People of the Pod

In this special episode, host Manya Brachear Pashman welcomes a co-host: her 11-year-old son, Max. Together, they sit down with Emmy-winning CNN anchor Bianna Golodryga to discuss her new novel, Don't Feed the Lion. Co-written with Yonit Levy, the book tackles the viral contagion of antisemitism in schools. From the pressure of being the only Jewish kid in class to the stress of Bar Mitzvah prep, this multi-generational conversation explores the void in modern education and the power of empathy. A rare, heartwarming, and urgent bridge between the newsroom and the classroom, this discussion is a must-listen for parents, educators, and anyone looking to understand the next generation's fight against hate. A Note to Our Listeners: As we head into 2026, People of the Pod will be taking a pause. After eight years of sharing your stories, we are contemplating our next chapter. Thank you for being part of this journey. *The views and opinions expressed by guests do not necessarily reflect the views or position of AJC. Key Resources: AJC's Center for Education Advocacy Confronting Antisemitism In Our Schools: A Toolkit for Parents of Jewish K-12 Students FAQs for Parents of K-12 Jewish Students Listen – AJC Podcasts: Architects of Peace The Forgotten Exodus People of the Pod Follow People of the Pod on your favorite podcast app, and learn more at AJC.org/PeopleofthePod You can reach us at: peopleofthepod@ajc.org If you've appreciated this episode, please be sure to tell your friends, and rate and review us on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Transcript of the Interview: Manya Brachear Pashman: Bianna Golodryga is an Emmy award winning news anchor for CNN, who has reported extensively on the October 7 Hamas terror attack on Israel and Russia's invasion of Ukraine. She is a mother and she is now a published novelist. Co-written with leading Israeli news anchor Yonit Levy, Don't Feed the Lion is about how the rise of antisemitism affects Theo, his sister Annie, and their friends Gabe and Connor, all students in a Chicago middle school, and it was written with middle schoolers in mind. Bianna is with us now to discuss the book, along with my co-anchor this week, my son Max, a middle schooler who read the book as well and has a few questions of his own. I will let Max do the honors. Max Pashman: Bianna, welcome to People of the Pod. Bianna Golodryga: Well, it is a joy to be with you Manya, and especially you, Max. We wrote the book for you, for you and your peers especially. So really excited to hear your thoughts on the book. Manya Brachear Pashman: Well, I want to know, Bianna, what prompted you to write this book? Was it the mother in you or the journalist or a little bit of both? Bianna Golodryga: It was definitely a little bit of both. It was the mother in me, initially, where the idea was first launched and the seed planted even before October 7. You know, sadly, antisemitism has been with us for millennia, but I never thought that I would be having these conversations with my own kids in the city, with the largest Jewish community and population outside of Israel. But you'll recall that there were a few high profile antisemitic social media posts and controversies surrounding Kanye West and then Kyrie Irving, who's a famous NBA player at the time, and my son, who was 10 at the time, a huge sports fan, and was very upset about the fact that not only were these comments made and these posts made, but there was really no accountability for them. There was no consequence. Ultimately, Kyrie Irving was suspended for a few games, but there was just a deluge of news surrounding this. People apologizing for him, but not him apologizing for himself. So my son asked as we were on our way to a basketball game to watch Kyrie play. Asked, why do they hate us? Can I not even go to the game? Does he not want me there? And I really was dumbfounded. I didn't know how to respond. And I said, you know, I don't have the answer for that, but I'm going to reach out to your school, because I'm sure this is something that they're addressing and dealing with and have the resources for. This was after the murder of George Floyd, and so we had already witnessed all of the investments, thankfully, into resources for our kids, and conversations, both at schools and the workforce, about racism, how to deal with racism, how to spot and identify it, other forms of hate. And I just assumed that that would include antisemitism. But when I reached out to the school and asked, you know, what are they doing on antisemitism, the response stunned me. I mean, it's basically nothing. And so as I said, the seed was planted that we really need to do something about this. There's a real void here. And then, of course, when the attacks of October 7 happened, you know, Yonit and I were on the phone and messaging every single day right after. And it was pretty quick, maybe two weeks later, when, you know, we'd already started seeing an uptick in antisemitism around the world and here in the US and New York as well, where we said, you know, we have to do something. And I said, I think we should write this book. We should write the book we couldn't find, that I couldn't find at the time. Because I did a bit of research, and there were really no books like this for this particular age group. Max Pashman: It was kind of answered in your other answer to the first question, but when I first read the book, I started wondering whether the incidents described in the book, were they taken from your experiences, or was it a realistic fiction book? Bianna Golodryga: I would say the inspiration for the athlete came from real life events. You know, I am a big sports fan as well, and I grew up watching basketball, and I have a lot of admiration for so many of these players, and I actually believe in redemption. And so people say things and they make mistakes, and I don't believe in purity tests. If people say things that are wrong, I think they have a right to apologize for it, make up for it. I don't like canceling people. We learn from our mistakes. We grow from our mistakes. No one's perfect. I think it's just more about accountability for all of us. And so the idea came about, yes, from real life, but you know, this is a soccer player in our book. I don't feel that he's very remorseful, even though ultimately he does have a quasi-apology. But you know, it's the impact that it has on society and fans and those who support him, especially like your age and my son's age, I think those are really the ones who hurt the most. Manya Brachear Pashman: Yeah, the impressionable minds. I mean, I thought the book did a lovely job of illustrating just how impressionable these young minds were, and then also how viral this was. I mean, once the celebrity athlete said his comments, what it unleashed. And, you know, you don't get into any violence. There's one incident that is rough, but brief, but it's, you know, the swastika painted on the locker, a rock through a window, but it's just that viral spread. I mean, was that your intent, to kind of illustrate this slow contagion? Bianna Golodryga: Yes, I think our kids are subject to so much more information than we were as kids and teenagers their age as well. You know, every society has had to deal with their challenges, and every generation has as well. And as we've said, antisemitism has been with us for millennia, but when you compound that with social media and the dangers. There's so many great things about social media. We have access to so much information, but then when you throw in disinformation, misinformation, you know, things going viral, news spreading, how much time people spend on social media sites and the influence that they succumb to by sometimes bad actors. So the book is not for antisemites, but I think what the book relays is what we've noticed, and sort of our theory, is that antisemitism has been somewhat accepted as part of society for far too long, and it's never been elevated to the level of urgency that other forms of hate has been. So I mentioned racism and post-George Floyd. I would think that if that much attention had been put into antisemitism as well, that people, especially children and those at school, would understand the gravity of antisemitism, and you know how much danger can be created from people who espouse antisemitic views and, you know, draw swastikas because they think it's funny, or they don't think it's such a big deal because they don't spend time talking about it, and they don't understand so much hate and so much pain that's behind these symbols. That's behind these words. And you know, we are such a small minority that so many times it's Jews that feel like they have to carry the weight and the burden of other people's actions, even if they don't mean to be as hurtful and as vile as some of this language is. So you said impressionable. That is why we are targeting this age group specifically, because it's such a magical age group. Kids Max's age, and my son's age, anywhere between nine and 15. They're very impressionable, but they still communicate with their families, their parents. They talk at dinner tables. They may not have social media accounts, but they are very well aware of what's going on in the world, and are very curious, and have access to so much good and bad. And so by not having this conversation at that age, you know, we're doing them a disservice, and I think we're doing ourselves a disservice as adults by not addressing these problems in this particular issue of antisemitism head on. Manya Brachear Pashman: I'm curious, once you identified that void in the school's curriculum and strategies for addressing prejudice, did they do anything to address that and to repair that void? I know a lot of Jewish parents are finding that really the burden falls on them to address these things in a very reactive manner. Not proactive. And I'm just curious what the situation ended up being at your school. Bianna Golodryga: I think we're starting, you know, without focusing as much on my school, because I feel that it's pretty obvious that that was status quo for many schools, not just in New York, but across the country, that you would have books and resources and materials on Hanukkah and Jewish holidays for kindergartners. And then some of the older kids in high school are introduced to the Holocaust. And some of these more challenging topics in areas in Jewish history to cover, and then the story sort of ends there. I don't know if it's because people are worried about conflating the Middle East and the conflict there with antisemitism, but there's a huge void, and it's something again, if you're 2% of the population and you are the victim of 70% according to the FBI, of all religious based violence, then there's a big problem. And the fact that that's not identified or discussed in schools, to us was just not acceptable. And so I think it's sort of a cop out to say no, it's because of the war. It's because of this. Antisemitism morphs and comes in different waves, and fortunately, I didn't experience much of it growing up. But that doesn't mean that, you know, it's not going to rear its ugly head again, and it has, and that was before the attacks of October 7. We obviously had the Tree of Life shooting. We had so many incidents around the world in the First Intifada, the Second Intifada, you know, dating before that, I don't remember growing up without security outside of my synagogue, or, you know, any Jewish institution. This is the best country in the world, but we've sort of come to accept that. And now, you know, we're at a place where I don't necessarily feel comfortable walking into a Jewish house of worship or institution without security. So we really, I think, wanted to send a message that these are conversations we should have been having for a long time now, and the best way to start it is with our kids, because, like Max, they have so many questions, and they also have so much empathy. Max Pashman: You mentioned your son being your main inspiration for it. Has he read the book? Bianna Golodryga: Oh, yes, I was the most nervous, and Yonit has three kids too, so we were the most nervous about appealing to them. It wasn't our editor or anybody else, our spouses, or even people in the industry that we cared about more than our kids, because we knew their reaction would really set the tone for you know kids like yourselves, and you're not a monolith. I know some kids like a certain book and some kids don't, but we wanted to make sure to write this book so it didn't feel like homework, so it didn't feel like you were forced to read it at school. And we wanted you to be able to identify with the characters and the story and find it really interesting, and oh, by the way, it just so happens to deal with the subject that we haven't really touched upon yet. So yes, my son really liked it. Both my kids really liked it. Manya Brachear Pashman: Would you agree, Max, that it didn't feel like homework? Max Pashman: Yeah, it felt like, well, a good book feels like, kind of like watching a movie, because it gives you enough details to the point where you can visualize the characters and kind of see what's going on. And that's also one of the reasons I like books more than movies, because it allows you to use your imagination to build the characters a little bit. But a good book doesn't just leave you with a general outline of what you want. It will give you the full picture, and then you can build most of the picture, and you can build off that with your mind. And I felt that it really did not feel like something that you were forced to read, because that's a lot less interesting. Bianna Golodryga: Well, that is the best review one could get, honestly, Max. And I can tell you you like a good book, and you're a voracious reader, and I agree with you 99.9% of the time, the book will always be better than the movie because of that detail, because of using your imagination. And so we wanted this to be a story that appealed to boys, girls, parents. You know, kids. It was very hard for us to say, Oh, here's our target audience, because we really wanted it to be an experience for every generation and for every position in life, from, you know, again, a kid, a parent, a teacher, a principal, a coach, grandparents. Manya Brachear Pashman: You know, it's interesting. You mentioned generations, and you mentioned being a Soviet refugee, and clearly you're outspoken about antisemitism. You're raising your children to be outspoken about antisemitism. What about your parents? How did they address antisemitism, or the form of antisemitism that they experienced? Bianna Golodryga: Yeah, I mean, as I said, we were so, I was so fortunate. I was like a piece of luggage. It was my parents who were courageous enough to decide to move to this country as Jewish refugees from the Soviet Union, where antisemitism was institutionalized. I mean, it was from top down. I mean, that was a mandated policy. And so my parents knew they didn't have a future. I didn't have a future in the Soviet Union. And so, of course, their dream was to come to the United States, and it was still the best decision they've ever made, and the best, you know, place I could have been raised. As I said, I was very fortunate to not really experience antisemitism as a kid. And mind you, I was the only Jewish student for many years at my first school, and we were the only Jewish family in our neighborhood for many years. Ultimately, my parents moved more into the center of the town and we always went to synagogue, so we were always around Jewish people and families, but the majority of my, especially early childhood friends, were not Jewish. And I have to say, for me, learning about antisemitism, it was more of a history lesson as to, like, why we left a certain country and why you can come to America and you're not identified as a Jew, by your race or religion. You're an American. I'm an American Jew. And you know, that's just not how people were identified in the Soviet Union, that that was their race. I mean, my birth certificate said Jew. My parents' library card said Jew. There were quotas and getting into good schools.And the types of jobs they could get. So for me, it was sort of backward looking, even knowing that, yes, antisemitism still exists, but it's sort of controlled. You know, once in a while we would have a bomb threat at our synagogue, and again, there were always police officers out there. And I noticed that was a difference from my friends' churches, because what ended up being sort of a beautiful tradition that my parents didn't intend to do, it just so happened to be the case that when I would have friends spend the night at my house, or I would spend a night at their house, sometimes they would come to Shabbat services with us, and I would go to church with them. And so for many of their congregants, I was the first Jewish person they'd ever seen. I was welcomed with open arms. But for you know, coming to my services, you know, it was the first time they'd been to a Jewish house of worship, and it was a very, very meaningful, I think, a great learning opportunity. But yeah, for me growing up, it wasn't a top priority. It wasn't top of mind just because I knew that I was an American Jew, and that was, that was who I was here. And it was only, you know, the last few years where I realized, you know, this is not something to be taken for granted. Max Pashman: I can definitely relate to being the only Jewish person in my class, because all through elementary school, there were no other Jewish kids in my grade. But as soon as I entered middle school, I met a few other kids who were Jewish. Who I've actually become very good friends with, and it's just like a lot more diversity. BIANNA; Yeah, that's great. I mean, I remember when I was in elementary school and it, you know, all the and we were trying to express this point too in the book, especially with Theo that, you know, so many kids at that age just want to be like everyone else. They don't want to stand out. And if you're the only Jewish kid you know on your soccer team, and all of a sudden you have practice or games right before Shabbat dinner, you know you're feeling the pressure, and you don't want to be excluded from your friends' activities after or have to keep reminding your coach, and it's incumbent on your coach and the adults in your life and who are not Jewish, to honor that, to respect that. To say, hey, we're going to move practice a little early, or, Hey, you know Theo, Max, I know you have Shabbat dinner, so we're going to, we're going to work on these, you know exercises 30 minutes before . . . you know, just to acknowledge that you are valued and you are respected. And that doesn't mean that everyone else's schedule needs to change because of yours, but it definitely doesn't mean that you have to walk on eggshells or feel like you're left out or stand out or different for all the wrong reasons because you have other responsibilities and plans. So for me, I remember as a kid, I was the only Jewish student in my elementary school, for the first elementary school I went to, and I remember leaving for winter break, and, you know, our principal getting on the intercom the loudspeaker, and wishing everyone, you know, Happy Holidays, Merry Christmas and Happy Hanukkah, Bianna. And I was like, Oh no, you know, I don't want to be excluded. And it wasn't out of malevolence, like it was just, I want to include. But at that point, I already had a funny last name. My parents had accents. I was from the Soviet Union, which was the enemy at the time, so I definitely stood out for a number of reasons. And on top of that, you know, I celebrate a different holiday. So yes, you know, we learn and grow from it, but we can remember, like I still remember it. Manya Brachear Pashman: The title of the book is, Don't Feed the Lion. And the book does get into that adage and what it means, don't take the bait, don't engage. That's how I interpreted it. But some would argue that it was not feeding the lion for a large portion of the book, you know, staying silent that really exacerbated the problem, or or you referring more to the more to the unproductive social media banter? Bianna Golodryga: Well, I think it's, you know, our message was that it shouldn't fall on the kids to do what's right, and that kids know what's right, and innately, I mean, in their gut, like I said that there's empathy. Most kids, you know when you've hurt someone else's feelings. You know when something makes you feel sad. But what we do, especially as children, as we're still learning, is we take cues from the adults in our lives, so if the adults aren't responding to what that initial reaction you have, that gut instinct is, then you start to question, well, maybe, maybe it wasn't a big deal. Or, you know, maybe the swastika isn't, you know, we'll just cover it up. Or, you know, why should we all suffer and have our team not play in the finals, just because of this one thing. And, oh, he didn't take it so personally. It's fine. And the principal then putting the pressure on Theo. Okay, I'm happy to write this report, but you know what it's going to generate and, and so ultimately, you know, you have the coach, and you have others who come around to, okay, no, we've got to step up and do the right thing. But our biggest concern was for too long. And you know, we know of this in real life instances, for our from our own friends and family members, that the burden falls on the kids, on the students, who then have to deal with the ramifications, whether it's the victim of antisemitic attacks or slurs or those that are delivering them, because maybe they don't think it's that big of a deal, because they haven't had conversations like this, they don't know how much that hurts somebody's feelings. They don't know the backstory or the history behind what that symbol means. So it was more on, yes, don't feed into your insecurity. Don't feed into the hate. You know, address it head on, but it's a two-way street, you know, as much as Theo should have, you know, and he realizes that he can learn from others around him, like his sister and Gabe, to do what's right and say what's right, it really is the adults that should have been the ones in the first place doing that. Max Pashman: Because in the book, you see Principal Connolly kind of pushing Theo to just like, say, oh, it's not a big deal, and to cover it up because of a sports team. And he wants the sports team to do well. Bianna Golodryga: Yes, and all the paperwork that this is going to involve now, and, you know, all of the sudden it's almost like it's Theo's fault, that he was victimized. Max Pashman: And he's kind of pushing, he's saying it's your choice Theo, and then kind of starting to make the decision for him. Bianna Golodryga: Right. So it really wasn't even Theo's choice, because he was playing mind games with Theo. And it took a lot of courage for Theo to even call for that meeting, right? So I'm so glad you picked up on that Max. But again, instances similar to that, you know, happen in real life that I know of, people close to me. And so we just want to, again, through fiction, through a really good story, make clear to people that this is not okay. Manya Brachear Pashman: So are you hoping that schools will pick up this book and use it as a resource, as a tool? Bianna Golodryga: For sure. I mean, that is our ultimate goal. I think it should be in every single school, library. You know, I see absolutely no reason why this would ever be deemed a controversial book or something. You know, we've had conversations with a number of Jewish organizations about maybe perhaps providing some supplementals for the book that can be added for class conversations around the book from teachers and others. But Yonit and I went and we spoke at a couple of schools, and speaking to kids, it was just so eye opening to know that there is a need for this that they are so eager to have these conversations that, you know, it's as much for Jewish students as it is for non-Jewish students, if not even more so. You know, Jewish students feel that they can be finally heard, but non-Jewish students and allies can truly understand what it feels like, and can have conversations about what to do to avoid certain situations preemptively, you know, avoid or if they've seen certain situations, or know about, how to respond. Manya Brachear Pashman: And I do appreciate the statement that the book makes about allies. Those are, those are strong characters in the book. Bianna Golodryga: We can't do it alone. Yeah, we didn't want to throw away character. We didn't want just an ally. Everyone has their own stories and no one really knows what's truly going on in someone's home life and in their head and their heart and in their reality. So any day, anytime, any day, our favorite characters would change. You know, don't ask Yonit and me who our favorite characters are, because we love them all. Manya Brachear Pashman: And add Middle School hormones to the mix, and you've got, you've got quite the drama. Bianna Golodryga: Exactly, and crushes and Bar Mitzvah prep and a lot of stress. Manya Brachear Pashman: A lot of stress, a lot of stress, well, and that, he just heaved a heavy sigh, because he's just, you reminded him of his own bar mitzvah preparation. Bianna Golodryga: Well, you will see that it's a magical experience. Max, worth all the work, definitely. Manya Brachear Pashman: Well, Bianna, thank you so much for joining us. Bianna Golodryga: Thank you. I loved this conversation. I'm so glad that you liked the book, Max. Max Pashman: Thank you. Manya Brachear Pashman: So Max, you and I haven't really had a conversation since we both finished this book. We kind of went into the conversation with Bianna cold. I do want to know which character you identified with the most. Max Pashman: I really related to Theo with his stress over his Bar Mitzvah and the stress of having a little sister, which I know very, very well. Manya Brachear Pashman: And why Theo, besides having the annoying sister, why did you relate to him? Max Pashman: Because, I guess the stress of having a Bar Mitzvah in middle school and kind of being the only kid in your, the only Jewish kid in your class, Manya Brachear Pashman: Well, you have a few. Max Pashman: A few, but not a lot. Manya Brachear Pashman: Did you realize before you read this book that the swastika, that spidery looking symbol, was as evil as it is? Max Pashman: No. Well, yes, going into this book, I did know, but actually I figured it out in other books, allowing me to digress. I read Linked by Gordon Corman about this boy who finds a swastika in his school, and then figures out that he is Jewish, and then swastikas start showing up around town. He comes up with a plan with his friends to stop it, and it changes points of view, kind of like, Don't feed the Lion. Manya Brachear Pashman: Okay. Max Pashman: Very similar book. But what really helped me realize, I realized the meaning and terror of the the swastika was Prisoner B3087 by Alan Gratz, about this 10 year old boy who is alive right before the Holocaust, and he is taken to multiple, to 10 different prison camps throughout the course of the Holocaust before his camp is liberated by American soldiers. Manya Brachear Pashman: Was that assigned reading? Or how did you come across that book? Max Pashman: I was actually sitting in the library, just waiting for you to get to the library, because after school. Manya Brachear Pashman: Alright, was there anything in particular that drew you to that book? Max Pashman: I was just looking on the shelves because that was a summer reading book. So I was just like, Okay, I guess I'll read it, because we're supposed to read some. And I read, like most of them, and it was just there on the shelf. And I decided this looks really interesting, and I picked it up and I read it, and it really had a deeper meaning than I expected it to. Manya Brachear Pashman: Excellent. You recommended Linked to me. I have not finished reading it yet. The Gordon Corman book. Would you recommend it to anyone else in your class? Or would you recommend Don't Feed the Lion? Max Pashman: I would definitely recommend it. They're both great books. They're actually very similar. I'm not sure they would read it, though. Manya Brachear Pashman: Why not? Max Pashman: Not a lot of kids in my class are big readers. Manya Brachear Pashman: Do you fear that they wouldn't be interested in the subject? Max Pashman: I mean, I don't really know, because I don't know what goes on in their heads, and I don't want to put words in their mouth, put thoughts in their head, or decide what they would like for them, so I don't know. Manya Brachear Pashman: That's fair. Okay. Well, good to talk with you. Max Pashman: It was great talking with you. Manya Brachear Pashman: It was fun co-hosting. Happy 2026. We wish all of you a peaceful year ahead with time to pause and reflect. On behalf of the AJC podcast team. We thank you for listening over the past eight years, and we thank everyone who has joined us as a guest during that time as well. What a privilege to share your voices and your stories. People of the Pod will be taking our own peaceful pause in 2026 to contemplate how we can best serve our audience. In the meantime, please continue to listen and share our limited series, The Forgotten Exodus and Architects of Peace, and we'd love to hear from you at podcasts@ajc.org. __ Thank you for listening. This episode is brought to you by AJC. Our producer is Atara Lakritz. Our sound engineer is TK Broderick. You can subscribe to People of the Pod on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or Google Podcasts, or learn more at AJC.org/PeopleofthePod.

Once considered a haven for Jews, Australia is reeling after a deadly Hanukkah terror attack at Bondi Beach left 15 dead—the tragic outcome of skyrocketing hate. AJC Asia Pacific Institute Associate Director Hana Rudolph joins the podcast to unpack the crisis, revealing that despite over 2,000 antisemitic incidents in the year following October 7, the government dropped the ball. Hana details how political inaction and a fear that "supporting Jews is not politically popular" have allowed extremism to fester. She criticizes the delay in implementing the recommendations set forth by Australia's Special Envoy to Combat Antisemitism, noting the government's failure to move beyond basic security measures. Listen as she explains why global pressure is now urgent to ensure Australia takes this massive gap seriously before more lives are lost. Read the Full Transcript: https://www.ajc.org/news/podcast/ajcs-asia-pacific-institute-on-how-australias-government-ignored-the-warning-signs-before Resources: -What To Know About the Antisemitic Terror Attack in Sydney -Take action: Urgent: Confirm U.S. Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Antisemitism Listen – AJC Podcasts: -Architects of Peace -The Forgotten Exodus -People of the Pod Follow People of the Pod on your favorite podcast app, and learn more at AJC.org/PeopleofthePod You can reach us at: peopleofthepod@ajc.org If you've appreciated this episode, please be sure to tell your friends, and rate and review us on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Transcript of the Interview: Manya Brachear Pashman: For more than 30 years, American Jewish Committee's Asia Pacific Institute has found Australia to be a nation that has stood shoulder to shoulder with the Jewish people and Israel. But that sense of steadfast support has started to fray as antisemitism has risen exponentially. The massacre at Bondi Beach on the first night of Hanukkah was only the latest and deadliest in a string of antisemitic incidents over the past two years. Here to discuss how we got here is Hana Rudolph, associate director of AJC's Asia Pacific Institute. Hana, welcome to People of the Pod. Hana Rudolph: Thank you so much for having me. Manya Brachear Pashman: Well, I want to ask you first, can you kind of introduce our listeners to the Australian Jewish community? How many people are we talking about? What is their history in Australia? Hana Rudolph: The Australian Jewish community is one of the most historic, long standing communities in the Asia Pacific. It dates back to 1788. So we're talking 18th century over 100,000 Jews. They're a diverse community. They reside primarily in the cities of Melbourne and Sydney, but they range in terms of practice, in terms of political views, similar to as we see in Europe or the US. There's some level of debate in terms of what, what percentage of the population it comprises, but somewhere between .5- 1% of the population. Manya Brachear Pashman: And has Australia been a friendly country for the Jewish community for all of that time, and at least until recently? Hana Rudolph: Yeah, absolutely. It has been a deep, close friend of Israel. Israeli diplomats have described Australia as an even closer partner to Israel at the UN and in other global forums than even the US. Jews have been living there for centuries, and have oftentimes described Australia as being like a haven. No matter the antisemitism that increases in Europe or in the US, Australia has been safe. It is the one place besides Israel, where they feel they can live in security. So the surge in antisemitism we've seen, especially since October 7, has just been so much more alarming and frightening and shocking for the community, because they just haven't seen incidents at this level anytime prior. Manya Brachear Pashman: What is it about Australia's community? I mean, I know that there's been a lot of emphasis on a kind of, give everyone a fair go, right? There's a lot of emphasis on equality. Is that what guides this kind of welcoming atmosphere? Or why are they such good friends with Israel? Is there something about the culture? Hana Rudolph: Yeah, Australia takes a lot of pride in its multiculturalism, the harmony and diversity, social cohesion, so they've placed a lot of emphasis on that in terms of, like, the national culture, and I think that's part of what's led to such a safe, thriving space for the Jewish community for so long until now. Manya Brachear Pashman: So what changed? Hana Rudolph: Million dollar question, right? October 7. It's really important to note that, you know, there have been threads of antisemitism from well before October 7, right? Things don't just happen overnight. And in the Hamas attack took place on October 7, before Israel had even begun its defensive war to recover the hostages and to complete its aims, on October 9, there was a massive protest in front of the Sydney Opera House, and people were yelling, were holding signs, yelling slogans of, where is the Jews, F the Jews. Some accounts of them saying, gas the Jews. I mean, we're talking about, there's no linkage here of like, Israel's counter defensive war. It's simply about terrorists attacked Israel. Now is a good time for us to talk about like, go find and hunt down the Jews. So October 7 was the trigger. But in the years since, there has been what the Australian Jewish community has really pointed to, a failure of the Australian Government to take the concerns of antiSemitism seriously. So in the year following October 7, there were over 2000 incidents of antiSemitism, which, if you if you break it down by day like it's horrific, especially when you think about the fact that the Jewish community primarily resides in two cities. So we're talking about 2000 incidents over two cities, primarily. And then in this last year, it was over 1600 incidents. And the Australian government has sought to be responsive. In many ways. They've done $30 million grants for security. They have committed to restoring synagogues that were fire bombed and all of that. But in a lot of ways that matter, kind of going beyond just simply police protection, but more about how do you fundamentally change the way that a society thinks about its Jewish community? They've really dropped the ball and we're seeing the impact of that now. Manya Brachear Pashman: What efforts have been made on the part of the Jewish community to change that? In other words, what advocacy have we seen from Australian Jews and their partners? Hana Rudolph: They've done everything we can, right, like in this they the Australian Jewish community is well established. They operate very similarly to European Jewish communities or American Jewish communities. So they have both umbrella organizations, and they also have advocacy organizations that run the gamut in terms of political viewpoints. AJC's partner organization, AJAC, the Australia Israel Jewish Affairs Council, has been very active in this space. And they have sought to work with leaders in both Maine political parties to call for various reforms. There has been a special envoy that was appointed by the government, which we laud in July 2024 in July 2025 she released a report containing about 50 recommendations for whole of society action, so some highest levels of government going all the way down to society, museums, media, schools, other institutes and just nothing has been done with the report. The government has not considered it. It has not acted on the recommendations, and we're talking about five months since that report was released. The Jewish community has really sought to emphasize that this is not simply a reaction to understandable public concerns about Israel's foreign policy, but rather, there is a deeper issue of antisemitism going on that the government needs to take seriously, and that's really where we're seeing just inaction. Manya Brachear Pashman: We talk a lot here at AJC about the sources of antiSemitism from the right, from the left, from Islamist sources. Where is it coming from? Primarily in Australia? Hana Rudolph: Yeah, it's a really interesting question, especially in Melbourne. My understanding is that the protests that were taking place weekly until the cease fire, and even now it's continued on, but it's morphed a little bit. But those weekly protests were drawing in, similar to what we see in the US, both the far left, people wearing keffiyehs, people calling for Palestinian rights. The same as we see in the US, and then also people on the far right. So it does draw an interesting mix of political views, united in their hatred of Jews and Israel. Manya Brachear Pashman: And what about Islamist sources? Is that separate? Hana Rudolph: Yeah, so especially cities like Melbourne, that is part of the challenge. Melbourne has a high Muslim population. In all of Australia there, the Muslim population is something like 3% but it's one of the largest growing demographics. And in places like Melbourne, I don't know the number offhand, but it has a significantly larger impact on in terms of demographics, in terms of like, how politicians think about their voting, and so that's why you see Australian Jewish leaders pointing to like Alex rivchin from The Executive Council of Australian Jewry, has talked publicly about supporting Jews is not politically popular. Politicians aren't willing to risk that support because of the political costs they see, I think, primarily from Muslim voters. So Melbourne, especially where the protests have been particularly violent. Obviously, this took place in Sydney, so the violence is happening there too. But in Melbourne, where we've seen protests that turned violent previously, too, there's been real concern about the Muslim population. They're kind of feeding that. The Executive Council of Australian Jewry recently won a lawsuit. Within the last year, won the lawsuit against a Muslim clergy member who was in November 2023 so we're talking one month after the Hamas terrorist attacks. So one month later, he was doing a series of lectures describing Jews as pigs, as treacherous, like all these kinds of horrific caricatures. And so thankfully, this lawsuit, the Jewish community won. But this is the kind of situation, and that's one example, and maybe a more extreme example, but these are the kinds of situations that the community is running up against. Also in February 2024 there was a viral video of two Muslim nurses talking about how they would kill any Jews who were their patient, or Israeli or Israelis who were there. I'm sorry, I don't actually know what I just said. There was a video. There was a video that went viral of two Muslim nurses talking about how they would kill any Jewish or Israeli patients that they had and that they had already, was the insinuation as well. And so the lawsuit is ongoing for them, but they have faced criminal charges. They have had their licenses revoked, but there was also significant Muslim community pushback to the consequences that they face, which is also really alarming and disturbing. Manya Brachear Pashman: Of the 49 recommendations that were mentioned in the special envoy's report, Which ones do you think should be the priority going forward? You can't implement them all at once. Hana Rudolph: There's a lot of overlap between what the antisemitism envoy Jillian Siegel has recommended in her report, and what has been recommended through things like the Global Guidelines for Countering Antisemitism, which AJC supports. So I would say things like the enforcement of hate crime that's a huge priority. There are various ways in which the special envoys plan notes how Australia's law enforcement can deepen their efforts. And I think there is, there is some positive there is some positive movement to that end. Now, following this attack, there was an announcement following the recent cabinet meeting of the Australian Prime Minister and his cabinet talking about a hate crime database and so forth. So these are positive things we're also highlighting from the Special Envoys report, things like engaging social media, countering the disturbing narratives that we see there, and establishing better standards. And then also education, and I think that's a really core point. So how do you promote Holocaust education, antisemitism education and so forth and that we need the government's help, but also it can be done through other institutions as well. Manya Brachear Pashman: Can you kind of share, kind of what AJC's advocacy, what you've learned, and what is AJC hearing and doing for Australia? Hana Rudolph: I mean, I think the number one takeaway that Ted [Deutch] and Shira [Lowenberg] had after visiting Australia, and they visited Melbourne, Canberra and Sydney. Canberra being the capital. Was just the the other shock at how much the community has been shaken by this massive spike in incidents. I think the last year's total of over 2000 incidents was something like three times higher than the previous year. So we're really talking about a spike. So just the shock that the Jewish community is facing and reeling from. And the sense from government and law enforcement that the only reaction needs to be about keeping them safe. So in terms of like, the protests that were happening weekly in Melbourne, the government's response was to encourage the Jewish community to stay at home, to not go into the city center where the protests were taking place for their own safety, as opposed to how, like, how do you protect free speech, of course, but also you don't allow it to reach A level where you're concerned about a Jewish person's safety if they come close to the protest. And similarly, just all of these measures that the Australian government has taken has really focused on security, you know, putting money towards law enforcement and and so forth, which is good, but nowhere near enough in terms of changing the slurs, the vandalism, the the arson attacks that has that have been on the rise over the past couple of years. So I think that was the first and primary takeaway that you know this, this massive gap between where the community is and how the government is responding. And in terms of AJC's advocacy, we're really trying to amplify the Australian Jewish community's message here, which is exactly that, that there is not enough being done. The problem is immense, and the government needs to take this seriously. This is not so easy as just putting some money towards security, but we need to go much further. And why is this report from the antiSemitism envoy appointed by the government sitting there for five months without any recommendations being considered or implemented. So things like this, we're we're amplifying that message, not just to Australian diplomats and leaders that we have connections with, but also in the US, because the US Australia relationship is so important, and we know that the US administration cares about antisemitism, and they care about antisemitism abroad, so we're working in close coordination with the White House, with state, to make sure that Canberra also hears this message from the US. Manya Brachear Pashman: Hana, thank you so much for joining us. Hana Rudolph: Thank you, Manya. It's a pleasure to join you.

