only with fear, but with clarity: the existence of Israel changes everything. Israel does not prevent antisemitism, nor does it stop terrorists from trying, but it ensures that Jewish blood is no longer cheap, that Jewish lives are no longer defenseless, and that Jewish communities are never truly alone.

This will not be the last targeted attack against Jews, but for the first time, Jews confront this reality with a state, an army, and a peoplehood that refuses to disappear quietly.

At Bondi Beach, terrorists tried to shatter a symbol of Jewish life lived openly and proudly, but in Israel, Australian Jews reminded us why that symbol still matters. They showed that even in the face of terror, Jewish life persists, visible, proud, and resilient, and that community and solidarity can overcome fear. The existence of Israel is a lifeline for Jewish life and security. It is a place where Jewish suffering is understood without explanation, where Jewish lives are defended, and where Jews from all over the world can find refuge and support.

This moment will be another test for the world and how it responds to the surge of terrorism globally. While Jews have historically been the first targets, we know that what begins with our community will never remain confined to it. The persistence of violence against Jews is a warning to all, and the way the world responds by calling out and taking strong measures against terrorism will determine whether hatred is allowed to spread unchecked.

For the Jewish community, the existence of Israel is not only a lifeline, but also a signal that injustice will not go unanswered and that the world must stand against those who seek to destroy the innocent.

The post Violence that begins with Jews never ends there appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Instead of condemning the mob for targeting a modern Orthodox synagogue, Mamdani's spokesperson, Dora Pekec, said, "He believes every New Yorker should be free to enter a house of worship without intimidation," and added, "And that these sacred spaces should not be used to promote activities in violation of international law."

For a long time, I did not want to speak over Jewish New Yorkers who now have to live with a mayor who cannot condemn phrases like "Globalize The Intifada." But I am tired of seeing bad-faith actors tell the worried Jewish community that their concerns are exaggerated, misinformed, or rooted in bad faith. Instead of confronting a record of statements and alliances that alarm many Jews, Mamdani and his defenders have chosen to tokenize Jewish voters and gaslight the community.

Mamdani's defenders often point to the fact that a significant portion of Jewish New Yorkers voted for him, claiming this proves he cannot be antisemitic and that all allegations are about his stance on Israel. However, no poll accurately measures Jewish support. Most cite a CNN exit poll showing 31 percent support among 710 Jewish respondents, without methodology or margin of error disclosed.

Another poll, conducted by Quinnipiac University, found only 16 percent of Jewish voters supported Mamdani, and 75 percent viewed him unfavorably.

The real problem is not which poll is correct. It is the instrumentalization of Jews. Invoking Jewish voters when convenient and dismissing Jewish fears when inconvenient treats Jews not as a community with legitimate safety concerns, but as a rhetorical shield.

If Mamdani wanted to reassure Jewish New Yorkers, his transition team selections did the opposite. Among the 400 appointees are several with documented histories of anti-Israel extremism or remarks crossing into antisemitism.

Elle Bisgaard-Church, appointed as Chief of Staff, has deep ties to the Democratic Socialists of America, an anti-Israel movement known for supporting the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement against Israel.

Waleed Shahid, on the Committee on Community Organizing, wrote on October 7, while Israelis were still being murdered, that Hamas' massacre was a "byproduct of Israel's violent policies." Contextualizing Jewish suffering in real time is not neutral; it is a moral failing.

Jenna Hamed, on the Arts and Culture Committee, wrote six days after the massacre that she "reaffirm[s]" her people "for all measures taken toward life and liberation" and that "freeing Palestine" requires the "obliteration of all borders." Given the context, this endorses violence and implies rejection of Israel's right to exist.

Tamika Mallory, on the Community Safety Committee, has refused to condemn Louis Farrakhan, suggested Jews oppress people of color, and resigned from the Women's March in 2019 amid accusations of antisemitism. Elevating her to a role in community safety sends a chilling message about whose safety matters.

These appointments are not incidental. They reflect a worldview that many Jewish New Yorkers already find alarming. Asking them to ignore that worldview because some voted for Mamdani is insulting.

Jewish New Yorkers are not imagining things. They are responding to explicit statements, documented histories, and public choices made by their incoming mayor. Their concerns cannot be dismissed with selective polling or accusations of hysteria.

If Mamdani wants to be a mayor for all New Yorkers, he must begin by acknowledging the legitimacy of Jewish concerns, not minimizing or manipulating them. He must be honest about the implications of his record and the rhetoric of those he elevates. Above all, he must stop allowing Jewish voters to be reduced to a talking point in the service of a political narrative.

Gaslighting is not leadership. Tokenization is not inclusion.

Jewish New Yorkers deserve better than both.

The post Tokenizing Jewish voters doesn't erase Mamdani's record of antisemitism appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

While Jew-hatred on the far-Right has always existed, much of the energy in combating antisemitism has been directed at the left, where anti-Zionism has flourished. In a post-colonial world that often vilifies power, authority, and socio-economic success, criticism of Israel can easily tip into hostility toward Jewish people. This has allowed far-Right voices to quietly gain traction in mainstream conservative politics while attention remained elsewhere.

