Powered by RND
PodcastsNewsPeople of the Pod

People of the Pod

American Jewish Committee (AJC)
People of the Pod
Latest episode

Available Episodes

5 of 392
  • Architects of Peace: Episode 3 - From the White House Lawn
    Dive into the third episode 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.  On September 15, 2020, the Abraham Accords were signed at the White House by President Trump, Prime Minister Netanyahu, and the foreign ministers of the UAE and Bahrain. In this third installment of AJC’s limited series, AJC CEO Ted Deutch and Chief Policy and Political Affairs Officer Jason Isaacson—who stood on the South Lawn that day—share their memories and insights five years later. Together, they reflect on how the Accords proved that peace is achievable when nations share strategic interests, build genuine relationships, and pursue the greater good. *The views and opinions expressed by guests do not necessarily reflect the views or position of AJC.  Read the transcript: https://www.ajc.org/news/podcast/from-the-white-house-lawn-architects-of-peace-episode-3 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: [email protected] If you’ve appreciated this episode, please be sure to tell your friends, and rate and review us on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Transcript: Ted Deutch: It was a beautiful day and there was this coming together, this recognition that this was such an historic moment. It’s the kind of thing, frankly, that I remember having watched previously, when there were peace agreements signed and thinking that's something that I want to be a part of. And there I was looking around right in the middle of all of this, and so excited about where this could lead. 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. Announcer: Ladies and gentlemen, the President of the United States. Accompanied by the Prime Minister of the State of Israel; His Highness the Minister of Foreign Affairs and International cooperation of the United Arab Emirates, and the Minister of the Foreign Affairs of the Kingdom of Bahrain.  Manya Brachear Pashman: The guests of honor framed by the South Portico of the White House were an unlikely threesome. Two Arab foreign ministers and the Prime Minister of Israel, there to sign a pair of peace agreements that would transform the Middle East.  Donald Trump: Thanks to the great courage of the leaders of these three countries, we take a major stride toward a future in which people of all faiths and backgrounds live together in peace and prosperity. There will be other countries very, very soon that will follow these great leaders. Manya Brachear Pashman: President Trump’s team had achieved what was long thought impossible. After decades of pretending Israel did not exist until it solved its conflict with the Palestinians, Trump’s team discovered that attitudes across the Arab region had shifted and after months of tense negotiations, an agreement had been brokered by a small circle of Washington insiders. On August 13, 2020, the United Arab Emirates agreed to become the first Arab state in a quarter century to normalize relations with Israel. Not since 1994 had Israel established diplomatic relations with an Arab country, when King Hussein of Jordan and Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin signed a treaty, ending the state of war that had existed between them since Israel’s rebirth. A ceremony to celebrate and sign the historic deal was planned for the South Lawn of the White House on September 15, 2020. Before the signing ceremony took place, another nation agreed to sign as well: not too surprisingly the Kingdom of Bahrain.  After all, in June 2019, Bahrain had hosted the Peace to Prosperity summit, a two-day workshop where the Trump administration unveiled the economic portion of its peace plan – a 38-page prospectus that proposed ways for Palestinians and Arab countries to expand economic opportunities in cooperation with Israel.  In addition to Bahrain, Egypt, Jordan, Morocco, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE all participated in the summit. The Palestinians boycotted it, even as Trump’s senior advisor Jared Kushner presented plans to help them. Jared Kushner: A lot of these investments people are unwilling to make because people don’t want to put good money after bad money. They’ve seen in the past they’ve made these investments, they’ve tried to help out the Palestinian people, then all of a sudden there’s some  conflict that breaks out and a lot of this infrastructure gets destroyed. So what we have here is very detailed plans and these are things we can phase in over time assuming there’s a real ceasefire, a real peace and there’s an opportunity for people to start making these investments. Manya Brachear Pashman: Now Israel, the UAE, and Bahrain would open embassies, exchange ambassadors, and cooperate on tourism, trade, health care, and regional security. The Accords not only permitted Israelis to enter the two Arab nations using their Israeli passports, it opened the door for Muslims to visit historic sites in Israel, pray at Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem, the third holiest site in Islam, and finally satisfy their curiosity about the Jewish state. Before signing the accords, each leader delivered remarks. Here’s Bahrain’s Foreign Minister Abdullatif bin Rashid Al-Zayani. Abdullatif bin Rashid Al-Zayani: For too long, the Middle East has been set back by conflict and mistrust, causing untold destruction and thwarting the potential of generations of our best and brightest young people. Now, I’m convinced, we have the opportunity to change that. Manya Brachear Pashman: UAE’s Minister of Foreign Affairs Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed Al Nahyan echoed that sentiment and also addressed accusations by Palestinian leadership that the countries had abandoned them. He made it clear that the accords bolstered the Emirates’ support for the Palestinian people and their pursuit of an independent state. Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed Al Nahyan:  [speaking in Arabic] Manya Brachear Pashman: [translating Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed Al Nahyan] This new vision, he said, which is beginning to take shape as we meet today for the future of the region, full of youthful energy, is not a slogan that we raise for political gain as everyone looks forward to creating a more stable, prosperous, and secure future. This accord will enable us to continue to stand by the Palestinian people and realize their hopes for an independent state within a stable and prosperous region. Manya Brachear Pashman: The Truman Balcony, named for the first American president to recognize Israel’s independence, served as the backdrop for a few iconic photographs. The officials then made their way down the stairs and took their seats at the table where they each signed three copies of the Abraham Accords in English, Hebrew, and Arabic. The brief ceremony combined formality and levity as the leaders helped translate for each other so someone didn’t sign on the wrong dotted line. After that was settled, they turned the signed documents around to show the audience. When they all rose from their seats, Prime Minister Netanyahu paused. After the others put their portfolios down, he stood displaying his for a little while longer, taking a few more seconds to hold on to the magnitude of the moment. Benjamin Netanyahu: To all of Israel’s friends in the Middle East, those who are with us today and those who will join us tomorrow, I say, ‘As-salamu alaykum. Peace unto thee. Shalom.’ And you have heard from the president that he is already lining up more and more countries. This is unimaginable a few years ago, but with resolve, determination, a fresh look at the way peace is done . . . The blessings of the peace we make today will be enormous, first, because this peace will eventually expand to include other Arab states, and ultimately, it can end the Arab Israeli conflict once and for all. [clapping] [Red alert sirens] Manya Brachear Pashman: But peace in Israel was and still is a distant reality as Palestinian leadership did not participate in the Accords, and, in fact, viewed it as a betrayal. As Netanyahu concluded his speech to the audience on the White House Lawn, thousands of miles away, Israel's Iron Dome missile defense system intercepted 15 rockets fired by terrorists in Gaza, at least one striking Israel’s coastal city of Ashdod. Iran’s regime condemned the agreement. But across most of the region and around the world, the revelation that decades of hostility could be set aside to try something new – a genuine pursuit of peace – inspired hope. Saudi journalists wrote op-eds in support of the UAE and Bahrain. Egypt and Oman praised the Abraham Accords for adding stability to the region. Germany, the United Kingdom, France, and Spain commended the monumental step. United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres welcomed the deal for paving the way toward a two-state solution. AJC’s Chief Policy and Political Affairs Officer Jason Isaacson was one of more than 200 domestic and foreign officials on the White House Lawn that day taking it all in. The guest list included members of Congress, embassy staff, religious leaders, and people like himself who worked behind the scenes – a cross section of people who had been part of a long history of relationship building and peacemaking in the Middle East for many years. Jason Isaacson: To see what was happening then this meeting of neighbors who could be friends. To see the warmth evident on that stage at the South Lawn of the White House, and then the conversations that were taking place in this vast assembly on the South Lawn. Converging at that moment to mark the beginning of a development of a new Middle East. It was an exciting moment for me and for AJC and one that not only will I never forget but one that I am looking forward to reliving. Manya Brachear Pashman: Jason, of course, is talking about his confidence in the expansion of the Abraham Accords. Through his position at AJC he has attended several White House events marking milestones in the peace process. He had been seated on the South Lawn of the White House 27 years earlier to watch a similar scene unfold -- when Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and Palestinian Leader Yasser Arafat met to sign the Oslo Accords with President Bill Clinton. Yitzhak Rabin: What we are doing today is more than signing an agreement. It is a revolution. Yesterday, a dream. Today, a commitment. The Israeli and the Palestinian peoples who fought each other for almost a century have agreed to move decisively on the path of dialogue, understanding, and cooperation. Manya Brachear Pashman: Brokered secretly by Norway, the Oslo Accords established mutual recognition between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization, which claimed to represent the Palestinian people. It also led to the creation of a Palestinian Authority for interim self-government and a phased Israeli withdrawal from parts of the West Bank and Gaza.  