The custodian of a synagogue in Glen Rock, New Jersey was detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), sparking calls for his release from the mayor of the northern New Jersey suburb.

Jorge Tomas Dagar Aquino, who had been working for the Glen Rock Jewish Center since 2014 and became the center’s full time maintenance supervisor in 2020, was detained by ICE during an asylum interview on June 16.

Glen Rock Mayor Kristine Morieko condemned his detention, asserting it was “in direct violation of due process and without cause.”

“Over the years, he has become an integral part of our community — not only through his work, but also through his relationships, his kindness, and his quiet contributions to the dignity of their shared space,” Morieko said.

The mayor also called on the Glen Rock community to write hand-signed letters of support for Aquino, who had lived in the United States for over 20 years, and send them to the Glen Rock Jewish Center.

Morieko did not immediately respond to a request for an update on Aquino’s arrest by JTA. The Glen Rock Jewish Center declined to comment on Aquino’s case, saying that it could jeopardize his immigration proceedings.

According to the synagogue website, Aquino is originally from Ecuador. He is married with three daughters and two grandchildren.

Aquino’s arrest by immigration enforcement comes as the Trump administration has ordered mass arrests and deportations of undocumented people across the United States.

Earlier this month in California, a volley of immigration raids and detainments sparked mass protests against ICE. As tensions over the protests mounted, rabbis and other Jewish communal leaders in California called for protesters to remain nonviolent.

In February, the governing bodies of the Reform, Conservative and Reconstructionist movements joined a lawsuit attempting to block the Trump administration from carrying out ICE raids at houses of worship. But in April, a federal judge sided with the Trump administration in such cases.

An 82-year-old victim of the firebombing attack at a Boulder, Colorado demonstration for Israeli hostages has died from her wounds.

The victim, Karen Diamond, “died tragically as a result of the severe injuries that she suffered in the attack,” according to a statement released by the Boulder County District Attorney’s Office.

Diamond is one of 29 targets in the June 1 attack, of whom 13 suffered physical injuries, according to an amended complaint by the district attorney’s office. The suspect in the firebombing attack, Mohamed Sabry Soliman, will now face two counts of murder as a result of Diamond’s death.

Soliman was indicted on 12 hate crime counts last week, and his lawyer entered a not guilty plea for him Friday. He is accused of trying to kill eight people at the attack on the demonstration, Run for Their Lives, in which he threw two molotov cocktails at the group.

As news of Diamond’s passing broke, several major Jewish organizations released statements expressing condolences for her passing and renewing calls for increased security for Jewish gatherings.

“Karen Diamond, who was severely injured in the antisemitic terror attack on a peaceful demonstration in Boulder earlier this month, has died from her wounds,” wrote the American Jewish Committee in a post on X. “We send our deepest condolences to her family. May her memory be a blessing. 13 other people were injured in this brutal assault on the group advocating for the remaining hostages held by Hamas.”

“We are heartbroken to learn of the passing of Karen Diamond, who was critically injured during the peaceful march in Boulder calling for the release of the hostages held by Hamas. May her memory be a blessing,” wrote the Secure Community Network, an organization that coordinates security for Jewish institutions nationwide, in a post on X.

“We pray for the full recovery of the other victims. This senseless murder is another painful reminder of the unprecedented threat environment the Jewish community faces in North America,” the post continued.

Diamond, a longtime member of Bonai Shalom congregation in Boulder, is survived by husband Lou, sons Andrew and Ethan, their wives, and five grandsons. “This event and the tragic loss of someone who has given so much of herself over the years to the Bonai community and beyond, has impacted us all and we are sad and horrified,” the congregation’s rabbi, Marc Soloway, said in a statement.

Soliman also faces 118 charges, including 28 counts of attempted murder, in Colorado state court. Soliman, an Egyptian national who officials say had been illegally living in the United States, did not speak at the federal hearing last week, and he listened to translations provided by an Arabic interpreter through headphones, according to the Associated Press.

The Supreme Court upheld a law allowing the families of victims of terrorism to sue Palestinian entities in U.S. courts, reviving decades-old lawsuits against the Palestine Liberation Organization and the Palestinian Authority.