Join host Manya Brachear Pashman for a powerful conversation about Red Alert, the Critics Choice Award-nominated Paramount+ docu-series that confronts the October 7 Hamas massacre with unflinching honesty. Producer Lawrence Bender (Pulp Fiction, Good Will Hunting) shares why this project couldn't wait—launched in real time to push back against denial, disinformation, and a world struggling to absorb the scale of the tragedy. Bender reflects on the courage and trauma of the ordinary Israelis whose stories anchor the series, including survivors like Batsheva Olami, whose resilience changed the production team forever. Hear how filming during an active war shaped the storytelling, the emotional toll on everyone involved, and why capturing these true accounts is essential to ensuring October 7 is neither minimized nor forgotten. Key Resources: AJC.org/Donate: Please consider supporting AJC's work with a year-end gift today. Right now, your gift will be matched, dollar-for-dollar, making double the impact. Every gift matters. Every dollar makes a difference in the fight for a strong and secure Jewish future. Listen – AJC Podcasts: Architects of Peace The Forgotten Exodus People of the Pod Follow People of the Pod on your favorite podcast app, and learn more at AJC.org/PeopleofthePod You can reach us at: peopleofthepod@ajc.org If you've appreciated this episode, please be sure to tell your friends, and rate and review us on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Transcript of the Interview: [Clip from Red Alert] Manya Brachear Pashman: Academy Award nominated film producer Lawrence Bender has quite a repertoire for both feature films and documentaries: Pulp Fiction, Inglorious Bastards, Good Will Hunting and Inconvenient Truth. In fact, his works have earned 36 Academy Award nominations. His most recent TV miniseries is a more personal project on the second anniversary of the October 7 Hamas terror attacks on Israel, Paramount Plus began streaming a four episode series called red alert about the attack on festival goers, innocent passers by and families waking up to terrorists inside their Israeli homes that day, a tragedy that many of us, either on this podcast or listening have watched with overwhelming grief for the last two years. Lawrence is with us now to talk about how he grappled with this attack on Israel and the rise of antisemitism that followed. Lawrence, welcome to People of the Pod. Lawrence Bender: Thank you, Manya, it's good to be here. Manya Brachear Pashman: So that clip that we played at the top of this episode, it's one of the few clips in English. Most of the dialog in this show is in Hebrew with subtitles. But that scene is a woman, Bathsheba and her two daughters. They're walking across a field trying to return home, and her son has been taken. Her husband is gone. This series weaves together her story and three or four other ordinary civilians fighting for their lives on October 7, 2023. You know, as someone personally who's been immersed in this subject matter for two years, to be honest, I had to muster the energy to watch this, and I'm so glad that I did. But why are, I mean, as we're still waiting for the last hostage to be returned, why was it important for this show to air now? Lawrence Bender: Well, thank you so much for doing this with me, and thank you for playing that clip. I have to tell you first, I love that clip. I love that scene because one of the things about the show and the stories that we portrayed is that even with the horrific things that happened on that day, people still were able to fight back. People were still able to be strong. A mother with her daughter and her infant stood in the face of a terrorist and stood him down in real life, this happened. Now, not everybody was so fortunate, and her husband Ohad was not fortunate, and her son was taken hostage, as you mentioned, but it does show her personal power in this horrific situation. And I just thought, you know, this woman is a real hero. I've spent a lot of time with her, Batsheva Olami, she's really an extraordinary human in all ways. So thank you for playing that clip. So in terms of the show, I felt on October 8, it's just amazing how quickly, before Israel did anything, the entire world quickly turned against the very people who were the victims and having spent subsequently, a lot of time with people on the set, because, as you mentioned, this show was about real people, and those real people spent a lot of time on the set with us. And the very people that were traumatized, felt isolated, they felt alone, and they're the very ones that need to be loved, that need to be hugged, they need to be supported. Anyway, I just felt like I needed to do something fast to try to show the world what really happened. AndRed Alert is the result of that. Manya Brachear Pashman: Do you fear that the world has already moved on? Lawrence Bender: Oh, that's a good question. It feels like we've passed a tipping point, actually, in terms of Jew hatred and anti-Israel and antisemitism. Even as we are now trying to have a peace process, right, that somehow we are stumbling forward, and if that's going to happen, people need to understand why we're here and why we're here happened on October 7. And if you watch the show, hopefully you're pulled into the show, and you have a, you know, you have an emotional journey, and then you understand, oh, this really happened. And you understand that's the truth. And only when you really understand the truth of October 7 do I really think that you can really get some sort of peace. Manya Brachear Pashman: So is this different from other historical events? You know, a lot of movies and television shows commemorate historical events, like the Holocaust, for example, but they happen years later. They're made years later. I kind of call it the never forget genre. But is October 7 unique in that it's not a question of whether people will forget or move on. It's a question of whether they believe that this present is actually true. Lawrence Bender: That's right, there's the deniers. There's people that just don't know. There's people that forgot, maybe you know, there are people who I know that I had to explain. Like, you know, it's interesting. As an example, when you see the show and you see all these Hamas terrorists invading the kibbutz, and Ohad says to her, his wife, Bathsheva, he whispers in her ear, I just saw about 20 terrorists, and someone said to me, who's not unintelligent, I didn't realize there are that many. I didn't realize that. And if you're not really paying attention, maybe you don't really know. And look, they're the haters, haters which are never going to change. But I think there's a large group of people that just don't really understand, and they're the ones that I feel we have a shot at showing this to and having a conversation with. Manya Brachear Pashman: In fact, are you actually introducing or experimenting with a new genre of truth or facts in the face of fiction. Lawrence Bender: I guess that's true. I mean, this just happened. And some people ask over this last, you know, when I released, and we were paramount, released the show. You know, I've been asked a question, is it too soon? And my answer is, I feel like it's not soon enough. And I felt like immediately I needed to work on something, and this is the result of that. For me, personally, there are many collaborators of people on this show that incredible Israeli partners, my American partners. I mean, there's a lot of amazing people that came together to work on this, to make this show, but we really felt like time was of the essence, because the world was shifting so quickly, we wanted this to get out there, to show the world what really happened. Manya Brachear Pashman: One of the reasons I'm pressing you on this, this was not a fiction film. This was based in reality. You said you met Bathsheba, the actors prepared for their roles by meeting with the very real people who they were portraying in this show whose stories they were recreating. I'm curious what some of the takeaways were for you, for your colleagues, from your encounters with these victims, with these survivors, and did anything about the production ever change after they got involved? Lawrence Bender: It was truly a life changing experience for myself, but really for everyone involved, of course, myself and my partner, Kevin Brown and Jordana Rubin, and we were basically the only non Israelis that were full time producing the show. And everyone else was a citizen of the country. Everyone else, you know, was affected dramatically, everything but from like our key grips brother ran the kibbutz Raim, where we filmed that area that was a kibbutz overrun by terrorists, right? His brother survived. So it was really like every single person at some point, you know, we call it triggered, but it really happened quite often where you have a scene and people just have to stop for a second and take a moment, whether it's an actor finishing a scene or a crew member, you know, partaking in the making of the scene. But lots of things happen. I'll tell you one story which was, you know, quite interesting. We're working at the Nova festival scene, and one of the actors, Moran, her niece, was on vacation in Greece, and her niece told her, if a red headed police woman shows up on the set, she's the one who saved my life. And indeed, her name was Bat, she showed up, and we said, we need you to meet somebody. And we FaceTimed Moran's niece with Bat, and the young lady she's like in her early 20s, said, You're the one who saved my life. You're the one I was hiding by your feet while you were firing. And we asked, Did you remember the people that you saved? And she said, I really only remember the people I didn't save. You really felt the pain that she is still at that point a year and a half later, this is. In April, May, suffering from what she went through. RPG hit nearby her. She went flying through the air. She had had half reconstructive surgery, on and on and on. It was obviously an extremely traumatic day for her to you know, a moment where there's a woman on the set whose daughter was murdered, and someone on my crew, actually, Mya Fisher, has said, you know, there's someone here I want to introduce you to. It's after lunch. And I spent some time with her, and I asked her, you know, like, how do you go? Fine, I can't, you know, I can't imagine losing my son in this way. It's just unimaginable. And I asked her, do you have a rabbi? What do you do to survive? And it was a very difficult emotional exchange. And sometime later, she had sort of retold that encounter to somebody else on the set who came to me and said, you know that woman you're talking to. She told me what happened, you know this conversation? And she said, You know this Hollywood producer came all the way from California, she doesn't know me, from Adam, and sat down with me for an hour to hear my story, and it clearly meant a lot to her. And again, you realize that the very people who are traumatized directly are not getting the love, are so isolated and people are against them, and it made me feel even more determined to tell these stories for the world to understand. Every day we had these type of difficult, emotional and to be honest, I was extremely honored every time I met someone. I spent every Saturday night at Hostage Square because we were making the show, I got to spend time backstage with all the families who had loved ones in the tunnels. There was a deep dive into this. Now, I have to tell you, on the other hand, the filming while a war is still going on is quite it's like things you don't have to think about normally, right? So, as an example, we were in a town and we're shooting a shootout. We're filming a shootout between the IDF actors and the Hamas actor. They're actors. I keep saying they're actors, right? Because they are actors. But the mayor and the chief of police in the town were extremely worried, because they look real, right? They look like real people. And unfortunately, the cemetery is littered with people who have been murdered and killed by the Hamas. And all the other men who are there, they have guns, they carry, and if something's happening, they're going to run towards the problem. So he's worried, what if someone walks by, or someone's up in a building. He looks down and they see an actor who looks like Hamas, they are going to shoot him. So we literally had speakers every 10 yards, like all up and down the street, and every like 15-20 minutes, saying, don't worry, in Hebrew, of course, this is a movie, everything's okay. We had a drone up in the air, never coming down, on a tether with a police officer. They're a full big screen watching case someone walks down the street. We dressed up the Hamas actors as they're walking from the holding area to the area where they're filming, we put them in these kind of white hazmat-like suits so that they couldn't confuse them, and when they got done filming, we put them right back in these hazmat white suits and brought them back to the holding area. We all had to dress up, and we had to wear these very, very light blue shirts the entire crew, so nobody looked like anything but a crew member. It was something, right? Manya Brachear Pashman: I did not even think about that. I mean, I knew that you had filmed on location in Israel, and I knew you had filmed during the war. In fact, I was going to explain to listeners who don't know Red Alert is what Israelis call the sirens and the phone alerts when there are rockets being fired upon Israel and they have time to seek shelter. I was going to ask you if you had been there during a red alert and had to seek shelter, but I didn't even think about the possibility of people confusing the filming with actual war activity. I imagine you were there during a red alert, and did have to seek shelter, yes? Lawrence Bender: so there's different types of alerts in the south. We did shoot in the guys called the Gaza envelope. We shot within less than a mile away from the Gaza border. So a scene that comes soon after the one that you showed. They're resting under a tree, and we are in the Gaza envelope. And this is a scene where they're running from the Hamas. They're running, they're bare feet, and they're out of breath, and they stop under this tree that's hot, and so forth. And you can hear, just a mile away, the war going on in Gaza. Hear the bombs and everything, and we weren't worried about we're going to be attacked, but it was eerie hearing a war go on, and we're filming a scene where they're running from that war, right? So it was dramatic every week or so still at that point, the Hamas would lob a missile bomb into southern Israel and an alert would go off. You have 15 seconds to. Get into. So we had to bring these portable concrete safe rooms with us so that crew, at any given moment can run quickly into one of these concrete things. We couldn't always do it. So there's always this conversation, and by the way, it costs a lot of money, so everything you're always carrying these things. There's a lot of planning that went on. But I have to tell you, as an American showing up in Israel for the first time after October 7, I wasn't used to these alarms going off, so we were fortunate that while we were filming in the south, no missiles were lobbed at us. However, my first day there, I'm in a meeting on the eighth floor. It was a Friday morning. I got in there on a Thursday evening, 10 o'clock in the morning, the alarm goes up. I mean, just like that, right? And it's loud. And you have these buzzers. Everyone's phone is buzzing, not like the Amber Alerts we have, like, really buzzing loud. And everyone stops and looks at me, and they apologize to me. They apologize and they go, Oh, we're really sorry, but it's an alert. We have to go into a safe room. Oh, don't worry, it's just from the Houthis. It takes eight minutes to get here. Now it's an intercontinental ballistic missile. These are real big missiles. They can really do bad damage. Don't worry, the Iron Dome usually gets them. It's really okay. So we go, you know, we go into and they pick up their danish and their coffee, and of course, I take out my cell phone and I'm videotaping. And then we go in there, and when it's off, we go back to the meeting. The meeting starts as if it never happened. And then they stop, and they go, Oh, how was that for you? And then I just didn't realize, what with the emotion that was going on because we're not used to having missiles shot at us. It's not normal. And I started to bubble up with emotion, and I had to, like, stop myself, I didn't want to cry in front of all these people that I barely knew. So I had to suppress my feelings. Like, don't worry, it's okay. You're having a normal reaction, right? And that happened quite often while I was there. Now, you do get used to it. And the last night I was there, I was having dinner outside, tables outside, you know, in restaurants everywhere. So we're having a typical outside dinner, and they're handing the fish, and the alarm goes off, and we go, let's eat. And we don't go into the restaurant where they're called maamads. You don't go into the safe room. So that's kind of the quote, unquote normal life. Now you imagine here in the United States we get a missile from Mexico or Canada or wherever. No one's going to put up with that. That's just insane. It's insane what people in Israel have to go through. Manya Brachear Pashman: it really is. But it's interesting that you've kind of adopted the nonchalance that your colleagues had at the very beginning of the trip, and wow, certainly no apologies. I want to know if there's a missile headed my way. Thank you. It does sound like October 7 changed you personally. And I'd like to know as a progressive Jew, on what level did it change you as a human being. I mean, how did it change you the most? Lawrence Bender: I've been an active Jewish person for maybe 20, somewhere, 2025, years. I went to Israel My first time. I was ready. As far as I'm concerned. I was too old already to go for the first time. It was like 2003 I went with the Israeli policy forum, and we met with a lot of people there, and we ended up going to Ramallah, met with Abu Mazen, we went to Cairo and met with the president there, Barak, and met with a lot of people in Israel and so forth. And I've been involved one way or another for quite a while. But of course, October 7 was dramatic. Of course, I was safe in my house in Los Angeles, but I still watched in horror. And of course, October 8, it's just hard to understand what happened. It was the latent antisemitism, Jew hatred, that sits there. I still don't quite understand that. It feels like antisemitism never went away, but it was underneath, and it just gave a good excuse to come out, and now the world is where it is. So yeah, for me, I became much more active than I was before. It became much more important to me, my Jewishness, my relationship to Israel. I want to protect Israel as much as I have that power to you know, whatever my ability is, like a lot of people, I know it's become a really important part of my existence, and it's like a new chapter in my life. I'm absolutely looking for more Jewish or Israeli projects. You know, I'm looking to do as much as possible in this area. Manya Brachear Pashman: A number of your colleagues in Hollywood have proposed boycotting Israeli film festivals, institutions, projects, they're going the opposite direction that you are. And I'm curious if you had difficulty finding an American network to air this series, and what do you say when you confront colleagues who do want to boycott and are hostile toward Israel? Lawrence Bender: You know, there's different groups of people. They're the true haters. I don't think that you can ever even have a conversation with them. There are people who just don't understand, and there's people you can and there are people who you know they're trying to be good people. They're trying to understand, like, What don't you understand about women being brutally raped and murdered? It's a little hard for me to understand that, actually. But there are a lot of good people who just are either confused or got too much of the wrong message. But the one thing I would say straight up is, let's take an analogy. You know, there's very few people that I know that you see on TV, on any news show, that is very empathetic with the regime in Iran as an example, right? That means a brutal regime. If you're a liberal or if you're a conservative, there's very few people who support that regime here in this country, right? But they don't boycott their filmmakers, right? They actually give their filmmakers Academy Awards. So why is that with Israel? I feel like there's something very misguided here in Hollywood. Now, we got really lucky when it came to distribution. I just have to say, because we were supposed to go out to sell the show like it was fully financed from equity and from Keshet, who's the local Israeli. This is the biggest network in Israel, by the way. It's the biggest drama in Israel in the last decade. It really performed well there. But now we're going to go sell it here in the United States and the rest of the world, and it's early September, which is our deadline to do that, and Israel bombs Qatar, and then this boycott letter is signed. And I have to tell the investors. You know, it's like, this is not a good time. We cannot go sell. We're just gonna fail, and there's no second chances. And you know, I was getting into dramatic arguments with my investors because they really felt strong. You got to be like that character in your show, the police officer is going to save his wife and you know, nothing's going to stop you. And I said, Yes, I'm with you. I developed that character I know in the Middle East arguments. I was at Skip Brittenham's memorial. Skip is like this beautiful man who was like the Mount Rushmore of lawyers here in LA. He's just a great human and one of those guys that wants to make deals, not just take everything and have the other guy get nothing. He was just like a he's just a real mensch, right? And well, loved anyway. Unfortunately, he passed, but I was at his memorial, and I ran into David Ellison. Now, I know David a little bit, not well, but I know him a little bit, and I also know that, you know, he loves Israel, from what I've read and so forth. And so I went up to him and said, Hey, man, we talked. I said, you got to know what I'm doing. And it probably got three words out of my mouth, and you can see him go, I'd love to see this. This sounds amazing, and sounds like it's exactly the timing we need. And we sent him the material, and he watched every episode himself, and then he gave it to Cindy Holland, who runs paramount, plus his main person. And you know, they said, we do this. We want this. It would be an honor to be your partner in this is actually quite humbling. And it was an incredible moment for us to have David Ellison, Cindy Holland, say, hey. You know, we want this now. Then they said, We need to drop it. We want to drop all the episodes on October 7? Well, by the time they got those episodes, it was like two weeks to go before October 7, or a couple days before, because we couldn't give it to them in the midnight before October 7, obviously. And they had pretty much final picture edit, but we had temporary sound, temporary music, temporary effects, and so we had to work double triple shifts to get it done. But of course, we did. Manya Brachear Pashman: This actually reminds me of a conversation I had with playwright, screenwriter, Oren softy for the Forgotten Exodus, which is a podcast series we did about Jews from the Middle East. He spoke about his father's side of the family, which hails from Aleppo, Syria, and he shared a lot of his frustrations with the modern anti Israel movement and sentiments in Hollywood, the protests which he's been trying to combat in theater and on the stage. And he actually said that investors had pulled out of a film project about Israel when tensions flared. So it's interesting to hear your investors took the opposite approach, but he told me in our conversations, he told me that being Jewish is about stepping up. That's how he sees it. It's about stepping up. And I'm curious if that rings true to you, and do you feel like this series and your plans to do more, is that your way of stepping up? Lawrence Bender: Hmm, that's beautiful, and I'm so glad to hear you recount that story with him. I'd love to talk to him about that I feel like, without really understanding that it's built into me genetically, right? My grandparents, far as you go back, my family is Jewish, right? From Romania, from Hungary, from Minsk Belarus. So it's the way that you're brought up as a Jew. It's just always been a part of our lives, and we're pretty much taught that that's part of being Jewish, right? So, you know, I've always felt like it's important for me. Now I tell you, you know, it's interesting, and I think about as we're talking so in the 90s, when I was getting started, and I was actually doing pretty well this one year, I had Good Will Hunting and Jackie Brown and a price above Rubens, those three movies, and things were going well, but I felt like something was missing in my life. And then we screened Good Will Hunting and Camp David in 1998 and it was an amazing moment. And that was like one of these light bulb moments for me. You know, I met the President and Mrs. Clinton and Madeleine Albright, Secretary of State, and Secretary of Defense, Sandy Berger and the Chief of Staff and Senate Majority Leader, and on and on, right? They're all there. And it was Matt Damon, Ban Affleck, Gus Van Zant, Robin Williams, et cetera, et cetera, right? And I felt like these guys are making a difference, and that's what was missing in my life. And so since 1998 I've been always looking for ways that I'm and that's that's that becomes like a more of a fulfilling way of living right for myself. So yes, I would answer that. That's a long way to get to yes. Manya Brachear Pashman: Wow, Camp David, that's awesome. Lawrence, thank you so much for joining us and for talking about the impetus behind this series. I encourage everyone to take some time, brace yourself emotionally, but do sit down and watch Red Alert. It is really quite worthwhile. Thank you so much. Lawrence Bender: Thank you. Manya Brachear Pashman: If you missed last week's episode, be sure to tune in for my conversation with AJC colleague, Dr Alexandra Herzog, the granddaughter of Chaim Herzog, Israel's Irish born sixth president. She shared how an attempt by Dublin officials to strip her grandfather's name from a community park illustrates how criticism of Israel can veer into an effort to erase Jewish memory. As I mentioned in my conversation with Lawrence, it took some degree of wherewithal to watch Red Alert, as we've spent the last two years on this podcast speaking with the families of hostages, former hostages themselves, and survivors of the October 7 massacre. I've wanted nothing more than to make sure their voices are heard. We end this week's episode with the voice of Orna Neutra, the mother of Omer Neutra. Orna recently spoke at the AJC Long Island meeting, shortly after the return of her son's remains more than two years after his death, followed by a word from AJC Long Island Director Eric Post. Orna Neutra: When Omer was taken, our world collapsed. But something else happened too. People stood up. People showed up. And many of you here showed up. This community, the broader Long Island Jewish community, AJC, our friends, colleagues, neighbors, complete strangers, carried us. You wrote, you marched, you advocated, you pressured you called you consoled and refused to let the world look away. To our personal friends and honorees here tonight, Veronica, Laurie, and Michael, your leadership has not been symbolic. It has been practical, steady and deeply felt by our family. Like you said, Veronica, on the first days when we were barely understanding what was going on, you connected us to Senator Schumer's office, and Michael, you helped us write a letter to the White House on October 8, and that was the first sign from hostage families that the White House received. We know that Secretary Blinken had the letter in his hands on October 8, indicating that Omer was probably a hostage. And AJC as an organization, beyond your many actions and advocacy, I want to specifically acknowledge your DC team. It was mentioned here tonight, throughout our many, many, many visits to Capitol Hill, AJC professionals were instrumental. They arranged meetings, they walked us through endless hallways, opened doors, prepared us and stood beside us, and they're still doing that for us, and we will see them this week. Always professional, with purpose and humanity, and we will never forget that. Over these two years, we learned something essential: that when Jewish families are in danger, the responsibility belongs to all of us, across movements, across generations, across continents. This work is the work that AJC does every day. This is the work that everyone here in this room understands. Eric Post: Since the horrors of October 7, AJC has been empowering leaders around the world to take action against antisemitism and stand with Israel. But we cannot succeed alone. Please consider supporting AJC's work with a year-end gift today. Right now, your gift will be matched, dollar-for-dollar, making double the impact. Every gift matters. Every dollar makes a difference in the fight for a strong and secure Jewish future. Donate at AJC.org/donate – that's www - dot - AJC - dot org slash donate.

Five years after the signing of the Abraham Accords, the Middle East looks very different—defined by both extraordinary cooperation and unprecedented challenges. In this episode, we unpack how Israel's defensive war on seven fronts affected regional partnerships, why Abraham Accords nations have stood by the Jewish state, and what expanded normalization could look like as countries like Saudi Arabia and others weigh making such monumental decisions. We also explore the growing importance of humanitarian coordination, people-to-people diplomacy, and the critical role AJC is playing in supporting deeper regional collaboration. From shifting narratives to new economic and security opportunities, we chart what the next five years could mean for peace, stability, and integration across the region. *The views and opinions expressed by guests do not necessarily reflect the views or position of AJC. This episode is up-to-date as of November 25, 2025. Read the transcript: Building What's Next | Architects of Peace - Episode 6 | AJC Resources: AJC.org/ArchitectsofPeace - Tune in weekly for new episodes. The Abraham Accords, Explained AJC.org/CNME - Find more from AJC's Center for a New Middle East Listen – AJC Podcasts: The Forgotten Exodus People of the Pod Follow Architects of Peace on your favorite podcast app, and learn more at AJC.org/ArchitectsofPeace You can reach us at: podcasts@ajc.org If you've appreciated this episode, please be sure to tell your friends, and rate and review us on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Transcript: ANNE DREAZEN: One thing that I have learned from my many years at the Department of Defense is that military instruments of power are not sufficient to really build longlasting peace and stability. The importance of trade, of economic development, of people-to-people ties, is so essential to what we think of as an enduring or a lasting peace. MANYA BRACHEAR PASHMAN: In September 2020, the world saw what had been years–decades–in the making. Landmark peace agreements dubbed the Abraham Accords, normalizing relations between Israel and two Arabian Gulf States, the United Arab Emirates and the Kingdom of Bahrain. Later, in December, they were joined by the Kingdom of Morocco. Five years later, AJC is pulling back the curtain to meet key individuals who built the trust that led to these breakthroughs and build bonds that would last. Introducing: the Architects of Peace. MANYA BRACHEAR PASHMAN: It has been five years since Israel, the United Arab Emirates, and Bahrain signed the Abraham Accords on the South Lawn of the White House. In those five years, Russia invaded Ukraine, sparking a massive refugee crisis. The U.S. elected one president then re-elected his predecessor who had ushered in the Abraham Accords in the first place. And amid news that Saudi Arabia might be next to join the Accords, the Hamas terror group breached the border between Israel and Gaza, murdered more than 1,200 people and kidnapped 251 more. Israel suddenly found itself fighting an existential war against Iran and its terror proxies on multiple fronts – Gaza, Lebanon, the West Bank, Yemen, Syria, Iraq, and Iran itself. At the same time, Israel also fought a worldwide war of public opinion – as Hamas elevated the death toll in Gaza by using Palestinian civilians as human shields and activists waged a war of disinformation on social media that turned international public perception against the Jewish state. Through it all, the Abraham Accords held. ALI RASHID AL NUAIMI: There are those who work hard to undermine what we are doing. And this is where many question: 'How come the UAE is still part of the Abraham Accords?' MANYA BRACHEAR PASHMAN: Dr. Ali Rashid Al Nuaimi is a leading parliamentarian and educator in the United Arab Emirates. He has served as the Chancellor of the United Arab Emirates University and the Chairman of the Abu Dhabi Department of Education and Knowledge. He currently serves as the Chairman of the International Steering Board of Hedayah, The International Center of Excellence for Countering Extremism and Violent Extremism. The center is based in Abu Dhabi. He was one of the first to go on Israeli and Arab media to talk to the general public about the Abraham Accords and was known for correcting news anchors and other interview subjects, that the UAE had not simply agreed to live in peace with the Jewish state. It had agreed to actively engage with the Israeli people. ALI RASHID AL NUAIMI: We saw the importance of engaging with both sides. We saw the importance of talking to the Israeli general public. We saw the importance of dialogue with the government in Israel, the Knesset, the NGO, the academician, businessman. MANYA BRACHEAR PASHMAN: That engagement started almost immediately with flights back and forth, musical collaborations, culinary exchanges, academic partnerships, business arrangements–much of which came to a halt on October 7, 2023. But that simply meant the nature of the engagement changed. Since the start of the Israel-Hamas War, the UAE has provided extensive humanitarian aid to Gaza, delivering more than 100,000 tons of food, medical supplies, tents, and clothing, by land, air and sea—about 46% of the total assistance that entered Gaza. It established six desalination plants with a combined capacity of two million gallons per day. And, in addition to operating field and floating hospitals that treated 73,000 patients, the UAE also provided five ambulances, facilitated a polio vaccination campaign, and evacuated 2,785 patients for treatment in the UAE. From Dr. Al-Nuami's point of view, the Abraham Accords made all of that humanitarian aid possible. ALI RASHID AL NUAIMI: This is why we were able to have these hospitals in Gaza, we were able to do these water solutions for the Palestinians, and we did so many things because there is a trust between us and the Israelis. That they allowed us to go and save the Palestinian people in Gaza. So there were so many challenges, but because we have the right leadership, who have the courage to make the right decision, who believe in the Abraham Accords principles, the vision, and who's working hard to transform the region. Where every everyone will enjoy security, stability, and prosperity without, you know, excluding anyone. Why the UAE didn't pull out of the Abraham Accords? My answer is this. It's not with the government, our engagement. The government will be there for two, three, four years, and they will change. Our Abraham Accords is with Israel as a nation, with the people, who will stay. Who are, we believe their root is here, and there is a history and there is a future that we have to share together. And this is where we have to work on what I call people to people diplomacy. This is sustainable peace. This is where you really build the bridges of trust, respect, partnership, and a shared responsibility about the whole region. MANYA BRACHEAR PASHMAN: On October 9, two years and two days after the start of the war between Israel and Hamas, the White House announced a ceasefire would take effect, the first step in a 20-point peace plan proposed for the region. Four days later, President Donald Trump joined the presidents of Egypt and Turkey, and the Emir of Qatar to announce a multilateral agreement to work toward a comprehensive and durable peace in Gaza. Since then, all but the remains of three hostages have been returned home, including Lt. Hadar Goldin, whose remains had been held since 2014, ending the longest hostage ordeal in Israel's history. Finally, the prospect of peace and progress seems to be re-emerging. But what is next for the Abraham Accords? Will they continue to hold and once again offer the possibilities that were promised on the White House Lawn in September 2020? Will they expand? And which countries will be next to sign on to the historic pact, setting aside decades of rejection to finally formalize full diplomatic relations with the Jewish state? The opportunities seem endless, just as they did in September 2020 when the Abraham Accords expanded the scope of what was suddenly possible in government, trade, and so much more. ANNE DREAZEN: The Abraham Accords really opened up lots of opportunities for us in the Department of Defense to really expand cooperation between Israel and its partners in the security sphere. MANYA BRACHEAR PASHMAN: Anne Dreazen spent the last 18 years as a civil servant in the U.S. Department of Defense. For most of that time, she worked on Middle East national security and defense policy, focusing on Iran, Iraq and Lebanon. And most recently serving as the principal director for Middle East policy, the senior civil service job overseeing the entire Middle East office. She was working at the Pentagon when the Abraham Accords were signed under the first Trump administration and immediately saw a shift in the region. ANNE DREAZEN: So, one thing that we saw at the very end of the first Trump administration, and it was made possible in part because of the success of the Abraham Accords, was the decision to move Israel from U.S. European Command into U.S. Central Command. And for many decades, it had been thought that that wouldn't be feasible because you wouldn't have any Middle East countries in CENTCOM that would really be willing to engage with Israel, even in very discreet minimal channels. But after the Abraham Accords, I think that led us policymakers and military leaders to sort of rethink that proposition, and it became very clear that, it would be better to increase cooperation between Israel and the other Gulf partners, because in many cases, they have similar security interests, specifically concerns about Iran and Iranian proxies and Iranian malign activity throughout the region. And so I think the Abraham Accords was one item that sort of laid the groundwork and really enabled and encouraged us to think creatively about ways through which we could, in the security and defense sphere, improve cooperation between Israel and other partners in the region. MANYA BRACHEAR PASHMAN: But sustaining peace in the region is more than a matter of maintaining security. Making sure young people can fulfill their dreams, make a contribution, build relationships and friendships across borders, and transcend religion and ideologies – even those in the security sphere know those are the necessary ingredients for peace and prosperity across the region. Despite the efforts of Hamas and other Iran-backed terror proxies to derail the Abraham Accords, the U.S., Arab, and Israeli leaders had continued to pursue plans for an Israeli-Saudi peace agreement and to explore a new security architecture to fight common threats. This spirit of optimism and determination led AJC to launch the Center for a New Middle East in June 2024. In October, Anne joined AJC to lead that initiative. ANNE DREAZEN: One thing that I have learned from my many years at the Department of Defense is that military instruments of power are not sufficient to really build long lasting peace and stability. The importance of trade, of economic development, of people-to-people ties is so essential to what we think of as an enduring or a lasting peace. And so at AJC, we're actually focused on those aspects of trying to advance normalization. Really trying to put more meat on the bones, in the case of where we already have agreements in place. So for example, with Jordan, Egypt, Bahrain, the UAE and Morocco, trying to really build out what more can be done in terms of building economic ties, building people-to-people ties, and advancing those agreements. MANYA BRACHEAR PASHMAN: Of course, that work had already begun prior to Anne's arrival. Just two years after the Abraham Accords, Retired Ambassador to Oman Marc Sievers became director of AJC Abu Dhabi: The Sidney Lerner Center for Arab-Jewish Understanding, the first and only Jewish agency office in an Arab and Islamic country. After more than 30 years as a U.S. diplomat serving across the Middle East and North Africa, Marc has witnessed a number of false starts between Arab nations and Israel. While the Abraham Accords introduced an unprecedented approach, they didn't suddenly stabilize the region. Marc's four years in Abu Dhabi have been fraught. In January 2022, Houthis in north Yemen launched a drone and missile attack on Abu Dhabi, killing three civilians and injuring six others. In 2023, the October 7 Hamas terror attack on Israel, Israel's retaliation, and Israel's war on seven fronts dimmed Emiratis' public perception of Jews. As recently as this past August, the U.S. Mission to the UAE issued a dire warning to Israeli diplomats and Jewish institutions in Abu Dhabi – a threat that was taken seriously given the kidnapping and murder of a Chabad rabbi in 2024. But just as the UAE stood by its commitment to Israel, Marc and AJC stood by their commitment to the UAE and Arab neighbors, working to advance Arab-Jewish and Muslim-Jewish dialogue; combat regional antisemitism and extremism; and invigorate Jewish life across the region. From Marc's vantage point, the Abraham Accords revolutionized the concept of normalization, inspiring a level of loyalty he's never before seen. It's worth noting the precursor to the Abraham Accords: the Peace to Prosperity Summit. For decades, diplomats had frowned on the idea of an economic peace preceding a two-state solution. MARC SIEVERS: That idea's been out there for a long time. …It was just never embraced by those who thought, you know, first you have a two-state solution. You have a Palestinian state, and then other things will follow. This approach is kind of the opposite. You create an environment in which people feel they have an incentive, they have something to gain from cooperation, and that then can lead to a different political environment. I happen to think that's quite an interesting approach, because the other approach was tried for years and years, and it didn't succeed. Rather than a confrontational approach, this is a constructive approach that everyone benefits from. The Prosperity to Peace Conference was a very important step in that direction. It was harshly criticized by a lot of people, but I think it actually was a very kind of visionary approach to changing how things are done. MANYA BRACHEAR PASHMAN: The conference Marc is referring to took place in June 2019 – a two-day workshop in Bahrain's capital city of Manama, where the Trump administration began rolling out the economic portion of its peace plan, titled "Peace to Prosperity." The workshop's host Bahrain, as well as Egypt, Jordan, Morocco, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the Emirates participated, to varying degrees. The plan called for large scale investment, mostly by other countries in the Gulf and Europe, to advance the Palestinian economy, to integrate the Palestinian and Israelis' economies and establish a small but functional Palestinian state. Angered by Trump's recognition of Jerusalem, Palestinian leadership rejected the plan before ever seeing its details. But as former U.S. Ambassador to Israel David Friedman pointed out in an earlier episode of this series, that was expected. The plan enabled Israel to demonstrate that it was open to cooperation. It enabled the Trump administration to illustrate the opportunities missed if countries in the region continued to let Palestinian leadership call the shots. It was economic diplomacy at its finest. And it worked. MANYA BRACHEAR PASHMAN: Benjamin Rogers, AJC's Director for Middle East and North Africa Initiatives, who also serves as Deputy Director of the Center for a New Middle East, said the Center has focused heavily on expanding private sector engagement. Israelis and Arab entrepreneurs have quietly traveled to the U.S. as part of the Center's budding business collectives. BENJAMIN ROGERS: So people who are focused on med tech, people who are focused on agri tech, people who are focused on tourism. And what we do is we say, 'Hey, we want to talk about the Middle East. No, we do not want to talk about violence. No, we don't want to talk about death and destruction. Not because these issues are not important, but because we're here