Jason Isaacson: I mean, 1993 was a tremendous breakthrough, and it was a breakthrough between the State of Israel and an organization that had been created to destroy Israel. And so it was a huge breakthrough to see the Israeli and Palestinian leaders agree to a process that would revolutionize that relationship, normalize that relationship, and set aside a very ugly history and chart a new path that was historic. Manya Brachear Pashman: While the Oslo Accords moved the Israelis and Palestinians toward a resolution, progress came to a halt two years later with the assassination of Prime Minister Rabin. In July 2000, President Clinton brought Arafat and then Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak to Camp David to continue discussions, but they could not agree.  In his autobiography, “My Life,” President Clinton wrote that Arafat walked away from a Palestinian state, a mistake that Clinton took personally. When Arafat called him a great man, Clinton responded “I am not a great man. I am a failure, and you made me one." Arafat’s decision also would prove fatal for both Israelis and Palestinians. By September, the Second Intifada – five years of violence, terror attacks, and suicide bombings – derailed any efforts toward peace. Jason says the Abraham Accords have more staying power than the Oslo Accords. That’s clear five years later, especially after the October 7 Hamas terror attacks sparked a prolonged war between Israel and Hamas in Gaza. Two years into the war, the Abraham Accords have held. But Jason recalls feeling optimistic, even as he sat there again on the South Lawn. Jason Isaacson: It's a different kind of historic moment, maybe a little less breathtaking in the idea of two fierce antagonists, sort of laying down their arms and shaking hands uneasily, but shaking hands. Uneasily, but shaking hands. All those years later, in 2020, you had a state of Israel that had no history of conflict with the UAE or Bahrain. Countries with, with real economies, with real investment potential, with wise and well-advised leaders who would be in a position to implement plans that were being put together in the summer and fall of 2020. The Oslo Accords, you know, didn't provide that kind of built in infrastructure to advance peace. Manya Brachear Pashman: Jason pointed out that the only source of conflict among the signatories on the Abraham Accords was actually a point of mutual agreement – a frustration and desire to resolve the conflict with the Palestinians. UAE and Bahrain were part of the League of Arab States that had sworn in 2002 not to advance relations with Israel in the absence of a two-state solution.  But 18 years later, that had gone nowhere and leaders recognized that perhaps it would be more beneficial to the Palestinian cause if they at least engaged with Israel. Jason Isaacson: I had no fear, sitting in a folding chair on the White House Lawn on September 15, that this was going to evaporate. This seemed to be a natural progression. The region is increasingly sophisticated and increasingly plugged into the world, and recognizing that they have a lot of catching up to do to advance the welfare of their people. And that that catching up is going to require integrating with a very advanced country in their region that they have shunned for too long. This is a recognition that I am hearing across the region, not always spoken in those words, but it's clear that it will be of benefit to the region, to have Israel as a partner, rather than an isolated island that somehow is not a part of that region. Donald Trump: I want to thank all of the members of Congress for being here … Manya Brachear Pashman: AJC CEO Ted Deutch also was at the White House that day, not as AJC CEO but as a Congressman who served on the House Committee on Foreign Affairs and chaired its Subcommittee on the Middle East, North Africa and Global Counterterrorism. Ted Deutch: It was a beautiful day and there was this coming together, this recognition that this was such an historic moment and it's exactly the kind of thing, frankly, that  I remember having watched previously, when there were peace agreements signed and thinking that's something that I want to be a part of. And there I was looking around right in the middle of all of this, and so excited about where this could lead. Manya Brachear Pashman: Despite his congressional role, Ted learned about the deal along with the rest of the world when it was initially announced a month before the ceremony, though he did get a tip that something was in the pipeline that would change the course of the committee’s work. Ted Deutch: I found out when I got a phone call from the Trump administration, someone who was a senior official who told me that there is big news that's coming, that the Middle East is never going to look the same, and that he couldn't share any other information. And we, of course, went into wild speculation mode about what that could be. And the Abraham Accords was the announcement, and it was as dramatic as he suggested. Manya Brachear Pashman: It was a small glimmer of light during an otherwise dark time. Remember, this was the summer and early fall of 2020. The COVID pandemic, for the most part, had shut down the world. People were not attending meetings, conferences, or parties. Even members of Congress were avoiding Capitol Hill and casting their votes from home. Ted Deutch: It was hard to make great strides in anything in the diplomatic field, because there weren't the kind of personal interactions taking place on a regular basis. It didn't have the atmosphere that was conducive to meaningful, deep, ongoing conversations about the future of the world. And that's really what this was about, and that's what was missing. And so here was this huge news that for the rest of the world, felt like it was out of the blue, that set in motion a whole series of steps in Congress about the way that our committee, the way we approach the region. That we could finally start talking about regional cooperation in ways that we couldn't before. Manya Brachear Pashman: The timing was especially auspicious as it boosted interest in a particular piece of legislation that had been in the works for a decade: the bipartisan Nita M. Lowey Middle East Partnership for Peace Act. Approved by Congress in December 2020, around the same time Morocco joined the Abraham Accords, the law allocated up to $250 million over five years for programs advancing peaceful coexistence between Israelis and Palestinians and supporting a sustainable two-state solution. Passed as part of a larger appropriations bill, it was the largest investment of any single country in Israeli-Palestinian civil society initiatives. Ted Deutch: Here we were having this conversation about increasing trade and increasing tourism and the countries working more closely together and being able to freely fly back and forth on a regular basis – something that we've seen as the tourism numbers have taken off. The trade has taken off. So it really changed what we do. Manya Brachear Pashman: The other thing Ted recalls about that day on the White House lawn was the bipartisan spirit in the air. Although his own committee didn’t tend to divide along party lines, Congress had become quite polarized and partisan on just about everything else. On that day, just as there was no animus between Israelis and Arabs, there was none between Republicans and Democrats either. And Ted believes that’s the way it always should be. Ted Deutch: It was a bipartisan stellium of support, because this was a really important moment for the region and for the world, and it's exactly the kind of moment where we should look for ways to work together. This issue had to do with the Middle East, but it was driven out of Washington. There's no doubt about that. It was driven out of the out of the Trump administration and the White House and that was, I think, a reminder of the kind of things that can happen in Washington, and that we need to always look for those opportunities and when any administration does the right thing, then they need to be given credit for it, whether elected officials are on the same side of the aisle or not. We were there as people who were committed to building a more peaceful and prosperous region, with all of the countries in the region, recognizing the contributions that Israel makes and can make as the region has expanded, and then thinking about all of the chances that we would have in the years ahead to build upon this in really positive ways. Manya Brachear Pashman: On that warm September day, it felt as if the Abraham Accords not only had the potential to heal a rift in the Middle East but also teach us some lessons here at home. Even if it was impossible to resolve every disagreement, the Abraham Accords proved that progress and peace are possible when there are shared strategic interests, relationships, and a shared concern for the greater good.   Ted Deutch: I hope that as we celebrate this 5th anniversary, that in this instance we allow ourselves to do just that. I mean, this is a celebratory moment, and I hope that we can leave politics out of this. And I hope that we're able to just spend a moment thinking about what's been achieved during these five years, and how much all of us, by working together, will be able to achieve, not just for Israel, but for the region, in the best interest of the United States and in so doing, ultimately, for the world. That's what this moment offers. Manya Brachear Pashman: In the next episode, we meet Israelis and Arabs who embraced the spirit of the Abraham Accords and seized unprecedented opportunities to collaborate. 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 [email protected]. 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.
