How Intersectionality Has Become a Political Weapon against Israel

Drawing on his recent experience as a student at Stanford University, Elliot Kaufman explains how the campus left uses the ideology of “intersectionality”—the notion that one can’t really fight for the rights of American blacks, for instance, without also fighting for the rights of women, or of Palestinians against Israelis—to build powerful coalitions within student government. The result, as Kaufman argues in conversation with Jonathan Silver, is that a variety of left-leaning or identity-based student groups become anti-Israel almost by default, and that students who break ranks risk social opposition. After outlining the problem, Kaufman suggests some possible ways that Jewish students can fight back. (Audio, 37 minutes. Options for download and streaming are available at the link below.)

Read more at Jewish Leadership Conference

More about: Israel & Zionism, Israel on campus, University

Iran’s Options for Revenge on Israel

On April 1, an Israeli airstrike on Damascus killed three Iranian generals, one of whom was the seniormost Iranian commander in the region. The IDF has been targeting Iranian personnel and weaponry in Syria for over a decade, but the killing of such a high-ranking figure raises the stakes significantly. In the past several days, Israelis have received a number of warnings both from the press and from the home-front command to ready themselves for retaliatory attacks. Jonathan Spyer considers what shape that attack might take:

Tehran has essentially four broad options. It could hit an Israeli or Jewish facility overseas using either Iranian state forces (option one), or proxies (option two). . . . Then there’s the third option: Tehran could also direct its proxies to strike Israel directly. . . . Finally, Iran could strike Israeli soil directly (option four). It is the riskiest option for Tehran, and would be likely to precipitate open war between the regime and Israel.

Tehran will consider all four options carefully. It has failed to retaliate in kind for a number of high-profile assassinations of its operatives in recent years. . . . A failure to respond, or staging too small a response, risks conveying a message of weakness. Iran usually favors using proxies over staging direct attacks. In an unkind formulation common in Israel, Tehran is prepared to “fight to the last Arab.”

Read more at Spectator

More about: Iran, Israeli Security, Syria