This Passover I'm holding on to my Jewish story and making space for yours
Imagine being told that to stand for justice, you need to leave part of yourself behind. That's what many Jews are hearing right now − that being proudly Jewish, or identifying as a Zionist, disqualifies us from participating in movements for justice and inclusion.
It's a painful message. But for Jews, it's also familiar. Across our history, we've known what it feels like to be othered − to be asked to choose between belonging and being ourselves. That's why Passover − a holiday that retells our journey from oppression to freedom and calls us to use that freedom with purpose − feels especially relevant this year.
In some circles, Zionism is treated as a slur − shorthand for injustice. We understand the pain of others. We also know Zionism has been used in ways that others experience as harmful. But that's not the full story. For most Jews, Zionism is deeply personal. It connects us to peoplehood, safety, and the belief that we − like all peoples − deserve the right to self-determination in our ancestral homeland. It's not about exclusion or domination but about survival, community, and the ability to live openly and without fear.
More: I'm a Zionist. That shouldn't prevent me from speaking at a rally against Nazis. | Opinion
We heard this firsthand at our Jewish Community Relations Council (JCRC) Annual Meeting when Jake Powers, a senior at the University of Cincinnati and president of Bearcats for Israel, bravely shared what happened to him. Someone broke into his apartment, tore down his mezuzah − and defecated in the space. He wasn't targeted for speaking out or leading a protest. He was targeted simply for being visibly Jewish. For identifying as a Zionist.
His story is horrifying. And sadly, not isolated. Across the country, Jewish students are facing pressure to hide who they are − not just from extremists but even in communities and causes where they once felt safe.
And online, the pressure is even more intense. Disinformation campaigns − led by humans and bots − are flooding conversations about Israel and Zionism, distorting dialogue and drowning out authentic voices. One recent study found that nearly one in four posts attacking Israel or Zionism on social media are generated by fake accounts. Even well-intentioned people can get swept up in that noise. Some in our community have shared that when they respond to antisemitic content − to correct falsehoods or offer a different point of view − their replies are quietly deleted. That kind of silencing doesn't just stifle debate − it pushes people out of conversations they care deeply about and have every right to be part of.
The story of Passover doesn't end with liberation. It continues in the wilderness − with uncertainty, disagreement, and the challenge of building something better together. That's where real freedom exists. It's not about always seeing eye-to-eye, but in choosing to stay in conversation − even when it's complicated.
More: Antisemitism concerns push more American Jews to hide their faith | Opinion
This moment isn't easy − for any of us. The way forward isn't always clear; I feel that, too. But I believe we can start by making more room for each other. Room for questions. For listening. For conversations that don't fit neatly into "right" and "wrong." What I'm asking for isn't certainty − it's nuance. A little more space for curiosity. A little more courage to stay in dialogue, even when it's hard.
Maybe the most meaningful thing we can offer this Passover is not just our story but space for someone else's, too.
To my Muslim friends, I wish you a blessed Eid. To my Christian family and friends, a joyful Easter. And to my Jewish family, a meaningful and peaceful Pesach.
Danielle V. Minson is CEO of the Jewish Federation of Cincinnati.