    --------  
    22:27
  • Architects of Peace: Episode 2 - Behind the Breakthrough
    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: [email protected] 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 [email protected]. 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    
    --------  
    22:20
  • Architects of Peace: Episode 1 - The Road to the Deal
    Listen to the first episode of AJC’s new 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.   Jason Isaacson, AJC Chief of Policy and Political Affairs, explains the complex Middle East landscape before the Accords and how behind-the-scenes efforts helped foster the dialogue that continues to shape the region today. Resources: Episode Transcript 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: [email protected] If you’ve appreciated this episode, please be sure to tell your friends, and rate and review us on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Transcript: Jason Isaacson: It has become clear to me in my travels in the region over the decades that more and more people across the Arab world understood the game, and they knew that this false narrative – that Jews are not legitimately there, and that somehow we have to focus all of our energy in the Arab world on combating this evil interloper – it’s nonsense. And it’s becoming increasingly clear that, in fact, Israel can be a partner. 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. Manya Brachear Pashman: On the eve of the signing of the Abraham Accords, AJC Chief Policy and Political Affairs Officer Jason Isaacson found himself traveling to the end of a tree filled winding road in McLean, Virginia, to sip tea on the back terrace with Bahraini Ambassador Shaikh Abdulla bin Rashid Al Khalifa and Bahrain’s Minister of Foreign Affairs Dr. Abdullatif bin Rashid Al Zayani. Jason Isaacson: Sitting in the backyard of the Bahraini ambassador's house with Dr. Al Zayani, the Foreign Minister of Bahrain and with Shaikh Abdulla, the ambassador, and hearing what was about to happen the next day on the South Lawn of the White House was a thrilling moment. And really, in many ways, just a validation of the work that AJC has been doing for many years–before I came to the organization, and the time that I've spent with AJC since the early 90s.  This possibility of Israel's true integration in the region, Israel's cooperation and peace with its neighbors, with all of its neighbors – this was clearly the threshold that we were standing on. Manya Brachear Pashman: If you’re wondering how Jason ended up sipping tea in such esteemed company the night before his hosts made history, wonder no more. Here’s the story. Yitzchak Shamir: The people of Israel look to this palace with great anticipation and expectation. We pray that this meeting will mark the beginning of a new chapter in the history of the Middle East; that it will signal the end of hostility, violence, terror, and war; that it will bring dialogue, accommodation, co-existence, and above all, peace. Manya Brachear Pashman: That was Israel’s Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir speaking in October 1991 at the historic Madrid Peace Conference -- the first time Israel and Arab delegations engaged in direct talks toward peace. It had taken 43 years to reach this point – 43 years since the historic United Nations Resolution that created separate Jewish and Arab states – a resolution Jewish leaders accepted, but Arab states scorned. Not even 24 hours after Israel declared its independence on May 14, 1948, the armies of Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria attacked the new Jewish state, which fought back mightily and expanded its territory. The result? A deep-seated distrust among Israel, its neighboring nations, and some of the Arab residents living within Israel’s newly formed borders. Though many Palestinian Arabs stayed, comprising over 20 percent of Israel’s population today, hundreds of thousands of others left or were displaced. Meanwhile, in reaction to the rebirth of the Jewish state, and over the following two decades, Jewish communities long established in Arab states faced hardship and attacks, forcing Jews by the hundreds of thousands to flee. Israel’s War of Independence set off a series of wars with neighboring nations, terrorist attacks, and massacres. Peace in the region saw more than a few false starts, with one rare exception.  In 1979, after the historic visit to Israel by Egyptian President Anwar Sadat, he and Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin joined President Jimmy Carter for negotiations at Camp David and signed a peace treaty that for the next 15 years, remained the only formal agreement between Israel and an Arab state. In fact, it was denounced uniformly across the Arab world.  But 1991 introduced dramatic geopolitical shifts. The collapse of the Soviet Union, which had severed relations with Israel during the Six-Day War of 1967, diminished its ability to back Syria, Iraq, and Libya. In the USSR’s final months, it re-established diplomatic relations with Israel but left behind a regional power vacuum that extremists started to fill. Meanwhile, most Arab states, including Syria, joined the successful U.S.-led coalition against Saddam Hussein that liberated Kuwait, solidifying American supremacy in the region and around the world. The Palestine Liberation Organization, which claimed to represent the world’s Palestinians, supported Iraq and Libya.  Seizing an opportunity, the U.S. and the enfeebled but still relevant Soviet Union invited to Madrid a joint Jordanian-Palestinian delegation, along with delegations from Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, Egypt, and Israel. Just four months before that Madrid meeting, Jason Isaacson had left his job on Capitol Hill to work for the American Jewish Committee. At that time, AJC published a magazine titled Commentary, enabling Jason to travel to the historic summit with media credentials and hang out with the press pool. Jason Isaacson: It was very clear in just normal conversations with these young Arab journalists who I was spending some time with, that there was the possibility of an openness that I had not realized existed. There was a possibility of kind of a sense of common concerns about the region, that was kind of refreshing and was sort of running counter to the narratives that have dominated conversations in that part of the world for so long.  And it gave me the sense that by expanding the circle of relationships that I was just starting with in Madrid, we might be able to make some progress. We might be able to find some partners with whom AJC could develop a real relationship. Manya Brachear Pashman: AJC had already begun to build ties in the region in the 1950s, visiting Arab countries like Morocco and Tunisia, which had sizable Jewish populations. The rise in Arab nationalism in Tunisia and rebirth of Israel eventually led to an exodus that depleted the Jewish community there. Emigration depleted Morocco’s Jewish community as well.  