today to talk about innovation, and we're here to talk about the next generation, and what can we do?' And when you say, like, food security for example, how can Israelis and Arabs work together in a way that helps provide more food for the entire world? That's powerful. How can the Israelis and Arabs working together with the United States help combat cancer, help find solutions to new diseases? If you really want to get at the essence of the Abraham Accords – the ability to do better and work together, to your average person on the street, that's meaningful. And so one of the initiatives is, hey, let's bring together these innovators, these business leaders, private sector, and let's showcase to Arabs, Israelis, non-Jewish community, what the Middle East can be about. MANYA BRACHEAR PASHMAN: People-to-people connections. That's what AJC has done for decades, traveling to the region since 1950 to build bridges and relationships. But providing a platform to help facilitate business ventures? That's a new strategy, which is why AJC partnered with Blue Laurel Advisors. The firm has offices in Tel Aviv, Dubai, and Washington, D.C.. It specializes in helping companies navigate the geopolitics of doing business in Saudi Arabia, UAE, Bahrain, and Israel. At AJC Global Forum in April, founder and Managing Director Tally Zingher told an audience that the Abraham Accords, which effectively lifted the UAE's ban on business with Israel, brought already existing deals above the radar. TALLY ZINGHER: We've been wowed by what the Center for a New Middle East has been able to do and put forth in the very short time that it's been incubated and Blue Laurel Advisors are really delighted to be part of this project and we're really aligned with its mission and its vision. It's quite simple in the region because the region is really driven by national agendas. I think it's no surprise that the appendix to the Abraham Accords was a direct parallel to the Abu Dhabi national vision. It's the key areas of growth in UAE and Saudi Arabia that are now really well aligned with Israeli strength. We're talking about the diversification efforts of the UAE and of Saudi Arabia. At Blue Laurel, we're quite focused on Saudi Arabia because of the real growth story underway there created by the diversification efforts. But they're focused on water, energy, renewable energy, healthy cyber security, tourism. Ten years ago when you were doing this work, 15 years ago there wasn't as much complementarity between Israel and the start-up innovation ecosystem and what was going on. The region is really ready and ripe to have Israeli innovation be a part of its growth trajectory. MANYA BRACHEAR PASHMAN: Benjy said there's another advantage to building bridges in the business world – continuity. BENJAMIN ROGERS:Out of the three sectors that we're focused on – diplomatic, business, and civil society – business relations are the most resistant to political conflict. There's this element of self interest in it, which I'm not saying is a bad thing, but when you tie the relationship to your own worth and your own value, you're much more likely to go through kind of the ebbs and flows of the political. Whereas, if you're a civil society, you're really at the mercy of populations. And if the timing is not right, it's not impossible to work together, but it's so much more difficult. Business is even more resistant than political engagement, because if political engagement is bad, the business relationship can still be good, because there's an element of self interest, and that element of we have to work together for the betterment of each other. MANYA BRACHEAR PASHMAN: The economic diplomacy complements AJC's partnership with civil society groups, other non-profits that work to bring people together to experience and embody each other's realities in the Middle East. The Center also has continued AJC's trademark traditional diplomacy to expand the circle of peace. Though Marc prefers to call it the circle of productivity. MARC SIEVERS: I think it achieved new relations for Israel that were perhaps different from what had happened with Egypt and Jordan, where we have long standing peace agreements, but very little contact between people, and very little engagement other than through very specific official channels. The Abraham Accords were different because there was a people-to-people element. The UAE in particular was flooded with Israeli tourists almost immediately after the Accords were signed, Bahrain less so, but there have been some. And not as many going the other way, but still, the human contacts were very much there. I think it was also building on this idea that economic engagement, joint partnerships, investment, build a kind of circle of productive relations that gradually hopefully expand and include broader parts of the region or the world that have been either in conflict with Israel or have refused to recognize Israel as a sovereign Jewish state. MANYA BRACHEAR PASHMAN: It being all of those things explains why the potential for expansion is all over the map. So where will the Abraham Accords likely go next? The Trump administration recently announced the addition of Kazakhstan. But as the Central Asian country already had diplomatic relations with Israel, the move was more of an endorsement of the Accords rather than an expansion. In November 2025, all eyes were on the White House when Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman paid a visit. In addition to the customary Oval Office meeting, President Trump also hosted the Saudi royal at a black-tie dinner. ANNE DREAZEN: Right now, everyone is really talking about and thinking, of course, about Saudi Arabia, and certainly I think there's a lot of promise now with the ceasefire having been achieved. That sort of lays a better groundwork to be able to think about whether we can, whether the United States can play an important role in bringing Saudi Arabia and Israel to the table to move forward on normalization. Certainly from the Saudis have have made they've cautioned that one of their prerequisites is a viable path toward Palestinian statehood. And we've known that, that's in President Trump's 20-point plan. So I think it remains to be seen whether or not Israel and Saudi Arabia can come to a mutually agreed upon way of addressing that key concern for Saudi Arabia. MANYA BRACHEAR PASHMAN: But there are also countries who only a year ago never would have considered a relationship with Israel. With Hezbollah diminished and a moderate and forward-leaning Lebanese government in place, quiet conversations are taking place that could lead to a significant diplomatic achievement, even if not as ambitious as the Abraham Accords. The same in Syria, where Ahmed al-Sharaa is sending positive signals that he would at least be willing to consider security arrangements. ANNE DREAZEN: Even if you don't have a Syrian Embassy opening up in Jerusalem or Tel Aviv, even if you don't have an Israeli embassy opening up in Damascus, there could be other arrangements made, short of a full diplomatic peace accord that would lay the groundwork for some understandings on security, on borders. MANYA BRACHEAR PASHMAN: Marc said it remains to be seen whether Oman, his final diplomatic post, will join the Accords. Two years before the signing of the Accords, while serving as ambassador, there was a glimmer of hope. Well, more than a glimmer really. MARC SIEVERS: In Oman, the late Sultan Qaboos, a good, almost two years before the Abraham Accords, invited Prime Minister Netanyahu to visit him in his royal palace in Muscat. Netanyahu came with his wife, Sarah, but also with a lot of the top senior leadership. Certainly his military secretary, the head of the Mossad, a few other people. As soon as Netanyahu landed in Israel, the Omanis put it all over the media, and there were some wonderful videos of the Sultan giving Netanyahu a tour of the palace and a choir of children who came and sang, and some other things that the Sultan liked to do when he had important guests. And it was quite an interesting moment, and that was two years before. And that was not initiated by the United States. Unlike the Abraham Accords process, that was an Omani initiative, but again, other than the meeting itself, nothing really came of it. The Omanis took a lot of pride in what they had done, and then they backed away. MANYA BRACHEAR PASHMAN: Instead, Marc points to the country with the largest Muslim population in the world: Indonesia – especially following recent remarks to the United Nations General Assembly by Indonesia's President Prabowo Subianto. PRABOWO SUBIANTO: We must have an independent Palestine, but we must also recognize, we must also respect, and we must also guarantee the safety and security of Israel. Only then can we have real peace. Real peace and no longer hate and no longer suspicion. The only solution is the two-state solution. The descendants of Abraham must live in reconciliation, peace, and harmony. Arabs, Jews, Muslims, Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, all religions. We must live as one human family. Indonesia is committed to being part of making this vision a reality. MARC SIEVERS: We've heard that, you know, Indonesia needs some time to consider this, which makes a lot of sense. It's not something to be done lightly, and yet that would be a huge achievement. Obviously, Indonesia has never been a party to the conflict directly, but they also have never had relations with Israel, and they are the most populous Muslim country. Should that happen, it's a different kind of development than Saudi Arabia, but in some ways, it kind of internationalizes or broadens beyond the Middle East, the circle of peace. MANYA BRACHEAR PASHMAN: But in addition to adding signatories, Anne said AJC's Center for a New Middle East will work to strengthen the current relationships with countries that stayed committed during Israel's war against Hamas, despite public apprehensions. Anne recently traveled to Bahrain and the UAE with AJC's Chief Policy and Political Affairs Officer Jason Isaacson, who has long led AJC's Middle East outreach. There, Anne discovered a significant slowdown in the momentum she witnessed when the Accords debuted. ANNE DREAZEN: I saw a real hesitancy during my travels in the region for politicians to publicly acknowledge and to publicly celebrate the Abraham Accords. They were much more likely to talk about peaceful coexistence and tolerance in what they characterize as a non-political way, meaning not tied to any sort of diplomatic agreements. So I saw that as a big impediment. I do think that among the leadership of a lot of these countries, though, there is a sense that they have to be more pragmatic than ever before in trying to establish, in time to sustain the ceasefire, and establish a more enduring stability in the region. So there's a bit of a disconnect, I think, between where a lot of the publics lie on this issue. But a lot of the political leaders recognize the importance of maintaining ties with Israel, and want to lay the groundwork for greater stability. We are very interested now in doing what we can as CNME, as the Center for New Middle East, to help rebuild those connections and help reinvigorate those relationships. MANYA BRACHEAR PASHMAN: This is especially the case in Bahrain, which has not seen the same economic dividends as the UAE. ANNE DREAZEN: Bahrain is a much smaller country than the UAE, and their key industries – they have less of a developed startup tech ecosystem than the UAE. And frankly, many of Bahrain's sectors don't overlap as neatly with some of Israel's emerging tech sectors, as is the case with the UAE. So, for example, Bahrain is very heavy on steel and aluminum manufacturing, on logistics. Manufacturing is a big part of the sector. Israeli tech doesn't really, in general, provide that many jobs in that type of sector. Tourism is another area where Bahrain is trying to develop as a top priority. This obviously was really challenged during the Abraham Accords, especially when direct flights stopped over Gulf air. So tourism was not a natural one, especially after October 7. Bahrain has really prioritized training their youth workforce to be able to take on jobs in IT and financial services, and this is one area we want to look into more and see what can be done. Bahrain is really prioritizing trying to build relationships in areas that can provide jobs to some of their youth. It is not as wealthy a country as the UAE, but it has a very educated young workforce. MANYA BRACHEAR PASHMAN: Again, fulfilling dreams, giving youth an opportunity to contribute. That's the necessary narrative to make the Abraham Accords a success. ALI RASHID AL NUAIMI: It's very important to focus on the youth, and how to create a narrative that will gain the heart and the mind of all youth in the region, the Israeli, the Palestinian, the Arabs, the Muslims. And this is where it is very important to counter hate that comes from both sides. Unfortunately, we still see some hate narratives that come from those far-right extremists who serve the extremists on the Arab side, taking advantage of what they are saying, what they are doing. From the beginning, I convey this message to many Israelis: please don't put the Palestinian people in one basket with Hamas, because if you do so, you will be saving Hamas. Hamas will take advantage of that. This is where it's very important to show the Palestinian people that we care about them. You know, we see them as human beings. We want a better future for them. We want to end their suffering. We want them to fulfill their dream within the region, that where everybody will feel safe, will feel respected, and that we all will live as neighbors, caring about each other's security and peace. We have to engage, have a dialogue, show others that we care about them, you see, and try to empower all those who believe in peace who believe that Israeli and Palestinian have to live together in peace and harmony. And it will take time, yes, but we don't have other options. MANYA BRACHEAR PASHMAN: But Dr. Al Nuaimi emphasizes that it can't be just a dialogue. It must be a conversation that includes the American voice. The UAE has been clear with the Israeli public on two occasions that attempts by Israel to unilaterally annex the West Bank would be a red line for the relationship between their two countries. But even as the five-year anniversary of the Abraham Accords approached, a milestone that should've been a reminder of the countries' mutual commitments, it took U.S. intervention for Israel to heed that warning. Anne Dreazen agrees that the U.S. plays an important role. She said Israel must continue to defend itself against threats. But in order to create a safe space for Israel in the long term, the U.S., the American Jewish community in particular, can help bridge connections and overcome cultural differences. That will keep the Accords moving in the right direction. ALI RASHID AL NUAIMI: I believe many Arab and Muslim leaders are eager to join it, but you know, they have to do their internal calculation within their people. We have to help them, not only us, but the Israelis. They are looking for a way, a path, to have them as neighbors, and to have a solution that the Palestinian will fulfill their dreams, but the Israeli also will be secure. I think having such a narrative that will take us to the next level by bringing other Arab countries and Muslim country to join the Abraham Accords. MANYA BRACHEAR PASHMAN: Thank you for listening. Atara Lakritz is our producer. T.K. Broderick is our sound engineer. Special thanks to Jason Isaacson, Sean Savage, and the entire AJC team for making this series possible. You can subscribe to Architects of Peace on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you listen to podcasts, and you can learn more at AJC.org/ArchitectsofPeace. The views and opinions of our guests don't necessarily reflect the positions of AJC. You can reach us at podcasts@ajc.org. If you've enjoyed this episode, please be sure to spread the word, and hop onto Apple Podcasts or Spotify to rate us and write a review to help more listeners find us. Music Credits: Middle East : ID: 279780040; Composer: Eric Sutherland Inspired Middle East: ID: 241884108; Composer: iCENTURY Mystical Middle East: ID: 212471911; Composer: Vicher

"To me, that ark is: engaging deeply with our traditions. It's reclaiming some of what we lost when we were assimilating and trying to fit in. We have thousands of years of text that have such wisdom about the human condition, about how to be a good person, and lead a worthy life . . . What we can really do is, we can be Jews. And to be a Jew has always been to be different." Sarah Hurwitz—former White House speechwriter and New York Times bestselling author of Here All Along—returns to People of the Pod to discuss her new book, As a Jew: Reclaiming Our Story from Those Who Blame, Shame, and Try to Erase Us. Hurwitz reflects on why antisemitism remains, in her words, "the least mysterious phenomenon," and how Jews can reclaim pride, wisdom, and purpose through Jewish text, practice, and community. Drawing from her work as a hospital chaplain and her conversations with Jewish students on campus, she makes a powerful case for reconnecting with the depth and resilience of Jewish tradition. Key Resources: AJC's Translate Hate Glossary AJC's Efforts to Support the Hostages Listen – AJC Podcasts: Architects of Peace The Forgotten Exodus People of the Pod Follow People of the Pod on your favorite podcast app, and learn more at AJC.org/PeopleofthePod You can reach us at: peopleofthepod@ajc.org If you've appreciated this episode, please be sure to tell your friends, and rate and review us on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Transcript of the Interview: Manya Brachear Pashman: During the Obama administration, Sarah Hurwitz served as senior speech writer for President Barack Obama and chief speech writer for First Lady Michelle Obama. But after she left the White House, she did a little bit of soul searching, and in her mid 30s, reconnected with her Judaism. She wrote about it in a book titled Here All Along, and joined us at the time to talk about it. Sarah has returned with us this week to talk about the book that followed, titled As a Jew: Reclaiming Our Story from Those Who Blame, Shame, and Try to Erase Us. Sarah, welcome back to People of the Pod. Sarah Hurwitz: Thank you so much. I'm thrilled to be here. Manya Brachear Pashman: So your title has a very powerful accusation. So tell us who is blaming, shaming and trying to erase us? Sarah Hurwitz: Yeah. So, you know, it's funny. My first book, as you know, was this love letter toJudaism. This, this journey of discovery of Jewish tradition, and I loved it so much, and I wanted to share it. You know, as I was writing it, I was thinking, Oh, where has this been all my life. Kind of a lovely, almost rhetorical question. But after it came out, a few things kind of happened that made me actually ask that question more seriously. Like, Wait, why did I not see any of the 4000 years of Jewish wisdom growing up? The first thing was, I trained to be a volunteer hospital chaplain, and you know, chaplaincy is multifaith, open to chaplains of all backgrounds. But you know, the training was kind of weirdly Christian. You know, we would talk about our ministry and our theology. And I was told that prayer is God, please heal so and so who's right here in front of me, and I'm just making this prayer up spontaneously, and they can hear me, and that's prayer. And everyone prays that way, I was told. I said, You know that that's not really a common form of Jewish prayer. But I was told, No, no, as long as you don't say Jesus, it is universal. That's interesting. And then something else that happened is I visited a college campus probably a year before October 7, and I was talking to students there at the Hillel, talking to a bunch of Jewish students. And one of them asked me, What did you do to respond to antisemitism when you were in college? And I was so stunned, I didn't even understand the question at first. And then I said, I didn't, not once, never. Not a single time did I deal with antisemitism. And the kids just looked kind of shocked, like they didn't believe me. And they started sharing stories of the antisemitism they were facing on campus. And I thought, uh oh, something's going on here. And then I really began kind of taking a deep dive into my identity. Of like, wait, so why did I spend my whole life being like, oh, I'm just a cultural Jew. I knew nothing about Jewish culture. Which is a beautiful way to be Jewish, being a cultural Jew, but I knew nothing about history, language, anything like that. When I said I'm an ethnic Jew, but Jews are of every ethnicity, so that's nonsense. Or I'd say social justice is my Judaism, but I didn't know anything about what Judaism said about social justice. Unlike these wonderful Jews who do know about social justice and spend their lives acting out Jewish social justice. And so I took a deep dive into history, and what I discovered was 2000 years of antisemitism and anti-Judaism and 200 years of Jews in Western Europe in a very understandable attempt to escape that persecution, kind of erasing many of our traditions. And I think that was kind of my answer to, where has this been all my life? And also my answer to, why did I have such an apologetic Jewish identity for so much of my life? Manya Brachear Pashman: In my introduction, I left off half the title of your first book because it was very long, but I am curious, kind of, when did you realize . . . well, let me give the full title of your book, it's Here All Along: Finding Meaning, Spirituality, and a Deeper Connection to Life--in Judaism (After Finally Choosing to Look There). So I guess, how was that delayed connection to Judaism, can you elaborate a little bit more about how it was tied to these forces that you just talked about? Sarah Hurwitz: Yeah, so, you know, something that I didn't really fully understand, I had intimations of this, but didn't really understand this, is that, you know, 2000 years ago, early Christianity very much defined itself against Judaism. There was actually a name for this, the Aversos Judeos tradition, which means against the Jews in Latin. And you know, early Church Fathers very much were defining Christianity against Judaism, because back then, both of these traditions had originated from Judaism. And you know they parted ways at some point, and the Church Fathers were really trying to distinguish Christianity from Judaism, and to get people to stop kind of practicing both traditions. This tradition really continues with Judaism defined as unspiritual, legalistic, depraved, dead, spiritually superseded. A lot of very, very ugly tropes that kind of have common themes that say that Jews are diabolically powerful, so supernaturally powerful, you can't even believe it. They are also profoundly depraved, evil, bloodthirsty, perverse, and they're in a conspiracy to hurt you. So there may be very few of them, but man, they are working together to really do harm. And you see these three themes kind of making their way through history, unfortunately, all the way basically, until the Holocaust. And I based a lot of my writing on the work of a number of really distinguished Christian scholars who make this argument. It's actually a pretty common argument among Christian scholars. And, you know, in recent decades, the church has very much disavowed its historic anti-Judaism and has worked very hard to, you know, fight antisemitism in the church. But, you know, these things really did kind of continue on through the 20th century. Manya Brachear Pashman: So you do describe in your book moments when you got oddly defensive about your Judaism, or perhaps a bit revisionist about Jewish history and the origin of Jewish traditions, or the reason why they exist now in modern day. Can you elaborate on some of those moments for our listeners and explain how you've self-corrected thatdefense? Sarah Hurwitz: You know, I think a lot of it took the form of, oh, I'm Jewish, but not that Jewish. It was just sort of this immediate, but I'm not one of those Jews. You know, those really Jewish Jews. Well, I'm sorry, would it be a problem if I were? What if social justice wasn't my Judaism, but Judaism was my Judaism? Would that be okay? You know, just beginning to notice, like, Why am I always kind of pushing it away, claiming that I'm not too Jewish? That's a very strange way to announce someone's identity. I think, you know, Dara Horn has actually a really, quite an amazing essay called The Cool Kids, and she talks about these two different types of antisemitism. And one is this kind of eliminationist antisemitism which says the Jews are bad, there's nothing they can do to be good. We must kill them. And you know, that is the Holocaust, pogroms. We learn about that kind of antisemitism in school. But there's another kind of antisemitism, which is conversionist, which says, yes, the Jews are bad, but there is something they can do to be okay and saved. And that is, they can disavow whatever we, the majority, find disgusting about Jewish civilization. So you know, back in the day, it was, reject Jewish religion and convert to Christianity, and you'll be saved, maybe. For some amount of time, possibly. In my parents and grandparents generation, it was, you know, reject your last name, get a nose job. Stop being so "Jewy", be a little bit more "waspy," and then maybe we'll let you into our club. Then maybe we'll accept you. And today, what you see is you have to reject your ancestral homeland, you know, reject Israel, and then you'll be okay. And, you know, I visited 27 college campuses, and I kind of saw how this sometimes takes on the format of almost like a Christian conversion narrative, where it goes something like, you know, growing up, my rabbi and my parents told me Israel was perfect and amazing and a utopia. And then I got to college, and I realized that actually it's a colonialist, Nazi, racist society, and I had an epiphany. I saw the light, and I took anti-Zionism and anti-colonialism into my heart, and now I'm saved. Now I'm a good Jew. And their classmates are like, now you're a good Jew. And as Dara Horn puts it, this kind of antisemitism involves the weaponization of shame. It involves really trying to convince Jews that there is something fundamentally shameful about some aspect of themselves, their identity, their tradition. And today, that thing is Israel. This idea that there's something fundamentally . . . it's like the original sin of the world. Manya Brachear Pashman: And you also talk about the tradition of circumcision, and how that came up, and you found yourself explaining this to someone. Can you elaborate on that for our listeners? Which I thought was really interesting. Sarah Hurwitz: This was during an encounter with a patient. I was doing a chaplaincy shift, and usually I don't tell my patients my religious background, I'm very neutral, unless they're Jewish, in which case, I do tell them I'm Jewish. But, you know, I was finishing up a conversation with this very lovely lady. And she was very curious about my background. And so I told her, you know, I'm Jewish. And her eyes kind of lit up, and she said, Oh, you know, many of my neighbors are Jewish. I've actually been to two brisses in the past month. And she just, you know, and she was so lovely, like, she actually seemed to be just really happy to be included in this tradition of her neighbors. And I got weirdly defensive, and was like, Oh, well, you know, just so, you know, medical professionals, they say whether you circumcise or don't circumcise, it's really, it's equally safe either way. And you know, we often, you know, when we do brisses, they're often done by a medical provider. And I'm going on and on and like, this woman did not say the slightest negative thing about this tradition, but suddenly I am defensive. Suddenly it's like, Huh, interesting. You know, I think that it was an illustration to me of the way that we can sometimes really imbibe all of the kind of negative views about Jews and Jewish traditions that are around us, and become defensive, and sometimes we don't even realize that they're there. It's almost like they're the air that we breathe. Manya Brachear Pashman: But let me challenge that and push back a little bit. I mean, is it okay to not agree with some of the traditions of the Jewish faith and be open about your disagreement with that? I certainly know a lot of Christians who don't like things that emerge from their tradition or from their community. Is that okay? Or is it not when Judaism is threatened? Sarah Hurwitz: So I actually do think that's okay. You know, I have no problem with that, but I think the problem in this situation was that I have no problem with circumcision, but I'm suddenly getting defensive and trying to convince this woman that it's not weird. And I'm thinking, why am I doing this? It was very interesting to me that I felt so suddenly defensive and anxious. You know, it was very surprising to me. Manya Brachear Pashman: And similarly, it's okay to criticize Israeli policy too, right? I mean, it's totally acceptable. Sarah Hurwitz: Absolutely. This is the thing that I'm so confused about. Where people are saying, well, you know, you're saying that it's not okay to criticize Israel. And I'm like, I'm sorry. Have you been to Israel? It's like the national pastime there to criticize the government. I criticize the Israeli government all the time, as do millions of American Jews. This idea that this is somehow… that we're somehow reacting to criticism of Israel, that's ridiculous. I think what we're reacting to is not criticism of Israel, but it's something else. You know, when you have students on a college campus saying from water to water, Palestine should be Arab, or Israelis are Nazis. I just, with all due respect, I don't see that as criticism. Nor would I see it as criticism if, God forbid, a Jewish student ever said from water to water, Israel should be Jewish, or, Palestinians are terrorists. That is hateful, disgusting, racist, eliminationist language. And if I ever heard a Jewish student say that, I mean, let me tell you, I would have quite a talking to with that kid. So that's not criticism. Criticism is, I am vehemently opposed and abhor, this policy, this ideology, this action, for these reasons. That's criticism. And I think you can use real strong language to do that kind of criticism. But there's a difference between a criticism and slurs and baseless accusations. And I think we need to be just clear about that. Manya Brachear Pashman: All right, so you just use the term from water to water instead of from river to sea. Was that on purpose? Sarah Hurwitz: Not necessarily. It's just a clearer illustration of what I think from the river to the sea really means, you know, I think that is the Arabic that is used. Infrom the river to the sea, Palestine shall be free. It's like, you can kind of make an argument that this is about Palestinian Liberation. And okay, fair enough. But I think when you get the from water to water, it shall be Arab, that's when I think there's less of an argument that it's about freedom, and it seems a little bit more eliminationist to me. Manya Brachear Pashman: Interesting. I've not heard that before. But I like that. So you call antisemitism the least mysterious phenomenon. Can you please explain what you mean by that? Sarah Hurwitz: Yeah, you know, I think, like a lot of young people, my antisemitism education was mainly just Holocaust education. And I kind of walked away thinking like, huh, how wild that the civilized world just lost its mind in the mid-20th century and started killing Jews. That's so shocking and disturbing, you know, why is that? And the answer was kind of like, well, you know, the Germans lost World War I. They blamed the Jews. There was a depression. They blamed the Jews. And when you ask why the Jews, it's like, well, because of prejudice and scapegoating. I'm like, Okay, right. But again, why the Jews? Prejudice and scapegoating, that's the answer. It's like, well, actually, the answer really is because of 2000 years of Christian anti-Judaism that preceded that. It wasn't mysterious why the Jews were targeted. This was a 2000-year neural groove that had been worn into the Western world psyche. And this is not my argument. This is the argument of countless Christian scholars whose brilliant work I cite. And so I think that the unfortunate thing about some forms of Holocaust education is that it leaves you with the impression that, oh, this is so mysterious, it's just kind of eternal and kind of comes out of nowhere. Or even worse, you might even think maybe we did something to deserve this. But it's not mysterious. I can show you its path through history. And I think it's very important that Jews understand this history. And look, I think this is very hard to teach in an average American public school. Because, you know, we live in a country where, you know, saying Happy Holidays instead of Merry Christmas is very upsetting for some people. They feel very threatened and triggered by that. So for a teacher to say, like, Okay, kids today we're going to learn about how 2000 years of Christian anti-Judaism paved the way for the Holocaust . . . I don't think that's going to go well. Even if many mainstream Christian scholars would agree that that's true, this is a challenge that we face. Manya Brachear Pashman: So you have continued, as you said, to visit college campuses where antisemitism has been an issue since October 7, more of an issue than it even was beforehand. And yet, when you were at Harvard and Harvard Law, you've said you could have walked through Harvard Yard wrapped in an Israeli flag and no one would have said a word or reacted negatively. So what has changed, and does it signal a more general shift on campuses of kind of uncensored, unbridled speech? In other words, if black students support black lives matter, or gay students are marching for pride, do you feel like there's a sense that students who disagree with that from either the right or the left, have kind of claimed a license to criticize that too? Sarah Hurwitz: No. I try to explain to college students when they say, Well, okay, my campus isn't that bad, you know, I can wear my Jewish star, and I won't get, you know, harassed or ostracized. And I say, like, okay, great, if it's not that bad, I'll just wear my Israel t-shirt and we'll see how it goes. They're like, No. And then I have to go through this long litany of like, okay, if your black classmate said to you, well, this campus isn't so bad for black students, but I can't wear my Black Lives Matter t-shirt or else I'll be harassed and ostracized. I hope you would say that's not okay, that's racism, pretty clear. Or if your queer classmate said, Well, this campus is pretty good for queer people, but I can't wear my pride t-shirt, I hope you would say, That's not pretty good. That's homophobia. You know, when the majority feels entitled to decide how the minority can embody and express their identity, I think we have a really serious problem. And sometimes the kids will push back on me. Well, no, no, but the problem isn't being Jewish. It's Israel. I'm like, okay, but if your Chinese American classmate wore a t-shirt that said China, even if all your classmates knew that the Chinese government had been interning a million Muslim Uighurs in camps and subjecting them to horrific human rights violations, would they harass and ostracize her? And they're like, Well, probably not. Right, because they would assume that she has a relationship to China that maybe involves having heritage there, or maybe she studied abroad there, or maybe she's studying Chinese, maybe she has family there. I think they would assume that she has some connection to the country that doesn't involve agreeing with the policies of the Chinese government, and Jewish students on campus really aren't afforded that courtesy. And I'll tell you, most of the Jewish students I spoke with on campus, they, like me, are extremely critical of this current Israeli government. Extremely, extremely critical. They have all sorts of criticisms about what's happening in Gaza, of the occupation. You know, their views are quite nuanced and complex, but there is no room given for that. You know, I think on some college campuses, Israel has been put into the same bucket as the KKK and the Nazi party. So I can't say to you, look, you know, I'm a Nazi, but I'm a liberal Nazi. Or, oh, you know, I'm in the KKK, but I'm not racist. It's like, come on, right? These are vile entities with which no connection is acceptable, period. And I think once Israel ceases to be a country and instead becomes the representation of all evil in the world, there's really no relationship that you can have with it that's acceptable. And I think that is a pretty devastating place for it to be today. And I'll tell you, I think it's a really challenging moment right now where I, like a lot of American Jews, I'm a Zionist. I believe that Jews have a right to a safe and secure home state in their ancestral homeland. I believe we have the right to national independence and self determination, like Japanese people have in Japan and Latvians have in Latvia, and on and on. And you know, we've run that experiment of Jewish powerlessness for 2000 years, and it didn't go well. Even as late as the 20th century. It wasn't just that two thirds of Jews in Europe got wiped out because of the Holocaust. It's that nearly a million Jews who lived in Arab lands had to flee persecution, most of them to Israel. It's that 2 million Russian Jews had to flee persecution, half of them to Israel. It's that 10s of 1000s of Ethiopian Jews, I can go on and on. So we know, we've run that experiment of Jewish statelessness, and it doesn't go well. And at the same time, we are looking at this current Israeli government, and we are appalled. We're appalled by the ideology, we're appalled by many of the policies. And you know, for me as an American, this feels very familiar, because I love this country. I'm a proud, patriotic American, and I happen to very much disagree with the current president. I happen to be very much appalled by the current president's policies and ideology. And so, I think many people are able to hold that, but somehow it's harder with Israel, because of what is in the air right now. Manya Brachear Pashman: So, really you're saying that antisemitism has distorted history. Distorted people's understanding of Israel's history, their understanding of modern Israel's rebirth and existence. It spawned anti-Zionism. Correct? Sarah Hurwitz: Yes. Manya Brachear Pashman: Did you encounter that during your time in the Obama administration? Do you see it now, in hindsight or or is it a more recent emergence? Sarah Hurwitz: I think this is more recent. I mean, you know, probably in some spaces it was, you know, I was in the administration from 2009 to 2017. I never once saw any kind of anti-Zionism or antisemitism. I mean, it was one of the best places to be a proud, passionate Jew. I knew my colleagues could not have been more supportive of my Jewish exploration. They were so proud when I wrote my first book. So I never saw any of this ever, once. And I think, you know, I think what is so confusing about this is that we often think about antisemitism as a kind of personal prejudice, like, oh, you know, Jews are fill in the blank, nasty thing. They are dirty, cheap, crass. I don't want my daughter to marry one. I don't want one in my country club. You don't really see that kind of antisemitism in the circles where I travel anymore. What you see instead is more of political antisemitism, which is antisemitism as a kind of conspiracy theory that says that we, the majority, are engaged in a grand moral project, and the only thing stopping us are these Jews. We the majority are Christianizing the Roman Empire. The only thing stopping us, these Jews who won't convert. We the majority are bringing about the brotherhood of man, the great communist revolution. The only thing stopping us, these capitalist Jews. We the Germans, are bringing about the great, racially pure Aryan fatherland. The only thing stopping us – these race-polluting Jews. And today in America, you see it on the right and the left. On the right, it's, you know, we white Christian Americans are bringing back white Christian civilization to America. And the only thing stopping us are these Jews who are importing black and brown immigrants to replace white people. That is the extremely racist and antisemitic theory known as the Great Replacement theory. It is an ugly, disgusting lie. On the left you have, you know, we this very moral group of people. we are bringing about the revolution of anti-colonialism, anti-Zionism. And the only thing stopping us are these colonialist Zionists, which is a polite way of saying Jews. And so, you know, I think it's very important to understand, as Yossi Klein Halevi, the journalist, puts it, you know, what you see again and again is whatever is the worst thing in a society, that is what the Jews are deemed to be. Whatever is the worst thing among a particular population, that is what the Jews are deemed to be. And I think we're kind of seeing that on both the right and the left today. Manya Brachear Pashman: If antisemitism defines so much, or has defined so much of Jewish identity, how do we reclaim that? How have you reclaimed that? And how have you found joy in your Jewish identity, especially after doing this book and immersing yourself and all of this extremely depressing perspective? Sarah Hurwitz: I hear this kind of line among many Jews that breaks my heart. It's this sort of self-flagellation, of like, if we just had the right PR campaign, if we just had the right tweet, then we would fight antisemitism. It's our fault, we're doing such a bad job fighting antisemitism. And, you know, I love the ambition there. I think that is so sweet. But there are 16 million of us in the whole world. That's with an M, million, like the size of like, the fifth largest city in China. We are a Chinese city. There are billions of people who don't really love us out there. And the idea that we, this tiny group of people, is going to somehow change the minds of billions of people. I really respect the ambition, but I think that's a tough one. I think it's sort of like trying to bail out a tsunami with buckets. You know, if enough of us do it, I'm sure we can make a difference. And I have such respect for the people who are doing that work. I think it's very important. But I also would just suggest that maybe we should put a little more of our energy into building an ark to weather the storm. And you know, to me, that ark is, engaging deeply with our traditions. It's reclaiming, I think, some of what we lost when we were assimilating and trying to fit in. You know, we have thousands of years of text that have such wisdom about the human condition, about how to be a good person and lead a worthy life and find profound spiritual connection. We have just so many beautiful traditions. And so I think that what we can really do is, we can be Jews. And to be a Jew has always been to be different. That was kind of our value proposition thousands of years ago when we came along and said, hey guys, monotheism. Totally different way of thinking. We said, hey, every human being is created in the image of God, which is an idea that every human being is infinitely worthy. Which, again, this is the idea that underlies things like liberalism, democracy, human rights. These are really Earth-shatteringly different counter cultural ideas, and we have so many more of those that I still think the world needs today. So I think that rather than just being anti-anti-semites, that we can be proud Jews instead, and we can really focus on becoming more learned, more vibrant members of our communities, you know, engaging in more of our traditions and our rituals. I also think, you know, Dara Horn has been doing a lot of great work about educating kids about Jewish civilization. Rather than having young people only know about the Jews via the Holocaust, she really wants to teach young people about Jewish civilization, ideas, and people. I think that is a very, very powerful and very helpful idea. Manya Brachear Pashman: So how are you doing this? How do you spend each week? How do you reclaim some of these traditions and joy? Sarah Hurwitz: For me, it's studying. That's really how I engage, you know, I have various chavrutas or I study Jewish texts. I love reading Jewish books, and I love participating in the Jewish community. You know, I love engaging with various Jewish organizations, you know, serving on various committees, and just trying to be part of this project of reclaiming Judaism, of making it more accessible to more Jews. This is what I love doing, and I'll be starting in January. I'm actually going to be starting a rabbinic program at the Hartman Institute. It's a part time program. And I'm not not planning to be a congregational rabbi, but I do want to keep writing books, and I am really grateful for this opportunity to get a much deeper, more thorough Jewish education than the one I've kind of given to myself, and, you know, kind of cobbled together. I think this is going to be a really extraordinary opportunity. So I'm very excited about that. Manya Brachear Pashman: Oh, wow. Well, congratulations. I look forward to welcoming you back to the podcast and calling you Rabbi. Sarah Hurwitz: Thank you. Manya Brachear Pashman: Thank you so much for joining us, Sarah. Sarah Hurwitz: Such a pleasure. Thank you for having me.

