For much of American Jewry, local Jewish federations remain important umbrella organizations that direct funds to a variety of Jewish philanthropies. But the New Israel Fund (NIF)—founded in 1979 to support left-wing organizations in the Jewish state—has recently taken the step of trying to compete with the federations in distributing monies, particularly through donor-advised funds. NIF’s supposed advantage is that it is happy to direct donations to anti-Israel groups such as IfNotNow, deemed off-limits by federations. Jonathan Tobin writes:

By taking money away from the federation’s charitable funds in this manner, [NIF] will drastically reduce already diminishing resources in an era of shrinking Jewish demographics and donations. What’s worse, . . . it’s an effort to destroy the links between American Jews and Israel.

The worst thing federations could do in response to the NIF’s efforts would be to seek to compete with them by opening themselves up to donors who want to direct money to anti-Israel groups.

[I]nclusion cannot be the primary goal of any Jewish community. A community that funds Jewish and Zionist philanthropies while also giving donors an option to back anti-Zionist . . . efforts that seek to hurt Israel is one that isn’t so much inclusive as one that stands for nothing. And communities that stand for nothing have no purpose or chance of survival.

The best response to this challenge is for federations to stand firm against this disreputable effort not only to damage Israel but to impact the ability of these philanthropies to fund the infrastructure of Jewish life—namely, schools, camps, adult-education and vocational assistance, services to the elderly and poor, and aid to overseas Jewish causes. . . . This is a moment when those who care about Israel—no matter where you stand on the ideological spectrum—must draw a line and demand that Jewish philanthropies continue to say “no” to anti-Zionist groups.

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.