Jason Isaacson: To say that somehow this is not the native land of the Jewish people is just flying in the face of the reality. And yet, that was the propaganda line that was pushed out across the region. Of course, Madrid opened a lot of people's eyes. But that wasn't enough. More had to be done. There were very serious efforts made by the U.S. government, Israeli diplomats, Israeli businesspeople, and my organization, which played a very active role in trying to introduce people to the reality that they would benefit from this relationship with Israel.  So it was pushing back against decades of propaganda and lies. And that was one of the roles that we assigned to ourselves and have continued to play. Manya Brachear Pashman: No real negotiations took place at the Madrid Conference, rather it opened conversations that unfolded in Moscow, in Washington, and behind closed doors in secret locations around the world. Progress quickened under Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin. In addition to a peace treaty between Israel and Jordan, reached in 1994, secret talks in Norway between Israel and PLO resulted in the Oslo Accords, a series of agreements signed in 1993 and 1995 that ended the First Intifada after six years of violence, and laid out a five-year timeline for achieving a two-state solution. Extremists tried to derail the process. A Jewish extremist assassinated Rabin in 1995. And a new terror group  launched a series of suicide attacks against Israeli civilians. Formed during the First Intifada, these terrorists became stars of the Second. They called themselves Hamas. AP News Report: [sirens] [in Hebrew] Don’t linger, don’t linger. Manya Brachear Pashman: On March 27, 2002, Hamas sent a suicide bomber into an Israeli hotel where 250 guests had just been seated for a Passover Seder. He killed 30 people and injured 140 more. The day after the deadliest suicide attack in Israel’s history, the Arab League, a coalition of 22 Arab nations in the Middle East and Africa, unveiled what it called the Arab Peace Initiative – a road map offering wide scale normalization of relations with Israel, but with an ultimatum: No expansion of Arab-Israeli relations until the establishment of a Palestinian state within the pre-1967 armistice lines and a so-called right of return for Palestinians who left and their descendants.   As the Second Intifada continued to take civilian lives, the Israeli army soon launched Operation Defensive Shield to secure the West Bank and parts of Gaza. It was a period of high tension, conflict, and distrust. But behind the scenes, Jason and AJC were forging ahead, building bridges, and encountering an openness in Arab capitals that belied the ultimatum.  Jason Isaacson: It has become clear to me in my travels in the region over the decades that more and more people across the Arab world understood the game, and they knew that that this false narrative that Jews are not legitimately there, and that somehow we have to focus all of our energy in the Arab world on combating this evil interloper – it’s nonsense. And it’s becoming increasingly clear that, in fact, Israel can be a partner of Arab countries. Manya Brachear Pashman: Jason led delegations of Jewish leaders to Arab capitals, oversaw visits by Arab leaders to Israel, and cultivated relationships of strategic and political consequence with governments and civil society leaders across North Africa, the Levant, and the Arabian Peninsula. In 2009, King Mohammed VI of Morocco bestowed on him the honor of Chevalier of the Order of the Throne of the Kingdom of Morocco. Jason’s priority was nurturing one key element missing from Arab-Israeli relations. An element that for decades had been absent in most Middle East peace negotiations: trust.   Jason Isaacson: Nothing is more important than developing trust. Trust and goodwill are, if not synonymous, are so closely linked. Yes, a lot of these discussions that AJC’s been engaged in over many years have been all about, not only developing a set of contacts we can turn to when there's a crisis or when we need answers to questions or when we need to pass a message along to a government. But also, develop a sense that we all want the same thing and we trust each other. That if someone is prepared to take certain risks to advance the prospect of peace, which will involve risk, which will involve vulnerability. That a neighbor who might have demonstrated in not-so-distant past animosity and hostility toward Israel can be trusted to take a different course. Manya Brachear Pashman: A number of Israeli diplomats and businesspeople also worked toward that goal. While certain diplomatic channels in the intelligence and security spheres stayed open out of necessity – other diplomats and businesspeople with dual citizenship traveled across the region, quietly breaking down barriers, starting conversations, and building trust.  Jason Isaacson: I would run into people in Arab capitals from time to time, who were fulfilling that function, and traveling with different passports that they had legitimately, because they were from those countries. It was just a handful of people in governments that would necessarily know that they were there. So yes, if that sounds like cloak and dagger, it’s kind of a cloak and dagger operation, a way for people to maintain a relationship and build a relationship until the society is ready to accept the reality that it will be in their country's best interest to have that relationship. Manya Brachear Pashman: Privately, behind the scenes, signs emerged that some Arab leaders understood the role that Jews have played in the region’s history for millennia and the possibilities that would exist if Muslims and Jews could restore some of the faith and friendship of bygone years.  Jason Isaacson: I remember sitting with King Mohammed the VI of Morocco just weeks after his ascension to the throne, so going back more than a quarter century, and hearing him talk with me and AJC colleagues about the 600,000 subjects that he had in Israel. Of course, these were Jews, Israelis of Moroccan descent, who are in the hundreds of thousands. But the sense that these countries really have a common history. Manya Brachear Pashman: Common history, yes. Common goals, too. And not for nothing, a common enemy. The same extremist forces that have been bent on Israel’s destruction have not only disrupted Israeli-Arab peace, they’ve prevented the Palestinian people from thriving in a state of their own and now threaten the security and stability of the entire region. Jason Isaacson:  We are hopeful that in partnership with those in the Arab world who feel the same way about the need to push back against extremism, including the extremism promoted, promulgated, funded, armed by the Islamic Republic of Iran, that we can have enough of a network of supportive players in the Arab world, in the West. Working with Israel and working with Palestinian partners who are interested in the same future. A real future, a politically free future, where we can actually make some progress. And that's an ongoing effort. This is a point that we made consistently over many years: if you want to help the Palestinian people–and we want to help the Palestinian people–but if you, fill in the blank Arab government official, your country wants to help the Palestinian people, you're not helping them by pretending that Israel doesn't exist.  