The ruling, which was delivered June 20 in a case naming the murdered American-Israeli activist Ari Fuld, upheld the 2019 Promoting Security and Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act and found that the law did not violate the due process of the Palestinian entities.

The Supreme Court found that the law accounted for “sensitive foreign policy matters within the prerogative of the political branches,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the court.

The court has “recognized the national government’s interest in holding accountable those who perpetrate an ‘act of violence against’ US nationals — who, even when physically outside our borders, remain ‘under the particular protection’ of American law,” Roberts wrote. “So too the national government’s corresponding authority to make ‘the killing of an American abroad’ punishable as a federal offense ‘that can be prosecuted in (US) courts.”

The ruling will be applied to attacks that occurred during the Second Intifada in the 2000s that killed 33 as well as the 2018 murder of Fuld, who was the named plaintiff in the case before the Supreme Court.

The Palestinian entities have argued that the cases should not be fought in American courts. The federal appeals court in New York had previously ruled in favor of the Palestine Liberation Organization and the Palestinian Authority.

The Supreme Court’s decision will likely lay the foundation for other U.S. victims of terrorism by Palestinian groups to seek damages through litigation in U.S. courts.

In March, the U.S. Justice Department announced a task force that will seek redress for the victims of Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023 attack on Israel by prosecuting people who participated in the attack as well as Hamas leaders who orchestrated it.

The Department of Homeland Security announced it would award $94 million in security grants to 512 Jewish organizations Friday.

The agency cited the recent string of violence against Jewish groups, including the attacks in Washington D.C. and Boulder, Colorado, in it announcement, writing that the funds would “help protect Jewish faith-based institutions from further attacks.”

“DHS is working to put a stop to the deeply disturbing rise in antisemitic attacks across the United States,” said DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin in a statement. “That this money is necessary at all is tragic. Antisemitic violence has no place in this country. However, under President Trump and Secretary Noem’s leadership, we are going to do everything in our power to make sure that Jewish people in the United States can live free of the threat of violence and terrorism.”

The grants mark the release of around half of the funding still tied up from a Trump administration review of federal spending.

The funding, which is distributed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency through he Nonprofit Security Grant Program (NSGP), was expected to include the full $220 million that has yet to be released to recipients.

NSGO provides funding for faith-based institutions including synagogues, schools and Jewish community centers to pay for security measures to protect their buildings from attack. Last month, FEMA lifted the Trump administration’s two-monthslong freeze on funding reimbursements.

Lauren Wolman, the director of federal policy and strategy at the Anti-Defamation League, told Jewish Insider that while the recent funding announcement is welcome, “the job isn’t done.”

“We welcome the Administration awarding $94 million in Nonprofit Security Grant Program (NSGP) funding to help protect over 500 Jewish institutions amid the historic levels of antisemitic threats that ADL is tracking,” said Wolman. “But the job isn’t done. DHS must urgently release the additional NSGP supplemental funds Congress appropriated to meet overwhelming demand and save lives. ADL will continue working with lawmakers and senior officials to underscore both the urgency of increasing funding and moving previously appropriated funding.”

The Trump administration informed Harvard that the school had violated the civil rights of its Jewish and Israeli students in its response to alleged antisemitism on campus.

The letter, reported Monday by the Wall Street Journal, was sent to Harvard President Alan Garber and accused the school of failing to properly address the concerns of Jewish and Israeli students who felt threatened by the pro-Palestinian protests on its campus.

It outlined various instances of harassment against Jewish and Israeli students on campus, including assault and the circulation of antisemitic imagery. The notice of violation called on Harvard to make “adequate changes immediately” to avoid the loss of the remainder of the school’s federal funding.

“Failure to institute adequate changes immediately will result in the loss of all federal financial resources and continue to affect Harvard’s relationship with the federal government,” the letter read. “Harvard may of course continue to operate free of federal privileges, and perhaps such an opportunity will spur a commitment to excellence that will help Harvard thrive once again.”

