A Jewish Family’s Fight to Reclaim Its German Past

Jan. 27 2016

The British-born journalist Dina Gold, descended on her mother’s side from a family of German fur-coat manufacturers, took it upon herself to discover what became of their large office building in downtown Berlin. Upon driving the Jewish-owned Wolff Furs out of business, the Nazis had forced the sale of the building; after the war it was inherited by East Germany and then by the unified Federal Republic. Gold relates her family history and the story of her attempt at receiving restitution in what is, according to Josh Gelernter, a gripping book:

The real story begins with the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989. Dina Gold . . . decided to have a look at her family’s building, and as the newly unified Germany opened up to reparation claims, she persuaded her mother to try to establish ownership. As might be expected, the German authorities were not especially helpful. First, they tried to prove that the Wolffs had sold their building voluntarily to the Nazis. Then they sought to prove that the building didn’t exist anymore: a communicating door had been built in the wall it shared with an adjacent building; this, it was claimed, made the two structures one entirely new building. Then they tried to prove that because the building had been “altered” since it was confiscated, it was no long subject to the laws of restitution. They also contested the validity of the Wolffs’ wills.

Fortunately, Dina Gold was able to find a few good Germans to help her, but they had to fight an uphill battle. How did it turn out? I won’t spoil it for you.

Read more at Weekly Standard

More about: German Jewry, Germany, History & Ideas, Holocaust, Holocaust restitution

What’s Behind Hamas’s Threat to Stall the Release of Hostages, and How Israel Should Respond

Feb. 12 2025

Hamas declared yesterday that it won’t release more hostages “until further notice.” Given the timing and wording of the announcement—several days before the release was supposed to take place, and speaking of a delay rather than a halt—Ron Ben-Yishai concludes that it is a negotiating tactic, aimed at “creating a temporary crisis to gain leverage.” Therefore, writes Ben-Yishai, “Hamas may reverse its decision by Saturday.” He adds:

Israel cannot afford to concede to Hamas’s demands beyond what is already outlined in the agreement, as doing so would invite continuous extortion throughout the negotiation process, further delaying hostage releases.

The group sees the public outrage and growing calls for action following the release of hostages in severe medical condition as an opportunity to extract more concessions. These demands include not only a rapid start to negotiations on the next phase of the deal and an end to the war but also smaller, immediate benefits, particularly improved conditions for displaced Gazans.

Beyond these tactical objectives, Hamas has another goal—one that Israelis do not always recognize: inflicting psychological pain on the Israeli public. The group benefits from, and perhaps even draws strength from, the anguish and emotional distress in Israel, as well as the testimonies of freed hostages detailing the abuse they endured. Hamas wants these stories to be heard—not only to pressure the Israeli government but also because, in the eyes of its supporters, Israel’s suffering is its ultimate victory.

Read more at Ynet

More about: Gaza War 2023, Hamas, Israeli Security