You're not helping them by isolating Israel, by making Israel a pariah in the minds of your people. You will actually have leverage with Israel, and you'll help the Palestinians when they're sitting at a negotiating table across from the Israelis. If you engage Israel, if you have access to the Israeli officials and they have a stake in your being on their side on certain things and working together on certain common issues. Manya Brachear Pashman: Jason says more and more Arab leaders are realizing, with some frustration, that isolating Israel is a losing proposition for all the parties involved. It has not helped the Palestinian people. It has not kept extremism at bay. And it has not helped their own countries and their own citizens prosper. In fact, the limitations that isolating Israel imposes have caused many countries to lag behind the tiny Jewish state. Jason Isaacson: I think there was just this sense of how far back we have fallen, how much ground we have to make up. We need to break out of the old mindset and try something different. But that before the Abraham Accords, they were saying it in the years leading up to the Abraham Accords, with increasing frustration for the failure of Palestinian leadership to seize opportunities that had been held out to them. But frankly, also contributing, I think, to this was this insistence on isolating themselves from a naturally synergistic relationship with a neighboring state right next door that could contribute to the welfare of their societies. It just didn't make a whole lot of sense, and it denied them the ability to move forward. Manya Brachear Pashman: Jason remembers the first time he heard an Arab official utter the words out loud – expressing a willingness, daresay desire, to partner with Israel. Jason Isaacson: It took a long time, but I could see in 2016, 17, 18, 19, this growing awareness, and finally hearing it actually spoken out loud in one particular conference that I remember going to in 2018 in Bahrain, by a senior official from an Arab country. It took a long time for that lesson to penetrate, but it's absolutely the case. Manya Brachear Pashman: In 2019, Bahrain hosted an economic summit where the Trump administration presented its "Peace to Prosperity" plan, a $50 billion investment proposal to create jobs and improve the lives of Palestinians while also promoting regional peace and security. Palestinians rejected the plan outright and refused to attend. Bahrain invited Israeli media to cover the summit. That September, on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly, AJC presented its inaugural Architect of Peace Award to the Kingdom of Bahrain’s chief diplomat for nearly 20 years. Shaikh Khalid bin Ahmed Al Khalifa, Bahrain’s Minister of Foreign Affairs at the time, told Jason that it was important to learn the lessons of the late Egyptian President Anwar Sadat and late Jordanian King Hussein, both of whom signed peace treaties with Israel. He also explained the reason why Bahrain invited Israeli media.  Shaikh Khalid bin Ahmed Al Khalifa: President Anwar Sadat did it, he broke a huge barrier. He was a man of war, he was the leader of a country that went to war or two with Israel. But then he knew that at the right moment he would want to go straight to Israeli and talk to them. We fulfilled also something that we’ve always wanted to do, we’ve discussed it many times: talking to the Israeli public through the Israeli media.  Why not talk to the people? They wake up every day, they have their breakfast watching their own TV channels, they read their own papers, they read their own media, they form their own opinion.    Absolutely nobody should shy away from talking to the media. We are trying to get our point across. In order to convince. How will you do it? There is no language of silence. You’ll have to talk and you’ll have to remove all those barriers and with that, trust can be built. Manya Brachear Pashman: Jason had spent decades building that trust and the year to come yielded clear results. In May and June 2020, UAE Ambassador to the UN Lana Nusseibeh and UAE Minister of State Dr. Anwar Gargash both participated in AJC webinars to openly discuss cooperation with Israel – a topic once considered taboo.  So when the Abraham Accords were signed a few months later, for Jason and AJC colleagues who had been on this long journey for peace, it was a natural progression. Though no less dramatic.  Sitting with Minister Al Khalifa’s successor, Dr. Al Zayani, and the Bahraini ambassador on the evening before the White House ceremony, it was time to drink a toast to a new chapter of history in the region. Jason Isaacson: I don't think that that would have been possible had there not been decades of contacts that had been made by many people. Roving Israeli diplomats and Israeli business people, usually operating, in fact, maybe always operating with passports from other countries, traveling across the region. And frankly, our work and the work of a limited number of other people who were in non-governmental positions. Some journalists, authors, scholars, business people, and we certainly did a great deal of this over decades, would speak with leaders in these countries and influential people who are not government officials. And opening up their minds to the possibility of the advantages that would accrue to their societies by engaging Israel and by better understanding the Jewish people and who we are, what we care about, who we are not.  Because there was, of course, a great deal of decades, I should say, centuries and millennia, of misapprehensions and lies about the Jewish people. So clearing away that baggage was a very important part of the work that we did, and I believe that others did as well. We weren't surprised. We were pleased. We applauded the Trump administration, the President and his team, for making this enormous progress on advancing regional security and peace, prosperity. We are now hoping that we can build on those achievements of 2020 going forward and expanding fully the integration of Israel into its neighborhood. Manya Brachear Pashman: Next episode, we hear how the first Trump administration developed its Middle East policy and take listeners behind the scenes of the high stakes negotiations that yielded the Abraham Accords.  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 [email protected]. 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 Middle East Violin: ID: 277189507; Composer: Andy Warner Frontiers: ID: 183925100; Publisher: Pond5 Publishing Beta (BMI); Composer: Pete Checkley (BMI) Middle East Tension: ID: 45925627 Arabic Ambient: ID: 186923328; Publisher: Victor Romanov; Composer: Victor Romanov Arabian Strings: ID: 72249988; Publisher: EITAN EPSTEIN; Composer: EITAN EPSTEIN Inspired Middle East: ID: 241884108; Composer: iCENTURY Middle East Dramatic Intense: ID: 23619101; Publisher: GRS Records; Composer: Satria Petir Mystical Middle East: ID: 212471911; Composer: Vicher    
    --------  
    22:39
  • 3 Ways Jewish College Students are Building Strength Amid Hate
    "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: [email protected] 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.  