This article originally appeared on Cincinnati Enquirer: This Passover I'm holding tight to my Jewish identity | Opinion
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Politico
37 minutes ago
- Politico
The MAGA split over Israel
Presented by Housing For US NOT SO SPECIAL — Israel's early-morning strikes targeting Iran have supercharged a debate that has been simmering for years on the MAGA right: Is America's 'special relationship' with Israel consistent with the realist principles of an 'America First' foreign policy? The clash — which is taking place between two powerful factions of the MAGA movement — is unfolding primarily at an ideological level, but its consequences are far from academic. As the U.S. and Israel weigh their response to retaliatory strikes from Iran, the position that the Trump administration eventually adopts in this intra-conservative skirmish will almost certainly shape its involvement in the next stages of conflict — and, by extension, the long-term trajectory of the Middle East. For now, the contours of the debate are straightforward, even if the politics surrounding them are far from it. Since the creation of the Jewish state in 1948, America has treated Israel as first among equals in the universe of American allies, offering the Middle Eastern country extensive diplomatic, military and economic support. In 1962, President John F. Kennedy Jr. coined the term 'special relationship' to describe the unusually close partnership between the two states, noting that the extent of the U.S.'s ties to Israel is 'really comparable only to that which it has with Britain over a wide range of world affairs.' Since then, the unique status of the relationship has garnered broad bipartisan support, illustrated most recently by President Joe Biden's offer of 'rock-solid and unwavering support' to Israel in the wake of the Oct. 7 attacks by Hamas. But the re-emergence of 'America First' foreign policy thinking under Trump has posed a fundamental challenge to the ideological underpinnings of the special relationship. In the eyes of America First hardliners, U.S. foreign policy should limit American involvement in foreign conflicts to those that have direct bearing on U.S. interests — and, in particular, to the interests of the 'forgotten Americans' that Trump has claimed as his base since 2016. That re-framing of the foreign policy discussion has inevitably raised questions on the right about the U.S.-Israel alliance: If the relationship between the two nations is 'special' — which is to say, grounded in an unchanging transnational bond — is it really based on cool-headed calculations of self interest? Are the interests of Israel always coextensive with the interests of the U.S.? Questions like these have been quietly swirling within the MAGA coalition since Trump's ascent in 2016, kept below the surface by the widespread perception that publicly breaking with Israel — especially following the Oct. 7 attacks — remains politically suicidal within the mainstream GOP. Yet there have been signs of a subtle rethinking of the relationship on the MAGA right. In May 2024, then-Sen. JD Vance, a leading proponent of foreign policy restraint within the GOP, gave a speech defending the U.S. relationship with Israel within the America First framework — a tacit admission that abstract invocations of the special relationship no longer carry much weight in the populist right's new foreign policy paradigm. Then earlier this year, the conservative think tank The Heritage Foundation — widely considered the intellectual barometer of Beltway conservatism — published a report calling on the U.S. to 're-orient its relationship with Israel' from a special relationship 'to an equal strategic partnership' based on mutual interests. But the debate has taken on new urgency as Israel has escalated its attacks on Iran. In the lead-up to the strikes this week, several prominent figures on the nationalist-populist right — including Steve Bannon, Tucker Carlson, Charlie Kirk, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, Jack Posobiec and Curt Mills, the editor of paleoconservative magazine The American Conservative — spearheaded a campaign to persuade Trump to keep America out of the conflict by appealing to the America First framework. In the aftermath of the strikes, some of those same figures confronted the contradiction between America First and the special relationship more directly. On a live-stream Thursday night, Kirk — while assuring his audience that he remains 'very pro-Israel' — wondered aloud: 'The question is also, I think fundamentally at its core: How does the America First foreign policy doctrine and foreign policy agenda … stay consistent with this right now?' In a post this morning, Carlson made the argument even more forcefully, arguing that 'regardless of what our 'special ally' says, a fight with the Iranians has nothing to offer the United States.' He added: 'Drop Israel. Let them fight their own wars.' Notably, the schism has taken on something of a generational character. In general, young conservatives like Kirk and Mills are making the case that America First foreign policy requires revising the special relationship with Israel, while older conservatives are tending to defend the status quo. 