Between 1948 and 1967, the number of Jews living in Arab lands went from about 800,000 to a few thousand, most of whom lived in the larger cities of North Africa. The majority had left for Israel, France, or America in the face of increasing persecution. After the Six-Day War, however, life became untenable even for those who had remained behind. Lucette Lagnado writes:

That week in June—which sparked terrifying anti-Jewish riots, shop burnings, mass incarcerations, and even murders—eliminat[ed] any last lingering illusions these Jews may have held that they could stay put.

We know of course how multiple Arab armies who had expected to stamp out Israel were themselves crushed. It was all so humiliating. . . . [R]esidents of those countries chose to vent their rage by turning it against the Jews in their midst, most of who were studiously apolitical and had nothing to do with the war, its outbreak, or its outcome.

Even in those countries that were, as some of us like to say, “nice to the Jews”—such as Tunisia, where fairly sizable Jewish communities were left in 1967—there were terrifying demonstrations and expressions of hatred and venom. Jews from Morocco left in [a mass] exodus. In countries like Libya, murderous assaults took place that prompted an emergency evacuation of hundreds of Jews.

Egypt, where I was born and spent my early childhood, engaged in especially tawdry behavior. . . . On that week in 1967, the Egyptian government began rounding up Jewish men, to send to jails and prison camps. By accounts of the time, as many as 400 or 500 Jews were imprisoned. . . .

Perhaps that is why, whenever a supporter of the BDS movement targeting Israel insists they are “only” anti-Israel not anti-Jewish, I cast a cold eye, recalling how bogus that distinction turned out to be for Jews of Arab countries. It is as false now as it was 50 years ago.

While it is commendable that administrators of several universities finally called upon police to crack down on violent and disruptive anti-Israel protests, the actions they have taken may be insufficient. At Columbia, demonstrators reestablished their encampment on the main quad after it had been cleared by the police, and the university seems reluctant to use force again. The school also decided to hold classes remotely until the end of the semester. Such moves, whatever their merits, do nothing to fix the factors that allowed campuses to become hotbeds of pro-Hamas activism in the first place. The editors of National Review examine how things go to this point:

Since the 10/7 massacre, Columbia’s Jewish students have been forced to endure routine calls for their execution. It shouldn’t have taken the slaughter, rape, and brutalization of Israeli Jews to expose chants like “Globalize the intifada” and “Death to the Zionist state” as calls for violence, but the university refused to intervene on behalf of its besieged students. When an Israeli student was beaten with a stick outside Columbia’s library, it occasioned little soul-searching from faculty. Indeed, it served only as the impetus to establish an “Anti-Semitism Task Force,” which subsequently expressed “serious concerns” about the university’s commitment to enforcing its codes of conduct against anti-Semitic violators.

But little was done. Indeed, as late as last month the school served as host to speakers who praised the 10/7 attacks and even “hijacking airplanes” as “important tactics that the Palestinian resistance have engaged in.”

The school’s lackadaisical approach created a permission structure to menace and harass Jewish students, and that’s what happened. . . . Now is the time finally to do something about this kind of harassment and associated acts of trespass and disorder. Yale did the right thing when police cleared out an encampment [on Monday]. But Columbia remains a daily reminder of what happens when freaks and haters are allowed to impose their will on campus.