In recent years, there has been a subtle but dangerous acceptance of far-Right antisemitism seeping into Christian communities, and there is no better example than someone like Nick Fuentes, who is once again back in the headlines. Fuentes is an American political commentator, white supremacist, Holocaust denier, and outspoken antisemite. He calls himself a "Christian conservative," yet his goal is to manipulate Christians to spread his antisemitism. He actively promotes conspiracy theories, Holocaust denial, and blood libels, claiming that Jews have no place in Western civilization because they are not Christian.

Fuentes's rhetoric has long been extreme, but his recent appearance on The Tucker Carlson Network highlighted how these ideas are beginning to gain traction in mainstream conservative circles. During the two-hour segment, he promoted a range of antisemitic tropes, including the claim that the main obstacle in the conservative movement was "these Zionist Jews."

While Fuentes's rhetoric is not new, ideas once confined to the far-Right are now gaining traction among mainstream conservative and Christian audiences. His strategy is to discredit antisemitism, spread conspiracy theories about an "organized Jewish lobby," and blame Jews for America's problems, all in an effort to divide the GOP and create distrust of Jewish communities. To understand how this is affecting Christian circles, I spoke with several activists, social media figures, and field professionals.

"Nick pushes a very specific brand of hatred, one that is especially attractive to young, white, Christian American men. If someone is listening to him and actually taking him seriously, they've crossed into dangerous territory," Liv Lane, Director of Social Media at Passages, an organization building relationships between young Christians, Jewish people, and Israel, says. Lane explains that Fuentes's rhetoric does not enter the Church overtly; it "slips in through the side door. A lot of Christians, especially younger ones who already feel disillusioned or disconnected from their faith communities, don't have the discernment to see the danger Nick poses to their spiritual health."

Jacob, a Christian activist known as "The Moderate Case" on social media, agrees. "I am not just saying he is offensive or edgy. It is dangerous because it is shallow, conspiratorial, and built on claims that he never actually backs up, yet people absorb them as truth. Those conspiracies always end up pointing toward hatred, whether it is toward Jews, immigrants, minorities, or whoever he decides is the villain."

Fuentes has spent much of his time on the Tucker Carlson Network promoting the dual loyalty trope, falsely claiming that Jews are disloyal to their home country because their "real" allegiance is to Israel. He implies Jews cannot be trusted as full citizens while pushing Christian and white supremacist ideas typically seen on the far-Right.

"Christians should be worried that his rhetoric will seep into our community," says Madeline D, a conservative Christian influencer. "The beliefs that Fuentes espouses, such as antisemitism, misogyny, and racism, go directly against the commandment to love thy neighbor."

Kirby Calhoun, Campus Director for Christians United For Israel, describes Fuentes's views as "un-American" and fundamentally "un-Christian," but notes that his messages are beginning to seep through, especially among those who are Biblically uninformed.

Some activists worry that Fuentes's antisemitism could even put Christians themselves at risk. Nick Matau, a US Navy veteran and Christian Zionist activist, warns, "They will tone police and dictate until there is a split within the Christian community. While Christians argue and there is infighting, these bad-faith actors will use it to target the West, Christianity, and Jewish people."

What can be done to counter Fuentes's influence? The activists I spoke with offer varied approaches. Lane believes that since most of his audience is young men, "the most effective way to fill the gap he exploits is for strong, Gospel-oriented men to step up and take real leadership." Jacob, who also advocates for free speech, believes silencing or canceling Fuentes only strengthens him by making his followers think critics are hiding something. He encourages open debate and evidence-based challenges to Fuentes's claims, noting that "people should show where his claims fall apart and expose the lack of substance in his arguments."

Amid these warnings, Kirby Calhoun emphasizes that the solution lies not in online debates or inflammatory talk shows. "For Christians, the antidote to the hatred of people like Nick Fuentes, Tucker Carlson, and Candace Owens is to open their Bible. The answers are there, not on a bigot's podcast."

Antisemitism is not a relic of the past. It is evolving, finding new voices and audiences, and increasingly infiltrating spaces where it once had little foothold. The rise of figures like Fuentes shows how dangerous this shift can be when extremist ideas slip into mainstream discourse, often disguised as faith or political conservatism. Christian communities face a choice: allow these conspiracies and distortions to shape their worldview or confront them with discernment, education, and moral clarity.

Combating antisemitism and standing up for true Judeo-Christian values requires vigilance, courage, and the willingness to speak truth, even when it challenges powerful narratives. The time to act is now.

The post Inside the Christian response to Nick Fuentes and far-right antisemitism appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Under the terms of the US-brokered ceasefire, Hamas was required to return all 48 hostages, both living and dead. So far, the terror group has only handed over 16 bodies, already violating the agreement. Hamas operatives claimed they were unable to locate the remaining bodies due to Israel's relentless bombardment of the strip, a claim debunked by released hostage Rom Braslavski, who revealed that he saw the bodies of slain hostages in Gaza shortly before his release. Meanwhile, an international body has sent dozens of personnel to the strip to assist in locating the remaining deceased hostage bodies..