'There is no appetite among the Gen Z MAGA cohort for war with Iran,' said Nick Solheim, the 28-year-old CEO of the conservative talent network American Moment. 'There is definitely a fear among the MAGA youth in D.C. that the Israeli strikes have the potential to drag us into yet another extended conflict in the Middle East — and America First foreign policy is the bulwark against that.' In the eyes of this younger generation, a more arms-length posture toward Israel's latest strikes on Iran is merely a natural extension of Trump's broader foreign policy vision. 'The president was unambiguous about his preference for diplomacy to resolve the tensions with Iran,' said Solheim, referring to Trump's earlier comments about the conflict. 'Our talent network knows what's been obvious for the last 10 years, ever since he trashed the Iraq War on the Republican primary debate stage — President Trump is the No New Wars President.' That position, in turn, has drawn fire from conservative supporters of Israel, who argue that the maintenance of the 'special relationship' remains an integral part of Trump's foreign policy. 'The demand that [Trump] abandon [Israel] is not MAGA. It's isolationist, which he has never been,' wrote Mark Levin, the conservative talk-radio host who has lobbied the White House to support strikes on Iran, on social media on Thursday. 'For crying out loud, don't accuse him of abandoning MAGA by projecting your own isolationism onto him. He's upholding a crucially important campaign promise.' The politics around the debate are complicated by two additional factors. The first is that the anti-Israel position on the right has long been occupied by conservatives who openly embrace antisemitism — meaning that populist conservatives who forcefully criticize the special relationship risk aligning themselves with politically toxic figures. Today, for instance, the most vocal critic of Israel on the right remains Nick Fuentes, the openly white nationalist commentator who has called for the execution of 'perfidious Jews' and other non-Christian groups. Despite an infamous dinner with Trump in 2022, Fuentes remains persona non grata on much of the mainstream right, making him an unattractive ally for populist conservatives trying to make a principled case for a revision of the special relationship. The second factor is, of course, Trump himself. Despite both sides' claims that they are following Trump's true foreign policy vision, the president himself has been characteristically ambiguous about his view of the special relationship. Today, Trump publicly affirmed his stalwart support for Israel, telling CNN: 'We of course support Israel, obviously, and supported it like nobody has ever supported it.' But in the past, Trump has offered some unusually pointed criticisms of Israel's leadership, suggesting that he sees limits to the special relationship. The direction of the debate will hinge in large part on the actions of the next few days. If the U.S. avoids getting drawn deeper into the conflict — even as Iran carries out retaliatory strikes against Israel — the populists can claim limited victory. If the U.S. becomes more involved in a conflict — by aiding further escalation, or if Iran directly targets U.S. military installations in the Middle East — the hawks will claim vindication. In the meantime, the debate is giving rise to a familiar scene on the MAGA right: Two factions of the movement duking it out in an ideological battle that Trump has no appetite to engage in. Welcome to POLITICO Nightly. Reach out with news, tips and ideas at nightly@ Or contact tonight's author at iward@ or on X (formerly known as Twitter) at @ianwardreports. What'd I Miss? — U.S. moves warships closer to Israel: The Pentagon is moving two destroyers toward the Eastern Mediterranean as Israel braces for a retaliatory attack from Tehran after today's airstrikes on Iranian military targets. The ships, which are capable of defending against ballistic and cruise missile attacks, were already in the region and are rerouting, said two U.S. defense officials granted anonymity to discuss the situation. — Trump embraces Israel after 'successful' Iran attack: President Donald Trump signaled there is no daylight between the United States and Israel after it launched an attack on Iran late Thursday, killing multiple high-ranking military leaders and targeting Iran's nuclear and long-range missile capabilities. Trump repeatedly praised the attack as 'successful' in a media blitz today, and urged Iran to agree to a deal with the U.S. to shutter its nuclear program. — Oil prices soar after Israel's attack on Iran: Israel's attack on Iran has President Donald Trump facing the prospect of the same economic nightmare that helped unravel Joe Biden's presidency — rapidly spiking energy prices triggered by a war outside his control. The series of airstrikes that began Thursday night caused the world benchmark oil price to jump to $73 a barrel as of noon Eastern time today, up $8 since early Wednesday, with the promise of more price hikes to come if