    --------  
    35:12
  • From the Amazon to Academia: Antisemitism, Zionism, and Indigenous Identity
    As the school year kicks off, Adam Louis-Klein shares his unexpected journey from researching the Desano tribe in the Amazon to confronting rising antisemitism in academic circles after October 7. He discusses his academic work, which explores the parallels between indigenous identity and Jewish peoplehood, and unpacks the politics of historical narrative.  *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:  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: [email protected] 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:   Adam Louis-Klein is a PhD candidate in anthropology at McGill University, where he researches antisemitism, Zionism, Jewish peoplehood, and broader questions of indigeneity and historical narrative. His work bridges academic scholarship and public commentary, drawing on field work with indigenous communities in the Amazon and studies in philosophy at Yale, The New School and the University of Chicago.  He writes on translation and the politics of peoplehood across traditions, and is committed to developing a Jewish intellectual voice grounded in historical depth and moral clarity. He blogs for The Times of Israel, and he's with us today to talk about his experience emerging from the Amazon, where he was doing research after October 7, 2023, and discovering what had happened in Israel. Adam, welcome to People of the Pod. Adam Louis-Klein:   Thank you so much for having me. It's a real pleasure to be here on this podcast with the American Jewish community. Manya Brachear Pashman:   So tell us about the research that you are doing that took you into the depths of the Amazon rainforest. Adam Louis-Klein:   So I work with a group called the Desano people who live in the Vaupés region, which is a tributary of the upper Rio Negro. Part of it's in Brazil, part of it's in Colombia today. I went there because I was really interested in trying to understand how people were often seen at the margins of the world, the periphery of the global economy. See themselves and their own sort of role in the cosmos and in the world in general.  And what I found actually is that these people see themselves at the center of it all, as a unique people, as a chosen people. And that was something that really inspired me, and later led me to rethink my own relationship to Jewish peoplehood and chosenness, and what it means to be a kind of indigenous people struggling for survival and recognition. Manya Brachear Pashman:   So were you raised Jewish? Did you have a Jewish upbringing? Adam Louis-Klein:   Yeah, I was raised as kind of a cultural and reform Jew. I wouldn't say that Israel was super present in our lives, but we did travel there for my younger brother's Bar Mitzvah at the Kotel, and that did have an impression on me. And then later on, I wear a wristband of Brothers for Life, which is a charity for injured Israeli soldiers. But as time went on, I got involved in these radical academic scenes.  And you know, my own field, anthropology, has fundamentally turned against Jewish peoplehood and Israel, unfortunately. But it was really in the Amazon, actually, that my journey of Teshuvah and rediscovering my Jewishness and the importance of Jewish peoplehood was really re-awoken for me. Manya Brachear Pashman:   You were involved in these radical circles. Did you ascribe to some of the beliefs that a lot of your academic colleagues were ascribing to? Did you start to question the legitimacy of Israel or the actions of the Israeli government?  Adam Louis-Klein:   I think I started to ascribe to them in a kind of background and passive way. In the way that I think that many people in these communities do. So I had actually learned about Israel. I did know something. But as I wanted to kind of ascribe to a broader social justice narrative, I sort of immediately assumed when people told me, that Israelis were the ones doing the oppression and the injustice, that that had to be true. And I didn't question it so much.  So it's ironic that those spaces, I think, that are built around critical thought, have become spaces, in my opinion, that are not so critical today. And I think we really need a critical discourse around this kind of criticism, sort of to develop our own critical discourse of what anti-Zionism is today. Manya Brachear Pashman:   So what inspired the research? In other words, so you're involved in these radical circles, and then you go and immerse yourself with these tribes to do the research. What inspired you to do it, and was it your Jewishness? Adam Louis-Klein:   So I think what led me to anthropology was probably a kind of diasporic Jewish sensibility. So I'd studied philosophy before, and I was very entrenched in the Western tradition. But I was kind of seeking to think across worlds and think in translation. I've always kind of moved between countries and cities, and I think that's always been an intuitive part of who I am as a Jew.  And anthropology was founded by Jews, by Franz Boas, Emile Durkheim, Claude Lévi-Strauss, so I think that's kind of part of what brought me there. But I ended up rediscovering also the meaning of, you know, homeland as well, and what it means to be part of a people with a unique destiny and relationship to territory and land. And that made me understand Zionism in a completely new light. Manya Brachear Pashman:   And did you understand it when you were there? Did you come to these realizations when you were there, or did you start to piece all of that together and connect the dots after you emerged? Adam Louis-Klein:   So part of my research looks at how indigenous people engage with Christian missionaries who try and translate the Bible into indigenous languages. So when that encounter happens, it's actually quite common throughout the world, that a lot of indigenous people identify with the Jewish people quite strongly. So this might sound a little counterintuitive, especially if someone's used to certain activist networks in which indigeneity is highly associated with Palestinians, Jews are treated now as settler colonists, which is basically the opposite of indigeneity. And that's become a kind of consensus in academia, even though it seems to fly in the face of both facts and our own self understanding as Jews. So I saw that in the Amazon, in the way people at the margins of the world who might not already be integrated in the academic, activist kind of scene, sort of organically identify with the Jewish people and Israel.  And they admire the Jewish people and Israel, because they see in us, a people that's managed to maintain our cultural identity, our specific and distinct civilization, while also being able to use the tools of modernity and technology to benefit us and to benefit the world. So I think that also kind of disrupts some primitivist notions about indigenous people, that they should remain sort of technologically backwards, so to speak. I think that they have a more nuanced approach. Manya Brachear Pashman:   So I guess, what did you discover when you did emerge from the Amazon? In other words, October 7 had happened. When did you emerge and how did you find out? Adam Louis-Klein:   So I'd been living in a remote Desano village without internet or a phone or any connection to the outside world for months. And then I returned a couple days after October 7 to a local town, so still in the Amazon, but I was signing onto my computer for the first time in months, and I remember signing onto Facebook and I saw the images of people running from the Nova Festival. And that was the first thing that I saw in months from the world. So that was a very traumatic experience that sort of ruptured my sense of reality in many ways, but the most difficult thing was seeing my intellectual milieu immediately transform into a space of denial or justification or even just straightforward aggression and hate to anyone who showed any solidarity with Israelis in that moment, or who saw it as a moment to to say something positive and inspiring and helpful about the Jewish people. That was actually seen as an act of violence.  So I went to Facebook, and I don't remember exactly what I said, I stand with the Jewish people, or with Israelis, or Am Yisrael Chai, or something like that. And many people in my circles, really interpreted that as an aggression. So at that point, it was really strange, because I'd been living in the Amazon, trying to help people with their own cultural survival, you know, their own struggle to reproduce their own civilization in the face of assimilation and surrounding society that refuses to validate their unique identity. And then I came back to the world, and I was seeing the exact same thing happening to my own people.  And even stranger than that, it was happening to my own people, but in the language of critique and solidarity. So the very language I'd learned in anthropology, of how to support indigenous people and sort of to align myself with their struggles was now being weaponized against me in this kind of horrible inversion of reality. Manya Brachear Pashman:   Had you sensed this aggressive tone prior to your time in the Amazon and when you were involved with these circles? Adam Louis-Klein:   No, I'd never witnessed anything like this in my life, and so it took some real searching and going inward, and I was still in the jungle, but encountering all this anti-Zionist hate online from people I thought were my friends. And I had to really ask myself, you know, maybe I'm in the wrong, because I've never seen people act like . . .  people who are scholars, intellectuals who should be thinking critically about antisemitism. Because antisemitism, you know, we talk a lot about in the academy, critical race theory. So we look at ideologies, tropes, and symbols that are used to dehumanize minority groups, and we learn to be skeptical.  