Then, early Sunday, in an even larger violation of the ceasefire agreement, Hamas terrorists fired anti-tank missiles and opened fire on IDF forces in the Rafah area, killing two Israeli soldiers. This attack was not only another act of aggression but also a far more serious breach of the agreement itself. In response, the Israeli Air Force launched airstrikes and artillery fire in the area, prompting the United States to scramble to restrain Israel from completely dismantling the already fragile truce.

None of us are surprised by Hamas's actions and with the players overseeing this ceasefire, it would be a miracle if it does not completely collapse. We are only in the first phase of Trump's 20-point plan, and few believe there will ever be an actual phase two. There is still a massive question mark on what the future of Gaza (and Hamas's role in it) will look like. For now, Israelis are focused on the relief of having our living hostages returned, which marks the end of the darkest chapter in our history, and the public wants to focus on a nation beginning to heal. Yet even as this immediate crisis eases, we must look ahead to the fragile days of the ceasefire and keep our eyes wide open. We cannot forget that the chaperones of this agreement, particularly Qatar and Turkey, do not have Israel's best interests at heart.

The way Trump was able to rally the Arab world and force Hamas into a corner where it had no choice but to accept the deal is something political and Middle East analysts will study for years. The genius behind the apparent chaos of Trump's strategy resembles a "fake it until you make it" approach, setting ambitious goals without immediately clarifying the details required to keep the plan intact. When Trump announced his so-called Gaza Riviera plan in February, few believed it was realistic. Yet it alarmed the Arab world, making states fear the possibility that Palestinians might be relocated to their doorstep.

The same strategy appears to be at work in the ceasefire plan, where Hamas shows no real interest in disarming, yet Washington remains convinced it will happen. Many of us were shocked by the overwhelming support for Trump's 20-point plan among the Arab states, and that he managed to bring Qatar and Turkey on board a plan that not only secured the return of all the hostages but also, if fully implemented, would achieve all of Israel's military aims. Israel's military strike targeting Hamas officials in Qatar appears to have alarmed Doha, bringing the Gaza war to their own soil. It also seemed to scare the wider Arab world, as monarchy states like the UAE and Saudi Arabia feared the conflict might spill over into their territories. For Qatar, the ongoing fighting between Israelis and Palestinians was secondary; the real concern was that if the war became a regional event and Israel's attacks on Arab states became unpredictable, it could destabilize the region. This prompted Qatar and the broader Arab world to act to shut the war down. Trump's strategic move was to offer extraordinary US security concessions to the Qataris, which increased Washington's leverage. This pressure ultimately forced Doha to push Hamas to release all the hostages at once, with the support of the Arab world

What should be telling for all of us who can read between the lines is that Qatar had this ability all along to force Hamas's hand and think about how many lives could have been saved if Qatar and the Arab world had done this sooner. In the negotiations for Trump's 20-point plan, the leading players in pressuring Hamas to accept the deal were Egypt (a positive but weak player), and Qatar and Turkey (which are stronger but more dangerous players). It is very concerning now because had we brokered this deal with Saudi Arabia and the Emeratis, it would have been less troubling than having Qatar, Turkey and a weak Egypt chaperoning this deal.

Now Trump's "fake it until you make it" strategy seems to be apparent in his calls for peace because there is no way the Israeli public is willing to accept a two state solution with Palestinians just days after we got back our people who were starved and tortured for two years, and certainly not while Hamas seems to have no interest in disarming and relinquishing control of Gaza.

Yet according to Trump, these are the first steps toward securing a long-term peace deal. After his stop in Israel, he immediately flew to Egypt, where he met with European and Arab leaders at the so-called Peace Summit in Sharm el-Sheikh, calling on more Arab countries to join the Abraham Accords. Trump also signed a document with Egyptian President el-Sisi, Turkish President Erdoğan, and Qatari Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani aimed at solidifying the Gaza-Israel deal. Even if his grandiose peace statements are simply for publicity, they remain completely out of touch with reality.

Another cause for concern is that neither Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu nor Emirati President Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan attended the summit. If the goal is peace in the Middle East, why were Israel and one of the region's most moderate and powerful leaders absent? Instead, the so-called ceasefire agreement is being guided by the US and a number of unstable or Islamist-leaning Arab states, two of which financed and enabled Hamas's October 7 attacks.

We are at a very sensitive point, and Israel cannot turn a blind eye to the fact that it is backed into a corner, relying on bad-faith actors to safeguard our long-term security. Since Hamas took over Gaza in 2006, Qatari funding bankrolled the terror group and bears responsibility for the two years of devastation we have endured. Hamas launched the war to prevent Israel from normalizing relations with Saudi Arabia, which was set to happen on October 19, 2023, there is no way that their financers in Qatar have any genuine interest in Israel's diplomatic standing or security within the wider Arab world.