The letter opens the latest front in the Trump administration’s campaign against the school, in which the administration has cited antisemitism as one of the chief reasons for cutting funding and demanding other changes.

Last month, the Trump administration revoked its permission for the school to enroll international students, and also announced its intent to cancel all of its remaining federal funding, approximately $100 million, over the school’s “disturbing lack of concern for the safety and wellbeing of Jewish students.”

Critics of those moves. Included some Jewish leaders, have called many of those demands either unwarranted or heavy-handed.

In April, Harvard released its long-awaited internal antisemitism report which was accompanied by a letter from Garber in which he apologized for the campus climate over the last year and a half.

Harvard has sued the Trump administration for freezing nearly $3 billion in research funding. Last week, the National Jewish Advocacy Center, a recently founded group that has filed lawsuits to protect Jews on campuses, filed an amicus brief in the suit siding with the Trump administration.

“No institution is simply entitled to billions of taxpayer dollars,” the brief read, according to the Harvard Crimson. “The federal government, for good reason, does not believe that Harvard is adequately protecting Jewish members of its community and does not want to support this obnoxious facade.”

The Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law, another Jewish advocacy group, also filed a brief last Monday siding with the administration, asking the court to reject three amicus briefs supporting Harvard in the case.

In November 1944, she joined the French Army as a nurse, but was soon transferred to the army’s intelligence service. She eventually crossed into German territory as the war was winding down. In her most storied piece of derring-do, she was able to report that the Siegfried Line, a German stronghold northwest of Freiburg, had been evacuated, and pinpoint the  location of German troops lying in ambush in the Black Forest.

In 1945, the French Army awarded Marthe the Croix de Guerre. Germany also later awarded her The Cross of the Order of Merit, Germany’s highest honor.

“I had no idea what I was getting myself into,” Cohn told the Los Angleles Times in 2000. “I’m not a liar or an actor, but when your survival depends upon it… I did it for what Germans had done to us.”

Cohn lived in the United States beginning in 1956, and worked as a nurse anesthetist at Magee-Womens Hospital at the University of Pittsburgh. Only in 1999 did her children and grandchildren learn about her exploits during the war. In a 2002 she wrote a memoir with Wendy Holden, “Behind Enemy Lines.” That year she was awarded the title of Chevalier de la Légion d’honneu, the highest French order for military and civil merits

Her story was also told in a documentary, “The Accidental Spy.”

Cohn later worked as a research assistant in her husband’s neuroscience lab at UCLA/Drew Medical Center. In 2020, at the start of the COVID pandemic, Cohn celebrated her 100th birthday in the driveway of her Los Angeles home, as a parade of well-wishers drove by in cars. A letter of congratulations from Israeli President Reuven Rivlin was read over a bullhorn and Cohn later received a phone call from both Rivlin and the president of Germany, as well as hundreds of emails.

She is survived by her husband of 67 years, Dr. Major Cohn, and their sons, Stephan and Remi.

Dozens of Jewish settlers rioted outside of a multi-million dollar security facility in the West Bank Sunday night and set it ablaze in a continuation of far-right settler protests against the IDF in recent days.

The violence comes after six settlers were arrested overnight Friday for assaulting a group of IDF reservists near the Palestinian village of Kafr Malik. The rioters Sunday were protesting the use of warning shots against settlers who committed the ambush Friday, which apparently resulted in the injury of a teenager.

The IDF denied that they had fired live ammunition at the settlers, writing in a statement that “an initial investigation indicates that IDF forces did not fire live ammunition at Israeli civilians in the area.” But settler groups have claimed this is false, posting a video of shell casings on the ground at the site of the attack.

The escalation of rioting by Israeli settlers comes after a violent attack Wednesday by armed Israeli settlers on two Palestinian villages in the West Bank. Three Palestinians were killed by IDF fire and two homes were set ablaze, according to the Palestinian Health Ministry. Israeli security forces arrested five settlers over the spree of violence.

Critics of extremist settlers and of the government in recent months have said that attacks by Jews on Palestinians living in the West Bank invariably go unpunished, and have intensified with attention focused on the war in Gaza. Opposition politicians regularly condemn government officials for doing too little to rein in settler violence.