"Since before he was President, he [Trump] has made it clear that this is a priority, and he has instructed his team to work on this issue day in and day out . . . " More than two years after the October 7 massacre, Hamas has agreed to return the 48 hostages still in Gaza under the U.S.-brokered peace deal. Jessica Bernton, AJC's Director of Congressional Affairs, shares details of AJC's joint advocacy with the hostage families of returned hostages—how personal stories, bipartisan meetings with Congress and the White House, and coordinated delegations kept the issue at the forefront. She reflects on the emotional weight of this work, its impact on the U.S. administration, and the ongoing need to press policymakers to ensure that all hostages are safely returned. *The views and opinions expressed by guests do not necessarily reflect the views or position of AJC. Take Action: Elected Leaders: Demand Hamas Release the Hostages Key Resources: AJC's Efforts to Support the Hostages Listen – AJC Podcasts: Architects of Peace The Forgotten Exodus People of the Pod Follow People of the Pod on your favorite podcast app, and learn more at AJC.org/PeopleofthePod You can reach us at: peopleofthepod@ajc.org If you've appreciated this episode, please be sure to tell your friends, and rate and review us on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Transcript of the Interview: Manya Brachear Pashman: More than two years after the October 7 massacre, the Hamas terror group has reportedly agreed at long last, to return the 48 hostages that remain in Gaza. With us now is Jessica Bernton, AJC's director of Congressional Affairs, who has been working with the families of hostages since day one to bring them all home. Jessica, welcome to People of the Pod. Jessica Bernton: Thanks so much, Manya, it's a pleasure to be here. Manya Brachear Pashman: So you must be so relieved. I know you've been so immersed in all of this. When can we celebrate though? Is now too soon? Jessica Bernton: Oh, what a great question. I would say, I have this cautious optimism at the moment. There have been many ups and downs. There have been starts and stops throughout these long months and now two years, but this one does feel different. I would say, you know, this is the most progress we've seen since the spring, and we have to continue to have hope. We also cannot afford to let up the pressure until every single hostage is returned home. And so I would say we cannot exhale until everyone is returned. And once everybody is walking across the border, or the deceased are returned home for burial, that is when we can truly celebrate. Once every single person is returned. Manya Brachear Pashman: You said it feels different? How? How does it feel different? Jessica Bernton: You know, there's been a lot of pressure exerted in recent weeks. I'd say the US administration has stepped up their efforts as well, working with other countries, including partners across the world here. And a deal was signed. And so I think a lot can happen, though, between this announcement and actually, again, when hostages are returned, or when the first phase begins, and both sides need to continue to adhere to each side of the agreement. But this really is the most progress that there has been in some time. Manya Brachear Pashman: As I said in the introduction, you've been working since day one, bringing delegations to Washington to meet with members of Congress, meet with White House staff, including both President Biden and President Trump. What has happened most recently that might have made a difference here? Jessica Bernton: I think the most important thing here is that the families as well as the returned hostages, because we've been so far down in this process that we were advocating for the release of certain hostages, and now those individuals have come to DC and have been traveling across the world to make sure that their voice is heard. And they're speaking up for those that they were held in captivity with, who don't have a voice at the moment. And so it's been really incredible and emotional to have advocated, let's say, for somebody like the return of Keith Siegel or Doron Steinbrecher. And now we have joined them in going to the Hill, into these meetings, advocating for the return of every single hostage, and that's been really incredible. But I think the most important thing here is that these conversations have continued. And keeping this issue at the forefront of everybody's minds. The American public, government officials, foreign officials, community leaders, ensuring that the hostages have not been forgotten has been our top priority here, and ensuring that this remains a foreign policy priority for the US government in particular. And clearly it has paid off, because these hostages have been able to continue to tell their story, and we are where we are today, and hopefully this progress will continue. But it's been really incredible to see this, especially in the past couple months, as those who have been returned or released have now come to Washington, DC as well and are able to do this type of advocacy. Manya Brachear Pashman: You mentioned Keith Siegel, one of the American-Israeli hostages, who was released earlier this year. They've been able to talk about their experiences, former hostages have been able to talk about their experiences in captivity and share that with President Trump in a way that their loved ones who were advocating for their release could not. What have they revealed about their experience that their loved ones could not possibly have known? Jessica Bernton: You know, I think it's one thing to read articles or, you know, hear about what happened to them, and then it's another thing to hear it firsthand. And I think hearing about the brutality and the heartbreak and everything that they suffered, as well as what they've shared publicly about who they were held with and the information that they've been able to also offer to families and hope that they've been able to give to the families who don't know the status of their loved one. Again, it's one thing to read an article and it's another to be sitting in a room listening to these incredibly powerful, emotional, and moving stories. And I think, you know, having them be able to share this has been incredibly important, and I think very impactful. Manya Brachear Pashman: Is there a particular story or experience that stands out in your mind, that perhaps someone shared with you first intimately, before they shared it publicly? One that really stands out. Jessica Bernton: I think I'll share a little bit about Ilana Gritzewsky, because we've hosted her for delegations, and our CEO, Ted Deutch joined with her at a press conference on Capitol Hill on Tuesday, on the second anniversary of the October 7 attacks. And she was also on Capitol Hill earlier this year, testifying at the House Foreign Affairs Committee at a bipartisan round table there. And she was brutally kidnapped alongside her partner, Matan Zangauker, who's still being held captive. And the words that have stuck with me about Ilana, and also sort of you know the story with her partner, Matan, is that she said she cannot heal until everyone has returned home, and the rest of the hostages who have come home also cannot heal until every single person has been returned. And I think that is something that we've heard time and time again, this process, you know, in order for them to grieve, to heal, to process. I don't think there will ever be getting back to a normal life, but as much as they can, it will begin once everybody is returned home. Manya Brachear Pashman: Former hostages, families of hostages have met with President Trump. He's welcomed them into the Oval Office. It seems like President Trump has made this a personal mission of his to get the hostages home. Perhaps that's why we've finally seen success and a deal made. Why do you think that might be the case? What moved the needle finally? Jessica Bernton: Yeah, I mean, I think since before he was President, he has made it clear that this is a priority, and he has instructed his team to work on this issue day in and day out, and to have this access to a president like this is very notable. And we've seen these incredibly powerful images of released hostages, returned hostages, and also family members of those who are still captive meeting in the Oval Office. And one can only assume that this has to be a priority for the President here, he's shown his seriousness. And again, we've now ended up with this current deal, which hopefully can be seen to fruition and can be implemented all the way. But it does seem like this has taken on greater importance as the months have gone on this past year, and it's truly incredible. Manya Brachear Pashman: Any final thoughts, Jessica, as we wait to see the hostages actually return and the various components of this deal come to fruition? Jessica Bernton: Yeah, I think you know, again, going back to this cautious optimism, I saw a video posted online where there's several returned hostages and released hostages, as well as family members who are in town this week, they've been in town for the second anniversary, and have been doing different meetings and events this week in Washington, DC. And they were on the phone with the President last night, you know, expressing their gratitude. And I think again, that's a powerful symbol here. But going back to your initial question, and, is it too early to celebrate? We need to be cautiously optimistic and keep the pressure on, and hopefully we really can be celebrating on Monday, if that's when everyone is returned. But AJC will not stop until everybody, every single hostage, has been returned, and that's when we will truly celebrate here. Manya Brachear Pashman: Thank you so much, Jessica. Really appreciate you joining us, and may we see all of this materialize in the days to come. Jessica Bernton: Absolutely thank you, Manya. Manya Brachear Pashman: Prior to the High Holidays, we brought you five episodes of our limited podcast series, architects of peace, the story of the Abraham accords. Our final episode deals with the challenges presented by the Israel-Hamas war. As we approach a potential end to that war, we are pressing pause on that episode to make sure we include any significant developments. Until then, People of the Pod will resume its regular weekly interviews. Stay tuned for the final episode of Architects of Peace.

Tune into the fourth installment of AJC's latest limited podcast series, Architects of Peace. Go behind the scenes of the decades-long diplomacy and quiet negotiations that made the Abraham Accords possible, bringing Israel, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, and later Morocco, together in historic peace agreements. From cockpits to kitchens to concert halls, the Abraham Accords are inspiring unexpected partnerships. In the fourth episode of AJC's limited series, four "partners of peace" share how these historic agreements are reshaping their lives and work. Hear from El Mehdi Boudra of the Mimouna Association on building people-to-people ties; producer Gili Masami on creating a groundbreaking Israeli–Emirati song; pilot Karim Taissir on flying between Casablanca and Tel Aviv while leading Symphionette, a Moroccan orchestra celebrating Andalusian music; and chef Gal Ben Moshe, the first Israeli chef to ever cook in Dubai on his dream of opening a restaurant in the UAE. *The views and opinions expressed by guests do not necessarily reflect the views or position of AJC. Episode lineup: El Mehdi Boudra (4:00) Gili Masami (11:10) Karim Taissir (16:14) Gal Ben Moshe (21:59) Read the transcript: https://www.ajc.org/news/podcast/partners-of-peace-architects-of-peace-episode-4 Resources: AJC.org/ArchitectsofPeace - Tune in weekly for new episodes. The Abraham Accords, Explained AJC.org/CNME - Find more on AJC's Center for a New Middle East Listen – AJC Podcasts: The Forgotten Exodus People of the Pod Follow Architects of Peace on your favorite podcast app, and learn more at AJC.org/ArchitectsofPeace You can reach us at: podcasts@ajc.org If you've appreciated this episode, please be sure to tell your friends, and rate and review us on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Transcript: El Mehdi Boudra: All the stereotypes started like getting out and people want to meet with the other. They wanted to discover the beauty of the diversity of Israel. And this is unique in the region, where you have Arabs Muslims, Arab Christians, Druze, Beta Yisrael, Ashkenazi, Sephardic Jews, Jews from India, from all over the world. This beauty of diversity in Israel is very unique for our region. Manya Brachear Pashman: In September 2020, the world saw what had been years – decades – in the making: landmark peace agreements dubbed the Abraham Accords – normalizing relations between Israel and two Arabian Gulf states, the United Arab Emirates and the Kingdom of Bahrain. Later, in December, they were joined by the Kingdom of Morocco. Five years later, AJC is pulling back the curtain to meet key individuals who built the trust that led to these breakthroughs and turning the spotlight on some of the results. Introducing: the Architects of Peace. ILTV correspondent: Well, hello, shalom, salaam. For the first time since the historic normalization deal between Israel and the UAE, an Israeli and an Emirati have teamed up to make music. [Ahlan Bik plays] The signs have been everywhere. On stages in Jerusalem and in recording studios in Abu Dhabi. [Camera sounds]. On a catwalk in Tel Aviv during Fashion Week and on the covers of Israeli and Arab magazines. [Kitchen sounds]. In the kitchens of gourmet restaurants where Israeli and Emirati chefs exchanged recipes. Just days after the announcement of the Abraham Accords, Emirati ruler Sheikh Khalifa bin Zayed Al Nahyan formally ended the UAE's nearly 50-year boycott of Israel. Though commerce and cooperation had taken place between the countries under the radar for years, the boycott's official end transformed the fields of water, renewable energy, health, cybersecurity, and tourism. In 2023, Israel and the UAE signed a Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA) to advance economic cooperation, and by 2024, commerce between the UAE and Israel grew to $3.2 billion. Trade between Bahrain and Israel surged 740% in one year. As one of the world's most water-stressed countries, Bahrain's Electrical and Water Authority signed an agreement to acquire water desalination technology from Israel's national water company [Mekorot]. Signs of collaboration between Israeli and Arab artists also began to emerge. It was as if a creative energy had been unlocked and a longing to collaborate finally had the freedom to fly. [Airplane take off sounds]. And by the way, people had the freedom to fly too, as commercial airlines sent jets back and forth between Tel Aviv, Casablanca, Abu Dhabi, and Manama. A gigantic step forward for countries that once did not allow long distance calls to Israel, let alone vacations to the Jewish state. At long last, Israelis, Moroccans, Emiratis, and Bahrainis could finally satisfy their curiosity about one another. This episode features excerpts from four conversations. Not with diplomats or high-level senior officials, but ordinary citizens from the region who have seized opportunities made possible by the Abraham Accords to pursue unprecedented partnerships. For El Medhi Boudra, the Abraham Accords were a dream come true. As a Muslim college student in 2007 at Al Akhawayn University in Ifrane, Morocco, he founded a group dedicated to preserving and teaching the Jewish heritage of his North African home. El Mehdi knew fostering conversations and friendships would be the only way to counter stereotypes and foster a genuine appreciation for all of Morocco's history, including its once-thriving Jewish community of more than 100,000. Five years later, El Mehdi's efforts flourished into a nonprofit called Mimouna, the name of a Moroccan tradition that falls on the day after Passover, when Jewish and Muslim families gather at each other's homes to enjoy cakes and sweets and celebrate the end of the Passover prohibitions. Together. El Mehdi Boudra: Our work started in the campus to fill this gap between the old generation who talk with nostalgia about Moroccan Jews, and the young generation who don't know nothing about Moroccan Judaism. Then, in the beginning, we focused only on the preservation and educating and the promotion of Jewish heritage within campuses in Morocco. In 2011, we decided to organize the first conference on the Holocaust in the Arab world. Manya Brachear Pashman: So did the Abraham Accords make any difference in the work you were already doing? I mean, I know Mimouna was already a longtime partner with AJC. El Mehdi Boudra: With Abraham Accords, we thought bigger. We brought young professionals from Morocco and Israel to work together in certain sectors on challenges that our regions are overcoming. Like environment, climate change, water scarcity and innovation, and bring the best minds that we have in Morocco and in Israel to work together. But we included also other participants from Emirates and Bahrain. This was the first one that we started with. The second was with AJC. We invited also young professionals from United States and France, which was an opportunity to work globally. Because today, we cannot work alone. We need to borrow power from each other. If we have the same vision and the same values, we need to work together. In Morocco, we say: one hand don't clap. We need both hands. And this is the strategy that we have been doing with AJC, to bring all the partners to make sure that we can succeed in this mission. We had another people-to-people initiative. This one is with university students. It's called Youth for MENA. It's with an Israeli organization called Noar. And we try to take advantage of the Abraham Accords to make our work visible, impactful, to make the circle much bigger. Israel is a country that is part of this region. And we can have, Israel can offer good things to our region. It can fight against the challenges that we have in our region. And an Israeli is like an Iraqi. We can work all together and try to build a better future for our region at the end of the day. Manya Brachear Pashman: El Mehdi, when you started this initiative did you encounter pushback from other Moroccans? I mean, I understand the Accords lifted some of the restrictions and opened doors, but did it do anything to change attitudes? Or are there detractors still, to the same degree? El Mehdi Boudra: Before the Abraham Accords, it was more challenging to preserve Moroccan Jewish heritage in Morocco. It was easier. To educate about Holocaust. It was also OK. But to do activities with civil society in Israel, it was very challenging. Because, first of all, there is no embassies or offices between Morocco. Then to travel, there is no direct flights. There is the stereotypes that people have about you going to Israel. With Abraham Accords, we could do that very freely. Everyone was going to Israel, and more than that, there was becoming like a tendency to go to Israel. Moroccans, they started wanting to spend their vacation in Tel Aviv. They were asking us as an organization. We told them, we are not a tour guide, but we can help you. They wanted to travel to discover the country. All the stereotypes started like getting out and people want to meet with other. They wanted to discover the beauty of the diversity of Israel. And this is unique in the region where you have Arab Muslims, Arab Christians, Druze, Beta Israel, Ashkenazi, Sephardic Jews, Jews from India, from all over the world. This beauty of diversity in Israel is very unique for our region. And it's not granted in this modern time, as you can see in the region. You can see what happened in Iraq, what's happening in Syria, for minorities. Then you know, this gave us hope, and we need this hope in these dark times. Manya Brachear Pashman: Hm, what do you mean? How does Israel's diversity provide hope for the rest of the Middle East North Africa (MENA) region? El Mehdi Boudra: Since the MENA region lost its diversity, we lost a lot. It's not the Christians or the Yazidis or the Jews who left the MENA region who are in bad shape. It's the people of the MENA region who are in bad shape because those people, they immigrated to U.S., to Sweden, they have better lives. But who lost is those countries. Then us as the majority Muslims in the region, we should reach out to those minorities. We should work closely today with all countries, including Israel, to build a better future for our region. There is no choice. And we should do it very soon, because nothing is granted in life. And we should take this opportunity of the Abraham Accords as a real opportunity for everyone. It's not an opportunity for Israel or the people who want to have relation with Israel. It's an opportunity for everyone, from Yemen to Morocco. Manya Brachear Pashman: Morocco has had diplomatic relations with Israel in the past, right? Did you worry or do you still worry that the Abraham Accords will fall apart as a result of the Israel Hamas War? El Mehdi Boudra: Yes, yes, to tell you the truth, yes. After the 7th of October and things were going worse and worse. We said, the war will finish and it didn't finish. And I thought that probably with the tensions, the protest, will cut again the relations. But Morocco didn't cut those relations. Morocco strengthened those relations with Israel, and also spoke about the Palestinians' cause in the same time. Which I'm really proud of my government's decisions to not cut those relations, and we hope to strengthen those relations, because now they are not going in a fast dynamic. We want to go back to the first time when things were going very fastly. When United States signed with the Emirates and Bahrain in September 2020, I was hoping that Morocco will be the first, because Morocco had strong relations with Israel. We had direct relations in the 90s and we cut those relations after the Second Intifada in 2000. We lost those 21 years. But it's not [too] late now. We are working. The 7th of October happened. Morocco is still having relations with Israel. We are still having the Moroccan government and the Israeli government having strong relations together. Of course, initiatives to people-to-people are less active because of the war. But you know, the war will finish very soon, we hope, and the hostages will go back to their homes, Inshallah, and we will get back to our lives. And this is the time for us as civil society to do stronger work and to make sure that we didn't lose those two years. [Ahlan Bik plays] Manya Brachear Pashman: Just weeks after the White House signing ceremony on September 15, 2020, Israeli music producer Gili Masami posted a music video on YouTube. The video featured a duet between a former winner of Israel's version of The Voice, Elkana Marziano, and Emirati singer Walid Aljasim. The song's title? Ahlan Bik, an Arabic greeting translated as "Hello, Friend." In under three weeks, the video had garnered more than 1.1 million views. Gili Masami: When I saw Bibi Netanyahu and Trump sign this contract, the Abraham Accords, I said, 'Wow!' Because always my dream was to fly to Dubai. And when I saw this, I said, 'Oh, this is the time to make some project that I already know how to do.' So I thought to make the first historic collaboration between an Israeli singer and an Emirati singer. We find this production company, and they say, OK. We did this historic collaboration. And the first thing it was that I invite the Emirati people to Israel. They came here. I take them to visit Jerusalem, Tel Aviv, and then I get a call to meet in Gitix Technology Week in the World Trade Center in Dubai. Manya Brachear Pashman: Gitix. That's the Gulf Information Technology Exhibition, one of the world's largest annual tech summits, which met in Dubai that year and invited an Israeli delegation for the first time. Gili Masami: They tell me. 'Listen, your song, it was big in 200 countries, cover worldwide. We want you to make this show.' I said, OK. We came to Dubai, and then we understand that the production company is the family of Mohammed bin Zayed al Nayhan, the president of UAE. And now we understand why they agree. The brother of Muhammad bin Zayed Al Nahyan, Sheik Issa Ben Zahid Al Nahyan, he had this production company. This singer, it's his singer. And we say, 'Wow, we get to this so high level, with the government of Dubai.' And then all the doors opened in Dubai. And then it was the Corona. 200 countries around the world cover this story but we can't do shows because this Corona issue, but we still did it first. Manya Brachear Pashman: The song Ahlan Bik translates to "Hello, Friend." It was written by Israeli songwriter Doron Medalie. Can you tell our listeners what it's about? Gili Masami: The song Ahlan Bik, it's this song speak about Ibrihim. Because if we go to the Bible, they are cousins. They are cousins. And you know, because of that, we call this Abraham Accords, because of Avraham. And they are sons of Ishmael. Yishmael. And we are sons of Jacob. So because of that, we are from back in the days. And this is the real cousins. Saudi Arabia, UAE, Morocco. They are the real ones. And this song speak about this connection. Manya Brachear Pashman: After Morocco joined the Abraham Accords, you also put together a collaboration between Elkana and Moroccan singer Sanaa Mohamed. But your connection to UAE continued. You actually moved to Dubai for a year and opened a production company there. I know you're back in Israel now, but have you kept in touch with people there? Gili Masami: I have a lot of friends in UAE. A lot of friends. I have a production company in UAE too. But every time we have these problems with this war, so we can do nothing. I was taking a lot of groups to Dubai, making tours, parties, shows, and all this stuff, because this war. So we're still friends. Manya Brachear Pashman: Given this war, do you ever go back and listen to the song Ahlan Bik for inspiration, for hope? Gili Masami: I don't look about the thinking that way. These things. I know what I did, and this is enough for me. I did history. This is enough for me. I did [a] good thing. This is enough for me. I did the first collaboration, and this is enough for me. Manya Brachear Pashman: Moroccan pilot and music aficionado Karim Taissir also knows the power of music. In 2016, he reached out to Tom Cohen, the founder and conductor of the Jerusalem Orchestra East & West and invited him to Morocco to conduct Symphonyat, an orchestra of 40 musicians from around the world playing Jewish and Arab music from Morocco's past that often has been neglected. Karim Taissir: In 2015 I contacted Tom via Facebook because of a story happening in Vietnam. I was in a bar. And this bar, the owner, tried to connect with people. And the concept was a YouTube session connected on the speaker of the bar, and they asked people to put some music on from their countries. So when he asked me, I put something played by Tom [Cohen], it was Moroccan music played by the orchestra of Tom. And people said, 'Wow.' And I felt the impact of the music, in terms of even, like the ambassador role. So that gave me the idea. Back in Morocco, I contacted him. I told him, 'Listen, you are doing great music, especially when it comes to Moroccan music, but I want to do it in Morocco. So are you ready to collaborate? And you should tell me, what do you need to create an orchestra that do this, this excellency of music?' And I don't know why he replied to my message, because, usually he got lots of message from people all over the world, but it was like that. So from that time, I start to look of musician, of all conditions, asked by Tom, and in 2016 in April, we did one week of rehearsals. This was a residence of musician in Casablanca by Royal Foundation Hiba. And this is how it starts. And from that time, we tried every year to organize concerts. Sometimes we succeed, and sometimes not. Manya Brachear Pashman: I asked this of El Mehdi too, since you were already doing this kind of bridge building Karim, did the Abraham Accords change anything for you? Karim Taissir: In '22 we did the great collaboration. It was a fusion between the two orchestras, under the conductor Tom Cohen in Timna desert [National Park], with the presence of many famous people, politician, and was around like more than 4,000 people, and the President Herzog himself was was there, and we had a little chat for that. And even the program, it was about peace, since there was Moroccan music, Israeli music, Egyptian music, Greek music, Turkish music. And this was very nice, 18 musicians on the stage. Manya Brachear Pashman: Oh, wow. 18 musicians. You know, the number 18, of course, is very significant, meaningful for the Jewish tradition. So, this was a combination of Israeli musicians, Moroccan musicians, playing music from across the region. Turkey, Greece, Egypt, Israel. What did that mean for you? In other words, what was the symbolism of that collaboration and of that choice of music? Karim Taissir: Listen, to be honest, it wasn't a surprise for me, the success of collaboration, since there was excellent artists from Israel and from Morocco. But more than that, the fact that Moroccan Muslims and other people with Israeli musicians, they work together every concert, rehearsals. They became friends, and maybe it was the first time for some musicians, especially in Morocco. I'm not talking only about peace, happiness, between people. It's very easy in our case, because it's people to people. Manya Brachear Pashman: How have those friendships held up under the strain of the Israel-Hamas War? Karim Taissir: Since 7th October, me, for example, I'm still in touch with all musicians from Israel, not only musicians, all my friends from Israel to support. To support them, to ask if they are OK. And they appreciate, I guess, because I guess some of them feel even before they have friends from all over the world. But suddenly it's not the case for us, it's more than friendships, and if I don't care about them, which means it's not true friendships. And especially Tom. Tom is more than more than a brother. And we are looking forward very soon to perform in Israel, in Morocco, very soon. Manya Brachear Pashman: So I should clarify for listeners that Symphonyat is not your full-time job. Professionally you are a pilot for Royal Air Maroc. And a week after that concert in Timna National Park in March 2022, Royal Air Maroc launched direct flights between Casablanca and Tel Aviv. Those flights have been suspended during the war, but did you get to fly that route? Karim Taissir: They call me the Israeli guy since I like very much to be there. Because I was kind of ambassador since I was there before, I'm trying always to explain people, when you will be there, you will discover other things. Before 7th of October, I did many, many, many flights as captain, and now we're waiting, not only me, all my colleagues. Because really, really–me, I've been in Israel since 2016–but all my colleagues, the first time, it was during those flights. And all of them had a really nice time. Not only by the beauty of the Tel Aviv city, but also they discover Israeli people. So we had really, really, very nice memories from that period, and hoping that very soon we will launch flight. Manya Brachear Pashman: Chef Gal Ben Moshe, the first Israeli chef to earn a Michelin Star for his restaurant in Berlin, remembers the day he got the call to speak at Gulfood 2021, a world food festival in Abu Dhabi. That call led to another call, then another, and then another. Before he knew it, Chef Gal's three-day trip to the United Arab Emirates had blossomed into a 10-day series: of master classes, panel discussions, catered dinners, and an opportunity to open a restaurant in Dubai. Gal Ben Moshe: Like I said, it wasn't just one dinner, it wasn't just a visit. It's basically from February '21 to October '23 I think I've been more than six, eight times, in the Emirates. Like almost regularly cooking dinners, doing events, doing conferences. And I cooked in the Dubai Expo when it was there. I did the opening event of the Dubai Expo. And a lot of the things that I did there, again, I love the place. I love the people. I got connected to a lot of people that I really, truly miss. Manya Brachear Pashman: When we first connected, you told me that the Abraham Accords was one of your favorite topics. Why? Gal Ben Moshe: I always felt kind of like, connected to it, because I was the first Israeli chef to ever cook in Dubai. And one of the most influential times of my life, basically going there and being there throughout basically everything from the Abraham Accords up to October 7. To a degree that I was supposed to open a restaurant there on the first of November 2023 which, as you probably know, did not happen in the end. And I love this place. And I love the idea of the Abraham Accords, and I've had a lot of beautiful moments there, and I've met a lot of amazing people there. And, in a way, talking about it is kind of me missing my friends less. Manya Brachear Pashman: So you were originally invited to speak at Gulfood. What topics did you cover and what was the reception like? Gal Ben Moshe: The journalist that interviewed me, he was a great guy, asked me, 'OK, so, like, where do you want to cook next?' And I said, 'If you would ask me six months ago, I would say that I would love to cook in Dubai, but it's not possible.' So having this happened, like, anything can happen, right? Like, if you would tell me in June 2020 that I would be cooking in Dubai in February 2021, I'm not sure I was going to believe you. It was very secretive, very fast, very surprising. And I said, 'Yeah, you know, I would love to cook in Damascus and Beirut, because it's two places that are basically very influential in the culture of what is the Pan-Arabic kitchen of the Levant. So a lot of the food influence, major culinary influence, comes from basically Aleppo, Damascus and Beirut. Basically, this area is the strongest influence on food. A lot of Jordanians are probably going to be insulted by me saying this, but this is very this is like culinary Mecca, in my opinion.' And I said it, and somebody from the audience shouted: 'I'm from Beirut! You can stay at my place!' And I was like, it's just amazing. And the funny thing is, and I always talk about it is, you know, I talk about my vegetable suppliers in Berlin and everything in the Syrian chefs and Palestinian chefs and Lebanese chefs that I met in the Emirates that became friends of mine. And I really have this thing as like, I'm gonna say it is that we have so much in common. It's crazy how much we have in common. You know, we have this war for the past two years with basically everyone around us. But I think that when we take this thing out of context, out of the politics, out of the region, out of this border dispute or religious dispute, or whatever it is, and we meet each other in different country. We have so much in common, and sometimes, I dare say, more than we have in common with ourselves as an Israeli society. And it's crazy how easy it is for me to strike a conversation and get friendly with the Lebanese or with a Palestinian or with the Syrian if I meet them in Berlin or in Dubai or in New York or in London. Manya Brachear Pashman: I should clarify, you run restaurants in Tel Aviv, but the restaurant that earned a Michelin star in 2020 and held on to it for four years, was Prism in Berlin. Tel Aviv was going to be added to the Michelin Guide in December 2023, but that was put on hold after the start of the Israel-Hamas War. Did your time in the Emirates inspire recipes that perhaps landed on your menu at Prism? Gal Ben Moshe: I was approached by a local journalist that wrote cookbooks and he did a special edition cookbook for 50 years for the Emirates. And he wanted me to contribute a recipe. And I did a dish that ended up being a Prism signature dish for a while, of Camel tartar with caviar, quail yolk, grilled onion, and it was served in this buckwheat tortelet. And at the time, it's a concept dish. So basically, the story is this whole story of Dubai. So you have the camel and the caviar, so between the desert and the sea. And then you have the camel, which basically is the nomadic background of Dubai, with the Bedouin culture and everything, and the caviar, which is this luxurious, futuristic–what Dubai is today. And it was really a dish about the Emirates. And I was invited to cook it afterwards in a state dinner, like with very high-end hotel with very high-end guests. And basically the chef of the hotel, who's a great guy, is like, sending, writing me an email, like, I'm not going to serve camel. I'm not going to serve camel in this meal. And I was like, but it's the whole story. It's the whole thing. He's like, but what's wrong with Wagyu beef? It's like, we're in Dubai. Wagyu beef is very Dubai. And I was like, not in the way that the camel is in that story. Listen, for a chef working there, it's a playground, it's heaven. People there are super curious about food. They're open-minded. And there's great food there. There's a great food scene there, great chefs working there. I think some of the best restaurants in the world are right now there, and it was amazing. Manya Brachear Pashman: There have been other Israeli chefs who opened their restaurants in Dubai before October 7. I know Chef Eyal Shani opened with North Miznon in a Hilton hotel in Dubai. You recently closed Prism, which really was a mom and pop place in Berlin, and you've now opened a hotel restaurant in Prague. Would you still consider opening a kitchen in Dubai? Gal Ben Moshe: I have not given up on the Emirates in any way. Like I've said, I love it there. I love the people there. I love the atmosphere there. I love the idea of being there. I would say that there is complexities, and I understand much better now, in hindsight of these two years. Of why, basically, October 7 meant that much. I live in Berlin for 13 years, and I work with my vegetable suppliers for the past, I would say nine or eight years. They're Palestinians and Syrians and Lebanese and everything. And even though October 7 happened and everything that's happened afterwards, we're still very close, and I would still define our relationship as very friendly and very positive. The one thing is that, I don't know, but I think it's because we know each other from before. And I don't know if they would have taken the business of an Israeli chef after October 7. So having known me and that I'm not a symbol for them, but I am an individual. For them it is easier because we're friends, like we worked together, let's say for five years before October 7. It's not going to change our relationship just because October 7 happened. But I think what I do understand is that sometimes our place in the world is different when it comes to becoming symbols. And there are people who don't know me and don't know who I am or what my opinions are, how I view the world, and then I become just a symbol of being an Israeli chef. And then it's you are this, and nothing you can say at that moment changes it. So I don't think that me opening a restaurant in Dubai before October 7 was a problem. I do understand that an Israeli chef opening a restaurant in Dubai after October 7 was not necessarily a good thing. I can understand how it's perceived as, in the symbolism kind of way, not a good thing. So I think basically, when this war is over, I think that the friendship is there. I think the connection is there. I think the mutual respect and admiration is there. And I think that there is no reason that it can't grow even further. Manya Brachear Pashman: In our next episode, expected to air after the High Holidays, we discuss how the Abraham Accords have held during one of Israel's most challenging times and posit which Arab countries might be next to join the historic pact. Atara Lakritz is our producer. T.K. Broderick is our sound engineer. Special thanks to Jason Isaacson, Sean Savage, and the entire AJC team for making this series possible. You can subscribe to Architects of Peace on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you listen to podcasts, and you can learn more at AJC.org/ArchitectsofPeace. The views and opinions of our guests don't necessarily reflect the positions of AJC. You can reach us at podcasts@ajc.org. If you've enjoyed this episode, please be sure to spread the word, and hop onto Apple Podcasts or Spotify to rate us and write a review to help more listeners find us. Music Credits: Middle East : ID: 279780040; Composer: Eric Sutherland אלקנה מרציאנו & Waleed Aljasim - אהלן ביכ | Elkana Marziano AHALAN bik أهلاً بيك Moroccan Suite: Item ID: 125557642; Composer: umberto sangiovanni Medley Ana Glibi Biddi Kwitou / Ma Nebra - Symphonyat with Sanaa Marahati - Casablanca - 2022 Middle East: Item ID: 297982529; Composer: Aditya Mystical Middle East: ID: 212471911; Composer: Vicher

Tune into the second episode of AJC's newest limited podcast series, Architects of Peace. Go behind the scenes of the decades-long diplomacy and quiet negotiations that made the Abraham Accords possible, bringing Israel, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, and later Morocco, together in historic peace agreements. Former U.S. Ambassador to Israel David Friedman, U.S. Army General Miguel Correa, and AJC Chief Policy and Political Affairs Officer Jason Isaacson unpack the first Trump administration's Middle East strategy, share behind-the-scenes efforts to engage key regional players, and reveal what unfolded inside the White House in the crucial weeks before the Abraham Accords signing. Full transcript: https://www.ajc.org/news/podcast/behind-the-breakthrough-architects-of-peace-episode-2 Resources: AJC.org/ArchitectsofPeace - Tune in weekly for new episodes. AJC.org/AbrahamAccords - The Abraham Accords, Explained AJC.org/CNME - Find more on AJC's Center for a New Middle East Listen – AJC Podcasts: AJC.org/ForgottenExodus AJC.org/PeopleofthePod Follow Architects of Peace on your favorite podcast app, and learn more at AJC.org/ArchitectsofPeace You can reach us at: podcasts@ajc.org If you've appreciated this episode, please be sure to tell your friends, and rate and review us on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Transcript: Donald Trump: I think we're going to make a deal. It might be a bigger and better deal than people in this room even understand. Manya Brachear Pashman: In September 2020, the world saw what had been years – decades – in the making: landmark peace agreements dubbed the Abraham Accords -- normalizing relations between Israel and two Arabian Gulf states, the United Arab Emirates and the Kingdom of Bahrain. Later, in December, they were joined by the Kingdom of Morocco. Five years later, AJC is pulling back the curtain to meet key individuals who built the trust that led to these breakthroughs. Introducing: the Architects of Peace. Shortly after he was elected in 2016 and before he took office, President Donald Trump nominated his company's former bankruptcy attorney David Friedman to serve as U.S. Ambassador to Israel. He gave Friedman two simple tasks. Task No. 1? Build peace across the Middle East by normalizing relations between Israel and its Arab neighbors. Task No. 2? Solve the Israeli Palestinian conflict that a half dozen previous White House residents had failed to fix. After all, according to conventional wisdom, the first task could not happen before the second. The future of cooperation between Israel and 20-plus other Arab countries hinged on peace between the Israelis and Palestinians. Here's former Secretary of State John Kerry. John Kerry: There will be no advance and separate peace with the Arab world without the Palestinian process and Palestinian peace. Everybody needs to understand that. Manya Brachear Pashman: Ambassador Friedman disagreed with this conventional wisdom. David Friedman: We were told initially by most countries that the road to peace began with the Palestinians. This was a hypothesis that I rejected internally, but I thought: 'OK, well, let's just play this out and see where this can go. And so, we spent a couple of years really working on what could be a plan that would work for Israel and the Palestinians. The Palestinians, you know, rejected discussions early on, but we had a lot of discussions with the Israelis. Manya Brachear Pashman: The son of a rabbi who grew up in Long Island, Ambassador Friedman had been active in pro-Israel organizations for decades, He had advised Trump on the importance of the U.S.-Israel bond during the 2016 presidential election and recommended nothing less than a radical overhaul of White House policy in the region. Not long after his Senate confirmation as ambassador, that overhaul commenced. In February 2017, President Trump invited Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to the White House – his first invitation to a foreign leader — and a symbolic one. After their meeting, they held a joint press conference. Donald Trump: With this visit, the United States again reaffirms our unbreakable bond with our cherished ally Israel. The partnership between our two countries, built on our shared values. I think we're going to make a deal. It might be a bigger and better deal than people in this room even understand. That's a possibility. So, let's see what we do. He doesn't sound too optimistic. But he's a good negotiator. Benjamin Netanyahu: That's the art of the deal. Manya Brachear Pashman: Nine months later, President Trump made another symbolic gesture -- recognizing Jerusalem as Israel's capital city and moving the American embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. Though such a move had been approved by Congress in 1995, no president had ever acted upon it. When Trump's son-in-law, businessman, and senior White House advisor Jared Kushner opened conversations about that 'bigger and better deal,' Palestinians refused to participate, using the pretext of the Jerusalem decision to boycott the Trump administration. But that didn't stop Ambassador Friedman and others from engaging, not only with Israel, but with Arab countries about a new path forward. AJC's Chief Policy and Political Affairs Officer Jason Isaacson, who has been building bridges in the region since the early '90s, recalls this strategy at the time. Jason Isaacson: It was very clear for many months, 2019 on into early 2020, that there was a team working under Jared Kushner in the White House that was going from country to country in the Gulf and North Africa, looking to make a deal, looking to make deals that would lead to normalization with Israel, would involve various benefits that the United States would be able to provide. But of course, the big benefit would be regional integration and a closer relationship with the United States. Manya Brachear Pashman: The pitch for a new path forward resonated in the United Arab Emirates, a Gulf country of 10 million residents, some 11% of whom are Emiratis — the rest expats and migrants from around the world. The UAE had designated 2019 the Year of Tolerance, an initiative aimed at promoting the country as a global capital for tolerance and respect between diverse cultures and nationalities. That year, the Emirates hosted a historic visit from Pope Francis, and 27 Israeli athletes competed in the 2019 Special Olympics World Games held in the capital city of Abu Dhabi. The pitch also resonated in Bahrain. In June of that year, during a two-day workshop in Bahrain's capital city of Manama, the Trump administration began rolling out the results of its Middle East tour – the economic portion of its peace plan, titled "Peace to Prosperity." Jason Isaacson: The White House plan for Peace to Prosperity was a kind of an early set of ideas for Israeli Palestinian resolution that would result in a small, but functional Palestinian state, created in a way that would not require the displacement of Israelis in the West Bank, and that would involve large scale investment, mostly provided by other countries, mostly in the Gulf, but not only, also Europe, to advance the Palestinian economy, to integrate the Palestinian and Israelis' economies in a way that had never happened. And there was discussion that was taking place that all led up to the idea of a very fresh approach, a very new approach to the regional conflict. Manya Brachear Pashman: The 38-page prospectus set ambitious goals — turning the West Bank and Gaza into tourism destinations, doubling the amount of drinkable water there, tripling exports, earmarking $900 million to build hospitals and clinics. The Palestinians, angered by Trump's recognition of Jerusalem and viewing the Manama workshop as an attempt to normalize Arab-Israel ties while sidelining their national rights, boycotted the meeting and rejected the plan before ever seeing its details. But the workshop's host Bahrain, as well as Egypt, Jordan, Morocco, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the Emirates participated, to varying degrees. Trump's team rolled out the rest of the plan in January 2020, including a map of land carved out for Palestinians and for Israel. The plan enabled Palestinians and Arab countries to expand economic opportunities. It enabled Israel to demonstrate that it was open to cooperation. It enabled the Trump administration to illustrate the opportunities missed if countries in the region continued to let Palestinian leadership call the shots. David Friedman: The expectation was not that the Palestinians would jump all over it. We were realistic about the possibility, but we did think it was important to show that Israel itself, under some circumstances, was willing to engage with the Palestinians with regard to a formula for peace that, you know, had an economic component, a geographic component, a governance component. Manya Brachear Pashman: The Palestine Liberation Organization accused the United States of trying to sell a "mirage of economic prosperity." Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh criticized the Arab leaders attending the al-Manama conference, saying "The (Palestinian) people, who have been fighting for 100 years, did not commission anyone to concede or to bargain." But that's the thing. Arab leaders weren't there solely on behalf of the Palestinians. They wanted to learn how their own countries' citizens could enjoy peace and prosperity too. David Friedman: The real point of all this that got the Abraham Accords jump started was not the fact that the Palestinians embraced this, but more so that they rejected it in such a way that enabled these other countries to say: 'Look, guys, you know what? We can't be more pro-Palestinian than you.' Here you have, you know, the U.S. government putting on a table a proposal that gets you more than halfway there in terms of your stated goals and aspirations. Maybe you don't like all of it, that's fine, but you're never going to get everything you wanted anyway. And here's the first government in history that's willing to give you something tangible to talk about, and if you're not going to engage in something that they spent years working on, talking to everybody, trying to thread the needle as best they could. If you're not willing to talk to them about it, then don't ask us to fight your fight. There's only so far we can go. But we thought that putting this plan out on a table publicly would kind of smoke out a lot of positions that had historically been below the surface. And so, beginning right after the 28th of January of 2020 when we had that ceremony with the President's vision for peace, we began to really get serious engagement. Not from the Palestinians, who rejected it immediately, but from the countries in the region. And so that's how the Abraham Accords discussions really began in earnest. Manya Brachear Pashman: AJC had been saying for years that if Arab leaders truly wanted to foster stability in the region and help the Palestinians, engaging with Israel and opening channels of communication would give them the leverage to do so. Isolating Israel was not the answer. Nothing underscored that more than the COVID-19 pandemic, the worst global health crisis in a century. As everyone around the world donned N95 masks and went into self-imposed isolation, some governments in the Middle East concluded that isolating innovative countries like Israel was perhaps not the wisest or safest choice. In May 2020, UAE Ambassador to the United Nations Lana Nusseibeh said as much during a virtual webinar hosted by AJC. Lana Nusseibeh: Of course, we've had Israeli medics participate in previous events in the UAE, that wouldn't be unusual. And I'm sure there's a lot of scope for collaboration. I don't think we would be opposed to it. Because I really think this public health space should be an unpoliticized space where we all try and pool our collective knowledge of this virus. Manya Brachear Pashman: A month later, UAE Minister of State for Foreign Affairs Dr. Anwar Gargash echoed that sentiment, during AJC Global Forum. Anwar Gargash: I think we can come to a point where we come to a given Israeli government and we say we disagree with you on this, we don't think it's a good idea. But at the same time there are areas, such as COVID, technology, and other things that we can actually work on together. Manya Brachear Pashman: Not surprisingly, the UAE was the first Arab country to begin negotiating with the White House to normalize relations with Israel. However, talks that summer hit a stalemate. Israel was moving forward with a plan to annex a significant portion of the West Bank, including Israeli settlements and the Jordan Valley. Even though President Trump himself had cautioned Prime Minister Netanyahu to hold off, Ambassador Friedman was not about to stop them. David Friedman: I thought that the idea of Israel walking away from its biblical heartland. Anything that required Israel to make that commitment was something I couldn't support. I was so dead set against it. Israel cannot, as a price for normalization, as great as it is, as important as it is, Israel cannot agree to cede its biblical heartland. Manya Brachear Pashman: Not only was this personal for Ambassador Friedman, it was also a major incentive for Israel, included in the Peace to Prosperity plan. The ambassador didn't want to go back on his word and lose Israel's trust. But annexation was a dealbreaker for the Emirates. In June, UAE's Ambassador to the U.S. Yousef Al Otaiba wrote a column speaking directly to the Israeli public. He explained that the UAE wanted diplomatic relations with Israel – it really did – but unilateral annexation of land that it considered still in dispute would be viewed as a breach of trust and undermine any and all progress toward normalization. David Friedman: It was a kind of a tumultuous period, both internally within our own team and with others, about what exactly was going to happen as a result of that Peace to Prosperity Plan. And even if there was an agreement by the United States to support Israeli annexation, was this something that was better, at least in the short term? Manya Brachear Pashman: Otaiba's message got through, and the team ultimately agreed to suspend the annexation plan — not halt, but suspend — an intentionally temporary verb. In addition to writing the column, Otaiba also recommended that a friend join the negotiations to help repair the trust deficit: General Miguel Correa, a U.S. Army General who had spent part of his childhood in the Middle East, served in the Persian Gulf War and as a peacekeeper maintaining the treaty between Israel and Egypt. General Correa had joined the National Security Council in March 2020 after serving as a defense attaché in Abu Dhabi. He had earned the respect of Emiratis, not as a dealmaker so much as a lifesaver, once orchestrating a secret rescue mission of wounded Emirati troops from inside Yemen. Among those troops, the nephew and son-in-law of Crown Prince Mohamed bin Zayed, the then-de facto ruler and now the current president of the UAE. Kushner and Friedman had never met Correa. Miguel Correa: I didn't know them, and they didn't know me. No one else had any military experience on the team. I had a unique perspective of the Arab side of the equation. And had relationships. So, it was a match made in heaven. Jared, David Friedman, these guys obviously understood Israeli politics and understood the Israeli side, and somewhat Jewish American side. I could provide a different dynamic or a different view from the Arab side, as someone who's kind of grown up with this. It really got serious when the team came together and, and we could start working on real, concrete things. Manya Brachear Pashman: Months of negotiations had already unfolded. It was already late July, first of August, when General Correa became the last person to join the tiny circle of a half dozen negotiators – kept intentionally small to keep a lid on the conversations. It's hard to keep a secret in Washington. David Friedman: The secrecy here was very, very important, because to be honest with you, I think anything bigger than that group of six or seven, we would have put it in jeopardy. Manya Brachear Pashman: In this situation, leaks not only threatened the deal, they could threaten lives. Though word trickled out that a deal was in the works, no one guessed just how transformational the result might be. In General Correa's opinion, the UAE had the most to lose. Miguel Correa: That was the concern that, frankly, guys like me had, that, I hurt a nation of good people that is incredibly tolerant, that builds synagogues and churches and Sikh temples, or Hindu temples, and tolerance 101, that everybody can pray to who they would like to pray to. And I was worried that all these extremists were going to come out of the woodwork and hurt that trajectory in the UAE, that was going to be a great nation with or without the normalization. But this ruler said: 'No, no, it's the right thing to do. Peace is the right thing to do.' Manya Brachear Pashman: General Correa actually had quite a few concerns. He didn't want the negotiations to be hijacked for political gain. He wanted leaders to have a security and public relations response in place before anything was announced. And the agreement? It lacked a name. Miguel Correa: A lot of it has to do with my military side. We love to name cool task forces, and things like that. And then I felt like: 'Hey, it has to be something that rolls off the tongue, that makes sense and that will help it, you know, with staying power. Let's do something that ties the people together. There was going to be a shock, a tectonic shock that was going to occur. From 1948, we're going to do a complete 180, and wow. So what do we do to take the wind away from the extremists? As a guy who's fought extremism, militant extremism, for most of his military career, I figured, hey, we've got to do what we can to frame this in a super positive manner. Manya Brachear Pashman: To the general's dismay, no one else shared his concern about what to call their project. A lot was happening in those last few weeks. Landing on a name – not a priority. On the morning of August 13, once all the details were hammered out, the team sat in the Oval Office waiting to brief the President before it was announced to the world. David Friedman: It came about 10 minutes before the end, we were all sitting around the Oval Office, waiting for this announcement about the UAE. And somebody, not me, said: 'Well, we need a name for this,' and I said, why? And they said, 'Well, you know, you have the Oslo Accords, you have the Camp David Accords. You need a name.' And I said, you know, Who's got an idea? And General Miguel Correa, he said: 'How about the Abraham Accords?' And I said: 'That's a great name.' And then we had a rush to call the Israelis and the Emiratis to make sure they were OK with it. Five minutes later we're broadcasting to a few hundred million people this groundbreaking announcement. And the President looks at me and says, 'David, explain why you chose the Abraham Accords?' So that was when we explained what the name was, which I hadn't really thought of until that point. We just thought it was a good name. So at that point I said, 'Well, you know, Abraham was the father of three great religions. He's referred to as Abraham in English, and Ibrahim in Arabic, and Avraham in Hebrew. And no single individual better exemplifies the opportunity and the benefits of unity among all peoples than Abraham.' And that was sort of on the fly how we got to the Abraham Accords. Manya Brachear Pashman: General Correa said he chose a name that would remind people of all faiths that what they have in common far outweighs what separates them. It was also important that the name be plural. Not the Abraham Accord. The Abraham Accords. Even if only one country – the UAE – was signing on at that moment, there would be more to come. Indeed, Bahrain came on board within a month. Morocco joined in December. Miguel Correa: I felt in my heart that this has to be more than one. As a guy that's been affected by this extremism and it allowed this, this craziness and that people decide who can get to know who and and I felt like, No, we can't allow this to be a one-shot deal. We have to prove that this is an avalanche. This could be sustained, and this is the way it should be. Everyone has to come into this one way or another. And it's not, by the way, saying that, hey, we're all going to walk lockstep with Israel. That's not the point. The point is that you have a conversation, the leaders can pick up the phone and have that conversation. So it has to be, has to be plural. By the way, this is the way that it was. This isn't new. This isn't like a crazy new concept. This is the way it was. It's not an introduction of Jews in this region, in society. This is a reintroduction. This is the way it's supposed to be. This is what's happened for thousands of years. So why are we allowing people to take us back, you know, thousands of years? Let's go back to the way things should be, and develop these relationships. It makes us all better. Manya Brachear Pashman: Next episode, we step out from behind the scenes and on to the South Lawn of the White House where leaders from the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Israel and the U.S. signed the Abraham Accords, while the world watched in awe. Atara Lakritz is our producer. T.K. Broderick is our sound engineer. Special thanks to Jason Isaacson, Sean Savage, and the entire AJC team for making this series possible. You can subscribe to Architects of Peace on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you listen to podcasts, and you can learn more at AJC.org/ArchitectsofPeace. The views and opinions of our guests don't necessarily reflect the positions of AJC. You can reach us at podcasts@ajc.org. If you've enjoyed this episode, please be sure to spread the word, and hop onto Apple Podcasts or Spotify to rate us and write a review to help more listeners find us. Music Credits: Middle East : ID: 279780040; Composer: Eric Sutherland Frontiers: ID: 183925100; Publisher: Pond5 Publishing Beta (BMI); Composer: Pete Checkley (BMI) Meditative: ID: 115666358; Composer: DANIELYAN ASHOT MAKICHEVICH (IPI NAME #00855552512), UNITED STATES BMI Arabian: Item ID: 214336423; Composer: MusicForVideos Arabian Strings: ID: 72249988; Publisher: EITAN EPSTEIN; Composer: EITAN EPSTEIN Desert: Item ID: 220137401; Publisher: BFCMUSIC PROD.; Composer: Andrei Marchanka Middle East Violin: ID: 277189507; Composer: Andy Warner Arabic Ambient: ID: 186923328; Publisher: Victor Romanov; Composer: Victor Romanov Oriental: Item ID: 190860465; Publisher: Victor Romanov; Composer: Victor Romanov Mystical Middle East: ID: 212471911; Composer: Vicher

"Our duty as Jewish youth is paving the way for ourselves. Sometimes we may feel alone . . . But the most important thing is for us as youth to pave the way for ourselves, to take action, to speak out. Even if it's hard or difficult." As American Jewish college students head back to their campuses this fall, we talk to three leaders on AJC's Campus Global Board about how antisemitism before and after the October 7 Hamas terror attacks revealed their resilience and ignited the activist inside each of them. Jonathan Iadarola shares how a traumatic anti-Israel incident at University of Adelaide in Australia led him to secure a safe space on campus for Jewish students to convene. Ivan Stern recalls launching the Argentinian Union of Jewish Students after October 7, and Lauren Eckstein shares how instead of withdrawing from her California college and returning home to Arizona, she transferred to Washington University in St. Louis where she found opportunities she never dreamed existed and a supportive Jewish community miles from home. *The views and opinions expressed by guests do not necessarily reflect the views or position of AJC. Key Resources: AJC Campus Global Board Trusted Back to School Resources from AJC AJC's 10-Step Guide for Parents Supporting Jewish K-12 Students AJC's Center for Education Advocacy Listen – AJC Podcasts: The Forgotten Exodus: Untold stories of Jews who left or were driven from Arab nations and Iran People of the Pod: Latest Episodes: War and Poetry: Owen Lewis on Being a Jewish Poet in a Time of Crisis An Orange Tie and A Grieving Crowd: Comedian Yohay Sponder on Jewish Resilience From Broadway to Jewish Advocacy: Jonah Platt on Identity, Antisemitism, and Israel Follow People of the Pod on your favorite podcast app, and learn more at AJC.org/PeopleofthePod You can reach us at: peopleofthepod@ajc.org If you've appreciated this episode, please be sure to tell your friends, and rate and review us on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Transcript of the Interview: MANYA: As American Jewish college students head back to their campuses this fall, it's hard to know what to expect. Since the Hamas terror attacks of October 7, maintaining a GPA has been the least of their worries. For some who attend universities that allowed anti-Israel protesters to vandalize hostage signs or set up encampments, fears still linger. We wanted to hear from college students how they're feeling about this school year. But instead of limiting ourselves to American campuses, we asked three students from AJC's Campus Global Board – from America, Argentina, and Australia – that's right, we still aim for straight A's here. We asked them to share their experiences so far and what they anticipate this year. We'll start on the other side of the world in Australia. With us now is Jonathan Iadarola, a third-year student at the University of Adelaide in Adelaide, Australia, the land down under, where everything is flipped, and they are getting ready to wrap up their school year in November. Jonathan serves as president of the South Australia branch of the Australian Union of Jewish students and on AJC's Campus Global Board. Jonathan, welcome to People of the Pod. JONATHAN: Thank you for having me. MANYA: So tell us what your experience has been as a Jewish college student in Australia, both before October 7 and after. JONATHAN: So at my university, we have a student magazine, and there was a really awful article in the magazine that a student editor wrote, very critical of Israel, obviously not very nice words. And it sort of ended with like it ended with Death to Israel, glory to the Intifada. Inshallah, it will be merciless. So it was very, very traumatic, obviously, like, just the side note, my great aunt actually died in the Second Intifada in a bus bombing. So it was just like for me, a very personal like, whoa. This is like crazy that someone on my campus wrote this and genuinely believes what they wrote. So yeah, through that experience, I obviously, I obviously spoke up. That's kind of how my activism on campus started. I spoke up against this incident, and I brought it to the university. I brought it to the student editing team, and they stood their ground. They tried to say that this is free speech. This is totally okay. It's completely like normal, normal dialog, which I completely disagreed with. And yeah, they really pushed back on it for a really long time. And it just got more traumatic with myself and many other students having to go to meetings in person with this student editor at like a student representative council, which is like the students that are actually voted in. Like student government in the United States, like a student body that's voted in by the students to represent us to the university administration. And though that student government actually laughed in our faces in the meeting while we were telling them that this sort of incident makes us as Jewish students feel unsafe on campus. And we completely were traumatized. Completely, I would say, shattered, any illusion that Jewish students could feel safe on campus. And yeah, that was sort of the beginning of my university journey, which was not great. MANYA: Wow. And that was in 2022, before October 7. So after the terror attacks was when most college campuses here in America really erupted. Had the climate at the University of Adelaide improved by then, or did your experience continue to spiral downward until it was addressed? JONATHAN: It's kind of remained stagnant, I would say. The levels haven't really improved or gotten worse. I would say the only exception was maybe in May 2024, when the encampments started popping up across the world. Obviously it came, came to my city as well. And it wasn't very, it wasn't very great. There was definitely a large presence on my campus in the encampment. And they were, they were more peaceful than, I would say, other encampments across Australia and obviously in the United States as well. But it was definitely not pleasant for students to, you know, be on campus and constantly see that in their faces and protesting. They would often come into people's classrooms as well. Sharing everything that they would like to say. You couldn't really escape it when you were on campus. MANYA: So how did you find refuge? Was there a community center or safe space on campus? Were there people who took you in? JONATHAN: So I'm the president of the Jewish Student Society on my campus. One of the things that I really pushed for when the encampments came to my city was to have a Jewish space on campus. It was something that my university never had, and thankfully, we were able to push and they were like 'Yes, you know what? This is the right time. We definitely agree.' So we actually now have our own, like, big Jewish room on campus, and we still have it to this day, which is amazing. So it's great to go to when, whether we feel uncomfortable on campus, or whether we just want a place, you know, to feel proud in our Jewish identity. And there's often events in the room. There's like, a Beers and Bagels, or we can have beer here at 18, so it's OK for us. And there's also, yeah, there's bagels. Then we also do Shabbat dinners. Obviously, there's still other stuff happening on campus that's not as nice, but it's great that we now have a place to go when we feel like we need a place to be proud Jews. MANYA: You mentioned that this was the start of your Jewish activism. So, can you tell us a little bit about your Jewish upbringing and really how your college experience has shifted your Jewish involvement, just activity in general? JONATHAN: Yeah, that's a great question. So I actually grew up in Adelaide. This is my home. I was originally born in Israel to an Israeli mother, but we moved, I was two years old when we moved to Adelaide. There was a Jewish school when I grew up. So I did attend the Jewish school until grade five, and then, unfortunately, it did close due to low numbers. And so I had to move to the public school system. And from that point, I was very involved in the Jewish community through my youth. And then there was a point once the Jewish school closed down where I kind of maybe slightly fell out. I was obviously still involved, but not to the same extent as I was when I was younger. And then I would say the first place I got kind of reintroduced was once I went to college and obviously met other Jewish students, and then it made me want to get back in, back, involved in the community, to a higher level than I had been since primary school. And yeah, then obviously, these incidents happened on campus, and that kind of, I guess, it shoved me into the spotlight unintentionally, where I felt like no one else was saying anything. I started just speaking up against this. And then obviously, I think many other Jews on campus saw this, and were like: 'Hang on. We want to also support this and, like, speak out against it.' and we kind of formed a bit of a group on campus, and that's how the club actually was formed as well. So the club didn't exist prior to this incident. It kind of came out of it, which is, I guess, the beautiful thing, but also kind of a sad thing that we only seem to find each other in incidences of, you know, sadness and trauma. But the beautiful thing is that from that, we have been able to create a really nice, small community on campus for Jewish students. So yeah, that's sort of how my journey started. And then through that, I got involved with the Australsian Union of Jewish Students, which is the Jewish Student Union that represents Jewish students all across Australia and New Zealand. And I started the South Australian branch, which is the state that Adelaide is in. And I've been the president for the last three years. So that's sort of been my journey. And obviously through that, I've gotten involved with American Jewish Committee. MANYA: So you're not just fighting antisemitism, these communities and groups that you're forming are doing some really beautiful things. JONATHAN: Obviously, I really want to ensure that Jewish student life can continue to thrive in my city, but also across Australia. And one way that we've really wanted to do that is to help create essentially, a national Shabbaton. An event where Jewish students from all across the country, come to one place for a weekend, and we're all together having a Shabbat dinner together, learning different educational programs, hearing from different amazing speakers, and just being with each other in our Jewish identity, very proud and united. It's one of, I think, my most proud accomplishments so far, through my college journey, that I've been able to, you know, create this event and make it happen. MANYA: And is there anything that you would like to accomplish Jewishly before you finish your college career? JONATHAN: There's a couple things. The big thing for me is ensuring, I want there to continue to be a place on campus for people to go and feel proud in their Jewish identity. I think having a Jewish space is really important, and it's something that I didn't have when I started my college journey. So I'm very glad that that's in place for future generations. For most of my college journey so far, we didn't have even a definition at my university for antisemitism. So if you don't have a definition, how are you going to be able to define what is and what isn't antisemitic and actually combat it? So now, thankfully, they do have a definition. I don't know exactly if it's been fully implemented yet, but I know that they have agreed to a definition, and it's a mix of IHRA and the Jerusalem Declaration, I believe, so it's kind of a mix. But I think as a community, we're reasonably happy with it, because now they actually have something to use, rather than not having anything at all. And yeah, I think those are probably the two main things for me, obviously, ensuring that there's that processes at the university moving forward for Jewish students to feel safe to report when there are incidents on campus. And then ensuring that there's a place for Jewish students to continue to feel proud in their Jewish identity and continue to share that and live that while they are studying at the university. MANYA: Well, Jonathan, thank you so much for joining us, and enjoy your holiday. JONATHAN: Thank you very much. I really appreciate it. MANYA: Now we turn to Argentina, Buenos Aires to be exact, to talk to Ivan Stern, the first Argentine and first Latin American to serve on AJC's Campus Global Board. A student at La Universidad Nacional de San Martin, Ivan just returned to classes last week after a brief winter break down there in the Southern Hemisphere. What is Jewish life like there on that campus? Are there organizations for Jewish students? IVAN: So I like to compare Jewish life in Buenos Aires like Jewish life in New York or in Paris or in Madrid. We are a huge city with a huge Jewish community where you can feel the Jewish sense, the Jewish values, the synagogues everywhere in the street. When regarding to college campuses, we do not have Jewish institutions or Jewish clubs or Jewish anything in our campuses that advocate for Jewish life or for Jewish students. We don't actually need them, because the Jewish community is well established and respected in Argentina. Since our terrorist attacks of the 90s, we are more respected, and we have a strong weight in all the decisions. So there's no specific institution that works for Jewish life on campus until October 7 that we gathered a student, a student led organization, a student led group. We are now part of a system that it's created, and it exists in other parts of the world, but now we are start to strengthening their programming and activities in Argentina we are we now have the Argentinian union with Jewish students that was born in October 7, and now we represent over 150 Jewish students in more than 10 universities. We are growing, but we are doing Shabbat talks in different campuses for Jewish students. We are bringing Holocaust survivors to universities to speak with administrations and with student cabinets that are not Jewish, and to learn and to build bridges of cooperation, of course, after October 7, which is really important. So we are in the middle of this work. We don't have a strong Hillel in campuses or like in the US, but we have Jewish students everywhere. We are trying to make this grow, to try to connect every student with other students in other universities and within the same university. And we are, yeah, we are work in progress. MANYA: Listeners just heard from your Campus Global Board colleague Jonathan Iadarola from Adelaide, Australia, and he spoke about securing the first space for Jewish students on campus at the University of Adelaide. Does that exist at your university? Do you have a safe space? So Hillel exists in Buenos Aires and in Cordoba, which Cordova is another province of Argentina. It's a really old, nice house in the middle of a really nice neighborhood in Buenos Aires. So also in Argentina another thing that it's not like in the U.S., we don't live on campuses, so we come and go every day from our houses to the to the classes. So that's why sometimes it's possible for us to, after classes, go to Hillel or or go to elsewhere. And the Argentinian Union, it's our job to represent politically to the Jewish youth on campus. To make these bridges of cooperation with non-Jewish actors of different college campuses and institutions, as I mentioned before, we bring Holocaust survivors, we place banners, we organize rallies. We go to talk with administrators. We erase pro- Palestinian paints on the wall. We do that kind of stuff, building bridges, making programs for Jewish youth. We also do it, but it's not our main goal. MANYA: So really, it's an advocacy organization, much like AJC. IVAN: It's an advocacy organization, and we are really, really, really happy to work alongside with the AJC more than once to strengthen our goals. MANYA: October 7 was painful for all of us, what happened on university campuses there in Argentina that prompted the need for a union? So the impact of October 7 in Argentina wasn't nearly as strong as in other parts of the world, and definitely nothing like what's been happening on U.S. campuses. Maybe that's because October here is finals season, and our students were more focused on passing their classes than reacting to what was happening on the Middle East, but there were attempts of engagements, rallies, class disruptions and intimidations, just like in other places. That's why we focused on speaking up, taking action. So here it's not happening. What's happening in the U.S., which was really scary, and it's still really scary, but something was happening, and we needed to react. There wasn't a Jewish institution advocating for Jewish youth on campus, directly, getting to know what Jewish students were facing, directly, lively walking through the through the hallways, through the campus, through the campuses. So that's why we organize this student-led gathering, different students from different universities, universities. We need to do something. At the beginning, this institution was just on Instagram. It was named the institutions, and then for Israel, like my university acronym, it's unsam Universidad national, San Martin unsam. So it was unsam for Israel. So we, so we posted, like every campaign we were doing in our campuses, and then the same thing happened in other university and in other universities. So now we, we gathered everyone, and now we are the Argentinian Union of Jewish students. But on top of that, in November 2023 students went on summer break until March 2024 so while the topic was extremely heated elsewhere here, the focus had shifted on other things. The new national government was taking office, which had everyone talking more about their policies than about Israel. So now the issue is starting to resurface because of the latest news from Gaza, So we will go where it goes from here, but the weight of the community here, it's, as I said, really strong. So we have the ability to speak up. MANYA: What kinds of conversations have you had with university administrators directly after. October 7, and then now, I mean, are you, are you communicating with them? Do you have an open channel of communication? Or is are there challenges? IVAN: we do? That's an incredible question there. It's a tricky one, because it depends on the university. The answer we receive. Of course, in my university, as I said, we are, we are lots of Jews in our eyes, but we are a strong minority also, but we have some Jewish directors in the administration, so sometimes they are really focused on attending to our concerns, and they are really able to to pick a call, to answer back our messages, also, um, there's a there's a great work that Argentina has been, has been doing since 2020 to apply the IHRA definition in every institute, in every public institution. So for example, my university, it's part of the IHRA definition. So that's why it was easy for us to apply sanctions to student cabinets or student organizations that were repeating antisemitic rhetorics, distortioning the Holocaust messages and everything, because we could call to our administrators, regardless if they were Jewish or not, but saying like, 'Hey, this institution is part of the IHRA definition since February 2020, it's November 2023, and this will be saying this, this and that they are drawing on the walls of the of our classrooms. Rockets with Magen David, killing people. This is distortioning the Jewish values, the religion, they are distortioning everything. Please do something.' So they started doing something. Then with the private institutions, we really have a good relationship. They have partnerships with different institutions from Israel, so it's easy for us to stop political demonstrations against the Jewish people. We are not against political demonstrations supporting the Palestinian statehood or anything. But when it regards to the safety of Jewish life on campus or of Jewish students, we do make phone calls. We do call to other Jewish institutions to have our back. And yes, we it's we have difficult answers, but we but the important thing is that we have them. They do not ghost us, which is something we appreciate. But sometimes ghosting is worse. Sometimes it's better for us to know that the institution will not care about us, than not knowing what's their perspective towards the problem. So sometimes we receive like, 'Hey, this is not an antisemitism towards towards our eyes. If you want to answer back in any kind, you can do it. We will not do nothing. MANYA: Ivan, I'm wondering what you're thinking of as you're telling me this. Is there a specific incident that stands out in your mind as something the university administrators declined to address? IVAN: So in December 2023, when we were all in summer break, we went back to my college, to place the hostages signs on the walls of every classroom. Because at the same time, the student led organizations that were far left, student-led organizations were placing these kind of signs and drawings on the walls with rockets, with the Magen David and demonizing Jews. So we did the same thing. So we went to the school administrators, and we call them, like, hey, the rocket with the Magen David. It's not okay because the Magen David is a Jewish symbol. This is a thing happening in the Middle East between a state and another, you have to preserve the Jewish students, whatever. And they told us, like, this is not an antisemitic thing for us, regardless the IHRA definition. And then they did do something and paint them back to white, as the color of the wall. But they told us, like, if you want to place the hostages signs on top of them or elsewhere in the university, you can do it. So if they try to bring them down, yet, we will do something, because that this is like free speech, that they can do whatever they want, and you can do whatever that you want. So that's the answers we receive. So sometimes they are positive, sometimes they are negative, sometimes in between. But I think that the important thing is that the youth is united, and as students, we are trying to push forward and to advocate for ourselves and to organize by ourselves to do something. MANYA: Is there anything that you want to accomplish, either this year or before you leave campus? IVAN: To keep building on the work of the Argentinian Union of Jewish Students is doing bringing Jewish college students together, representing them, pushing our limits, expanding across the country. As I said, we have a strong operations in Buenos Aires as the majority of the community is here, but we also know that there's other Jewish students in other provinces of Argentina. We have 24 provinces, so we are just working in one. And it's also harder for Jewish students to live Jewishly on campus in other provinces when they are less students. Then the problems are bigger because you feel more alone, because you don't know other students, Jews or non-Jews. So that's one of my main goals, expanding across the country, and while teaming up with non-Jewish partners. MANYA: You had said earlier that the students in the union were all buzzing about AJC's recent ad in the The New York Times calling for a release of the hostages still in Gaza.Are you hoping your seat on AJC's Campus Global Board will help you expand that reach? Give you some initiatives to empower and encourage your peers. Not just your peers, Argentina's Jewish community at large. IVAN: My grandma is really happy about the AJC donation to the Gaza church. She sent me a message. If you have access to the AJC, please say thank you about the donation. And then lots of Jewish students in the in our union group chat, the 150 Jewish students freaking out about the AJC article or advice in The New York Times newspaper about the hostages. So they were really happy MANYA: In other words, they they like knowing that there's a global advocacy organization out there on their side? IVAN: Also advocating for youth directly. So sometimes it's hard for us to connect with other worldwide organizations. As I said, we are in Argentina, in the bottom of the world. AJC's worldwide. And as I said several times in this conversation, we are so well established that sometimes we lack of international representation here, because everything is solved internally. So if you have, if you have anything to say, you will go to the AMIA or to the Daya, which are the central organizations, and that's it. And you are good and there. And they may have connections or relationships with the AJC or with other organizations. But now students can have direct representations with organizations like AJC, which are advocating directly for us. So we appreciate it also. MANYA: You said things never got as heated and uncomfortable in Argentina as they did on American college campuses. What encouragement would you like to offer to your American peers? I was two weeks ago in New York in a seminar with other Jewish students from all over the world and I mentioned that our duty as Jewish youth is paving the way for ourselves. Sometimes we may feel alone. Sometimes we are, sometimes we are not. But the most important thing is for us as youth to pave the way for ourselves, to take action, to speak out. Even if it's hard or difficult. It doesn't matter how little it is, but to do something, to start reconnecting with other Jews, no matter their religious spectrum, to start building bridges with other youth. Our strongest aspect is that we are youth, Not only because we are Jewish, but we are youth. So it's easier for us to communicate with our with other peers. So sometimes when everything is, it looks like hate, or everything is shady and we cannot see the light at the end of the tunnel. We should remember that the other one shouting against us is also a peer. MANYA:. Thank you so much, Ivan. Really appreciate your time and good luck going back for your spring semester. IVAN: Thank you. Thank you so much for the time and the opportunity. MANYA: Now we return home. Campus Global Board Member Lauren Eckstein grew up outside Phoenix and initially pursued studies at Pomona College in Southern California. But during the spring semester after the October 7 Hamas terror attacks, she transferred to Washington University in St. Louis. She returned to California this summer as one of AJC's Goldman Fellows. So Lauren, you are headed back to Washington University in St Louis this fall. Tell us what your experience there has been so far as a college student. LAUREN: So I've been there since January of 2024. It has a thriving Jewish community of Hillel and Chabad that constantly is just like the center of Jewish life. And I have great Jewish friends, great supportive non-Jewish friends. Administration that is always talking with us, making sure that we feel safe and comfortable. I'm very much looking forward to being back on campus. MANYA: As I already shared with our audience, you transferred from Pomona College. Did that have anything to do with the response on campus after October 7? LAUREN: I was a bit alienated already for having spent a summer in Israel in between my freshman and sophomore year. So that would have been the summer of 2023 before October 7, like few months before, and I already lost some friends due to spending that summer in Israel before anything had happened and experienced some antisemitism before October 7, with a student calling a pro-Israel group that I was a part of 'bloodthirsty baby killers for having a barbecue in celebration of Israeli independence. But after October 7 is when it truly became unbearable. I lost hundreds of followers on Instagram. The majority of people I was friends with started giving me dirty looks on campus. I was a history and politics double major at the time, so the entire history department signed a letter in support of the war. I lost any sense of emotional safety on campus. And so 20 days after October 7, with constant protests happening outside of my dorm, I could hear it from my dorm students going into dining halls, getting them to sign petitions against Israel, even though Israel had not been in Gaza at all at this point. This was all before the invasion happened. I decided to go home for a week for my mental well being, and ended up deciding to spend the rest of that semester at home. MANYA: What did your other Jewish classmates do at Pomona? Did they stay? Did they transfer as well? LAUREN: I would say the majority of Jewish students in Claremont either aren't really–they don't really identify with their Jewish identity in other way, in any way, or most of them identify as anti-Zionist very proudly. And there were probably only a few dozen of us in total, from all five colleges that would identify as Zionists, or really say like, oh, I would love to go to Israel. One of my closest friends from Pomona transferred a semester after I did, to WashU. A few other people I know transferred to other colleges as well. I think the choice for a lot of people were either, I'm going to get through because I only have a year left, or, like, a couple years left, or I'm going to go abroad. Or I'm just going to face it, and I know that it's going to be really difficult, and I'm only going to have a few friends and only have a few professors I can even take classes with, but I'm going to get through it. MANYA: So have you kept in touch with the friends in Pomona or at Pomona that cut you off, shot you dirty looks, or did those friendships just come to an end? LAUREN: They all came to an end. I can count on one hand, under one hand, the number of people that I talked to from any of the Claremont Colleges. I'm lucky to have one like really, really close friend of mine, who is not Jewish, that stood by my side during all of this, when she easily did not need to and will definitely always be one of my closest friends, but I don't talk to the majority of people that I was friends with at Pomona. MANYA: Well, I'm very sorry to hear that, but it sounds like the experience helped you recognize your truest friend. With only one year left at WashU, I'm sure plenty of people are asking you what you plan to do after you graduate, but I want to know what you are hoping to do in the time you have left on campus. LAUREN: I really just want to take it all in. I feel like I haven't had a very normal college experience. I mean, most people don't transfer in general, but I think my two college experiences have been so different from each other, even not even just in terms of antisemitism or Jewish population, but even just in terms of like, the kind of school it is, like, the size of it and all of that, I have made such amazing friends at WashU – Jewish and not – that I just really want to spend as much time with them as I can, and definitely spend as much time with the Jewish community and staff at Hillel and Chabad that I can. I'm minoring in Jewish, Islamic, Middle Eastern Studies, and so I'm really looking forward to taking classes in that subject, just that opportunity that I didn't have at Pomona. I really just want to go into it with an open mind and really just enjoy it as much as I can, because I haven't been able to enjoy much of my college experience. So really appreciate the good that I have. MANYA: As I mentioned before, like Jonathan and Ivan, you are on AJC's Campus Global Board. But you also served as an AJC Goldman Fellow in the Los Angeles regional office this summer, which often involves working on a particular project. Did you indeed work on something specific? LAUREN: I mainly worked on a toolkit for parents of kids aged K-8, to address Jewish identity and antisemitism. And so really, what this is trying to do is both educate parents, but also provide activities and tools for their kids to be able to really foster that strong Jewish identity. Because sadly, antisemitism is happening to kids at much younger ages than what I dealt with, or what other people dealt with. And really, I think bringing in this positive aspect of Judaism, along with providing kids the tools to be able to say, 'What I'm seeing on this social media platform is antisemitic, and this is why,' is going to make the next generation of Jews even stronger. MANYA: Did you experience any antisemitism or any challenges growing up in Arizona? LAUREN: I went to a non-religious private high school, and there was a lot of antisemitism happening at that time, and so there was a trend to post a blue square on your Instagram. And so I did that. And one girl in my grade –it was a small school of around 70 kids per grade, she called me a Zionist bitch for posting the square. It had nothing to do with Israel or anything political. It was just a square in solidarity with Jews that were being killed in the United States for . . . being Jewish. And so I went to the school about it, and they basically just said, this is free speech. There's nothing we can do about it. And pretty much everyone in my grade at school sided with her over it. I didn't really start wearing a star until high school, but I never had a second thought about it. Like, I never thought, oh, I will be unsafe if I wear this here. MANYA: Jonathan and Ivan shared how they started Jewish organizations for college students that hadn't existed before. As someone who has benefited from Hillel and Chabad and other support networks, what advice would you offer your peers in Argentina and Australia? LAUREN: It's so hard for me to say what the experience is like as an Argentinian Jew or as an Australian Jew, but I think community is something that Jews everywhere need. I think it's through community that we keep succeeding, generation after generation, time after time, when people try to discriminate against us and kill us. I believe, it's when we come together as a people that we can truly thrive and feel safe. And I would say in different places, how Jewish you want to outwardly be is different. But I think on the inside, we all need to be proud to be Jewish, and I think we all need to connect with each other more, and that's why I'm really excited to be working with students from all over the world on the Campus Global Board, because I feel like us as Americans, we don't talk to Jews from other countries as much as we should be. I think that we are one people. We always have been and always will be, and we really need to fall back on that. MANYA: Well, that's a lovely note to end on. Thank you so much, Lauren. LAUREN: Thank you. MANYA: If you missed last week's episode, be sure to tune in for my conversation with Adam Louis-Klein, a PhD candidate at McGill University. Adam shared his unexpected journey from researching the Desano tribe in the Amazon to confronting rising antisemitism in academic circles after October 7. He also discussed his academic work, which explores the parallels between indigenous identity and Jewish peoplehood, and unpacks the politics of historical narrative. Next week, People of the Pod will be taking a short break while the AJC podcast team puts the finishing touches on a new series set to launch August 28: Architects of Peace: The Abraham Accords Story. Stay tuned.