The return of the hostages is a monumental turning point for Israel, but it does not erase the danger that still looms. With the ceasefire overseen by actors whose priorities do not align with Israel's security, the nation cannot afford complacency. We made that mistake on October 7, and we can never allow it to happen again.

The post Trump's ceasefire holds, but Turkey and Qatar cast shadows over Israel's future appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

According to the map shared by the president, the IDF would withdraw to what he showed was an initial "yellow" perimeter line (which still covers most of Gaza). After the agreement, the ceasefire would begin immediately, all hostages would be returned within 72 hours, and any further IDF withdrawal from Gaza would be dependent on Hamas disarming. Yes, this does sound almost unbelievable, and Hamas would surely dislike these terms; yet, based on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's recent speech, he appears absolutely certain the deal will happen. If it comes through, all 48 hostages will be back in Israel by the end of the Jewish holiday of Sukkot.

So why would Hamas agree? Shortly after the deal was presented, Hamas announced it would release all the hostages and enter talks, of course with its own conditions and revisions attached. The key sticking points on the group's agenda will likely be the prisoner-hostage exchange terms, the transfer of Gaza's administration, and future governance arrangements. Despite what the deal stipulates, Hamas clearly wants to remain involved in Gaza's future.

Many details remain uncertain, but one development that gives Israelis some hope is that, for the first time in two years, the United States (backed by the international community) has begun treating Hamas as terrorists rather than as a legitimate negotiating partner. The group has been backed into a corner to accept the deal "or else." In his speech, President Trump made clear that Israel has his full backing to continue the war should Hamas reject the terms. The group must accept the deal; otherwise, "all options are on the table." For once, international pressure is focused on forcing Hamas to agree, and two of its major backers, Turkey and Qatar, are now demanding and applying pressure on it to do so.

This is how you force Hamas's hand, and it is how the international community should have dealt with these terrorists from day one. Until now, Hamas operated under the belief that by repeatedly rejecting ceasefire offers, by holding out a little longer, by allowing more Palestinians to die and more propaganda videos of emaciated hostages to circulate, and by prompting violent domestic protests in the West, the international community would increase pressure on Israel to capitulate. Until now, that strategy worked.

But the leaders have made clear that the group has no more cards to play. Netanyahu has accepted Trump's plan; Israeli opposition leaders support the plan (even Yair Golan, one of Netanyahu's fiercest critics, said only someone who hates Israel would oppose it); the Arab world (including Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar, and Turkey) supports the plan; and Western nations, including those that recognized a Palestinian state, have also backed it. Hamas's rejection of this plan would expose, once and for all, that it has no real interest in peace, freedom, or the well-being of Palestinians. It would show what we've known all along, that the group is only interested in prolonging suffering to preserve its own power. What is deeply frustrating is that, had this been done earlier, many lives could have been spared.

Finally, something very crucial about this plan is that it offers a serious vision for what the "day after" in Gaza can look like. Commentators across the political spectrum say this plan provides a complex, nuanced framework we have lacked for two years. Many of its details align with Israel's security objectives and address the grievances that contributed to the October 7 attacks; there is a real possibility this plan could end the war. It appears to be the best deal for Israel: demilitarizing Hamas in the Gaza Strip, securing the release of the hostages, and establishing an alternative form of governance in Gaza. What satisfies many observers is that the deal does not bow to the demands of Israel's far right on annexation and displacement, and it would restore the legitimacy of Israel's position if Hamas rejects the ceasefire.

The international community cannot lose its nerve now. For the first time since October 7, the balance of power has shifted in the right direction, not through appeasement or empty rhetoric, but through unified, unwavering pressure on Hamas to lay down its weapons or face the consequences alone. This is the moment to keep them cornered, to hold firm, and not let the group manipulate global sympathy or exploit Palestinian suffering yet again. If the world stands united and refuses to back down, Hamas will finally be forced to confront the consequences of its own brutality. The people of Gaza deserve a future free from their rule, and the people of Israel deserve lasting security. This time, the world must finish what it started.

The post Cornered at last: International community must force Hamas to accept the deal appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

"Pretty obvious that Israel ordered the hit after Charlie started noticing."

"He was their friend. He basically dedicated his life to them. And they murdered him in front of his family. Israel just shot itself."

The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) has just published a report showing a sharp surge in antisemitic conspiracy theories online following the assassination of conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. Almost immediately, while the manhunt was still underway and no suspect had been identified, antisemites flooded social media with conspiracy theories and claims blaming Israel for the assassination or targeting Jews in general. Within two days of Kirk's shooting, more than 10,000 posts on X had appeared blaming Israel for his death.

Throughout history, a strong indicator of societal collapse is when Jews become the target and scapegoat during times of crisis or social unrest. After Tsar Alexander II was assassinated in 1881, pogroms broke out across the Russian Empire. During the Black Plague, Jews were falsely accused of poisoning the wells, which led to violent attacks, massacres, and expulsions in many European cities. During political instability in France, a Jewish army officer, Alfred Dreyfus, was falsely accused of treason in what became known as the Dreyfus Affair, sparking a wave of antisemitic hysteria across the country. And in Germany, as the economy collapsed after World War I, people latched onto the rumor that Jews controlled the banks, a lie that laid the groundwork for the antisemitism that eventually fueled the Holocaust. Similarly, during the coronavirus pandemic, uncertainty and fear allowed conspiracy theories to spread online, showing the same pattern of scapegoating and targeting of Jewish communities during times of crisis.