In attacking soldiers, however, there was agreement at the top that the settlers had crossed a line.

Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz convened an urgent meeting about the settler violence against Israeli security forces Monday.

“This phenomenon must be immediately put to an end. We will take all necessary measures and uproot this violence from its roots — no one will dare raise their hand against IDF soldiers or security forces,” said Katz in a statement according to the Jerusalem Post.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar also condemned the recent attacks by Jewish extremist settlers against IDF soldiers.

“No civilized country can tolerate violent and anarchic acts such as the burning of a military installation, damage to IDF property, and assaults on security personnel by citizens of the state,” said Netanyahu in a statement.

“The settler community is a model and an example of developing the land, meaningful service in the IDF, and contributing to the cultivation of Torah scholars. We will not allow a violent and fanatic few to tarnish an entire community,” continued Netanyahu.

“I strongly condemn the violence against the IDF and security forces,” wrote Sa’ar in a post on X early Monday. “Such incidents are unacceptable, and the offenders must be severely punished. The IDF and security forces work day and night to protect Israel’s citizens and security. They must be supported, their activities must not be disrupted, and under no circumstances should any of them be attacked.”

But Yair Golan, the leader of the Democrats party, rejected the portrayal of the settlers as a fringe minority, writing in a post on X Monday that they are a “violent arm operating with the government’s legitimacy.”

“Some will continue to call them ‘weeds,’ ‘hilltop youth,’ ‘extremist minority.’ But this is no longer a negligible group. This is an armed and violent arm operating with the government’s legitimacy,” wrote Golan.

“These are Ben-Gvir and Smotrich’s militias, who see the law and the IDF as an unnecessary obstacle on their path to annexation. And they are no longer content with violence against Palestinians, but have long since turned against the IDF and the Zionist, democratic Israel,” the post continued.

It’s a good thing Chuck Schumer loves pickles — because he’s in a real big one following Zohran Mamdani’s apparent victory in New York’s Democratic mayoral primary last week.

The Senate Minority Leader’s Biden-y vibes (pro-Israel moderate) and vintage (74 years old) were already shaping up to be big problems for him in a potential 2028 primary challenge from Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the progressive powerhouse from the Bronx who campaigned for Mamdani. If Schumer fails to get behind Mamdani, it will galvanize progressive opposition — not only to his re-election, but quite possibly his leadership of the Democratic caucus in the Senate.

The problem for Schumer is that anything resembling an endorsement — or, to use the technical term, kashering — of Mamdani will outrage many of his longtime political supporters in the Jewish community, who see Mamdani as mainstreaming the sort of pro-Palestinan politics that villainizes Israel and endangers Jews. They expect him to take the lead in sticking up for Israel and speaking out against antisemitism.

On this last point, Schumer the senator has only Schumer the shomer to blame.

When Schumer took to the Senate floor in March 2024 to deliver a major speech on the war in Gaza and the Israel political landscape, he broke out his favorite Hebrew lesson to make clear that he was speaking as more than just an elected official.

“My last name is Schumer, which derives from the Hebrew word shomer, or ‘guardian,’” Schumer said. “Of course, my first responsibility is to America and to New York. But as the first Jewish Majority Leader of the United States Senate, and the highest-ranking Jewish elected official in America ever, I also feel very keenly my responsibility as a shomer yisroel — a guardian of the People of Israel.”

In his speech, Schumer strongly condemned Hamas, blaming it for the war and much of the devastation in Gaza, and called for the replacement of Mahmoud Abbas as leader of the Palestinian Authority. The biggest news, however, was his call for new Israeli elections, arguing that Prime Minister Benjamin Netyanhu and the far-right members of his cabinet had also become “obstacles to peace.”

Schumer took up the shomer mantle again this past March, turning his sentinel gaze to the U.S., with the release of his book “Antisemitism in America: A Warning.”

With the combination of his Senate speech and new book, Schumer has positioned himself as a leading voice on what’s good (and bad) for the Jews — in New York, America and Israel. So one would think Schumer would have had something to say about the raging Jewish debate over Mamdani. Instead, his statement after Mamdani’s upset victory in the New York City mayoral primary treated the topic like a loaf of rye bread on Passover. 

