How an Intra-Protestant Theological Divide Has Shaped U.S. Policy toward Israel

While most American Jews tend to see their country’s relationship with the Jewish state as motivated by attitudes toward Jews and Judaism, Michael Doran argues that underlying this and other foreign-policy debates is a division between Protestant “modernists”—who wish to perfect the world through charitable works, social reforms, and international institutions in an ecumenical spirit—and Protestant “fundamentalists”—who favor American exceptionalism and doctrinal orthodoxy while believing mankind’s fallen state makes social perfection unachievable. The modernists, as Doran wrote in a recent essay, tend to be hostile toward Israel and Zionism, while the fundamentalists tend to be sympathetic. Even in our secular age, this intra-Christian divide often lurks behind debates over Middle East policy. (Interview by Jonathan Silver. Audio, 36 minutes. Options for download and streaming are available at the link below.)

Read more at Tikvah

More about: History & Ideas, Protestantism, U.S. Foreign policy, US-Israel relations

 

How Columbia Failed Its Jewish Students

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.

Read more at National Review

More about: Anti-Semitism, Columbia University, Israel on campus