"The Jewish voice must be heard, not because it's more right or less right, but it's there. The suffering is there, the grief is there, and human grief is human grief." As Jews around the world mark Tisha B'Av, we're joined by Columbia University professor and award-winning poet Owen Lewis, whose new collection, "A Prayer of Six Wings," offers a powerful reflection on grief in the aftermath of October 7th. In this conversation, Lewis explores the healing power of poetry in the face of trauma, what it means to be a Jewish professor in today's campus climate, and how poetry can foster empathy, encourage dialogue, and resist the pull of division. *The views and opinions expressed by guests do not necessarily reflect the views or position of AJC. Listen – AJC Podcasts: The Forgotten Exodus: Untold stories of Jews who left or were driven from Arab nations and Iran People of the Pod: Latest Episodes: An Orange Tie and A Grieving Crowd: Comedian Yohay Sponder on Jewish Resilience From Broadway to Jewish Advocacy: Jonah Platt on Identity, Antisemitism, and Israel Sexual Violence as a Weapon of War: The Dinah Project's Quest to Hold Hamas Accountable Follow People of the Pod on your favorite podcast app, and learn more at AJC.org/PeopleofthePod You can reach us at: peopleofthepod@ajc.org If you've appreciated this episode, please be sure to tell your friends, and rate and review us on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Transcript of the Interview: Owen Lewis: Overheard in a New York Restaurant. I can't talk about Israel tonight. I know. I can't not talk about Israel tonight. I know. Can we talk about . . . Here? Sure. Let's try to talk about here. Manya Brachear Pashman: On Saturday night, Jews around the world will commemorate Tisha B'av. Known as the saddest day on the Jewish calendar, the culmination of a three week period of mourning to commemorate several tragedies throughout early Jewish history. As a list of tragedies throughout modern Jewish history has continued to grow, many people spend this day fasting, listening to the book of Lamentations in synagogue, or visiting the graves of loved ones. Some might spend the day reading poetry. Owen Lewis is a Professor of Psychiatry in the Department of Medical Humanities and Ethics at Columbia University. But he's also the award-winning author of four poetry collections which have won accolades, including the EE Cummings Prize and the Rumi Prize for Poetry. His most recent collection, A Prayer of Six Wings documents in verse his grief since the October 7 terror attacks. Owen is with us now to talk about the role of poetry in times of violence and war, what it's been like to be a Jewish professor on the Columbia campus, and a Jewish father with children and grandchildren in Israel. And also, how to keep writing amid a climate of rising antisemitism. Owen, welcome to People of the Pod. Owen Lewis: Thank you so much, Manya. Manya Brachear Pashman: So you opened with that short poem titled overheard in a New York restaurant. I asked you to read that because I wanted to ask whether it reflected how you felt about poetry after October 7. Did you find yourself in a place where you couldn't write about Israel, but yet you couldn't not write about Israel? Owen Lewis: Among the many difficult things of that First Year, not only the war, not only the flagrant attacks on the posters of the hostages one block from where I live, 79th and Broadway, every day, taken down every day, put back up again, defaced. It was as if the war were being fought right here on 79th and Broadway. Another aspect that made this all so painful was watching the artistic and literary world turn against Israel. This past spring, 2000 writers and artists signed a petition, it was published, there was an oped about it in The Times, boycotting Israeli cultural institutions. And I thought: artists don't have a right to shut their ears. We all need to listen to each other's grief, and if we poets and artists can't listen to one another, what do we expect of statesmen? Statesmen, yeah, they can create a ceasefire. That's not the same as creating peace. And peace can only come when we really listen to each other. To feel ostracized by the poetry community and the intellectual community was very painful. Fortunately, last summer, as well as this past summer, I was a fellow at the Yetzirah conference. Yetzirah is an organization of Jewish American poets, although we're starting to branch out. And this kind of in-gathering of like-minded people gave me so much strength. So this dilemma, I can't talk about it, because we just can't take the trauma. We can't take hearing one more thing about it, but not talk about it…it's a compulsion to talk about it, and that's a way to process trauma. And that was the same with this poetry, this particular book. I feel in many ways, it just kind of blew through me, and it was at the same time it blew through me, created this container in which I could express myself, and it actually held me together for that year. I mean, still, in many ways, the writing does that, but not as immediately and acutely as I felt that year. Manya Brachear Pashman: This book has been praised as not being for the ideological but for the intellectually and emotionally engaged. So it's not it's not something that ideologically minded readers will necessarily be able to connect to, or is it actually quite the opposite? Owen Lewis: Well, it's very much written from the gut, from the experience, from in a sense, being on the ground, both in Israel and here in New York and on campus, and trying to keep a presence in the world of poetry and writers. So what comes from emotion should speak to emotion. There are a few wisps of political statements, but it's not essentially a politically motivated piece of writing. I feel that I have no problem keeping my sympathies with Israel and with Jews. I can still be critical of aspects of the government, and my sympathies can also be with the thousands of Palestinians, killed, hurt, displaced. I don't see a contradiction. I don't have to take sides. But the first poem is called My Partisan Grief, and it begins on October 7. I was originally going to call the bookMy Partisan Grief, because I felt that American, Jewish, and Israeli grief was being silenced, was being marginalized. And I wanted to say, this is our grief. Listen to it. You must listen to this. It doesn't privilege this grief over another grief. Grief is grief. But I wanted ultimately to move past that title into something broader, more encompassing, more humanitarian. Manya Brachear Pashman: And did that decision come as the death toll in Gaza rose and this war kept going and going and the hostages remained in captivity, did that kind of sway your thinking in terms of how to approach the book and frame it? Owen Lewis: Yes, but even more than those kind of headlines, which can be impersonal, the poetry of some remarkable Palestinian poets move me into a broader look. Abu Toha was first one who comes to mind Fady Joudah, who's also a physician, by the way. I mean his poetry, I mean many others, but it's gorgeous, moving poetry. Some of it is a diatribe, and you know, some of it is ideological, and people can do that with poetry, but when poetry really drills down into human experience, that's what I find so compelling and moving. And that's what I think can move the peace process. I know it sounds quite idealistic, but I really think poetry has a role in the peace process here. Manya Brachear Pashman: I want to I want to unpack that a little bit later. But first, I want to go back to the protests that were roiling Columbia's campus over the past year and a half, two years. What was it like to be, one, writing this book, but also, teaching on campus as a Jewish professor? Owen Lewis: Most of my teaching takes place up at the Medical Center at 168th Street. And there I have to say, I didn't feel battered in any way by what was happening. I had a very shocking experience. I had a meeting that I needed to attend on, or that had been scheduled, I hadn't been quite paying attention. I mean, I knew about the encampments, but I hadn't seen them, and I come face to face with a blocked campus. I couldn't get on the campus. And what I'm staring at are signs to the effect, send the Jews back to Poland. I'm thinking, Where am I? What is this? I mean, protest, sure. I mean we expect undergraduates, we expect humans, to protest when things really aren't fair. But what did this have to do…why invoke the Holocaust and re-invoke it, as if to imply the Jews should be punished? All Jews. And what it fails to account for are the diversity of Jewish opinion. And you know, for some Jews, it's a black or white matter, but for most thinking Jews that I know, we all struggle very much with a loyalty to Israel, to the Jewish people, to the homeland and larger humanitarian values. So that was quite a shock. And I wrote a piece called "The Scars of Encampment," in which I say, I can't unsee that. " And I go to campus, and, okay, it's a little bit more security to get onto campus. It's a beautiful campus. It's like an oasis there, but at the same time, I'm seeing what was as if it still is. And in a way, that's the nature of trauma that things from the past just roil and are present with almost as much emotion as when first encountered. Manya Brachear Pashman: So did you need to tune out those voices, or did that fuel your work? Owen Lewis: No, that fueled my work. I mean, if anything, it made me feel much more, a sense of mission with this book. And a commitment, despite criticism that I may receive, and no position I take is that outlandish, except to sympathize with the murdered on October 7th, to sympathize with their families, to resonate with what it must be like to have family members as hostages in brutal, brutal conditions. Not knowing whether they're dead or alive. So I really felt that the Jewish voice must be heard, not because it's more right or less right, but it's there. The suffering is there, the grief is there, and human grief is human grief. Manya Brachear Pashman: Owen, if you wouldn't mind reading another poem from the collection. Of course, many of us remember the news out of Israel on Thanksgiving Day 2023, right after October 7th. And this poem is titled, "Waiting for the Next Release, Reported by the New York Times, November 23 2023". Owen Lewis: Waiting For the Next Release, Reported N.Y. Times, Nov. 23, 2023 Maybe tomorrow, if distrust doesn't flare like a missile, some families will be reunited. How awful this lottery of choice; Solomon would not deliberate. Poster faces always before my eyes, Among them, Emma & Yuli Cunio. Twins age 3, Raz Katz-Asher, age 4, Ariel Bibas, another four year old. What do their four year old minds make of captivity? What will they say? What would my Noa say? What will the other Noas say? Remembering Noa Argamani, age 26, thrown across the motorcycle to laughter and Hamas joy. I have almost forgotten this American day, Thanks- giving, With its cornucopian harvests, I am thinking of the cornucopian jails of human bounty. (What matter now who is to blame?) Manya Brachear Pashman: Really beautiful, and it really captures all of our emotions that day. You have children and grandchildren in Israel, as I mentioned and as you mentioned in that poem, your granddaughter, Noa. So your grief and your fear, it's not only a collective grief and fear that we all share, but also very personal, which you weave throughout the collection. In another poem, "In a Van to JFK", you talk about just wanting to spend one more hour with your family before they fly off to Israel. And it's very moving. But in addition to many of the poems, like the one you just read, they are based on and somewhat named for newspaper headlines, you said that kind of establishes a timeline. But are there other reasons why you transformed those headlines into verse? Owen Lewis: Yes, William Carlos Williams in his poem Asphodel, says, and I'm going to paraphrase it badly. You won't get news from poems yet, men die every day for wanting what is found there. And I think it's a very interesting juxtaposition of journalism and poetry. And I mean, I'm not writing news, I'm writing where my reflections, where my heart, goes in response to the news, and trying to bring another element to the news that, you know, we were confronted. I mean, in any time of high stress, you swear off – I'm not watching any more TV. I'm not even gonna look at the newspaper. And then, of course, you do. I can't talk about Israel today. I can't not talk about it. I can't read the paper. I can't not read the paper. It's kind of that back and forth. But what is driving that? And so I'm trying to get at that next dimension of what's resonating behind each one of these headlines, or resonating for me. I mean, I'm not claiming this is an interpretation of news. It's my reaction, but people do react, and there's that other dimension to headlines. Manya Brachear Pashman: That seems like it might be therapeutic, no? Owen Lewis: Oh, totally, totally. You know, I'm very fortunate that having started a career in medicine, in psychiatry, and particularly in child and adolescent psychiatry. I always had one foot in the door academically. I spent, you know, my life as, I still teach, but I'm very fortunate to have, maybe 10+ years ago, been introduced to a basically a woman who created the field of Narrative Medicine, Rita Sharon. And now at Columbia in the medical school, we have a free-standing Department of Medical Humanities and Ethics, of which she's chairman. So I've had the fortune of bringing psychiatry and medicine and writing together in a very integrated way. And yes, writing is therapeutic, especially, I could say in medicine, which has given itself over to electronic medical record keeping, but our whole society is moving towards the electronic. And what happens when you sit and write, and what happens when you then sit and read, you reflect. Your mind engages in a different way that is a bit slower than the fast pace of electronic communications and instant communications and instant thinking. And now with AI, instant analysis of any situation you want to feed data from. So that's sorely lacking in the human experience. And the act of writing, the act of reading has huge therapeutic values, huge salutary benefits for humans in general, but particularly in times of stress. In a lot of work on Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, finding an outlet, an artistic outlet, it doesn't have to be writing, but that's often a way of transcending the trauma. And medicine is filled with trauma. People trying to come to terms with acute illnesses, chronic illnesses. Doctors and caregivers trying to come to terms with what they can and can't do. And you know, we're coming up against limitations. But how do you make peace with those limitations? And it's not that it's a magical panacea, but it's a process of engagement, not only with the subject, but with yourself in relation to the subject. Manya Brachear Pashman: I mean, I imagine dialogue is really the healthiest way of conversation and speaking through and interacting with a topic. And so I would imagine poetry, or, as you said, any art form, responding to news reports, it makes that a two way conversation when you're able to process and it's not just the headlines shouting at you, you're actually interacting and processing it by writing and reaction, or painting and reaction, whatever you choose to do. Owen Lewis: Exactly. Manya Brachear Pashman: You have said that poetry can serve a purpose during times of war. Is this one of the purposes to to be therapeutic or are you talking more in terms of what statesmen could learn from it? Owen Lewis: Well, yes, of course, what statesmen could learn from it, but it's human nature to want to take sides. I mean, that's kind of just what we do. But I think we can always do better than that. So I'm really talking about the people. I mean, there are also many Jews who are so angry at Israel that they can't listen to the story of Jewish grief. They should be reading mine and others poetries from this era. I wish the Palestinian poets were. I wish the Palestinian people. I mean, of course, in their current situation, they don't have time when you're starving, when you're looking for your next glass of fresh water. You don't have time for anything beyond survival. But once we get beyond that, how long are these positions going to be hardened. I mean, I think when the people of all sides of the dilemma really listen to the others, I mean, they're, I mean, if, unless as Hamas has expressed, you know, wants to push Israel into the sea, if Israel is going to coexist with the Palestinian people, whether they're in a nation or not in a nation, each has to listen to the other. And it's, you know, it's not one side is right, one side is wrong. It's far too complex a history to reduce it to that kind of simplicity. And I think poetry, everyone's poetry, gets at the complexity of experience, which includes wanting to take sides and questioning your wanting to take sides and moving towards something more humanitarian. Manya Brachear Pashman: You said earlier, you recommend Abu Toha, Fady Joudah, two Palestinian poets who have written some beautiful verse about– tragically beautiful verse–about what's happening. But there have been some really deep rifts in the literary world over this war. I mean, as you mentioned before, there was a letter written by authors and entertainers who pledged to boycott Israeli cultural institutions. Some authors have refused to sell rights to their books to publishers in Israel. So why not reciprocate? And I know the answer. I think you've already addressed it pretty well. What's wrong with that approach? Owen Lewis: In any conflict, there are at least three sides to the conflict. I mean, claims to nationhood, claims to who shoved first, who. I mean, you don't entangle things by aggressively reacting. I mean, if we learned anything from Mahatma Gandhi, it's what happens when we don't retaliate, right? And what happens when we go the extra mile to create bridges and connections. There are a host of people in Israel who continue to help Palestinians get to medical facilities, driving them back and forth, working for peace. I mean, there's a Palestinian on the Supreme Court of Israel, and well, he should be there. You know, that's the part of Israel that I am deeply proud of. So why not retaliate? I think it entrenches positions and never moves anything forward. Manya Brachear Pashman: So have you gotten any negative feedback from your writing colleagues? Owen Lewis: Some cold shoulders, yes. I mean not nothing overtly. I haven't been slammed in a review yet. Maybe that's coming. But when I publish pieces, I tend not to look at them. I had an oped in the LA Times. I've had some other pieces, you know, that precipitates blogs, and I started to read them. And the first blog that came off of the the LA Times oped was, God, is he an opportunist, just taking advantage of having a daughter in Israel? And trying to make a name for himself or something. And I said, You know what, you can't put yourself out and take a position without getting some kind of flack. So occasionally, those things filter back, it's par for the course. Manya Brachear Pashman: Right, not really worth reading some of those. You included Midrash in this book. You also spelled God in the traditional sense in the poems. Why did you choose to do that? Owen Lewis: Well, I felt it honors a tradition of Jewish writing. It mean we have yud, hey, vav, hey, you know, which in English comes down as Yahweh, but it's unpronounceable. The name of God is unpronounceable. And, you know, yud, hey, vav, hey is just a representation. It isn't God's name. And there's a tradition that the name of God, when it's written down, can't be destroyed. And it's a way of honoring that tradition. Millennium of Jewish writers, you know, it's similar to say Elokim, instead of Elohim when the text is written. To sort of substitute. We know what we're talking about, but really to honor tradition, to pay respect and sort of to stay in the mind frame that, if there is a God, he, she, they, are unknowable. And somehow it creates, for me, a little bit of that mystery by leaving a letter out. It's like, G, O, D, seems more knowable than G-d. It's leaving that white space right for something bigger, grander, and mysterious, for the presence of that right in the word itself. Manya Brachear Pashman: And what about including Midrash? Owen Lewis: That's a very interesting question. You know Midrash for me, when you steep yourself in traditional Midrash, there's stories that exemplify principles and they fill in gaps. I mean, some of the most important. I mean, we have this notion of Abraham breaking the idols of his father before he left. No. That's Midrash, thats not in the Torah. And yet, nine out of ten Jews will say that's in the Torah, right? So, it kind of expands our understanding of the traditional text. But it also very much allows a writer to creatively engage with the text and expand it. It's like a commentary, but it's a commentary in story, and it's a commentary in terms that evoke human responses, not necessarily intellectual responses. So frankly, I think it's every Jews' responsibility to write Midrash. That reinvigorates the stories, the texts, and the meanings, and then we write midrashes upon midrashes. And you know, we get a whole community buzzing about a single story. Manya Brachear Pashman: Which is very much what you've done with this collection, you know, writing poetry in response to news stories and engaging it in that way. It's very Jewish response, I would argue. Do you observe Tisha B'av? Owen Lewis: You know what I do. You're gonna laugh. My grandmother always warned us, don't go in the water on Tisha B'av, the sea will swallow you up. So I'm a big swimmer. I love swimming. I don't swim on Tisha B'av, because I hear my grandmother's voice, I'm going to be swallowed up. Manya Brachear Pashman: If you could please wrap up this conversation by sharing a poem of your choice from your latest collection. Owen Lewis: A poem I love to read again starts with a headline. 2000 Pound Bombs Drop, Reported N.Y. Times, Dec,, 22 2023. In Khan Younis, the call to prayer is the call of a dazed Palestinian child crying baba, standing at the brim of a cavernous pit of rubble biting his knuckles–baba, baba . . . It's so close to the abba of the dazed Israeli children of Be'eri, Kfar Azza. There is no comfort. From his uncles he's heard the calls for revenge– for his home and school, for his bed of nighttime stories, for his nana's whisper-song of G-d's many names. His Allah, his neighbor's Adonai, cry the same tears for death and shun more blood. No miracle these waters turning red. Who called forth the fleets of avenging angels? By viral post: Jewish Plagues on Gaza! A firstborn lost, then a second, a third. What other plagues pass over? Hail from the tepid sky? From on high it falls and keeps falling. Though we've "seen terrible things," will you tell us, Adonai, Allah, tell us– do You remember the forgotten promise? From the pile once home of rubble stone, a father's hand reaching out, baba, abba crushed by the load. We know the silence of the lost child . . . G-d "has injured us but will bind up our wounds . . ." Mothers Look for us, called by the name yamma, calling the name imma. Our father of mercy, not the god of sacrifice. Our many crying heads explode. Manya Brachear Pashman: Owen Lewis, thank you so much for talking to us about how this book came about and for sharing some of these verses. Owen Lewis: Thank you so much. Manya Brachear Pashman: If you missed last week's episode, be sure to listen to my conversation with Israeli comedian Yohay Sponder on the sidelines of AJC Global Forum 2025. Hear how his Jewish identity shapes his work, how his comedy has evolved since the Hamas terror attacks, and what he says to those who try to silence him.