Unfortunately, the same antisemitism is now driving online discourse around Kirk's murder, with many claiming that his criticism of Israel and opposition to American involvement in a potential war with Iran were motives for his killing. Notorious antisemitic American political commentator Jackson Hinkle has amplified these false claims, maintaining a running list titled "EVERY ISRAELI connection to Charlie Kirk's ASSASSINATION (so far)," which escalates from Kirk mildly criticizing Israel to absurd assertions that he said Epstein was Mossad or opposed an Iran war – each entry framing Jews and Israel as responsible for his death.

Hinckle is one of many figures promoting "false flag" conspiracy theories suggesting that Israel politically orchestrated Kirk's murder. The ADL report even shows that some posts blame American Jewish organizations for orchestrating Kirk's murder because he had become more critical of Israel or because they feared that Kirk would "turn on them."

While it is true that Kirk received backlash from some Jewish communities for hosting Tucker Carlson at the Turning Point USA conference and for moderating a debate between comedian Dave Smith and Josh Hammer, a pro-Israel conservative and senior editor at Newsweek, those citing these events as motives for his murder offer no evidence whatsoever.

Other fueling conspiracy theories suggest that Israel and the US government worked together to have Kirk assassinated the day before the anniversary of September 11 to fuel hate against Muslim people.

We now know that Charlie's murderer is suspected to be 22-year-old Tyler James Robinson, who was arrested two days later after being identified through surveillance footage and tips from his family. Police are still unclear about his motives, but at a time when political violence is surging, Jewish communities are becoming more of a target, and allowing these conspiracy theories to fester online is putting Jews in danger. We have seen time and time again that, especially when it comes to antisemitism, what starts online will never just stay there.

The truth is that while Charlie Kirk was a controversial figure, to many American Jews and Israelis, he was a source of comfort during a dark period. After Hamas massacred 1,200 Jews during the October 7 attacks, Jewish communities around the world felt abandoned and isolated. While I did not agree with Kirk's stance on many issues, seeing someone outside the Jewish community who could fiercely challenge some of the most prominent antisemites and critics of Israel with such conviction was a powerful sign that we were not alone.

Antisemites and those who thrive on spreading hate will try to exploit Kirk's death for their agenda, but for the average person, even those who disagreed with him politically, his murder was an attack on humanity and a stark reminder of the urgent need to confront violence, intolerance, and the destructive power of hatred.

The post Charlie Kirk was murdered – and Jews are blamed appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Since the strike, Qatar has announced it is suspending its mediation efforts in the hostage negotiations indefinitely. But the question remains: why is Qatar even in a position to mediate? And more importantly, why is this tiny Gulf nation still treated as a neutral or benign actor, despite decades of behavior that has directly harmed Israel and Western interests?

For a country with a population smaller than many major cities, Qatar has assumed an outsized role on the world stage. Most of the public recognizes that Qatar often acts in bad faith, claiming to mediate while simultaneously supporting the very groups it is supposed to contain. Yet few truly understand the depth and scope of Qatar's global influence. With one of the highest GDP per capita figures in the world and a sovereign wealth fund managing over $500 billion in assets, Qatar wields extraordinary financial and political power. It has used this power to insert itself into both legitimate and illegitimate spheres, shaping policies, media narratives, and even the politics of other countries

Over the years, Qatar has consistently bought influence around the world. While Iran is known as the top state sponsor of terrorism, Qatar has emerged as the number one financier of political Islam globally. It funds the Muslim Brotherhood, the Taliban, Hay'at Tahrir al-Sham in Syria, and, most prominently, Hamas. In 2009, Emir Hamad became the first head of state to visit Gaza after Hamas forcibly seized power, pledging $200 million annually to support Hamas's vision of an Islamic state in Gaza. That act was not symbolic; it was a clear signal that Qatar was willing to use its wealth to empower a terrorist organization that has repeatedly targeted Israeli civilians.

The regime in Doha has maintained this support for over a decade. Senior Hamas leaders live in Doha, fundraising in luxurious hotels, attending lavish events, and enjoying a life of privilege, while Palestinians in Gaza endure hardship under Hamas rule. These are not isolated acts but are part of a systematic strategy to legitimize and strengthen an organization whose charter openly calls for the destruction of Israel. By providing a safe haven and financial resources to Hamas, Qatar is directly contributing to the planning and execution of terrorist operations against Israel.

Qatar's influence is not limited to direct support for terrorism. The country has been implicated in bribery and political manipulation around the world. Allegations include bribing members of the European Parliament, U.S. Senator Bob Menendez, and even two of Prime Minister Netanyahu's staffers to present it in favorable light during the hostage negotiations. Prior to the October 7 massacre, Qatar cooperated with Israel in an effort to stabilize Hamas, a tactic that failed spectacularly and clearly did not serve Israeli security. These incidents reveal a consistent pattern of Qatar using its wealth and diplomatic influence to manipulate governments, institutions, and public opinion in order to advance its interests and protect the terrorist organizations it supports.