the fighting spreads. Energy analysts said the price could shoot to $100 a barrel — a level not seen since the aftermath of Russia's invasion of Ukraine in 2022 — if the conflict widens and interrupts oil shipments from the Middle East. No matter how the fighting unfolds, it promises to increase prices at American gasoline pumps just as voters' natural gas and electricity bills are already set to rise. — Second judge blocks most of Trump's executive order on elections: A federal judge today blocked key provisions of President Donald Trump's executive order that sought to make it harder to register to vote in federal elections, including a requirement for voters to prove their citizenship. Massachusetts U.S. District Judge Denise Casper wrote in the ruling that the Constitution gives the power to regulate elections to Congress, adding that lawmakers have not passed any laws that authorize Trump's actions or otherwise delegate their authority to the president. — Kilmar Abrego Garcia pleads not guilty to human trafficking charges: Kilmar Abrego Garcia, the Salvadoran national illegally deported by the Trump administration in March, pleaded not guilty today to human trafficking charges that federal prosecutors leveled upon his return to the United States. One of Abrego Garcia's defense attorneys, William Allensworth, entered the not guilty plea on his client's behalf at a federal court hearing expected to focus on whether Abrego Garcia should be detained pending trial on the two felony criminal charges he faces related to immigrant smuggling. AROUND THE WORLD HIGH SEAS TREATY — The race to save the world's oceans is on. The United Nations Oceans Conference in Nice, France ended today with promises from world leaders to ratify a global, binding agreement to help protect the world's oceans by September — paving the way for the world's very first Conference of the Parties for a High Seas Treaty next year. 'This is a considerable victory,' said French Oceans Ambassador Olivier Poivre d'Arvor in a press conference today. 'It's very difficult to work on oceans right now when the United States have withdrawn from almost everything. But the Argentinian president helped a lot. China [promised to ratify]. Indonesia just ratified a few hours ago. So, we won.' If that happens, it will have been a long time coming. The negotiating process started 20 years ago and the treaty was adopted in 2023, but countries have been slow to ratify and at least 60 must do so for the treaty to come into force. With marine and coastal ecosystems facing multiple threats from climate change, fishing, and pollution, the treaty's main aim is to establish marine protected areas in international waters, which make up around two thirds of the ocean. But if getting 60 countries to ratify a treaty they already endorsed was hard, deciding which parts of the world's international waters to protect from overfishing — and how — won't be much easier. SPANISH SCANDAL — Corruption scandals rocking Spain's governing Socialist Party spell trouble for Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez — but they're being celebrated by the country's far-right Vox party. The ultranationalist group, which campaigns on the principle that Spain's democratic system is rotten, on Thursday said it was vindicated by news reports revealing that organized crime investigators had evidence connecting the Socialist Party's third-highest ranking member, Santos Cerdán, with taking kickbacks. As right-wing parties have surged in elections around Europe — from Romania to Portugal to Poland — Vox has been consistently rising in Spanish polls since last fall, attracting particular support among potential voters aged 18 to 44. It grabbed the opportunity to hammer Sánchez and his socialists. THE PUTIN EFFECT — The Baltic countries signed a deal pledging to jointly plan for mass evacuations today as the specter of bellicose Russian President Vladimir Putin looms over the region. The interior ministers of Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia committed to develop joint mass evacuation plans, streamline information exchange and ensure vulnerable groups are not left behind during evacuations. Data will be shared on evacuation capacity, possible evacuation corridors and the status of key border crossings, as fears grow over the security situation in the Baltic region as Putin continues to wage war on Ukraine. Nightly Number RADAR SWEEP DOWN AND DIRTY — There's a new semi-sport that's finding purchase around the country that's deceptively simple — it's called CarJitsu, and it's what it sounds like: JiuJitsu that takes place entirely inside a car. The sport, which is already legal to bet on in New Jersey, takes premiere athletes from JiuJitsu competitions and puts them inside a hard interior that restricts their movement. And it gets brutal quickly. In a photo essay for The Baffler, Tristan deBrauwere depicts the intensity in photos with accompanying words from Adrian Nathan West. Parting Image Did someone forward this email to you? Sign up here.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
The War Israel Was Ready to Fight