Being Jewish podcast host Jonah Platt—best known for playing Fiyero in Broadway's Wicked—joins People of the Pod to discuss his journey into Jewish advocacy after October 7. He reflects on his Jewish upbringing, challenges media misrepresentations of Israel, and shares how his podcast fosters inclusive and honest conversations about Jewish identity. Platt also previews The Mensch, an upcoming film he's producing to tell Jewish stories with heart and nuance. Recorded live at AJC Global Forum 2025. *The views and opinions expressed by guests do not necessarily reflect the views or position of AJC. Listen – AJC Podcasts: The Forgotten Exodus: Untold stories of Jews who left or were driven from Arab nations and Iran People of the Pod: Latest Episodes: Sexual Violence as a Weapon of War: The Dinah Project's Quest to Hold Hamas Accountable Journalist Matti Friedman Exposes Media Bias Against Israel John Spencer's Key Takeaways After the 12-Day War: Air Supremacy, Intelligence, and Deterrence Follow People of the Pod on your favorite podcast app, and learn more at AJC.org/PeopleofthePod You can reach us at: peopleofthepod@ajc.org If you've appreciated this episode, please be sure to tell your friends, and rate and review us on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Transcript of the Interview: Manya Brachear Pashman: Jonah Platt: is an award winning director of theater and improv comedy, an accomplished musician, singer and award winning vocal arranger. He has been on the Broadway stage, including one year as the heartthrob Fiyero in Wicked and he's producing his first feature film, a comedy called The Mensch. He also hosts his own podcast, Being Jewish with Jonah Platt:, a series of candid conversations and reflections that explore the many facets of Jewish identity. Jonah is with us now on the sidelines of AJC Global Forum 2025. Jonah, welcome to People of the Pod. Jonah Platt: Thank you so much for having me, happy to be here. Manya Brachear Pashman: So tell us about your podcast. How is being Jewish with Jonah Platt: different from Jewish with anyone else? Jonah Platt: That's a great question. I think it's different for a number of ways. I think one key difference is that I'm really trying to appeal to everybody, not just Jews and not just one type of Jews. I really wanted it to be a very inclusive show and, thank God, the feedback I've gotten, my audience is very diverse. It appeals to, you know, I hear from the ultra orthodox. I hear from people who found out they were Jewish a month ago. I hear from Republicans, I hear from Democrats. I hear from non Jews, Muslims, Christians, people all over the world. So I think that's special and different, especially in these echo-chambery, polarized times online, I'm trying to really reach out of that and create a space where the one thing we all have in common, everybody who listens, is that we're all well-meaning, good-hearted, curious people who want to understand more about our fellow man and each other. I also try to really call balls and strikes as I see them, regardless of where they're coming from. So if I see, let's call it bad behavior, on the left, I'll call it out. If I see bad behavior on the right, I'll call it out. If I see bad behavior from Israel, I'll call it out. In the same breath that I'll say, I love Israel, it's the greatest place. I think that's really unfortunately rare. I think people have a very hard time remembering that we are very capable of holding two truths at once, and it doesn't diminish your position by acknowledging fault where you see it. In fact, I feel it strengthens your position, because it makes you more trustworthy. And it's sort of like an iron sharpens iron thing, where, because I'm considering things from all angles, either I'm going to change my mind because I found something I didn't consider. That's going to be better for me and put me on firmer ground. Or it's going to reinforce what I thought, because now I have another thing I can even speak to about it and say, Well, I was right, because even this I checked out, and that was wrong. So either way, you're in a stronger position. And I feel that that level of sort of, you know, equanimity is sorely lacking online, for sure. Manya Brachear Pashman: Our podcasts have had some guests in common. We've had Dara Horn, Sarah Hurwitz, you said you're getting ready to have Bruce Pearl. We've had Coach Pearl on our show. You've also had conversations with Stuart Weitzman, a legendary shoe designer, in an episode titled Jews and Shoes. I love that. Can you share some other memorable nuggets from the conversations you've had over the last six months? Jonah Platt: I had my dad on the show, and I learned things about him that I had never heard about his childhood, growing up, the way his parents raised him. The way that social justice and understanding the conflict and sort of brokenness in the world was something that my grandparents really tried to teach them very actively, and some of it I had been aware of, but not every little specific story he told. And that was really special for me. And my siblings, after hearing it, were like, We're so glad you did this so that we could see Dad and learn about him in this way. So that was really special. There have been so many. Isaac Saul is a guy I had early on. He runs a newsletter, a news newsletter called Tangle Media that shows what the left is saying about an issue with the right is saying about an issue, and then his take. And a nugget that I took away from him is that on Shabbat, his way of keeping Shabbat is that he doesn't go on social media or read the news on Shabbat. And I took that from him, so now I do that too. I thought that was genius. It's hard for me. I'm trying to even start using my phone period less on Shabbat, but definitely I hold myself to it, except when I'm on the road, like I am right now. When I'm at home, no social media from Friday night to Saturday night, and it's fantastic. Manya Brachear Pashman: It sounds delightful. Jonah Platt: It is delightful. I highly recommend it to everybody. It's an easy one. Manya Brachear Pashman: So what about your upbringing? You said you learned a lot about your father's upbringing. What was your Jewish upbringing? Jonah Platt: Yeah, I have been very blessed to have a really strong, warm, lovely, Jewish upbringing. It's something that was always intrinsic to my family. It's not something that I sort of learned at Hebrew school. And no knock on people whose experience that is, but it's, you know, I never remember a time not feeling Jewish. Because it was so important to my parents and important to their families. And you know, part of the reason they're a good match for each other is because their values are the same. I went to Jewish Day School, the same one my kids now go to, which is pretty cool. Manya Brachear Pashman: Oh, that's lovely. Jonah Platt: Yeah. And I went to Jewish sleepaway camp at Camp Ramah in California. But for me, really, you know, when I get asked this question, like, my key Jewish word is family. And growing up, every holiday we spent with some part of my very large, amazing family. What's interesting is, in my city where I grew up, Los Angeles, I didn't have any grandparents, I didn't have any aunts or uncles or any first cousins. But I feel like I was with them all the time, because every holiday, someone was traveling to somebody, and we were being together. And all of my childhood memories of Jewish holidays are with my cousins and my aunts and my uncles and my grandparents. Because it was just so important to our family. And that's just an amazing foundation for being Jewish or anything else, if that's your foundation, that's really gonna stay with you. And my upbringing, like we kept kosher in my house, meat and milk plates. We would eat meat out but no pork, no shellfish, no milk and meat, any of that. And while I don't ascribe to all those things now, I'm grateful that I got sort of the literacy in that. In my Jewish Day School we had to wrap tefillin every morning. And while I don't do that now, I'm glad that I know how to do that, and I know what that looks like, and I know what that means, even if I resisted it very strongly at the time as a 13 year old, being like what I gotta wrap this up every day. But I'm grateful now to have that literacy. And I've always been very surprised to see in my life that often when I'm in a room with people, I'm the most observant in the room or the most Jewish literate in the room, which was never the case in my life. I have family members who are much more observant than me, orthodox. I know plenty of Orthodox people, whatever. But in today's world, I'm very grateful for the upbringing I had where, I'll be on an experience. I actually just got back from one in Poland. I went on a trip with all moderate Muslims from around the North Africa, Middle East, and Asia, with an organization called Sharaka. We had Shabbat dinner just this past Friday at the JCC in Krakow, and I did the Shabbat kiddush for everybody, which is so meaningful and, like, I'm so grateful that I know it, that I can play that role in that, in special situations like that. Manya Brachear Pashman: So you've been doing a lot of traveling. Jonah Platt: Yes. Manya Brachear Pashman: I saw your reflection on your visit to Baku, Azerbaijan. The largest Jewish community in the Muslim world. And you went with the Jewish Federation's National Young leadership cabinet. Jonah Platt: Shout out to my chevre. Manya Brachear Pashman: And you posted this reflection based on your experience there, asking the question, how much freedom is too much? So can you walk our listeners through that and how you answered that question? Jonah Platt: Yes. So to be fair, I make very clear I don't have the answer to that question definitively, I just wanted to give people food for thought, and what I hoped would happen has happened where I've been getting a lot of people who disagree with me and have other angles at which they want to look and answer this question, which I welcome and have given me a lot to think about. But basically, what I observed in Azerbaijan was a place that's a little bit authoritative. You know, they don't have full freedom of the press. Political opposition is, you know, quieted, but there's no crime anywhere. They have a strong police presence on the streets. There are security cameras everywhere, and people like their lives there and don't want to mess with it. And so it just got me thinking, you know, they're an extremely tolerant society. It's sort of something they pride themselves on, and always have. It's a Muslim majority country, but it is secular. They are not a Muslim official country. They're one of only really two countries in the world that are like that, the other being Albania. And they live together in beautiful peace and harmony with a sense of goodwill, with a sense of national pride, and it got me thinking, you know, look at any scenario in our lives. Look at the place you work, look at the preschool classroom that your kid is in. There are certain rules and restrictions that allow for more freedom, in a sense, because you feel safe and taken care of and our worst instincts are not given space to be expressed. So that is what brought the question of, how much freedom is too much. And really, the other way of putting that is, how much freedom would you be willing to give up if it meant you lived in a place with no crime, where people get along with their neighbors, where there's a sense of being a part of something bigger than yourself. I think all three of which are heavily lacking in America right now that is so polarized, where hateful rhetoric is not only, pervasive, but almost welcomed, and gets more clicks and more likes and more watches. It's an interesting thing to think about. And I heard from people being like, I haven't been able to stop thinking about this question. I don't know the answer, but it's really interesting. I have people say, you're out of your mind. It's a slippery slope. The second you give an inch, like it's all going downhill. And there are arguments to be made there. But I can't help but feel like, if we did the due diligence, I'm sure there is something, if we keep the focus really narrow, even if it's like, a specific sentence that can't be said, like, you can't say: the Holocaust was a great thing. Let's say we make that illegal to say, like, how does that hurt anybody? If that's you're not allowed to say those exact words in that exact sequence, you know. So I think if it's gonna be a slippery slope, to me, is not quite a good enough argument for Well, let's go down the road and see if we can come up with something. And then if we decide it's a slippery slope and we get there, maybe we don't do it, but maybe there is something we can come to that if we eliminate that one little thing you're not allowed to say, maybe that will benefit us. Maybe if we make certain things a little bit more restrictive, it'll benefit us. And I likened it to Shabbat saying, you know, on Shabbat, we have all these restrictions. If you're keeping Shabbat, that's what makes Shabbat special, is all the things you're not allowed to do, and because you're not given the quote, unquote, freedom to do those things, you actually give yourself more freedom to be as you are, and to enjoy what's really good about life, which is, you know, the people around you and and having gratitude. So it's just something interesting to think about. Manya Brachear Pashman: It's an interesting perspective. I am a big fan of free speech. Jonah Platt: As are most people. It's the hill many people will die on. Manya Brachear Pashman: Educated free speech, though, right? That's where the tension is, right? And in a democracy you have to push for education and try to make sure that, you know, people are well informed, so that they don't say stupid things, but they are going to say stupid things and I like that freedom. Did you ever foresee becoming a Jewish advocate? Jonah Platt: No. I . . . well, that's a little disingenuous. I would say, you know, in 2021 when there was violence between Israel and Gaza in the spring over this Sheik Jarrah neighborhood. That's when I first started using what little platform I had through my entertainment career to start speaking very, you know, small things, but about Israel and about Jewish life, just organically, because I am, at the time, certainly much more well educated, even now, than I was then. But I was more tuned in than the average person, let's say, and I felt like I could provide some value. I could help bring some clarity to what was a really confusing situation at that time, like, very hard to decipher. And I could just sense what people were thinking and feeling. I'm well, tapped into the Jewish world. I speak to Jews all over the place. My, as I said, my family's everywhere. So already I know Jews all over the country, and I felt like I could bring some value. And so it started very slowly. It was a trickle, and then it started to turn up a little bit, a little bit more, a little bit more. I went on a trip to Israel in April of 2023. It's actually the two year anniversary today of that trip, with the Tel Aviv Institute, run by a guy named Hen Mazzig, who I'm sure, you know, well, I'm sure he's been on the show, yeah. And that was, like, sort of the next step for me, where I was surrounded by other people speaking about things online, some about Jewish stuff, some not. Just seeing these young, diverse people using their platforms in whatever way, that was inspiring to me. I was like, I'm gonna go home, I'm gonna start using this more. And then October 7 happened, and I couldn't pull myself away from it. It's just where I wanted to be. It's what I wanted to be spending my time and energy doing. It felt way too important. The stakes felt way too high, to be doing anything else. It's crazy to me that anybody could do anything else but be focusing on that. And now here we are. So I mean, in a way, could I have seen it? No. But have I sort of, looking back on it, been leaning this way? Kinda. Manya Brachear Pashman: Do you think it would've you would've turned toward advocacy if people hadn't been misinformed or confused about Israel? Or do you think that you would've really been more focused on entertainment. Jonah Platt: Yeah, I think probably. I mean, if we lived in some upside down, amazing world where everybody was getting everything right, and, you know, there'd be not so much for me to do. The only hesitation is, like, as I said, a lot of my content tries to be, you know, celebratory about Jewish identity. I think actually, I would still be talking because I've observed, you know, divisions and misunderstandings within the Jewish community that have bothered me, and so some of the things I've talked about have been about that, about like, hey, Jews, cut it out. Like, be nice to each other. You're getting this wrong. So I think that would still have been there, and something that I would have been passionate about speaking out on. Inclusivity is just so important to me, but definitely would be a lot lower stakes and a little more relaxed if everybody was on the same universe in regards to Israel. Manya Brachear Pashman: You were relatively recently in Washington, DC. Jonah Platt: Yeah. Manya Brachear Pashman: For the White House Correspondents Dinner. I was confused, because he just said he was in Krakow, so maybe I was wrong. Jonah Platt: I flew direct from Krakow to DC, got off the plane, went to the hotel where the dinner was, changed it to my tux, and went downstairs for the dinner. Manya Brachear Pashman: Wow. Jonah Platt: Yeah. Manya Brachear Pashman: Are you tired? Jonah Platt: No, actually, it's amazing. I'll give a shout out. There's a Jewish businessman, a guy named Andrew Herr, who I was in a program with through Federation called CLI in LA, has started a company called Fly Kit. This is a major shout out to Fly Kit that you download the app, you plug in your trip, they send you supplements, and the app tells you when to take them, when to eat, when to nap, when to have coffee, in an attempt to help orient yourself towards the time zone you need to be on. And I have found it very useful on my international trips, and I'm not going to travel without it again. Yeah. Manya Brachear Pashman: Wow. White House Correspondents dinner. You posted some really thoughtful words about the work of journalists, which I truly appreciated. But what do American journalists get wrong about Israel and the Jewish connection to Israel? Jonah Platt: The same thing that everybody who gets things wrong are getting wrong. I mean, we're human beings, so we're fallible, and just because you're a journalist doesn't make you immune to propaganda, because propaganda is a powerful tool. If it didn't work, people wouldn't be using it. I mean, I was just looking at a post today from our friend Hen Mazzig about all the different ways the BBC is getting things horribly, horribly wrong. I think part of it is there's ill intent. I mean, there is malice. For certain people, where they have an agenda. And unfortunately, you know, however much integrity journalists have, there is a news media environment where we've made it okay to have agenda-driven news where it's just not objective. And somehow it's okay for these publications that we've long trusted to have a story they want to tell. I don't know why that's acceptable. It's a business, and I guess maybe if that, if the dollars are there, it's reinforcing itself. But reporters get wrong so much. I'd say the fundamental misunderstanding that journalists as human beings get wrong, that everybody gets wrong, is that Jews are not a group of rich, white Europeans with a common religion. That's like the number one misunderstanding about Jews. Because most people either don't know Jews at all on planet Earth. They've never met one. They know nothing about it except what they see on the news or in a film, or the Jews that they know happen to maybe be white, rich, European ancestry people, and so they assume that's everybody. When, of course, that's completely false, and erases the majority of Jews from planet Earth. So I think we're missing that, and then we're also missing what Israel means to the Jewish people is deeply misunderstood and very purposefully erased. Part of what's tricky about all of this is that the people way behind the curtain, the terrorists, the real I hate Israel people agenda. They're the ones who plant these seeds. But they're like 5% of the noise. They're secret. They're in the back. And then everybody else, without realizing it, is picking up these things. And so the vast majority of people are, let's say, erasing Jewish connection to Israel without almost even realizing they're doing it because they have been fed this, because propaganda is a powerful tool, and they believe it to be true what they've been told. And literally, don't realize what they're doing. And if they were in a calm environment and somebody was able to explain to them, Hey, here's what you're doing, here's what you're missing, I think, I don't know, 75% of people would be like, holy crap. I've been getting this wrong. I had no idea. Maybe even higher than 75% they really don't know. And that's super dangerous. And I think the media and journalism is playing a major role in that. Sometimes things get, you know, retracted and apologized for. But the damage is done, especially when it comes to social media. If you put out, Israel just bombed this hospital and killed a bunch of doctors, and then the next day you're like, Oops, sorry, that was wrong. Nobody cares. All they saw was Israel bombed a bunch of doctors and that seed's already been planted. So it's been a major issue the info war, while you know, obviously not the same stakes as a real life and death physical war has been as important a piece of this overall war as anything. And I wouldn't say it's going great. Manya Brachear Pashman: Did it come up at all at the Correspondent's Dinner, or more of a celebration? Jonah Platt: No, thank God. Yeah. It was more of a celebration. It was more of just sort of it was cool, because there was no host this year, there was no comedian, there was no president, he didn't come. So it was really like being in the clubhouse with the journalists, and you could sense they were sort of happy about it. Was like, just like a family reunion, kind of a vibe, like, it's just our people. We're all on the same page. We're the people who care about getting it right. We care about journalistic integrity. We're here to support each other. It was really nice. I mean, I liked being sort of a fly on the wall of this other group that I had not really been amongst before, and seeing them in their element in this like industry party, which was cool. Manya Brachear Pashman: Okay, so we talked about journalists. What about your colleagues in the entertainment industry? Are you facing backlash from them, either out of malice or ignorance? Jonah Platt: I'm not facing any backlash from anybody of importance if I'm not getting an opportunity, or someone's written me off or something. I don't know that, you know, I have no idea if I'm now on somebody's list of I'm never gonna work with that guy. I don't know. I don't imagine I am. If I am, it says way more about that person than it does about me, because my approach, as we've discussed, is to try to be really inclusive and honest and, like, objective. And if I get something wrong, I'll delete it, or I'll say I got it wrong. I try to be very transparent and really open that, like I'm trying my best to get things right and to be fair. And if you have a problem with that. You know, you've got a problem. I don't have a problem. So I wouldn't say any backlash. In fact, I mean, I get a lot of support, and a lot of, you know, appreciation from people in the industry who either are also speaking out or maybe too afraid to, and are glad that other people are doing it, which I have thoughts about too, but you know, when people are afraid to speak out about the stuff because of the things they're going to lose. Like, to a person, maybe you lose stuff, but like, you gain so many more other people and opportunities, people who were just sort of had no idea that you were on the same team and were waiting for you to say something, and they're like, Oh my God, you're in this with me too. Great, let's do something together, or whatever it is. So I've gotten, it's been much more positive than negative in terms of people I actually care about. I mean, I've gotten fans of entertainment who have nasty things to say about me, but not colleagues or industry peers. Manya Brachear Pashman: So you would declare yourself a proud Zionist. Jonah Platt: Yes. Manya Brachear Pashman: But you wrote a column in The Forward recently over Passover saying, let's retire the word Zionist. Why? Jonah Platt: Yes. I recently wrote an op-ed and actually talked about on my pod as well about why I feel we should retire the word Zionism. Not that I think we actually are. It's pretty well in use. But my main reasoning was, that the way we all understand Zionism, those of us who actually know what it is, unlike a lot of people –is the belief that Jews should have self determination, sovereignty in some piece of the land to which they are indigenous. We have that. We've had it for almost 80 years. I don't know why we need to keep using a word that frames it as aspirational, that like, I believe we should have this thing. We already have it. And I feel by sort of leaving that sentence without a period, we're sort of suggesting that non-existence is somehow on the table. Like, if I just protest enough, Israel's going to stop existing. I want to slam that door closed. I don't think we need to be the, I believe that Israel should exist people anymore. I think we should be the I love Israel people, or I support Israel people. I'm an Israel patriot. I'm a lover of Israel, whatever the phrase may be. To me, the idea that we should continue to sort of play by their framework of leaving that situation on the table, is it only hurts us, and I just don't think we need it. Manya Brachear Pashman: It lets others define it, in their own terms. Jonah Platt: Yeah, we're playing, sort of by the rules of the other people's game. And I know, you know, I heard when I put that out, especially from Israelis, who it to them, it sort of means patriot, and they feel a lot of great pride with it, which I totally understand. But the sort of more universal understanding of what that word is, and certainly of what the Movement was, was about that aspirational creation of a land, that a land's been created. Not only has it been created, it's, you know, survived through numerous wars, it's stronger than ever. You know, third-most NASDAQ companies in the world. We need to just start talking about it from like, yeah, we're here. We're not going anywhere, kind of a place. And not, a we should exist, kind of a place. Manya Brachear Pashman: So it's funny, you said, we all know what Zionism is. And I grinned a little bit, because there are so many different definitions of Zionism. I mean, also, Zionism was a very inclusive progressive ideology packaged in there, right, that nobody talks about because it's just kind of not, we just don't talk about it anymore. So what else about the conversation needs to change? How do we move forward in a productive, constructive way when it comes to teaching about Jewish identity and securing the existence of Israel? Jonah Platt: In a way, those two things are related, and in a way they're not. You can have a conversation about Jewish identity without necessarily going deep down the Israel hole. But it is critical that people understand how central a connection to Israel is, to Jewish identity. And people are allowed to believe whatever they want. And you can be someone who says, Well, you know, Israel is not important to me, and that's okay, that's you, but you have to at least be clear eyed that that is an extreme and fringe position. That is not a mainstream thing. And you're going to be met with mistrust and confusion and anger and a sense of betrayal, if that's your position. So I think we need to be clear eyed about that and be able to have that conversation. And I think if we can get to the place where we can acknowledge that in each other. Like, dude, have your belief. I don't agree with it. I think it's crazy. Like, you gotta at least know that we all think you're crazy having that idea. And if they can get to the base, we're like, yeah, I understand that, but I'm gonna believe what I'm gonna believe, then we can have conversations and, like, then we can talk. I think the, I need to change your mind conversation, it doesn't usually work. It has to be really gently done. And I'm speaking this as much from failure as I am from success. As much as we try, sometimes our emotions come to the fore of these conversations, and that's–it's not gonna happen. You know, on my pod, I've talked about something called, I call the four C's of difficult conversation. And I recently, like, tried to have a conversation. I did not adhere to my four C's, and it did not go well. And so I didn't take my own advice. You have to come, like, legitimately ready to be curious to the other person's point of view, wanting to hear what they have to say. You know, honoring their truth, even if it is something that hurts you deeply or that you abhor. You can say that, but you have to say it from a place of respect and honoring. If you want it to go somewhere. If you just want to like, let somebody have it, go ahead, let somebody have it, but you're definitely not going to be building towards anything that. Manya Brachear Pashman: So before I let you go, can you tell us a little bit about The Mensch? Jonah Platt: Yeah, sure. So the Mensch is one of a couple of Jewish entertainment projects I'm now involved with in the last year, which, you know, I went from sort of zero to now three. The Mensch is a really unique film that's in development now. We're gonna be shooting this summer that I'm a producer on. And it's the story of a 30 something female rabbi in New Mexico who, life just isn't where she thought it would be. She's not connecting with her congregation. She's not as far along as she thought things would be. Her synagogue is failing, and there's an antisemitic event at her synagogue, and the synagogue gets shut down. And she's at the center of it. Two weeks later, the synagogue's reopening. She's coming back to work, and as part of this reopening to try to bring some some life and some juzz to the proceedings, one of the congregants from the synagogue, the most eccentric one, who's sort of a pariah, who's being played by Jennifer Goodwin, who's a fantastic actress and Jewish advocate, donates her family's priceless Holocaust-era Torah to the synagogue, and the rabbi gets tasked with going to pick it up and bring it. As things often happen for this rabbi, like a bunch of stuff goes wrong. Long story short, she ends up on a bus with the Torah in a bag, like a sports duffel bag, and gets into an altercation with somebody who has the same tattoo as the perpetrator of the event at her synagogue, and unbeknownst to the two of them, they have the same sports duffel bag, and they accidentally swap them. So she shows up at the synagogue with Jennifer Goodwin, they're opening it up, expecting to see a Torah, and it's full of bricks of cocaine. And the ceremony is the next day, and they have less than 24 hours to track down this torah through the seedy, drug-dealing, white nationalist underbelly of the city. And, you know, drama and hilarity ensue. And there's lots of sort of fun, a magic realism to some of the proceedings that give it like a biblical tableau, kind of sense. There's wandering in the desert and a burning cactus and things of that nature. So it's just, it's really unique, and what drew me to it is what I'm looking for in any sort of Jewish project that I'm supporting, whether as a viewer or behind the scenes, is a contemporary story that's not about Jews dying in the Holocaust. That is a story of people just being people, and those people are Jewish. And so the things that they think about, the way they live, maybe their jobs, even in this case, are Jewish ones. But it's not like a story of the Jews in that sense. The only touch point the majority of the world has for Jews is the news and TV and film. And so if that's how people are gonna learn about us, we need to take that seriously and make sure they're learning who we really are, which is regular people, just like you, dealing with the same kind of problems, the same relationships, and just doing that through a little bit of a Jewish lens. So the movie is entertaining and unique and totally fun, but it also just happens to be about Jews and rabbis. Manya Brachear Pashman: And so possible, spoiler alert, does the White Nationalist end up being the Mensch in the end? Jonah Platt: No, no, the white nationalist is not the mensch. They're the villain. Manya Brachear Pashman: I thought maybe there was a conversion moment in this film. Jonah Platt: No conversion. But sort of, one of the themes you take away is, anybody can be a mensch. You don't necessarily need to be the best rabbi in the world to be a mensch. We're all fallible, flawed human beings. And what's important is that we try to do good and we try to do the right thing, and usually that's enough. Manya Brachear Pashman: Well, I thought that kind of twist would be… Jonah Platt: I'll take it up with the writer. Manya Brachear Pashman: Well, Jonah, you are truly a mensch for joining us on the sidelines here today. Jonah Platt: Thank you. Manya Brachear Pashman: Safe travels, wherever you're headed next. Jonah Platt: Thank you very much. Happy to be with you.

How has the media distorted Israel's response to the October 7 Hamas attacks? In this powerful conversation from AJC Global Forum 2025, award-winning journalist and former AP correspondent Matti Friedman breaks down the media bias, misinformation, and double standards shaping global coverage of Israel. Moderated by AJC Chief Communications and Strategy Officer Belle Etra Yoeli, this episode explores how skewed narratives have taken hold in the media, in a climate of activist journalism. A must-listen for anyone concerned with truth in journalism, Israel advocacy, and combating disinformation in today's media landscape. Take Action: Take 15 seconds and urge your elected leaders to send a clear, united message: We stand with Israel. Take action now. Resources: Global Forum 2025 session with Matti Friedman:: Watch the full video. Listen – AJC Podcasts: The Forgotten Exodus: Untold stories of Jews who left or were driven from Arab nations and Iran People of the Pod: Latest Episodes: John Spencer's Key Takeaways After the 12-Day War: Air Supremacy, Intelligence, and Deterrence Iran's Secret Nuclear Program and What Comes Next in the Iranian Regime vs. Israel War Why Israel Had No Choice: Inside the Defensive Strike That Shook Iran's Nuclear Program Follow People of the Pod on your favorite podcast app, and learn more at AJC.org/PeopleofthePod You can reach us at: peopleofthepod@ajc.org If you've appreciated this episode, please be sure to tell your friends, and rate and review us on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Transcript of the Interview: Manya Brachear Pashman: I've had the privilege of interviewing journalism colleague Matti Friedman: twice on this podcast. In 2022, Matti took listeners behind the scenes of Jerusalem's AP bureau where he had worked between 2006 and 2011 and shared some insight on what happens when news outlets try to oversimplify the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Then in 2023, I got to sit down with Matti in Jerusalem to talk about his latest book on Leonard Cohen and how the 1973 Yom Kippur War was a turning point both for the singer and for Israel. Earlier this year, Matti came to New York for AJC Global Forum 2025, and sat down with Belle Yoeli, AJC Chief Strategy and Communications Officer. They rehashed some of what we discussed before, but against an entirely different backdrop: post-October 7. For this week's episode, we bring you a portion of that conversation. Belle Yoeli: Hi, everyone. Great to see all of you. Thank you so much for being here. Matti, thank you for being here. Matti Friedman: Thanks for having me. Belle Yoeli: As you can tell by zero empty seats in this room, you have a lot of fans, and unless you want to open with anything, I'm going to jump right in. Okay, great. So for those of you who don't know, in September 2024 Matti wrote a piece in The Free Press that is a really great foundation for today's discussion. In When We Started to Lie, Matti, you reflect on two pieces that you had written in 2015 about issues of media coverage of Israel during Operation Protective Edge in 2014. And this piece basically talked about the conclusions you drew and how they've evolved since October 7. We're gonna get to those conclusions, but first, I'm hoping you can describe for everyone what were the issues of media coverage of Israel that you first identified based on the experience in 2014? Matti Friedman: First of all, thanks so much for having me here, and thanks for all of the amazing work that you guys are doing. So it's a real honor for me. I was a reporter for the AP, between 2006 and the very end of 2011, in Jerusalem. I was a reporter and editor. The AP, of course, as you know, is the American news agency. It's the world's largest news organization, according to the AP, according to Reuters, it's Reuters. One of them is probably right, but it's a big deal in the news world. And I had an inside view inside one of the biggest AP bureaus. In fact, the AP's biggest International Bureau, which was in Jerusalem. So I can try to sketch the problems that I saw as a reporter there. It would take me seven or eight hours, and apparently we only have four or five hours for this lunch, so I have to keep it short. But I would say there are two main problems. We often get very involved. When we talk about problems with coverage of Israel. We get involved with very micro issues like, you call it a settlement. I call it a neighborhood. Rockets, you know, the Nakba, issues of terminology. But in fact, there are two major problems that are much bigger, and because they're bigger, they're often harder to see. One of the things that I noticed at the Bureau was the scale of coverage of Israel. So at the time that I was at the AP, again, between 2006 and the very end of 2011 we had about 40 full time staffers covering Israel. That's print reporters like me, stills photographers, TV crews. Israel, as most of you probably know, is a very small country. As a percentage of the world's surface, Israel is 1/100 of 1% of the surface of the world, and as a percentage of the land mass of the Arab world, Israel is 1/5 of 1%. 0.2%. And we had 40 people covering it. And just as a point of comparison, that was dramatically more people than we had at the time covering China. There are about 10 million people today in Israel proper, in China, there are 1.3 billion. We had more people in Israel than we had in China. We had more people in Israel than we had in India, which is another country of about 1.3 billion people. We had more people in Israel than we had in all of the countries of Sub-Saharan Africa. That's 50 something countries. So we had more people in Israel than we had in all of those countries combined. And sometimes I say that to Jews, I say we covered Israel more than we covered China, and people just stare at me blankly, because it's Israel. So of course, that makes perfect sense. I happen to think Israel is the most important country in the world because I live there. But if the news is meant to be a rational analysis of events on planet Earth, you cannot cover Israel more than you cover the continent of Africa. It just doesn't make any sense. So one of the things that first jumped out at me– actually, that's making me sound smarter than I am. It didn't jump out at me at first. It took a couple of years. And I just started realizing that it was very strange that the world's largest organization had its largest international bureau in the State of Israel, which is a very small country, very small conflict in numeric terms. And yet there was this intense global focus on it that made people think that it was the most important story in the world. And it definitely occupies a place in the American political imagination that is not comparable to any other international conflict. So that's one part of the problem. That was the scope, the other part was the context. And it took me a while to figure this out, but the coverage of Israel is framed as an Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The conflict is defined in those terms, the Israeli Palestinian conflict, and everyone in this room has heard it discussed in those terms. Sometimes we discuss it in those terms, and that is because the news folks have framed the conflict in those terms. So at the AP bureau in Jerusalem, every single day, we had to write a story that was called, in the jargon of the Bureau, Is-Pals, Israelis, Palestinians. And it was the daily wrap of the Israeli Palestinian conflict. So what Netanyahu said, what Abbas said, rockets, settlers, Hamas, you know, whatever, the problem is that there isn't an Israeli=Palestinian conflict. And I know that sounds crazy, because everyone thinks there is. And of course, we're seeing conflicts play out in the most tragic way right now in Gaza. But most of Israel's wars have not been fought against Palestinians. Israel has unfortunately fought wars against Egyptians and Jordanians and Lebanese and Iraqis. And Israel's most important enemy at the moment, is Iran, right? The Iranians are not Palestinian. The Iranians are not Arab. They're Muslim, but they're not Arab. So clearly, there is a broader regional conflict that's going on that is not an Israeli Palestinian conflict, and we've seen it in the past year. If we had a satellite in space looking down and just following the paths of ballistic missiles and rockets fired at Israel. Like a photograph of these red trails of rockets fired at Israel. You'd see rockets being fired from Iraq and from Yemen and from Lebanon and from Gaza and from Iran. You'd see the contours of a regional conflict. And if you understand it's a regional conflict, then you understand the way Israelis see it. There are in the Arab world, 300 million people, almost all of them Muslim. And in one corner of that world, there are 7 million Jews, who are Israelis. And if we zoom out even farther to the level of the Islamic world, we'll see that there are 2 billion people in the Islamic world. There's some argument about the numbers, but it's roughly a quarter of the world's population. And in one corner of that world there, there are 7 million Israeli Jews. The entire Jewish population on planet Earth is a lot smaller than the population of Cairo. So the idea that this is an Israeli-Palestinian conflict, where Israelis are the stronger side, where Israelis are the dominant actor, and where Israelis are, let's face it, the bad guy in the story, that's a fictional presentation of a story that actually works in a completely different way. So if you take a small story and make it seem big. If you take a complicated regional story and you make it seem like a very small local story involving only Israelis and Palestinians, then you get the highly simplified but very emotive narrative that everyone is being subjected to now. And you get this portrayal of a villainous country called Israel that really looms in the liberal imagination of the West as an embodiment of the worst possible qualities of the age. Belle Yoeli: Wow. So already you were seeing these issues when you were reporter, earlier on. But like this, some of this was before and since, since productive edge. This is over 10 years ago, and here we are. So October 7 happens. You already know these issues exist. You've identified them. How would you describe because obviously we have a lot of feelings about this, but like, strictly as a journalist, how would you describe the coverage that you've seen since during October 7, in its aftermath? Is it just these issues? Have they? Have they expanded? Are there new issues in play? What's your analysis? Matti Friedman: The coverage has been great. I really have very I have no criticism of it. I think it's very accurate. I think that I, in a way, I was lucky to have been through what I went through 10 or 15 years ago, and I wasn't blindsided on October 7, as many people were, many people, quite naturally, don't pay close attention to this. And even people who are sympathetic to Israel, I think, were not necessarily convinced that my argument about the press was right. And I think many people thought it was overstated. And you can read those articles from 2014 one was in tablet and one was in the Atlantic, but it's basically the two chapters of the same argument. And unfortunately, I think that those the essays, they stand up. In fact, if you don't really look at the date of the essays, they kind of seem that they could have been written in the past year and a half. And I'm not happy about that. I think that's and I certainly wrote them in hopes that they would somehow make things better. But the issues that I saw in the press 15 years ago have only been exacerbated since then. And October seven didn't invent the wheel. The issues were pre existing, but it took everything that I saw and kind of supercharged it. So if I talked about ideological conformity in the bureaus that has been that has become much more extreme. A guy like me, I was hired in 2006 at the AP. I'm an Israeli of center left political leanings. Hiring me was not a problem in 22,006 by the time I left the AP, at the end of 2011 I'm pretty sure someone like me would not have been hired because my views, which are again, very centrist Israeli views, were really beyond the pale by the time that I left the AP, and certainly, and certainly today, the thing has really moved what I saw happening at the AP. And I hate picking on the AP because they were just unfortunate enough to hire me. That was their only error, but what I'm saying about them is true of a whole new. Was heard. It's true of the Times and CNN and the BBC, the news industry really works kind of as a it has a herd mentality. What happened was that news decisions were increasingly being made by people who are not interested in explanatory journalism. They were activists. Activists had moved into the key positions in the Bureau, and they had a very different idea of what press coverage was supposed to do. I would say, and I tried to explain it in that article for the free press, when I approach a news story, when I approach the profession of journalism, the question that I'm asking is, what's going on? That's the question I think you're supposed to ask, what's going on? How can I explain it in a way that's as accurate as as possible? The question that was increasingly being asked was not what's going on. The question was, who does this serve? That's an activist question. So when you look at a story, you don't ask, is it true, or is it not true? You ask, who's it going to help? Is it going to help the good guys, or is it going to help the bad guys? So if Israel in the story is the villain, then a story that makes Israel seem reasonable, reasonable or rational or sympathetic needs to be played down to the extent possible or made to disappear. And I can give you an example from my own experience. At the very end of 2008 two reporters in my bureau, people who I know, learned of a very dramatic peace offer that Prime Minister Ehud Olmert had made to the Palestinians. So Olmert, who was the prime minister at the time, had made a very far reaching offer that was supposed to see a Palestinian state in all of Gaza, most of the West Bank, with land swaps for territory that Israel was going to retain, and a very far reaching international consortium agreement to run the Old City of Jerusalem. Was a very dramatic. It was so far reaching, I think that Israelis probably wouldn't have supported it. But it was offered to the Palestinian side, and the Palestinians rejected it as insufficient. And two of our reporters knew about this, and they'd seen a map of the offer. And this was obviously a pretty big story for a bureau that had as the thrust of its coverage the peace process. The two reporters who had the story were ordered to drop it, they were not allowed to cover the story. And there were different explanations. And they didn't, by the way, AP did not publish the story at the time, even though we were the first to have it. Eventually, it kind of came out and in other ways, through other news organizations. But we knew at first. Why were we not allowed to cover it? Because it would have made the Israelis who we were trying to villainize and demonize, it would have made Israel seem like it was trying to solve the conflict on kind of reasonable lines, which, of course, was true at that time. So that story would have upended the thrust of our news coverage. So it had to be made to go away, even though it was true, it would have helped the wrong people. And that question of who does this serve has destroyed, I want to say all, but much, of what used to be mainstream news coverage, and it's not just where Israel is concerned. You can look at a story like the mental health of President Biden, right. Something's going on with Biden at the end of his term. It's a huge global news story, and the press, by and large, won't touch it, because why? I mean, it's true, right? We're all