Beyond its role in the Middle East, Qatar has mastered the use of soft power globally. In the United States alone, it has invested over $100 billion in universities, banks, media outlets, think tanks, corporations, and political figures. CENTCOM, the U.S. Central Command responsible for counterterrorism, regional stability, and naval security, operates from Qatar, hosting over 100,000 U.S. troops. These relationships give Qatar a veneer of legitimacy and strategic importance. Yet behind the scenes, the country continues to fund and enable operations that harm both U.S. and Israeli security.

Having Qatar mediate hostage negotiations was a mistake from the start. Despite claiming to be "disinterested," Qatar spent $30 million a month to sustain Hamas (something that Israel allowed in hopes that it would bring stability). And now, the recent "Qatargate" scandal suggests possible meddling in Israeli politics and media.

Qatar's state media outlet, Al Jazeera, has amplified these threats through propaganda and arguably harmed Israel in ways that Hamas could only dream of. The network's coverage of the Gaza war has shaped the narrative across the Arab world, demonizing and flat-out lying about Israel. Al Jazeera staff in Doha were directly involved in producing the hostage parade ceremonies orchestrated by Hamas. This is not simple reporting but a strategic method of dehumanizing Jews and legitimizing violence against hostages to the entire Arab world.

Qatar's actions have been a persistent and strategic threat to Israel and Western interests. Even though the regime has placed itself in the perfect position to leverage both sides, the fact that Israel has not categorized it as a hostile state was a huge mistake, and we paid the price on October 7.

Western governments have treated Qatar as a neutral partner for far too long. Its wealth, diplomacy, and strategic positioning have allowed it to cultivate a relationship with the United States and other global powers while simultaneously pursuing operations that destabilize the region and harm Western interests.

It is time to recognize Qatar for what it truly is: a hostile state. Its funding of terrorism, harboring of terrorists, manipulation of Western institutions, and use of soft power to shield malign operations are a threat and Israel and the West cannot continue to turn a blind eye to it. For the safety of Israelis and the stability of the Middle East, Qatar must be treated as the adversary it has become.

The post Qatar should be classified as a hostile threat to Israel and West appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Prime Minister Albanese revealed that Australia's top spy agency, the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO), had determined that the regime was responsible for plotting arson attacks against Lewis' Continental Kitchen in Sydney last October and the Adass Israel Synagogue in Melbourne in December. Despite efforts to conceal their involvement, Albanese said it is likely that Iran directed further attacks as well.

According to some reports, these were the most dangerous examples of attacks by a foreign regime in modern Australian history. They prompted Australia to legislate the designation of the regime's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps as a terrorist organisation. The Albanese government also expelled Tehran's ambassador and suspended operations at Australia's embassy in Tehran.

These are the correct steps for a country like Australia to take, but they are long overdue, and every nation in the West must investigate and follow suit. This is far from the first time the regime has attacked Jewish communities across the globe.

In 1992, the Israeli Embassy in Buenos Aires was struck by a Hezbollah suicide bomber who killed 29 civilians, including two Israelis, and injured 242 people. The blast caused the embassy building to collapse along with a nearby church, school, and apartment building. In April 2024, Argentina's second highest court found that the Iranian regime had masterminded the bombing. Two years later, the Asociación Mutual Israelita Argentina (AMIA), a Jewish community center in Buenos Aires, was targeted in another suicide bombing, this time by a terrorist who drove a bomb-laden van into the building and detonated it, killing 85 people and injuring more than 300. To this day, it remains the deadliest terror attack in Argentina's history, and the same court ruled that Iran directed the attack and that Hezbollah carried it out. The ruling also characterized Iran as a terrorist state.

The regime was also responsible for the 2012 Burgas bus bombing in Bulgaria, where a suicide bomber detonated inside a transport bus at Burgas airport as it was carrying 42 Israeli tourists, mostly young people arriving on a flight from Tel Aviv. The explosion killed the Bulgarian bus driver and five Israelis and wounded 32 others. Months later, Bulgarian Interior Minister Tsvetan Tsvetanov confirmed there was well-founded evidence that Hezbollah was behind the attack. Hezbollah, the arm of the Iranian regime based primarily in Lebanon, has since expanded its activities far beyond the Middle East, engaging in fundraising, smuggling, and logistical operations across Latin America, West Africa, and parts of Europe and North America. This should be setting off alarms across the globe, as it shows the regime in Iran has no intention of limiting its influence to its own region.

The list continues. Countries such as Azerbaijan, Turkey, Greece, and Brazil have foiled Hezbollah and Iranian plots by gathering intelligence and exposing IRGC–Hezbollah networks planning suicide attacks and kidnappings of Jews and Israelis. In June 2022, the Iranian regime finalized a significant 20-year cooperation agreement with Venezuela, expanding Hezbollah's activities in Latin America and securing easier access to challenge US interests in the Western Hemisphere.