“I have known @ZohranKMamdani since we worked together to provide debt relief for thousands of beleaguered taxi drivers & fought to stop a fracked gas plant in Astoria,” Schumer posted on X the morning after the election. “He ran an impressive campaign that connected with New Yorkers about affordability, fairness, & opportunity.” Schumer added: “I spoke with @ZohranKMamdani this morning and am looking forward to getting together soon.”

Schumer’s avoidance of the very topic that had riled so many pro-Israel supporters stood in sharp contrast to several other New York lawmakers.

Rep. Jerry Nadler of the very Jewish Upper West Side went so far as to endorse Mamadani in the November election – but even there, he addressed the antisemitism concerns. He told The New York Times that he had spoken with Mamdani and came away reassured. “I’ve spoken to him today about his commitment to fighting antisemitism, and we’ll work with all New Yorkers to fight against all bigotry and hate,” said Nadler. In a follow-up story on how the race is dividing the Jewish community, Nadler was quoted as saying that the election “results show that most Jews, at least in New York City, at least in my district, agree he’s not antisemitic.”

On the flip side, it was New York’s upstate junior senator, Kirsten Gillibrand, giving voice to the Jews in Schumer’s old Brookly congressional district and the rest of the city who are worried about Mamdani. She told WNYC that she was not yet ready to endorse Mamdani, and criticized him for failing to condemn the phrase “globalize the intifada” in an interview prior to the primary vote.

“As a leader of a city as diverse as New York City, with 8 million people, as the largest Jewish population in the country, he should denounce it,” Gillibrand said. “That’s it. Period. You can’t celebrate it. You can’t value it. You can’t lift it up.”

“When you hear things like intifada, when you hear things like jihad, when you hear ‘from the river to the sea,’ it is received as slaughter the Jews and destroy Israel. Period. It’s how it’s received,” Gillibrand continued. “If you want to be a leader, you have to recognize how these things are felt and received.”

What makes things extra tricky for Schumer — assuming he plans to endorse, or at least not doing anything to oppose, Mamdani — is that Gillibrand could have been taking a page right out of his book. Literally.

“Other frequently used expressions such as ‘globalize the intifada’ sound to many of us like a call to not only kill the Jews in Israel, but to kill all the Jews worldwide,” Schumer wrote in “Antisemitism in America.”

When repeatedly pressed in an interview Sunday on “Meet The Press” if he would condemn the phrase, Mamdani did not directly answer the question, but said “that’s not language that I use.”

“I’ve heard those fears [of Jewish New Yorkers], and I’ve had those conversations, and ultimately, they are part and parcel of why in my campaign, I’ve put forward a commitment to increase funding for anti-hate crime programming by 800%,” Mamdani said. He added: “I don’t believe that the role of the mayor is to police speech,” but also pledged to “root out” antisemitism.

In his book, Schumer raised several other concerns that could apply to Mamdani.

Mamdani regularly accuses Israel of genocide — a claim Schumer not only rejected, but said strikes the “vast majority” of American Jews as “painful, cruel, unfair and vicious.”

“It creates the impression that Israel is monstrous, and therefore Jewish supporters of Israel might be monsters, too,” Schumer said. “Antisemitism, once again, could lie just around the bend.”

While Mamdani said during the campaign that Israel has a right to exist, he demurred on whether that applied to its status as a Jewish state. He affiliates with the anti-Zionist Democratic Socialists of America. Schumer wrote in his book that denying the Jewish people a right to their own state qualified as antisemitism.

Mamdani has said that he would have Netanyahu arrested if he attempted to come to New York City, even though the U.S. is not a party to the International Criminal Court, which issued a warrant for the Israeli leader’s arrest. Schumer took to the Senate floor to call the ICC warrant “profoundly unfair” and “reprehensible” and accused the court of decades-long anti-Israel bias.

Mamdani supports the anti-Israel boycott, divestment and sanctions movement. Schumer has called BDS a “modern version of anti-Semitism.”

