Responding to a fellow tenured professor’s decision to resign his post rather than persist in teaching at an increasingly illiberal and anti-Semitic university, Samuel J. Abrams argues that Jewish academics can do more good by remaining in the lions’ den:

Sarah Lawrence College is not the friendliest school when it comes to viewpoint diversity; students regularly self-censor and often feel too intimidated to disagree with the prevailing—[usually] progressive—norms of the campus. . . . As an outwardly observant Jew who also publicly supports Israel even when I deeply disagree with its government, [I witness my] faculty colleagues regularly attacking Israel and me without worry. They habitually make deeply insensitive and inappropriate remarks to me and regularly assert that Israel is an illegitimate, genocidal, and apartheid state. I have found Nazi imagery on my office door over the years and have been told to make no real issue of it.

In my situation, it was made clear by the highest level of administrators and the college president that I may want to find employment elsewhere and that many would rather I no longer be on campus. But I have tenure and academic freedom; it is a sacred privilege to be a professor and I love teaching, my students, and the innovative liberal-arts curriculum that we have at Sarah Lawrence College. I promote viewpoint diversity and discourse and being able to be openly Jewish, which has backstopped scores of students who now feel far more comfortable pushing back on the anti-Semitic Zeitgeist. While I will never have a complete picture, I know that I have made many feel safer and more willing to question and express themselves.

I may not be able to stop anti-Jewish [sentiment], but I can certainly blunt it on occasion and perhaps change minds.

Israel’s goals of freeing the hostages and defeating Hamas (the latter necessary to prevent further hostage taking) are to some extent contradictory, since Yahya Sinwar, the ruler of the Gaza Strip, will only turn over hostages in exchange for concessions. But Jacob Nagel remains convinced that Jerusalem should continue to pursue both goals:

Only consistent military pressure on Hamas can lead to the hostages’ release, either through negotiation or military operation. There’s little chance of reaching a deal with Hamas using current approaches, including the latest Egyptian proposal. Israeli concessions would only encourage further pressure from Hamas.

There is no incentive for Hamas to agree to a deal, especially since it believes it can achieve its full objectives without one. Unfortunately, many contribute to this belief, mainly from outside of Israel, but also from within.

Recent months saw Israel mistakenly refraining from entering Rafah for several reasons. Initially, the main [reason was to try] to negotiate a deal with Hamas. However, as it became clear that Hamas was uninterested, and its only goal was to return to its situation before October 7—where Hamas and its leadership control Gaza, Israeli forces are out, and there are no changes in the borders—the deal didn’t mature.