For those who might think this is simply a Jewish or Israeli problem, the evidence proves otherwise. Iran's regime and its proxy Hezbollah have shed blood across continents, killing Americans in Beirut, Saudi Arabia, and Iraq; murdering Europeans in Paris, Bulgaria, and elsewhere; and slaughtering Arabs in Lebanon, Syria, and throughout the region. From the 1983 Marine barracks bombing to the Khobar Towers, from the streets of Buenos Aires to the battlefields of Syria, their victims have included diplomats, soldiers, aid workers, tourists, and countless civilians of every background. This is not a Jewish issue; it is a global one.

Iran's involvement in antisemitic attacks in the West vindicates what Jews have been warning for months: the rallies and encampments we are seeing are not entirely organic, but in part orchestrated by foreign regimes. If Tehran can plot terror abroad, it can bankroll encampment protests as well.

Australia's actions should serve as a wake-up call to every democracy. The Iranian regime has demonstrated time and again that it will burn synagogues in Melbourne, bomb embassies in Buenos Aires, kill Marines in Beirut, and butcher civilians in Syria with the same ruthless intent. The longer the West hesitates, the more freedom Tehran will have to export its terror. Australia has taken the right steps, but one country is not enough. Every Western democracy must thoroughly investigate Iranian networks operating on its soil, dismantle Hezbollah's fundraising and logistical infrastructure, and formally designate the IRGC as the terrorist organisation that it is. Only a coordinated and resolute front will demonstrate that Tehran's campaign of global terror will no longer be tolerated.

The post Australia's actions should be a wake-up call to every democracy appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

In my last piece, I wrote about how Jews in the diaspora should not be speaking over Israelis when discussing internal issues that directly affect our daily lives. Yet the flipside is equally true: Israeli Jews must also learn how to better support their brothers and sisters in the diaspora. What diaspora Jews may not fully appreciate is that Israeli Jews embody the Zionist dream, where Jews finally have complete agency over their fate and live immersed in the Israeli narrative. This often means criticizing Israel without worrying about how that criticism, or their actions more broadly, might be weaponized by antisemites. After all, living the Zionist dream means that your life and your decisions no longer need to be dictated by those who seek your destruction.

And yet, October 7 reminded us that the story of Israel is inseparable from the story of the Jewish people everywhere. After Hamas committed its heinous acts, the global Jewish community rallied with such speed that within 24 hours, donations poured in and supplies were shipped in such abundance that soldiers joked they could not even find their mattresses on base amidst the overflow. However tragic those days were, they were also filled with extraordinary kindness and love, and for a moment, we witnessed the true nature of Jewish peoplehood.

But as uplifting as this solidarity was, it also raises difficult questions about perspective, responsibility, and the differences between living as a majority in Israel and as a minority in the diaspora. Something that gives me uncomfortable chills is asking: if an atrocity like October 7 were to happen in a diaspora Jewish community, would Israeli Jews rally in the same way? I want to believe so, but I am not certain. Israelis do not fully understand the challenges of being a minority, nor do I know if they feel the same sense of responsibility toward diaspora Jews as diaspora Jews instinctively feel toward Israel. The way Israelis behave and carry themselves as a majority in their own country, with the confidence and protections that come with that, is very different from the lived experiences of Jews in places like Canada, Australia, and the UK, where protections are weaker and Jewish safety is rarely a national priority.

This disconnect is visible in how out of touch some segments of Israeli society are, particularly within its leadership. Throughout this war, we have seen poor messaging and incompetent spokespeople who do not know how to represent Israel. Politicians and ministers have made reckless statements with real consequences for Jews around the world, both on the right and left. Yair Golan, leader of the Israeli Democrats, accused Israel of "killing babies as a hobby" in Gaza. While many Hebrew speakers understood he was attacking Netanyahu's government rather than actual Israeli policy, the damage abroad was immense. He undermined Israel's legitimacy in wartime, and someone in his position should have known better.

On the opposite end of the spectrum, far-right leaders such as Ben Gvir and Smotrich inflame their bases with racist, incendiary remarks about Palestinians and Arabs and by promising annexation, something that is not part of Israel's war objectives. Yes, the international community has long been unfairly hostile to Israel, but members of our own government should not be handing them ammunition. The list goes on: ministers appearing on national television, making reckless statements, and worsening the situation not only for Israel but also for diaspora Jews.

Beyond politics, I have watched army officials stumble in English during press briefings with international media. Israel has plenty of fluent English speakers in uniform, yet it consistently places decorated generals before foreign journalists regardless of their ability to communicate with Western audiences. British commentator Melanie Phillips said it best: "As the world demonises Israel with serial lies and puts a target on the back of every Jew, Israel's failure to put its own case properly is inexcusable." This is not because we cannot do it, but it is because we choose not to.