So we learn that there are discourses that speak at times, in languages of reason, of justice, even that are actually biased, structurally biased, against minorities. So then I was deeply confused. Why did these same people not know how to apply those same analytics to Jews? And not only did they not know how, they seemed to think it was offensive to even try. So that was really strange, and I had to kind of think, well, you know, maybe I'm wrong, you know, I think there's a process of they've attempted to sort of stabilize this consensus at such a degree. That Israel is committing genocide, that Israel is a settler colonial entity that is fundamentally evil, basically. And Israelis are fundamentally oppressors. They've created a space it's almost impossible to question them.  And it took me a long time to emerge and to come to that realization that I think anti-Zionism is really a discourse of libel, fundamentally. And these accusations, I wouldn't say, are offered in good faith. And it's unfortunately, not much use to try and refute them. And so instead, I started writing, and I started trying to analyze anti-Zionism itself as an object of critique and as an ideology that we can deconstruct. Manya Brachear Pashman:   So did this change the course of your academic research? In other words, you said you started writing, are you writing academic articles, or is it more The Times of Israel blog and your more public writings? Adam Louis-Klein:   So I've been writing publicly. I started writing on Facebook, and then the readership on Facebook started to grow, and then I sent it to the Times of Israel. And I do have some plans lined up to try and get this material out in the academic context as well. Because I think that's really important, that we build parallel academic spaces and our own language of academic legitimacy. Because I think that academic language, and as well, that kind of activist language, critique of oppression is valuable, but it's also culturally hegemonic today. And so I think that as Jews, if we abandon that language, we will have trouble telling our story. So I think there are also projects like this. I'd like to mention the London Center for the Study of contemporary antisemitism. I think that's a great model. So they're doing serious academic work on contemporary antisemitism, not just classical antiSemitism, which we're all familiar with, Neo Nazis, etc. You know, what does it look like today? You know, red triangles, Hamas headbands. This is a new language of hate that I think we need to be on top of. Manya Brachear Pashman:   In fact, you presented a paper recently, there, correct, at the London Center, or at a conference sponsored by the London Center? Adam Louis-Klein:   Yeah, I did. I presented a paper. It was called the Dissolving the Denotational Account of Antisemitism. So denotational means, what words refer to. Because what I found very often is that it's a trope that's become really familiar now. Anti-Zionists, they say, we don't hate Jews, we only hate Zionists. We don't hate Judaism, we hate Zionism. We're not antisemitic, we're critical of Israel.  So these distinctions that are made are all about saying, you can't point to us as attacking Jews, because our language is such that we are denoting we are referring to something else. So in my talk, I was trying to explain that I like look at anti-Zionism more like a symbolic anthropologist. So when an anthropologist goes and works with an indigenous culture, we look at the kinds of symbols that they use to articulate their vision of the world. The Jaguar, for example, becomes a symbol of certain kinds of potency or predation, for example. So I look at anti-Zionism in the same way. It's not important to me whether they think they're referring to Israel or Jews. What's important to me is the use of conspiratorial symbols, or a symbol of child killing, for example. So we see that classical antisemitism accused Jews of killing children. Anti-Zionism today constructs Israelis as bloodthirsty and desiring to kill children. So when we see that, we see that even if they say not Jews, Zionists, they're using similar symbols that have mutated. So I think that's what I'm trying to track, is both the mutation of classical antisemitism into anti-Zionism, and also the continuities between the two. Manya Brachear Pashman:   Did you ever experience antisemitism from your academic circles or really anywhere in life through from childhood on? Adam Louis-Klein:   Not particularly. So I went to a northeastern prep school, and we were, there were very few Jews, so I think we were sort of seen as another to the kind of traditional northeast New England aristocracy. But it wasn't something that overt, I would say. I think that antisemitism is something that occurs more so in cycles. So if you look at the 19th century, emancipation of Jews and integration of Jews into society, that was the up part of the cycle, and then the reaction to that came on the down part of the cycle. So unfortunately, I think we're in the same thing today.  So Jews have very successfully assimilated into American society and became very successful and integrated into American society. But now we're seeing the backlash. And the backlash is taking a new form, which is anti-Zionism, which allows itself to evade what classical antisemitism looks like, and what we're used to identifying as classical antisemitism. Manya Brachear Pashman:   So I do want to talk about the word indigenous or indigeneity. Jews celebrate the creation of Israel as a return to their indigenous homeland, and Palestinians also consider it their indigenous homeland. So how are their definitions of indigeneity, how are those definitions different or distinct? I mean, how are their experiences distinct from each other's and from the people and the tribes with whom you immersed yourself in the Amazon? Adam Louis-Klein:   So I think indigeneity, in its fundamental meaning, captures something very real that's common to tons of different groups across the world. Which is a certain conception of the way that one's genealogical ancestry is connected to a specific territory where one emerged as a people, and through which one's own peoplehood  is defined. So as Jews, our own peoplehood is connected to the land of Israel. It's the Promised Land, it's the place where our civilization first flourished, and it's the place we've always looked to return to. And so that is very similar to indigenous groups around the world.  Now, at the same time, I think there's another concept of indigeneity that gets thrown in and sometimes confuses the issue a little bit, and that's that being indigenous relates to a specific history of dispossession, usually by European colonialism, starting in the 16th century. Now, in fact, there have been many colonialism throughout history. So there have been Islamic civilization practiced widespread colonialism. The Romans practiced colonialism. The Babylonians. But there is a tendency to only look at this form of colonialism.  And now when we look at the Middle East, what we find then is these analytics are becoming confused and applied in strange ways. So we see that Palestinians, for example, their genealogical traditions, they understand themselves as tribally derived from tribes in Arabia that expanded with Muhammad's conquest, and that's very common. And Arabian culture and Arabic language is what they practice.  And so at that level, from a factual perspective, Palestinians are not indigenous in the genealogical sense. However, there's a tendency to believe, since Jews have a state today, then since they appear not as dispossessed, because Jews have actually repossessed our ancestral land, that Jews can't be indigenous. But so I think that's a confusion. The basic understanding of what indigenous means, and largely what the UN definition is based on, is this notion of continuous identification with the territory.  So I really think that this isn't so much a question of who can live where. I think Palestinians’ right to live in the land has largely been recognized by the UN Partition Plan in 1947, or the Oslo Accords, and other peace deals, but it's a question of conceptual clarity and fact. And so at this level, I believe that the UN and other institutions should formally recognize Jews as indigenous to the land of Israel. Manya Brachear Pashman:   You have written, and I want to read this line, because it's so rich you have written that the recursive logic of an antiSemitic consensus builds upon itself, feeds on moral certainty, and shields its participants from having to ask whether what they are reproducing is not justice at all, but a new iteration of a very old lie. I. So are there other examples of that phenomenon in academia, either currently or in the past? Adam Louis-Klein:   So what I was trying to grasp with that was my sense of despair in seeing that it was impossible to even point to people, point people to fact within academia, or debate these issues, or explain to non Jews who Jews even are. So I got the sense that people are talking quite a lot about Jews, but don't seem to really care about our voices.  So some of that writing that you're quoting is an attempt to understand anti Zionism, not just not only as libel, but also as a kind of practice of exclusion, where Jews feel silenced in spaces. And where, where for all the talk of Academic Freedom versus antisemitism, which I think can sometimes be a tricky issue, I believe that Jews own academic freedom has fundamentally been violated by this discourse so that recursive logic is the way rumor and repeating slogans and repeating notions, regardless of their factual content, like the Jews or settler colonists, sort of builds on itself, as well as on social media, with this algorithmic escalation until it's almost impossible to talk back to it.  