Over the past year, Columbia University has developed a reputation as one of the campuses where anti-Israel demonstrations have been the most strident and persistent, and among the most violent. It has also been the home of some of academia’s foremost apologists for terrorism: Edward Said, Rashid Khalidi, and Joseph Massad. But Columbia, in addition, has long been a place where Jews, and Jewish studies have thrived—as well as a place of restrictive quotas and presidents overly friendly to Nazis. Michelle Margolis takes a look at the university during the 1930s and 40s:

The year 1928 saw not only the first Jewish trustee in over a century (Benjamin Cardozo), but also a donation from Linda Miller honoring her husband with the endowment of the Nathan J. Miller Chair in Jewish History, the first such chair in the United States. Although there was some discussion over the hiring of the incumbent, the young Salo Baron would ultimately be hired in 1930 to the position and would go on to transform Jewish studies in the United States.

In 1936, Maír José Benardete would lead the newly established “Sephardic Section” of the Hispanic Institute at Columbia. Benardete’s M.A. thesis . . . was completed in 1923, on Spanish ballads of Sephardi Jews.

Like his predecessor, Donald Trump seeks to expand the Abraham Accords to include Saudi Arabia. But there are other Arab nations that might consider taking such a step. Ahmad Charai points to Kuwait—home to the Middle East’s largest U.S. army base and desperately in need of economic reform—as a good candidate. Kuwaitis haven’t forgiven Palestinians for supporting Saddam Hussein during his 1990 invasion, but their country has been more rhetorically hostile to Israel than its Gulf neighbors:

The Abraham Accords have reshaped Middle Eastern diplomacy. . . . Kuwait, however, remains hesitant due to internal political resistance. While full normalization may not be immediately feasible, the United States should encourage Kuwait to take gradual steps toward engagement, emphasizing how participation in regional cooperation does not equate to abandoning its historical positions.

Kuwait could use its influence to push for peace in the Middle East through diplomatic channels opened by engagement rather than isolation. The economic benefits of joining the broader framework of the Abraham Accords are overwhelming. Israel’s leadership in technology, agriculture, and water management presents valuable opportunities for Kuwait to enhance its infrastructure. Trade and investment flows would diversify the economy, providing new markets and business partnerships.

Kuwaiti youth, who are increasingly looking for opportunities beyond the public sector, could benefit from collaboration with advanced industries, fostering job creation and entrepreneurial growth. The UAE and Bahrain have already demonstrated how normalization with Israel can drive economic expansion while maintaining their respective geopolitical identities.