The Atlantic Daily, a newsletter that guides you through the biggest stories of the day, helps you discover new ideas, and recommends the best in culture. Sign up for it here. On October 7, 2023, Israel suffered the most catastrophic assault in its history when Hamas terrorists killed more than 1,000 people and took hundreds of others hostage. Almost a year later, Israel assassinated Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah, the most powerful militia in the world, along with the entire leadership of his organization. Last night, it did the same to the rulers of Iran, eliminating the heads of the regime's armed forces, the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, and regional proxies. How could the same country that was bested by a ragtag militia in its own backyard turn around and ravage multiple regional powers with devastating decapitation strikes? The dissonance between these events has fomented confusion and conspiracy theories. But Israel's successes and failures in the past 20 months stem from a single source. A very specific plan to stop Iran led to both the disaster of October 7 and the triumphs since. For decades, Iran's theocratic leaders have called for Israel's destruction, denying the Nazi Holocaust while urging another one. The regime funneled millions of dollars and thousands of missiles to proxies on Israel's borders and beyond: Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in Gaza, the Houthis in Yemen. Iran's authorities constructed monuments to their predicted victory, displaying missiles emblazoned with the words Death to Israel and even erecting a countdown clock to Israel's end. [Read: What Trump knew about the attack against Iran] Israel, a nation born out of the ashes of an attempted Jewish genocide, took these threats seriously. Just as Iran labeled America 'the Great Satan' and Israel 'the Little Satan,' Israel's security establishment conceived of its adversaries in tiers: Iran was the biggest threat, its fearsome proxy Hezbollah ranked next, and the smaller Hamas posed the least danger. The Israelis prioritized their resources accordingly. Their best people—and best exploding beepers—were put to work countering Iran and Hezbollah, which had formidable arsenals of advanced weapons. Hamas, by contrast, was treated as an afterthought, contained behind a blockade of Gaza that was maintained less by manpower than by advanced security technology. October 7 exposed this folly, as Hamas and its allies disabled that technology and stormed across the border on land, meeting little resistance as they rampaged through civilian communities. This was a war Israel did not expect and was not prepared to fight. That fact was evident not only in the casualties and hostage-taking during the massacre, but in the grinding, brutal, and haphazard war in Gaza that has followed. Simply put, Israel was flying without radar. It did not know Hamas's capabilities, had not infiltrated its leadership, did not have widespread intelligence sources on the ground, and was largely ignorant of the group's sprawling underground infrastructure in Gaza. This operational ignorance has resulted in a horrific meat grinder of a war with thousands of civilian casualties and still no end in sight. It's also why Israel's military took more than a year after October 7 to find and kill the Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar. By the time that happened, Israel had already taken out Hezbollah's Nasrallah, a far more protected and high-value target, after neutralizing many of his elite forces via exploding beepers and walkie-talkies and blowing up many of the group's missiles while they were still in storage. The very resources that had not been brought to bear on Hamas, thus enabling the disaster of October 7, achieved the neutralization of Hezbollah within weeks. Hezbollah had joined in the attacks on Israel after the assault on October 7, apparently believing that Israel was too hobbled to respond beyond token tit-for-tat strikes. Likewise, the group's patrons in Iran may have misread the events of October 7 as evidence of fundamental Israeli weakness, rather than a terrible but isolated error. For months, Tehran continued to supply its proxies in Lebanon and Yemen with advanced missiles to fire at Israel, seemingly under the belief that it would be immune from similar incoming in response. That mistake, like Israel's on October 7, proved costly. Last night, Israel began running the same playbook it used on Hezbollah against Iran. Key military leaders were reportedly assassinated, drone factories were targeted, and missile depots and launchers were eliminated before they could be used. In retrospect, October 7 wasn't a preview of an Israel-Iran war—the mysterious strike last July that killed the Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh in an Iranian Revolutionary Guard guesthouse in Tehran was. That audacious assassination revealed that Israel had clandestine capabilities within Iran's most fortified strongholds of a sort it never had in Gaza. After last night's initial assault, Israel's Mossad released rare footage of its agents operating inside Iran. [Read: In the game of Spy vs. Spy, Israel keeps getting