So an example would be in 2024 the American Anthropological Association had its big conference, and the Gaza genocide was the main theme. But it wasn't a theme we were all going to go and debate. It was a theme that we assumed was true, and we were going to talk about it as a thing in the world, and then the Society for cultural anthropology released an issue with the exact same premise.  It was glorifying Ismail Haniyeh of Hamas and Nasrallah of Hezbollah. And then, interestingly enough, just the other day, they released another edition, which was about settler colonialism, and saying, We want to come back to this issue and and reaffirm that settler colonialism applies to Israel and Palestine against people who are attacking the concept, and we're against the exceptionalization of Israel in their terms.  And so I searched through the document, but I couldn't find anywhere where Jews were talked about as indigenous, not even as a fact, but even as a claim. I couldn't find anywhere in this journal where Jew it was even acknowledged that Jews might believe that we are indigenous. So it's almost as if the very notion is just completely erased by consciousness within academia. Which is quite frightening. Manya Brachear Pashman:   And do you feel able to push back on that. In other words, as a fellow anthropologist, are you able to ask, why is this omitted from this paper, from this journal? Adam Louis-Klein:   No, because they will simply ignore you. So that's why I believe these parallel spaces are so important and what I see my work trying to do is to help build a Jewish intellectual discourse. And unfortunately, I think we have to start a little bit internally. So we've been somewhat ghettoized.  But if we build up that space, and construct these spaces where we have, where we can share the same premises and we don't have to argue from the bottom up every time. I think that will give us strength and also more clarity on our own understanding of what's happening. You know, both of the level of what is anti-Zionism, what is this new discourse? And at the level of, how can we speak from Jewish peoplehood as a legitimate place to even theorize from or build academic theories from. Manya Brachear Pashman:   You mentioned earlier that you held on to doubt. You kept open the possibility that Israel is in the wrong here, and you were watching for, looking for signs or evidence that your colleagues were correct. But as you've watched the horrors unfold, and wondered to yourself whether maybe Israel isn't really defending itself, why have you not concluded that that is indeed the case? Why have you reached the opposite conclusion? Adam Louis-Klein:   Yeah, so I talked earlier about using, like a critical race theory analysis, so thinking about ideologies and the kind of tropes they're using and the way they're talking about Israelis, but I think that's only one part of the picture. So what I noticed is, one, they didn't want to do that kind of analysis, but two, they also weren't interested in empirical fact. So when I would sometimes try and do that analysis like this. This sounds like antisemitic, right? They would say, oh, but it's true. Israel is doing this stuff. Israel is intentionally killing Palestinian children. Israel is going completely beyond the laws of war. This is a genocide of unique proportions. Completely irrational and exaggerated statements.  They also didn't want to engage with fact. I spent a lot of time digging up the sources of this material, given disinformation. For example, the Al-Ahli incident, where it was claimed by the Hamas health ministry that Israel had intentionally bombed the Al-Ahli hospital, killing 500 people. Al Jazeera promoted it. Western outlets also promoted it, and I had people all over my wall attacking me, saying that I'm justifying this by standing with Israel. And I saw what happened after, which was that they looked into it. The casualty count was tragic, but it was far lower than reported. It was about 50 people, and it was an Islamic Jihad rocket, so Israel was not even responsible.  So I think that any rational person who sees what happened in that incident becomes skeptical of everything else they're being told and of the information circuits. And so when I also saw that the people who were talking about the Gaza genocide, weren't seemed completely unfazed by that. That made me have to rethink also what they were doing, because if they're unfazed by something like that, that suggests this isn't a truth that they're being forced to acknowledge, it sounds a bit more like a truth that has its own sort of incentive to believe in despite fact, rather than being pushed towards it because of fact. Manya Brachear Pashman:   So I'm curious, if you went back to the people that you had been immersed with and had been studying for the matter of months before October 7, did you go back to them and tell them what had happened, or did they somehow know what had happened? And I'm just curious if there was any kind of response from them? Adam Louis-Klein:   Interesting. Yeah, I speak with them regularly, on a regular basis. They don't know exactly what's happened. I think they see sometimes news, but it's largely their understanding, is that there's a lot of wars in the Western world. And they ask why? Why is there so much war? Why is there so much suffering?  I mean, they were particularly interested in in the Ukraine war, because they couldn't wrap their head around why Putin was doing this, which I think is pretty similar to a lot of people, but they do see, some of them see Israel as kind of, you know, a figure of strength, and compare Israel almost to their own notions of ancestral, sort of potency or power. So they have a very different understanding of the relationship between, let's say, power and victimhood. They don't necessarily fetishize being powerless. Manya Brachear Pashman:   Tell me a little bit about this tribe, these people that you spent time with.  Adam Louis-Klein: So the Desano there, they're one of a number of many ethnicities who inhabit the Northwest Amazonian region in northwest Brazil and southeast Columbia. They live in an extremely complex world in which there are over 25 languages in the region. And they have a very unique form of marriage, where you have to marry someone who speaks a different language than you. And so any community has a kind of nucleus of people who speak the same language, and they're from the same tribe. But the women in the community all speak different languages and come from different tribes.  So I think it's a kind of space where you have to think across difference. You're constantly confronted with people who are other than you, who are from different tribes and different communities, as well as the relationship between the Western world and the indigenous world itself. And I think that's really part of the promise of anthropology, like coming back to what I was saying earlier about a diasporic Jewish sensibility, I think it's also just a Jewish sensibility. Part of being a distinct people is that we need to think with other people, and I think that includes Muslims and Arabs and Christians as well. Manya Brachear Pashman:   That is such an enlightened approach that they have taken to marriage. Isn't that what marriage is all about, crossing those differences and figuring out and they just do it from the very beginning. And I'm also curious, though, are they also mixing with Western cultures. In other words, have they broadened that, or do they keep it within those villages? Adam Louis-Klein:   Yeah, so they've taken on a lot of features of the surrounding, Colombian Spanish language culture, and that is the struggle today. Because there's a lot of economic pressures to move to the towns and the cities in order to get work and employment. And that can pose problems to the reproduction of the traditional village community.  And so that's part of what we've been struggling with and part of the project with them. So we're currently translating an old book about anthropology, about them into their language, so they have the Bible, which was translated into the language by missionaries. And now we also want to translate their own cultural material into their language so that can help them preserve the language and preserve their own cultural knowledge. Manya Brachear Pashman:   So what's next for you, Adam? Adam Louis-Klein:   So I'm hoping to continue writing and to continue getting out this work. I'm hoping to also work with grassroots organizers to try to put some activist meat onto this opposition to anti-Zionism. So I believe that, as I was talking about parallel academic spaces are really important, I also think it's important to be able to speak back to anti-Zionism with activist language. Not only the academic side, but the activist side. So I'm working with the group now, a decentralized group, developing infographics, memes, things that can circulate to educate people about anti-Zionism as the new form of antisemitism today. Manya Brachear Pashman:   Thank you for taking on this work and for sharing your story. Adam Louis-Klein:   Thank you so much. It was a pleasure.  
    --------  
    32:31

More News podcasts

About People of the Pod

People of the Pod is an award-winning weekly podcast analyzing global affairs through a Jewish lens, brought to you by American Jewish Committee. Host Manya Brachear Pashman examines current events, the people driving them, and what it all means for America, Israel, and the Jewish people.
Podcast website

Listen to People of the Pod, The Daily and many other podcasts from around the world with the radio.net app

Get the free radio.net app

  • Stations and podcasts to bookmark
  • Stream via Wi-Fi or Bluetooth
  • Supports Carplay & Android Auto
  • Many other app features

People of the Pod: Podcasts in Family

Social
v7.23.9 | © 2007-2025 radio.de GmbH
Generated: 9/16/2025 - 8:58:49 AM