The Changing Face of American Immigration to Israel

When Michael Oren came from the U.S. to Israel in the 1970s, it was a very different country than it is now. Likewise, American Jewry was quite different, and those American Jews who chose to leave their native country for their ancestral homeland often did so for very different reasons than they do now. Israeli society too has changed its attitudes toward aliyah: there is much less commitment now to the Zionist ideal that Diaspora communities would come wholesale to the Jewish state, and much more concern that new immigrants will compete for jobs and resources. Discussing his own experiences with Daniel Gordis—an American of about the same age who made aliyah decades later—Oren analyzes these changes, and urges Jerusalem once again to embrace the mission of encouraging the ingathering of exiles. (Audio, 34 minutes. A transcript is available at the link below.)

Read more at Israel from the Inside

More about: Aliyah, American Jewry, Israeli society, Michael Oren

The Right and Wrong Ways for the U.S. to Support the Palestinians

Sept. 29 2023

On Wednesday, Elliott Abrams testified before Congress about the Taylor Force Act, passed in 2018 to withhold U.S. funds from the Palestinian Authority (PA) so long as it continues to reward terrorists and their families with cash. Abrams cites several factors explaining the sharp increase in Palestinian terrorism this year, among them Iran’s attempt to wage proxy war on Israel; another is the “Palestinian Authority’s continuing refusal to fight terrorism.” (Video is available at the link below.)

As long as the “pay for slay” system continues, the message to Palestinians is that terrorists should be honored and rewarded. And indeed year after year, the PA honors individuals who have committed acts of terror by naming plazas or schools after them or announcing what heroes they are or were.

There are clear alternatives to “pay to slay.” It would be reasonable for the PA to say that, whatever the crime committed, the criminal’s family and children should not suffer for it. The PA could have implemented a welfare-based system, a system of family allowances based on the number of children—as one example. It has steadfastly refused to do so, precisely because such a system would no longer honor and reward terrorists based on the seriousness of their crimes.

These efforts, like the act itself, are not at all meant to diminish assistance to the Palestinian people. Rather, they are efforts to direct aid to the Palestinian people rather than to convicted terrorists. . . . [T]he Taylor Force Act does not stop U.S. assistance to Palestinians, but keeps it out of hands in the PA that are channels for paying rewards for terror.

[S]hould the United States continue to aid the Palestinian security forces? My answer is yes, and I note that it is also the answer of Israel and Jordan. As I’ve noted, PA efforts against Hamas or other groups may be self-interested—fights among rivals, not principled fights against terrorism. Yet they can have the same effect of lessening the Iranian-backed terrorism committed by Palestinian groups that Iran supports.

Read more at Council on Foreign Relations

More about: Palestinian Authority, Palestinian terror, U.S. Foreign policy