the better of Iran] When Israel went after Hezbollah in Lebanon last September, American and Israeli officials characterized the move as 'de-escalation through escalation.' That line was mocked by many, but it is largely what happened, because Israel was prepared for the conflict—unlike in Gaza—and achieved a decisive victory. Within months, Israel and Lebanon had agreed to a cease-fire, and Hezbollah was effectively disabled. Israel did the heavy lifting, and the U.S. acted as the closer with its diplomacy. By contrast, Israel's unplanned war in Gaza has seen no such resolution and steadily devolved into a messianic power grab by Israel's far right. No Israeli faction has religious or territorial designs on Tehran, which makes this outcome less likely in Iran. Nonetheless, Iran is a far more powerful adversary than any Israel has yet faced, making a protracted and profoundly destructive conflict likely. This is the war Israel had prepared to wage, but in war, preparation is no insulation from devastation. Article originally published at The Atlantic
New York Post
2 hours ago
- New York Post
Why Iran may back down after Israel's devastating attack
In every war, after the first bullet flies, the first question asked is 'How does this end?' Anyone who confidently answers is either Nostradamus or nuts. That said, here is what we do know about what might come next: Fear-mongering to the contrary, it's difficult to see this growing into a wider war. Too many rungs are missing on the escalation ladder. Advertisement Iran doesn't have a lot to fight back with, and doing so on the ground is out of the question; there are too many countries in between. Iran's Air Force is too old, small, and ill-prepared to mount an effective campaign. Tehran's surrogates in Yemen, Gaza, Lebanon and Syria have all been battered. Iran can lob missiles and drones, but so can Israel. Want to guess who will come off better in that exchange? It's not Iran. Don't look for much from Moscow. Putin is bogged down in his Ukraine quagmire. Beijing sticks its neck out for no one. Iran's Arab neighbors are not only unlikely to help, they're probably quietly cheering (and some maybe not so quietly) any setbacks to Iran's nuclear weapons program. Meanwhile, back at home, the regime's leadership and infrastructure have been smacked around. We also know that most of Iran has had more than enough of the revolution and would be happy to see all mullahs take a long vacation. Advertisement Don't expect the world to come to Iran's rescue. Like every nation, Israel has the inherent right of self-defense. Iran has not only threatened to destroy Israel, it has played a heavy hand in attacks on it, from the Oct. 7 atrocities to attacks by the Houthis and Hezbollah. To be clear, Israel's action, like it or not, is not preventive or even preemptive war. The regime in Tehran has come after Israel, and Israel is defending itself. In addition, the Israelis have already weathered a world's worth of orchestrated criticism and worse, and they have been undeterred in defending their interests. Riots, shooting and firebombing innocent Jews in the street, calumnies, Greta Thunberg's armada — none of them have stopped Israel from defending Israelis. A few mean posts on social media won't make much of a difference. Advertisement Don't blame Donald Trump. President Trump is addicted to offering adversaries an off-ramp (unless you are a terrorist, then you just get whacked). The Iranians had their offer and kicked sand all over his negotiating table. Sure, they could do a sudden about-face and plead for a deal, but that's asking a lot from a regime that would do anything before bending a knee to the Great Satan. At the same time, the Israelis are doing what Trump has been demanding from friends and allies. Collective defense means showing you have skin in the game, a willingness to defend yourself. Trump is not a fan of starting wars or pushing regime change. If Tehran doesn't want to make their world even worse, the last step they should consider is striking out against the United States. Advertisement Get opinions and commentary from our columnists Subscribe to our daily Post Opinion newsletter! Thanks for signing up! Enter your email address Please provide a valid email address. By clicking above you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Never miss a story. Check out more newsletters No global entity that tried to deliberately kill and maim Americans while Donald Trump was the president of the United States ever achieved anything other than regretting that decision. With Israel's capacity to do more — to attack more accurately and more lethally — fighting a war of attrition does not look like a smart bet for Iran. More likely, Tehran is focused on the politics of its response. It might fire off a bunch of stuff like the Fourth of July and call it day. But who knows? Iran is down, not out. They may find other ways to try to strike back. What we do know is that this is not the end — not until Iran changes its policies of aggression, or its government. James Jay Carafano is Senior Advisor to the President and the E.W. Richardson Fellow at the Heritage Foundation.