One of my greatest frustrations as someone who grew up in the diaspora is watching how badly Israel handles its communications abroad. The only Israeli who has consistently made a strong case for Israel, ironically, is Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. No matter what one's opinion of him may be, it is undeniable that few Israelis have been able to present Israel's case to the English-speaking world in a way that resonates with American audiences. Even many of Netanyahu's fiercest critics must acknowledge that, historically, he was one of the only Israeli leaders engaging with Western media at a time when few others were effective at doing so. This is one of the main reasons why it is difficult for diaspora Jews to criticize him: for them, he remains one of the few voices able to speak both to them and to the wider world about Israel's security concerns, its moral dilemmas, and its right to exist in a hostile region. For many in the diaspora, even when they disagree with his politics, Netanyahu has been one of the only figures capable of articulating Israel's case in a language and style that resonates beyond its borders.

Israelis, especially those in positions of power, need to wake up and stop making decisions and statements that directly harm Jewish communities abroad. Since moving here, part of my journey has been embracing the right to criticize leadership and policy while advocating for Israel to become the best version of itself. Yet I never forget that my words also reverberate outside this country, and I weigh every sentence with diaspora Jews in mind. Our experiences may differ, and we may see the world through different lenses, but in the end, all we have is each other, and our survival, our safety, and the strength of our people depend on how well we protect one another.

The post The cost of Israel's bad messaging appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

From the earliest days of Zionism, debates raged between those in the diaspora and those in Israel and Ben-Gurion himself often clashed with American Jewry, warning that life in the diaspora came with risks of detachment. These tensions are not new, but they have intensified in an age where social media gives every voice a megaphone, regardless of proximity to the struggle.

Israel is the homeland of the Jewish people, and October 7 demonstrated more than ever that what happens here affects Jews everywhere. This is part of the reason why certain token Jewish actors like Mandy Patinkin and Miriam Margolyes feel entitled to blame Israel or Netanyahu for the antisemitism Jews are facing worldwide (which is absurd, as it amounts to blaming Jews for antisemitism). It is also why many diaspora Jews feel deeply connected to what is happening in Israel, as though it affects their daily lives. The Jewish nation is small, and most diaspora Jews have some family or connection to Israel, where nearly half of the global Jewish population lives.

It was only after I moved to Israel, after I began to understand the nuances of Israeli society, learned Hebrew, followed local news closely, spoke directly with military and government officials, and as a journalist visited places like the West Bank and the Gaza border, that my understanding of Israel and the Middle East truly shifted. This was not a shift toward one political side but rather an upgrade, a deeper awareness of the region and the complexities Israelis face. Looking back at my views in the diaspora, I now see myself as a well-intentioned but naïve version of me, lacking the knowledge and context to comment meaningfully.

This is the message to so many who feel a "moral responsibility" to weigh in on the war between Israel and Hamas, even though they have never set foot in the region and could not point out Gaza on a map or explain which river and sea they are chanting about. And while most diaspora Jews who comment on Israeli affairs have likely visited, that does not give them the authority to dictate or misrepresent our internal struggles.

Israel has been enduring nearly two years of war. Before that, the judicial reform crisis nearly pushed us to civil war. Israelis have been grappling with weak and incompetent leadership, and now we stand at another crossroads: a potential hostage deal or a new Gaza maneuver.

During the reform protests, I saw self-proclaimed "influencers" spreading falsehoods, portraying demonstrators as merely "angry leftists" instead of the diverse mosaic of Israelis fearful for their democracy. After six hostages were murdered by Hamas, Israelis filled the streets in outrage, many furious that government delays had prevented a deal that could have saved lives. Yet from abroad, some dismissed these demonstrations as misguided. When a previous hostage deal collapsed in March, activists outside Israel cheered the government's renewed fight against Hamas, even though polls showed most Israelis wanted the deal to continue. And now, as many fear that new operations in Gaza could endanger the remaining hostages, Israelis are again taking to the streets to make clear that the majority supports ending the war in order to bring the hostages home. Every poll since May 2024 shows this, along with a collapse of faith in the government's ability to deliver.

Agree or disagree with the Israeli public, it is unacceptable to misrepresent their actions or reduce them to "a bunch of angry leftists" or, conversely, dismiss those who oppose ending the war as "Kahanists" who want hostages dead. Such simplifications are dishonest and erase the complexity of a nation in pain.

Diaspora Jews absolutely have the right to care about what is happening in Israel. But they should not misrepresent events, nor claim to know what is best for Israelis better than the people who actually live here.

Moshe Emilio Lavi, whose cousin Omri Miran remains in Hamas captivity, put it best on X: "If you want to comment on our internal affairs, ethos, and social contract, then move to Israel, conscript to the IDF or national service, learn our modern language, culture, society, and ethos, and maybe live on the border with your life and your family's life on the line. Until then, your opinions on our domestic discourse are entirely misplaced."

The relationship between diaspora Jews and Israelis is complex, as is natural in a global family. And while Israelis can always improve in how we support our Jewish brothers and sisters abroad, one truth remains clear: those on the front lines must have the loudest voice in deciding their own future.

The post When diaspora Jewish voices speak over Israelis appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.