Even while warning about these issues and the need to speak out on them, Schumer also  cautioned in his book against rushing to brand people as antisemites.

“[W]e must be careful not to permanently condemn as an antisemite every single person who might use language that many Jewish-Americans consider over the line,” Schumer said. “Many have little idea of what these slogans, phrases, and words imply; what they entail; and how dangerous they can be.”

He also waxed nostalgic about several previous attempts to find common ground between far-left and establishment liberals, and warned that unfair accusations of antisemitism “make it even harder to have a constructive dialogue about these emotional and complex issues.” 

Whether Schumer sticks with sweet or goes sour with Mamdani, it’s hard to see how he doesn’t end up over a barrel on this one.

The late singer-songwriter Meir Ariel had a hit song that Israelis tend to invoke at times of crisis: “Avarnu et Par’o, Na’avor Gam et Zeh” — If we survived Pharoah, we’re going to survive this.

You heard it during the COVID pandemic, during the street protests over the government’s planned judicial overhaul, after the trauma of Oct. 7, and yet again earlier this month, when Israel attacked Iran and Iran responded with a hail of missiles. 

It suggests a society that is not only used to crisis, but also resigned and resilient. It’s the moral to a story Israelis often tell about themselves, but is it true? And when the triggers begin to multiply — fear for the missing hostages, the scramble to safe rooms and bomb shelters, deep internal rifts over the government and its top leader — how much can Israelis take?

Bruria Wiesel Adini studies that question as the head of the Department of Emergency Management and Disaster Medicine at Tel Aviv University’s School of Public Health. She and her colleagues at TAU and Tel-Hai College have tracked the resilience of Jewish Israelis since the COVID lockdown, with regular questionnaires put to the same people. 

Their most recent survey was conducted June 12 and 13, the first and second days of Israel’s strikes on Iran. Like previous studies, the latest results show that when crises strike, Jewish Israelis score high in personal resilience and morale, adjusting to whatever seems to be thrown at them. 

On the other hand, researchers continue to find declines in resilience, hope and, crucially, trust in the government at the national level.

“That is very concerning, because if we want to survive here, we need that cohesion – you know, like the slogan in Israel: ‘beyachad nenatzeach, together, we will win,’” Adini told me in an interview Tuesday, shortly after Israel and Iran agreed to a ceasefire. “But if we’re not together, then what does that say about our capacity to actually cope with all of these different adversities and all the crises that we still may need to face?”

Bruria’s team recommends that the government do more to build this societal cohesion by communicating its goals transparently and putting partisanship aside. In times of normalcy (a relative term in Israel), they support programs that encourage community engagement, volunteerism and social support networks

Adini, 69, has a PhD in health systems management. She specializes in emergency preparedness and healthcare system responses to mass casualty events and disasters. In our conversation, we spoke about what makes Israelis resilient and the deep divides that could shred the country’s social fabric.

Our interview was edited for length and clarity. 

I wanted to talk to you when Israel launched its attacks on Iran, which opened by my count a fourth front in this current war, if you count Gaza, Lebanon, Yemen and Tehran. There’s a question I hear American Jews ask about the flood of bad and anxious news, which is, “how much can we take?” How much can Israelis take?

How much can we take? Whatever we need to. Whatever we need to face.

I’m a second-generation Holocaust survivor. Both my parents were in Auschwitz; they lost all their family. They were in camps, but they survived. They rebuilt their family. And I’m the example of that. So people have the ability to adjust their life to whatever life actually puts in their midst. 

There are people who give up, because they don’t have any element of hope. They actually become ill and are not able to cope. But that’s not the majority of the population. 

What does your data tell you about Israeli resiliency?

We measured adversity at its peak, in the week after Oct. 7, when it was a horrific attack and everyone in Israel was in shock, feeling devastated and not comprehending how this could happen. But at the same time, a level of both individual resilience and societal resilience rose very steeply. 

We saw the same thing 12 days ago, in the night between the 12th and 13th of June, when there was the Israeli attack on Iran. What we saw again is a very substantial and statistically significant increase in the level of personal resilience and societal resistance. 