seeing that it's true, but why can't you touch it? Because it would help the wrong people. It would help the Republicans who in the press are the people who you are not supposed to help. The origins of COVID, right? We heard one story about that. The true story seems to be a different story. And there are many other examples of stories that are reported because they help the right people, or not reported because they would help the wrong people. And I saw this thinking really come into action in Israel 10 or 15 years ago, and unfortunately, it's really spread to include the whole mainstream press scene and really kill it. I mean, essentially, anyone interested in trying to get a solid sense of what's going on, we have very few options. There's not a lot, there's not a lot out there. So that's the broader conclusion that I drew from what I thought at the time was just a very small malfunction involving Israel coverage. But Israel coverage ends up being a symptom of something much bigger, as Jews often are the symptom of something much bigger that's going on. So my problems in the AP bureau 15 years ago were really a kind of maybe a canary in the coal mine, or a whiff of something much bigger that we were all going to see happen, which is the transformation of the important liberal institutions of the west into kind of activist arms of a very radical ideology that has as its goal the transformation of the west into something else. And that's true of the press, and it's true of NGO world, places like Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, which were one thing 30 years ago and are something very different today. And it's also true of big parts of the academy. It's true of places like Columbia and places like Harvard, they still have the logo, they still have the name, but they serve a different purpose, and I just happen to be on the ground floor of it as a reporter. Belle Yoeli: So obviously, this concept of who does this serve, and this activist journalism is deeply concerning, and you actually mentioned a couple other areas, academia, obviously we're in that a lot right now in terms of what's going on campus. So I guess a couple of questions on that. First of all, think about this very practically, tachlis, in the day to day. I'm a journalist, and I go to write about what's happening in Gaza. What would you say is, if you had to throw out a percentage, are all of them aware of this activist journalist tendency? Or you think it's like, like intentional for many of them, or it's sort of they've been educated that way, and it's their worldview in such a way that they don't even know that they're not reporting the news in a very biased way. Does that make sense? Matti Friedman: Totally. I think that many people in the journalism world today view their job as not as explaining a complicated situation, but as swaying people toward the correct political conclusion. Journalism is power, and the power has to be wielded in support of justice. Now, justice is very slippery, and, you know, choosing who's in the right is very, very slippery, and that's how journalism gets into a lot of trouble. Instead of just trying to explain what's going on and then leave, you're supposed to leave the politics and the activism to other people. Politics and activism are very important. But unless everyone can agree on what is going on, it's impossible to choose the kind of act, the kind of activism that would be useful. So when the journalists become activists, then no one can understand what's what's going on, because the story itself is fake, and there are many, many examples of it. But you know, returning to what you asked about, about October 7, and reporting post October 7, you can really see it happen. The massacres of October 7 were very problematic for the ideological strain that now controls a lot of the press, because it's counterintuitive. You're not supposed to sympathize with Israelis. And yet, there were a few weeks after October 7 when they were forced to because the nature of the atrocities were so heinous that they could not be ignored. So you had the press covering what happened on October 7, but you could feel it. As someone who knows that scene, you could feel there was a lot of discomfort. There was a lot of discomfort. It wasn't their comfort zone, and you knew that within a few weeks, maybe a month, it was gonna snap back at the first opportunity. When did it snap back? In the story of the Al Ahli hospital strike. If you remember that a few weeks in, there's a massive global story that Israel has rocketed Hospital in Gaza and killed about 500 people and and then you can see the kind of the comfort the comfort zone return, because the story that the press is primed to cover is a story about villainous Israelis victimizing innocent Palestinians, and now, now we're back. Okay. Now Israel's rocketing hospital. The problem was that it hadn't happened, and it was that a lot of stories don't happen, and they're allowed to stand. But this story was so far from the truth that even the people involved couldn't make it work, and it had to be retracted, but it was basically too late. And then as soon as the Israeli ground offensive got into swing in Gaza, then the story really becomes the same old story, which is a story of Israel victimizing Palestinians for no reason. And you'll never see Hamas militants in uniform in Gaza. You just see dead civilians, and you'll see the aftermath of a rocket strike when the, you know, when an Israeli F16 takes out the launcher, but you will never see the strike. Which is the way it's worked in Gaza since the very end of 2008 which is when the first really bad round of violence in Gaza happens, which is when I'm at the AP. As far as I know, I was the first staffer to erase information from the story, because we were threatened by Hamas, which happened at the very end of 2008. We had a great reporter in Gaza, a Palestinian who had always been really an excellent reporter. We had a detail in a story. The detail was a crucial one. It was that Hamas fighters were dressed as civilians and were being counted as civilians in the death toll, an important thing to know, that went out in an AP story. The reporter called me a few hours later. It was clear that someone had spoken to him, and he told me, I was on the desk in Jerusalem, so I was kind of writing the story from the main bureau in Jerusalem. And he said, Matti, you have to take that detail out of the story. And it was clear that someone had threatened him. I took the detail out of the story. I suggested to our editors that we note in an Editor's Note that we were now complying with Hamas censorship. I was overruled, and from that point in time, the AP, like all of its sister organizations, collaborates with Hamas censorship in Gaza. What does that mean? You'll see a lot of dead civilians, and you won't see dead militants. You won't have a clear idea of what the Hamas military strategy is. And this is the kicker, the center of the coverage will be a number, a casualty number, that is provided to the press by something called the Gaza health ministry, which is Hamas. And we've been doing that since 2008, and it's a way of basically settling the story before you get into any other information. Because when you put, you know, when you say 50 Palestinians were killed, and one Israeli on a given day, it doesn't matter what else you say. The numbers kind of tell their own story, and it's a way of settling the story with something that sounds like a concrete statistic. And the statistic is being, you know, given to us by one of the combatant sides. But because the reporters sympathize with that side, they're happy to play along. So since 2008, certainly since 2014 when we had another serious war in Gaza, the press has not been covering Gaza, the press has been essentially an amplifier for one of the most poisonous ideologies on Earth. Hamas has figured out how to make the press amplify its messaging rather than covering Hamas. There are no Western reporters in Gaza. All of the reporters in Gaza are Palestinians, and those people fall into three categories. Some of them identify with Hamas. Some of them are intimidated by Hamas and won't cross Hamas, which makes a lot of sense. I wouldn't want to cross Hamas either. So either. And the third category is people who actually belong to Hamas. That's where the information from Gaza is coming from. And if you're credulous, then of course, you're going to get a story that makes Israel look pretty bad. Belle Yoeli: So this is very depressing. That's okay. It's very helpful, very depressing. But on that note, I would ask you so whether, because you spoke about this problem in terms, of, of course, the coverage of Israel, but that it's it's also more widespread you talk, you spoke about President Biden in your article, you name other examples of how this sort of activist journalism is affecting everything we read. So what should everyone in this room be reading, truly, from your opinion. This is Matti's opinion. But if you want to you want to get information from our news and not activist journalism, obviously The Free Press, perhaps. But are there other sites or outlets that you think are getting this more down the line, or at least better than some, some better than others? Matti Friedman: No, it's just The Free Press. No. I mean, it's a question that I also wrestle with. I haven't given up on everyone, and even in publications that have, I think, largely lost the plot, you'll still find good stuff on occasion. So I try to keep my eye on certain reporters whose name I know. I often ask not just on Israel, but on anything, does this reporter speak the language of the country that they're covering? You'd be shocked at how rare that is for Americans. A lot of the people covering Ukraine have no idea what language they speak in Ukraine, and just as someone who covers Israel, I'm aware of the low level of knowledge that many of the Western reporters have. You'll find really good stuff still in the Atlantic. The Atlantic has managed, against steep odds, to maintain its equilibrium amid all this. The New Yorker, unfortunately, less so, but you'll still see, on occasion, things that are good. And there are certain reporters who are, you know, you can trust. Isabel Kirchner, who writes for The New York Times, is an old colleague of mine from the Jerusalem report. She's excellent, and they're just people who are doing their job. But by and large, you have to be very, very suspicious of absolutely everything that you read and see. And I'm not saying that as someone who I'm not happy to say that, and I certainly don't identify with, you know, the term fake news, as it has been pushed by President Trump. I think that fake news is, you know, for those guys, is an attempt to avoid scrutiny. They're trying to, you know, neuter the watchdog so that they can get away with whatever they want. I don't think that crowd is interested in good press coverage. Unfortunately, the term fake news sticks because it's true. That's why it has worked. And the press, instead of helping people navigate the blizzard of disinformation that we're all in, they've joined it. People who are confused about what's going on, should be able to open up the New York Times or go to the AP and figure out what's going on, but because, and I saw it happen, instead of covering the circus, the reporters became dancing bears in the circus. So no one can make heads or tails of anything. So we need to be very careful. Most headlines that are out there are out there to generate outrage, because that's the most predictable generator of clicks, which is the, we're in a click economy. So I actually think that the less time you spend following headlines and daily news, the better off you'll be. Because you can follow the daily news for a year, and by the end of the year, you'll just be deranged. You'll just be crazy and very angry. If you take that time and use it to read books about, you know, bitten by people who are knowledgeable, or read longer form essays that are, you know, that are obviously less likely to be very simplistic, although not, you know, it's not completely impossible that they will be. I think that's time, that's time better spent. Unfortunately, much of the industry is kind of gone. And we're in an interesting kind of interim moment where it's clear that the old news industry is basically dead and that something new has to happen. And those new things are happening. I mean, The Free Press is part of a new thing that's happening. It's not big enough to really move the needle in a dramatic way yet, but it might be, and I think we all have to hope that new institutions emerge to fill the vacuum. The old institutions, and I say this with sorrow, and I think that this also might be true of a lot of the academic institutions. They can't be saved. They can't be saved. So if people think that writing an editor, a letter to the editor of the New York Times is going to help. It's not going to help. Sometimes people say, Why don't we just get the top people in the news industry and bring them to Israel and show them the truth? Doesn't help. It's not about knowing or not knowing. They define the profession differently. So it's not about a lack of information. The institutions have changed, and it's kind of irrevocable at this point, and we need new institutions, and one of them is The Free Press, and it's a great model of what to do when faced with fading institutions. By the way, the greatest model of all time in that regard is Zionism. That's what Zionism is. There's a guy in Vienna in 1890 something, and his moment is incredibly contemporary. There's an amazing biography of Herzl called Herzl by Amos Elon. It's an amazing book. If you haven't read it, you should read it, because his moment in cosmopolitan Vienna sounds exactly like now. It's shockingly current. He's in this friendly city. He's a reporter for the New York Times, basically of the Austro Hungarian empire, and he's assimilated, and he's got a Christmas tree in his house, and his son isn't circumcised, and he thinks everything is basically great. And then the light changes. He notices that something has changed in Vienna, and the discourse about Jews changes, and like in a Hollywood movie, the light changes. And he doesn't try to he doesn't start a campaign against antisemitism. He doesn't get on social media and kind of rail against unfair coverage. He sits down in a hotel room in Paris and he writes this pamphlet called the Jewish state, and I literally flew from that state yesterday. So there's a Zionist model where you look at a failing world and you think about radical solutions that involve creation. And I think we're there. And I think Herzl's model is a good one at a dark time you need real creativity. Belle Yoeli: Thank God you found the inspiration there, because I was really, I was really starting to worry. No, in all seriousness, Matti, the saying that these institutions can't be saved. I mean the consequences of this, not just for us as pro-Israel, pro-Jewish advocates, but for our country, for the world, the countries that we come from are tremendous. And the way we've been dealing with this issue and thinking about how, how can you change hearts and minds of individuals about Israel, about the Jewish people, if everything that they're reading is so damaging and most of what they're reading is so damaging and basically saying there's very little that we can do about that. So I am going to push you to dream big with us. We're an advocacy organization. AJC is an advocacy organization. So if you had unlimited resources, right, if you really wanted to make change in this area, to me, it sounds like you're saying we basically need 15 Free Presses or the new institutions to really take on this way. What would you do? What would you do to try to make it so that news media were more like the old days? Matti Friedman: Anyone who wants unlimited resources should not go into journalism. I have found that my resources remain limited. I'll give you an answer that is probably not what you're expecting or not what you want here. I think that the fight can't be won. I think that antisemitism can't be defeated. And I think that resources that are poured into it are resources wasted. And of course, I think that people need legal protection, and they need, you know, lawyers who can protect people from discrimination and from defamation. That's very important. But I know that when people are presented with a problem like antisemitism, which is so disturbing and it's really rocking the world of everyone in this room, and certainly, you know, children and grandchildren, you have a problem and you want to address it, right? You have a really bad rash on your arm. You want the rash to go away, and you're willing to do almost anything to make it go away. This has always been with us. It's always been with us. And you know, we recently celebrated the Seder, and we read in the Seder, in the Haggadah, l'chol dor vador, omdim aleinu l'chaloteinu. Which is, in every generation, they come at us to destroy us. And it's an incredibly depressing worldview. Okay, it's not the way I wanted to see the world when I grew up in Toronto in the 1990s. But in our tradition, we have this idea that this is always gonna be around. And the question is, what do you do? Do you let other people define you? Do you make your identity the fight against the people who hate you? And I think that's a dead end. This crisis is hitting the Jewish people at a moment when many of us don't know who we are, and I think that's why it's hitting so hard. For my grandfather, who was a standard New York Jew, garment industry, Lower East Side, poor union guy. This would not have shaken him, because he just assumed that this was the world like this. The term Jewish identity was not one he ever heard, because it wasn't an issue or something that had to be taught. So if I had unlimited resources, what I would do is I would make sure that young Jewish people have access to the riches of Jewish civilization, I would, you know, institute a program that would allow any young Jewish person to be fluent in Hebrew by the time they finish college. Why is that so important? Why is that such an amazing key? Because if you're fluent in Hebrew, you can open a Tanakh, or you can open a prayer book if you want. Or you can watch Fauda or you can get on a plane to Israel and hit on Israeli guys. Hebrew is the key to Jewish life, and if you have it, a whole world will open up. And it's not one that antisemites can interfere with. It does not depend on the goodwill of our neighbors. It's all about us and what we're doing with ourselves. And I think that if you're rooted in Jewish tradition, and I'm not saying becoming religious, I'm just saying, diving into the riches of Jewish tradition, whether it's history or gemara or Israel, or whatever, if you're if you're deep in there enough, then the other stuff doesn't go away, but it becomes less important. It won't be solved because it can't be solved, but it will fade into the background. And if we make the center of identity the fight against antisemitism, they've won. Why should they be the center of our identity? For a young person who's looking for some way of living or some deep kind of guide to life, the fight against antisemitism is not going to do it, and philanthropy is not going to do it. We come from the wisest and one of the oldest civilizations in the world, and many of us don't know how to open the door to that civilization, and that's in our hands. And if we're not doing it, it's not the fault of the antisemites. It's our own fault. So if I had unlimited resources, which, again, it's not, it's not going to happen unless I make a career change, that's where I would be putting my effort. Internally and not externally. Belle Yoeli: You did find the inspiration, though, again, by pushing Jewish identity, and we appreciate that. It's come up a lot in this conversation, this question about how we fight antisemitism, investing in Jewish identity and who we are, and at the same time, what do we do about it? And I think all of you heard Ted in a different context last night, say, we can hold two things, two thoughts at the same time, right? Two things can be true at the same time. And I think for me, what I took out of this, in addition to your excellent insights, is that that's exactly what we have to be doing. At AJC, we have to be engaging in this advocacy to stand up for the Jewish people and the State of Israel. But that's not the only piece of the puzzle. Of course, we have to be investing in Jewish identity. That's why we bring so many young people to this conference. Of course, we need to be investing in Jewish education. That's not necessarily what AJC is doing, the bulk of our work, but it's a lot of what the Jewish community is doing, and these pieces have to go together. And I want to thank you for raising that up for us, and again, for everything that you said. Thank you all so much for being here. Thank you. Manya Brachear Pashman: If you missed last week's episode, be sure to tune in as John Spencer, Chair of Urban Warfare Studies at West Point, breaks down Israel's high-stakes strike on Iran's nuclear infrastructure and the U.S. decision to enter the fight.

Since Israel launched Operation Rising Lion—a precise and defensive military campaign aimed at preventing the Iranian regime from acquiring nuclear weapons—Iran has responded with a barrage of ballistic missiles and drones, indiscriminately targeting Israeli civilians. Dr. Matthew Levitt, director of the Reinhard Program on Counterterrorism and Intelligence at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, and a leading expert on Iran's global terror network, explains what's at stake—and what could come next. Take Action: We must stop a regime that vows to murder millions of Israelis from gaining the weapons to do it. Urge your elected leaders to assure that Israel has all the necessary support to end Iran's nuclear threat. Resources and Analysis: Iranian Regime vs. Israel War Explained: What You Should Know AJC Advocacy Anywhere: Israel and Iran: Latest Updates, Global Responses, and the Path Ahead 5 Key Reasons Behind Israel's Defensive Strike on Iran's Imminent Nuclear Threat Listen – AJC Podcasts: The Forgotten Exodus: Untold stories of Jews who left or were driven from Arab nations and Iran People of the Pod: Latest Episodes: Why Israel Had No Choice: Inside the Defensive Strike That Shook Iran's Nuclear Program What Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks' State of the Jewish World Teaches Us Today Follow People of the Pod on your favorite podcast app, and learn more at AJC.org/PeopleofthePod You can reach us at: peopleofthepod@ajc.org If you've appreciated this episode, please be sure to tell your friends, and rate and review us on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Transcript of the Interview: Israel's shadow war with the Iranian regime, the world's leading state sponsor of terrorism, erupted into open conflict last week following a stunning report from the International Atomic Energy Agency that confirmed Iran was much closer to obtaining nuclear weapons than previously known. Since Israel launched a wave of attacks on nuclear sites and facilities, Iran has fired missiles toward Israel's most populated cities. Joining us to discuss what this all means is one of the foremost experts on Iran and its global threats, and a regular guest when trouble arises with Iran. Dr. Matthew Levitt, director of the Reinhard Counterterrorism Program at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. Matt, welcome back to People of the Pod. Matthew Levitt: It's a pleasure to be back, but I need to come sometime when the world's okay. Manya Brachear Pashman: That would be nice. That'd be nice. But what will we talk about? Matthew Levitt: Yeah, just call me one of the Horsemen of the Apocalypse. Manya Brachear Pashman: Well, you are one of the foremost experts on the dangers posed by Iran, especially its terror proxies. And you've written the definitive book on Hezbollah, titled Hezbollah: the Global Footprint of Lebanon's Party of God. And I say that whole title, I want to get in there, because we are talking about global threats here. Can you explain the scale of Iran's global threat and the critical role that its terror proxies, like Hezbollah, Hamas, the Houthis, play in advancing that strategy? Matthew Levitt: So I really appreciate the question, because it's really important to remind listeners that the Israel Iran war did not start Thursday night US time, Friday morning, Israel time. In fact, it's just the latest salvo where the Israelis, after years and years and years of Iranian we call it malign activity, but that's too soft a term. We're talking about Iran sending weapons and funds to proxies like Hamas to carry out October 7, like Hezbollah to fire rockets at Israel almost daily for almost a year. Like the Houthis, who were much more than a thorn in the Saudi backside until the Iranians came and gave them more sophisticated capabilities. We're talking about an Iran that a few years ago decided that instead of making sure that every gun that it sent to the West Bank had to go to Hamas or Islamic Jihad. They decided to just flood the West Bank with guns. Who cares who's shooting at the Israelis so long as somebody is. And an Iran that not only carries out human rights abuses of all kinds at home, but that threatens Israel and its neighbors with drones, low altitude cruise missiles, short range ballistic missiles, and medium and long range ballistic missiles. And so the totality of this, much like the totality of Hezbollah's striking Israel for almost a year, ultimately led Israel to do what most people thought couldn't be done, and just tear Hezbollah apart, that the Israel war on Hezbollah is the prequel to what we've been seeing over the past few days in Iran. Similarly, for the Israelis, it got to be too much. It wasn't even really that President Trump's 60 days expired and Israel attacked on day 61. It wasn't only that the IAEA came out with a report saying that the Iranians have refused to explain certain activities that can only be explained as nuclear weaponization activities. It was that the Israelis had information that two things were happening. One, that Iran was working very, very hard to rebuild its capability to manufacture medium, long range ballistic missiles that can hit Israel. After the Israeli reprisal attack last October took out a key component of that program, the mixers that are important for the solid propellant, without which you can't make ballistic missiles. And Iran is believed to have, at least the beginning of this recent round of the conflict –Thursday, Friday–about 2000 such missiles. Far fewer now, the Israelis say they've taken out about a third of them, plus launchers, plus radars, et cetera. But that Iran had a plan within just a few years to develop as many as 8000 of these. And that simply was not tolerable for the Israelis. And the second is that the Israelis say that they compiled evidence that Iran had a secret, secret nuclear weapons program that had been going on predating October 7, but was fast tracked after October 7, that they were planning to maintain this program, even as they were negotiating over the more overt program with the Trump administration. President Trump has even taken issue with his own Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, who testified in March that the US intelligence committee does not assess that Iran is weaponizing. And President says, I don't care what she says, I think they were very close to weaponizing. The Israelis say they have shared this information at least recently with their US counterparts and that was not tolerable. So the primary goals that Israel has set out for itself with this campaign is beyond the critically important shattering the glass ceiling. Think where people in particular, in Iran thought this would never happen, was two things, one, addressing and significantly degrading and setting back the Iranian ballistic missile production program, and second, doing the same to the nuclear program. They've already carried out strikes at Isfahan, Natanz, even at the upper parts of Fordow. And there is an expectation that the Israelis are going to do something more. The Israeli national security advisor said on Israeli television today, We are not going to stop without addressing the nuclear activities at Fordow. Manya Brachear Pashman: You know, you called it a prequel, Israel's operations against Hezbollah last year. Did you know that it was a prequel at the time and to what extent did it weaken Iran and leave it more vulnerable in this particular war? Matthew Levitt: I'm going to be the last person in Washington, D.C. who tells you when he doesn't know. And anybody who tells you they did know is lying to you. None of us saw what Israel did to Hezbollah coming. None of us saw that and said, Oh, they did it to a non-state actor right across their border. So they'll definitely be able to do it to Iran, 1000+ kilometers away, big nation state with massive arsenals and a nuclear program and lots of proxies. One plus one does not equal three in this. In other words, the fact that Israel developed mind boggling capabilities and incredible intelligence, dominance and then special tools, pagers and walkie talkies, in the case of Hezbollah, did not mean that they were going to be able to do the same vis a vis Iran. And they did. The same type of intelligence dominance, the same type of intelligence, knowing where somebody was at a certain time, that the protocols would be that certain leaders would get in a certain secret bunker once hostilities started, and they'd be able to take them out in that bunker. As they did to a bunch of senior Hezbollah commanders just months ago. Drone operations from within Iran, Iran being hit with missiles that were fired at Iran from within Iran, all of it. One case did not necessarily translate into the other. It is exponentially impressive. And Israel's enemies have to be saying, you know, that the Israelis are just all capable. Now you're absolutely right. You hit the nail on the head on one critical issue. For a very long time, Israel was at least somewhat deterred, I would say very deterred, from targeting Iran. Because Iran had made very, very clear if Israel or the United States or anybody else targeted Iran or its nuclear program, one of the first things that would happen would be that Hezbollah in Lebanon, Israel, Iran's first, most important proxy would rain hellfire in Israel in the form of 1000s upon 1000s of rockets. Until Israel addressed the problem, Hezbollah is believed to have had 150 to 200,000 different types of projectiles, up to and including precision guided munitions. Not only have the overwhelming majority of those been destroyed, Hezbollah still has 1000s of rockets, but Hezbollah leadership has been decimated. There's a new sheriff in town in Lebanon. There's a new government that immediately, when hostility started with Iran's, went to Hezbollah and said, You're not doing this, not dragging Lebanon back into a war that nobody wanted again. We are finally coming out of this economic crisis. And so Iran was faced with a situation where it didn't have Hezbollah to deter Israel. Israel, you know, paved the way for a highway in the air to Iran, taking out air defense systems. It was able to fly over and through Syria. The Syrians are not shedding any tears as they see the Quds Force and the IRGC getting beaten down after what Iran did in Syria. And the Israelis have air dominance now. President Trump said, We, using the we term, air dominance now, earlier today. And they're able to slowly and methodically continue to target the ballistic missile program. Primarily, the medium and long range missiles that target Israel, but sometimes it's the same production lines that produce the short range missiles that Iran uses to target U.S. Forces in the region, and our allies in the Gulf. So Israel is not just protecting itself, it's protecting the region. And then also taking out key military security intelligence personnel, sometimes taking out one person, then a couple days later, taking out the person who succeeded that person, and then also taking out key scientists who had the know-how to potentially rebuild all the things that Israel is now destroying. Manya Brachear Pashman: But Israel is also not hearing from the Houthis, is not hearing from Hamas. It's not hearing from other terror proxies either. Very few attacks from Iran's terror proxies in the aftermath of this wave. Why? Why do you think that is? Matthew Levitt: The crickets are loud. The crickets are loud. Look, we've discussed Hezbollah. Hezbollah understands that if it were to do something, the Israelis will come in even harder and destroy what's left. Hamas is still holding hostages. This is still an open wound, but it doesn't have the capabilities that it once had, and so there have been a couple of short range things that they tried to shoot, but it's not anything that's going to do huge damage, and the Israeli systems can deal with those. The Houthis did fire something, and it hurt some Palestinians near Hebron. You know, the Houthis and the Iranians in particular, in this conflict have killed Palestinians, and in one case, Syrians. They're continuing to hurt people that are not Israelis. One of the things that I think people are hopeful for is that as Iran tries to sue for peace, and it already is, it's been reaching out to Cyprus to pass messages, etcetera. The hope is that Iran will recognize that it's in a position whereby A) there has to be zero enrichment and the facilities have to be destroyed, whatever's left of them. And B) there's a hope that Israel and the United States together will be able to use this diplomatic moment to truly end the conflict in Gaza and get the hostages home. Manya Brachear Pashman: Well, that was what I was going to ask. I mean, if Israel achieves its objectives in this war, primarily eliminating Iran's nuclear threat, how significant a setback would that be for Hamas and Iran's other terror proxies, and could it indeed pave the way for an end of the war in Gaza and the return of the hostages? Matthew Levitt: Like everybody else, I'm so scarred, I don't want to get my hopes up, but I do see this as a distinct possibility, and here's why. Not Hezbollah, not the Houthis, not Hamas, none of them, and plenty of other proxies that don't start in the letter H, none of them could have been anywhere as capable as they've proven to be, were it not for Iranian money and weapons. Also some training, some intelligence, but primarily money and weapons. And so Hamas is already on its back foot in this regard. It can still get some money in. It's still being able to make money off of humanitarian aid. Iran is still sending money in through money exchange houses and hawaladars, but not weapons. Their ability to manufacture weapons, their military industrial complex within Gaza, this is destroyed. Hezbollah, we've discussed, discussed, and a lot of their capabilities have been destroyed. And those that remain are largely deterred. The Houthis did shoot up some rockets, and the Israelis did carry out one significant retaliatory attack. But I think people are beginning to see the writing on the wall. The Israelis are kicking the stuffing out of Iran with pinprick attacks that are targeting the worst of the bad guys, including people who have carried out some of the worst human rights transgressions against Iranians. Let's not pretend that this is not affecting the average Iranian. It is. The president says, Everybody get out of Tehran. That's just not possible. People, average Iranians, good people. It must be just an absolute terror. But Israel's not bombing, you know, apartment buildings, as Iran is doing in Israel, or as Russia is doing in Ukraine. And so it really is a different type of thing. And when the Houthis, when Hamas, when Hezbollah, look at this, you don't you don't poke the tiger when it's angry. I think they also understand now's the time to get into survival mode. What you want is for the regime in Iran not to be destroyed. This is no longer a moment, as it's been since long before October 7, but certainly since then, of how Iran as proxies, export Iran's revolution. This is now a question of how they maintain and preserve the revolution at home. And it's extremely important to the proxies that Iran remain, so that even if it's knocked down over time, hopefully, theoretically, from their perspective, it can regain its footing. It will still have, they hope, its oil and gas, etcetera, and they will get back to a point where they can continue to fund and arm the proxies in. Maybe even prioritize them as it takes them longer to rebuild their ballistic missile, drone, and nuclear programs. Manya Brachear Pashman: Which is a scary prospect as well to know that terror proxies could be spread throughout the world and empowered even a little bit more. President Trump left the G7 summit a day early to meet with security advisors, and just a few hours ago, prior to this interview, President Trump called for Iran's, quote, unconditional surrender, saying that the US knows where the Supreme Leader is, and some other threatening language. But I mean, this appears to be a kind of a clear commitment to Israel. So I'm curious how you assess his administration's actions before and during the war thus far, and do you see the United States edging toward direct involvement? Matthew Levitt: All politics is local, and there is a tug of war within the MAGA movement over whether or not the US should be getting involved. Not only in supporting an important ally, but in removing a critical threat. The President is clearly frustrated that Iran was not being more forthcoming in the negotiations. He said many times, we'd offered you a great deal, you should have taken the deal. He's very aware that his deadline ended, and they didn't particularly seem to care. There's also the background that once upon a time, they tried to assassinate him, I think, after the Israelis did what they did, the President appreciates capabilities. He appreciates success. He likes backing the winning horse. And so the New York Times is reporting that after getting off the phone with Prime Minister Netanyahu, President Trump reportedly turned to some aides and said, maybe we need to help him. Now it's not clear that's what's going to happen, and my understanding is that the Israelis have plans of their own for things like the heavily fortified facility at Fordow, which is the most important and highly fortified, protected of the nuclear installations. The Israeli National Security Advisor spoke today and said, you know, we're not going to be done until we do something with Fordow. The United States can do multiple things only the United States has the MOP: the Massive Ordinance Penetrator, and the airplanes to deliver it, and they could end Fordow if they wanted. Short of that, they could do other things to support Israel. There's been defensive support for the State of Israel already, but there's other things they could do, refueling and other things if they wanted to. And at a minimum, I don't see the president restraining Israel at all. Now, I've heard some people say that so far, the President has fired nothing more than some social media postings, some of them even in all caps. But the truth is, those do have an effect, and so long as Israel is not restrained. I think the Israelis went into this with a plan. That plan is not necessarily to entirely destroy the entire nuclear program, but if the ballistic missile program and the nuclear program are sufficiently degraded so that it will take them years and a tremendous amount of time and money to rebuild, knowing that Israel has broken the glass ceiling on this idea of targeting Iran, that if the Israelis feel they need to, they will come back. If the Iranians rebuild their air defense systems, the Israelis will address them and create a new highway going if they need to. I think the Israelis are making that clear. Knowing that it's going to be a little bit of a road for Iran, especially when it will have to deal with some domestic issues coming out of this. Finally, the Israelis have started signaling there's other things they could do. The Israelis have not yet fully targeted oil and gas fields and facilities. For example, they had one set of attacks where they basically knocked at the front door of some of these facilities without walking in the house. That's signaling, and I think it's one of the reasons you're seeing Iran quietly trying to reach out for some type of a ceasefire. Other signaling, for example, is the Israelis deciding to fly all the way to Mashhad, which is in far eastern Iran, to take out an airplane. That airplane was not particularly important. It was the message. There is nowhere in Iran we can't go. It's not a question of distance, it's not a question of refueling, it's not a question of air defense systems. We can do what we need to do. And I think the Iranians understand that now. Manya Brachear Pashman: So we talked about the commitment to Israel, and how clear, how important it is to clarify that commitment to Israel. How important is it to clarify the United States commitment to Arab partners in the Middle East to help defend them in other words, if this conflict escalates? Matthew Levitt: This is critically important. You know, one of the individuals who was taken out, for example, was the person who was in charge of the drone attack on the Abqaiq oil facility in Saudi Arabia. If you look, for example, at the Saudi statement condemning the Israeli actions, it was issued by the Foreign Ministry without a single name attached to it. Wasn't issued by the Crown Prince, wasn't issued by the foreign minister. So I think you should expect a whole lot of public criticism. I imagine there's a different conversation going on behind closed doors. It's not necessarily, you know, pom-poming. This makes the Gulf states very, very nervous, in part because they understand that one way Iran could try and get out of this is to expand the conflict. And that the reason they haven't is because, short of trying to prevent Iranians from taking to the streets and potentially doing something to maybe overthrow the regime, short of that, the number one thing that the Iranian regime is most desperate to avoid is getting the United States involved militarily. And I think the Iranians really understand and the messaging's been clear. If you target US Forces in the region, if you target our allies in the region, we'll get involved. If you don't, then we might not. Now the President now is talking about potentially doing that, and as a lot of maybe this, maybe that, nothing very clear. I think what is clear is that the Israelis are going to continue doing what they need to do for another one to two weeks. Even going so far as doing something, though they haven't made clear what to address the really complicated problem of the fortified facility at Fordow. Manya Brachear Pashman: So how important is it for global security if Israel is successful in eliminating the nuclear threat in Iran? Matthew Levitt: Look, Iran has been the single most destabilizing factor in the region for a long time now. Imagine a region without a destabilizing revolutionary regime in Iran without a regime that is supporting Shia militants in Saudi Arabia and other Gulf countries. Imagine the Shia militias in Iraq suddenly without a funder and a patron, enabling the Shia government in Iraq to actually be able to take control of the country and establish a monopoly over the use of force. At a time when the Shia militias, because of Iran's backing, are becoming more dangerous and more powerful in Iraq. Imagine the Lebanese government being able to be more forward leaning in their effort to establish a monopoly over the use of force in that country, reclaim bases that Hezbollah has used for all this time, and establish a new Lebanon that is not beholden to Iran and Hezbollah. And imagine an Israeli-Palestinian situation where you didn't have Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad as spoilers. Recall that October 7 happened in large part because Hamas and Hezbollah and Iran could not tolerate the prospect of Israeli-Saudi normalization. For most Palestinians, this was great news. The Saudis were demanding real dividends for the Palestinians from the Netanyahu government, which was likely going to do them. This was great for Palestinians, bad for Hamas. Imagine Hamas no longer getting that support from Iran. Imagine Iran no longer able to send or being interested in sending millions upon millions of dollars to its proxies, and instead spending what money it has on helping its population, instead of cracking down on it with human rights violations. You could have a very, very different region, let alone imagine Iran no longer carrying out acts of terrorism, kidnapping plots, abduction plots of dissidents and Jews and Israelis and others around the world of the type that we've seen throughout Europe and throughout the Middle East and even in the United States over the past few years. Manya Brachear Pashman: That's quite an imagination you have. But I take your point. Let me ask you this then. Did you ever imagine that Israel would take this dramatic step? Matthew Levitt: What the Israelis have achieved, when you are so against the wall and you're forced to come up with solutions, because it's a matter of life or death – you make the impossible possible. And I think that perhaps the Iranians assumed that the Israeli post-October 7 doctrine applied to non-state actors only. And that doctrine is very simple. Israel will no longer allow adversaries who are openly committed to its destruction to build up weapons, arsenals that they can then use at some point to actually try and destroy Israel. They will not allow that to happen. They allowed it to happen with Hamas. It was a mistake. They allowed it to happen with Hezbollah. It was a mistake that they corrected. And Iran is the biggest, arguably, really, the only existential threat as huge, as a tasking as that was, clearly they invested in doing it. And the question became, not, why can't it be done? What is it that has to be overcome? And I don't think sitting here with you right now, you know, what is it, 3:30 on Tuesday, the 17th, that we've seen the last of the tricks up Israel's sleeve. Manya Brachear Pashman: I only have one last question for you, and that is about the United States. The importance of the United States getting directly involved. I mean, we've talked about previously undisclosed nuclear sites, and who knows how many there could be. We're talking about more than what, 600,000 square miles of Iran. If the goal is a non nuclear Iran, can Israel finish this war without the United States, or does it even matter? I mean, is this just a step to force Iran back to the negotiating table with virtually zero leverage? Matthew Levitt: So look, I don't think the goal here is completely destroying the Iranian nuclear program, or even completely destroying the Iranian ballistic missile program. The goal is to so degrade it that it is set back many, many years, and break that ceiling. People now understand if Israelis need to come back, they're coming back. I think they would like to do as much damage to these destructive programs as possible, of course, and I don't think we've seen the end of it. I think there are more tricks up Israel's sleeve when it comes to some of these complicated problems. Judged by this yardstick, by the way, the Israeli operation is a tremendous success, tremendous success, even though there have been some significant casualties back in Israel, and even though this has caused tremendous trauma for innocent Iranians who have no love for the regime. This is a situation that the Iranian regime has brought down on all of us. I do think that the Israelis have made very, very clear that this doesn't end until something is done to further disrupt and dismantle Fordow, which is the most important and the most heavily fortified, underground, under a mountain facility. It's not clear what the Israelis have in mind. It seems they have something in mind of their own. It's clear they would love for the United States to get involved, because the United States could do real damage to that facility and potentially end the Iranian nuclear program. But at the end of the day, if it can't be completely destroyed, I anticipate it's going to be damaged enough to significantly set it back. This phase of the Israel-Iran war, which didn't start last week, is not about pushing them back a week or a month or two months. Manya Brachear Pashman: Well, Matt, thank you so much for your wise counsel and perspective on this matter, and yes, hopefully we can have you back another time to talk about peace and love and things that have nothing to do with war and conflict with Iran or its terror proxies. Matthew Levitt: I would really look forward to prepping for that interview. In the meantime, I want to thank AJC for all the important work it does, and thank you guys for having me on the podcast. Manya Brachear Pashman: If you missed last week's episodes, be sure to tune in for our crossover episode with Books and Beyond: The Rabbi Sacks Podcast, a podcast of the Rabbi Sacks Legacy, and my conversation with AJC's Jerusalem Director Avital Liebovich. During a special breaking news episode the day after Israel launched Operation Rising Lion, the latest in Israel's ongoing war of self-defense against the Iranian regime.