What we’ve learned is that as the level of distress rises, also the level of resilience rises, not only here, but in other societies, like in Ukraine during their war. Because you rise to the situation, then you recruit all the resources that you can, all the power, both on the individual level and on the societal level, in order to be able to cope with that.

But it is not all good news, especially on the societal level. Your study assesses four components of societal resilience: patriotism, solidarity among people, trust in the government and the prime minister, and trust towards public institutions like the Knesset, the courts, the IDF, the police, education system and the media. Which of these components are under stress?

If you look at our graph of the four elements, from the first week after Oct. 7, to the 13th to 17th of June 2025, you see that the level of patriotism is highest in relation to the other three. And the lowest is the level of trust in the government and the prime minister, which shows you the rift within the Israeli society.

There is also a very, very deep rift between those respondents that are supporters of the government and the ones that oppose the government. For example, one of the questions was, “to what extent do you feel that the government is doing all that is needed to return the hostages?” Throughout the war we saw a very, very substantial gap between the perceptions of those that support the government, that feel that the government is doing everything that is needed, versus the opposers that do not feel that. There is a big gap between the two populations. That is very concerning.

How so?

Because it’s very highly associated with the level of resilience of the group as a whole. I go back to the idea of hope. Hope is the basis for believing that despite the great adversity, I believe that the future is going to be better. And here we see that there is, again, a substantial difference between the level of hope between those who trust and don’t trust the government. And here there is a feeling that many of the authorities are sometimes taking too much of a political stand and not coming from a more societal stand, not tending to everyone’s needs and expectations, especially the vulnerable people. 

How does this erode resilience on a societal level?

It has taken a very huge toll. During the severe crisis in October 2023 and even November 2023 there was a very high perception of this social cohesion, but then it started to drop, and the decline is very, very, very steep. That is very concerning, because if we want to survive here, we need that cohesion — you know, like the slogan in Israel: “beyachad nenatzeach,” together we will win. But if we’re not together, then what does that say about our capacity to actually cope with all of these different adversities and all the crises that we still may need to face?

We see a small increase [in social cohesion] now after the attack in Iran, but it’s still very, very far from the levels that we saw after Oct. 7. We’re not in a good place concerning social solidarity and social cohesion, which is one of the main resources that we need in order to be able to cope effectively.

How do these feelings play out in Israeli society? Are there comparisons to what the United Sates went through as a result of COVID — challenges like isolation, violence in the family, depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder — as a result of now almost two years of war?

First of all, you know, there has been a detrimental impact on mental health. Another is obesity that we saw among children, which became more severe than it was before: less exercise, more sitting in front of screens, less healthy food. You see the impact in the education system and test scores. 

Are there differences across Israeli society — say, among age groups? 

Both in COVID and during the war, the retired population, ages 61 and up, have the highest resilience and the lowest levels of distress. The ones that actually are the most vulnerable are the “mid young” people, 31 to 40. They’re the ones whose financial situations are still sometimes unstable, and they’re concerned what is going to happen with their jobs and their position after the adversity. They have children in school. They are actually the backbone of society. They go to reserve duty, and they fight in the war and so on. So we identified them as the vulnerable age group, rather than the elderly.

Is there something particular to Israel — an ethos, or a shared history, or the sheer size of the country — that helps people either become resilient or approach trauma in a way different than other countries?

Israel has a very, very high level of perceived attachment to the country, the patriotism. I do a lot of research with Europeans. For them, the word “patriotism,” or even saying national resilience, seems to them very close to militarism. They perceive it as something negative. In Israel, that’s not the perception. Israeli people are very, very highly patriotic. Even in the most dire situations, a very low percentage thinks of leaving the country. There are people that have left, but the percentage is less than 6%, even when things get to be very, very harsh.  

I want to ask about something we see here in the United States compared to what the media offers in Israel. Here the media shows the extent of the destruction in Gaza, the daily death toll among civilians, the threat of starvation, accusations of war crimes. In addition to the anxiety about getting the hostages out, are Israelis anxious about the aims or impact of the war itself — on Israel’s reputation, on Palestinian civilians, on the possibilities for a real peace to emerge out of this?  

First of all, I have to say that Israelis at large don’t really see the pictures of what is happening in Gaza. They get stories of what is happening to our soldiers, to the military, and what they’re doing in Gaza, they don’t mostly see the stories that people everywhere else in the world are seeing about the destruction, about children and women being impacted, people not having enough food, and so on.

You know, Israelis, after Oct. 7, became much less compassionate, saying “they want to kill us. They are one society. We don’t trust any of them.” The horrific consequences of what happened on Ot. 7 caused such devastation and anger that there’s a lot of opposition among many groups in Israel to providing humanitarian aid to Gazans.  

I want very much to do the research on both sides of the border — I work with Palestinian researchers — and study together what the war does and how it impacts civilians. But it’s very, very challenging to do so because it is a sensitive and “rifted” discussion here in Israel.  Many people oppose any attempt to actually understand what is happening there. There’s a very high level of consensus that Hamas cannot stay there, that Hamas are terrorists, but to learn about and believe that not all Gazans are Hamas or terrorists, that’s a very non-consensus topic in Israel.  

I forgot to ask the most basic question at the beginning, which is, how are you doing? What have the last couple of weeks been like for you?

First of all, you need to adapt. For example, I have two daughters and three grandchildren. My eldest daughter’s husband [has been called to reserve duty] many weeks since Oct. 7, and he’s in Gaza. She has two children, one a year old and a four-and-a-half-year old. They don’t have a shelter in their home. She lives in Tel Aviv, very close to areas that are targeted. She and her children are here with me. She’s a physician. She’s considered an essential employee, so she has to go to work even when everyone stays at home. So until she comes home, I take care of my grandchildren. 

The distress and the concern — we all feel it. We’re all very much concerned about what is going to happen to the country. What is the future here? What kind of future is it going to be for my grandchildren? But what’s been very, very helpful is that I’m very, very busy because of the research and my university position and so on. It is something that I always say when I’m asked, “What can we do to maintain resilience?” Maintain some routine, don’t be glued 24/7 to the television and the news, be there to support others and receive support. All of those things help you to cope with the situations.

It doesn’t mean that it passes by us. But, as I’ve said, I think we are a resilient society, certainly at an individual level.

Three days after first lashing out against the prosecution of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, President Donald Trump has renewed his criticism — and added the suggestion that Netanyahu’s trial could impede a hostage deal.

“It is terrible what they are doing in Israel to Bibi Netanyahu,” Trump posted late Saturday on Truth Social, his social media platform.

“He is a War Hero, and a Prime Minister who did a fabulous job working with the United States to bring Great Success in getting rid of the dangerous Nuclear threat in Iran. Importantly, he is right now in the process of negotiating a Deal with Hamas, which will include getting the Hostages back,” Trump wrote, adding, “This travesty of ‘Justice’ will interfere with both Iran and Hamas negotiations.”

Trump noted that the United States sends billions of dollars annually to Israel before concluding, “We are not going to stand for this. We just had a Great Victory with Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu at the helm — And this greatly tarnishes our Victory. LET BIBI GO, HE’S GOT A BIG JOB TO DO!”

The prospect of a deal to release the remaining hostages in Gaza was still on Trump’s mind several hours later when he posted an all-caps message: “MAKE THE DEAL IN GAZA. GET THE HOSTAGES BACK!!! DJT.”

The messages come in the wake of Trump’s successful effort to force a ceasefire in a 12-day war between Israel and Iran, in which the United States made an unusual intervention by dropping bombs on Iranian nuclear sites. Trump has said he believes a deal to free the 50 remaining Israeli hostages taken on Oct. 7, 2023, could come within the week.

Trump’s call to end Netanyahu’s prosecution represents an unusual intervention by a U.S. president in another country’s domestic functioning. Netanyahu has been embroiled in the trial since May 2020, and currently faces three charges of bribery, fraud and breach of trust. In December, when he took the stand, Netanyahu denied the allegations and referred to the trial as a “witch hunt,” the same language Trump used in both posts criticizing the prosecution.