July 16, 2026 – 91传媒 Journal

Rahm Emanuel and the IHRA Definition of Antisemitism

On Jul. 8, 2026 former White House chief of staff, once Chicago Mayor, and possible Democratic presidential candidate Rahm Emanuel聽聽at Tel Aviv University about U.S.-Israel relations. He did not hold back.

Emanuel begins by stating that he understands why Israelis might dismiss criticism from outside. Palestinian leaders, after all, have refused offer after offer of 鈥渟overeignty in exchange for your security,鈥� and each time, the offer was not only rejected, but also Israel was 鈥渁ttacked as a direct consequence.鈥�

Even so, Israel has become, not a start-up nation, but 鈥渁 modern-day Sparta鈥� (Netanyahu鈥檚 phrase) and even worse, 鈥渁 territorial pariah.鈥� While Emanuel does not excuse the Palestinians (more on that below), he blames Netanyahu and his government for leading Israel 鈥渋nto a dead-end.鈥� Unconditional American support, Emanuel says, has led Israelis to treat Palestinians in the West Bank abysmally and with impunity. Consequently, support for Israel 鈥渋s plummeting around the world,鈥� Israeli scientists 鈥渇ace exclusion from international research,鈥� and artists and writers,聽, face 鈥渞ising hostility and exclusion.鈥�

And Emanuel, unequivocally and forcefully, blames Netanyahu, who failed to turn Israel鈥檚鈥渕ilitary wins into strategic advantages,鈥� and even worse, 鈥測our government is complicit in the horrors now being inflicted on innocent families in the West Bank.鈥� As a direct result of Netanyahu鈥檚 not just tolerating, but also encouraging, the worst aspects of Israeli politics, Israel has lost its legitimacy in the world鈥檚 eyes, and 鈥測ou cannot fight indefinitely against a world that has stopped believing you have the right to fight.鈥� By focusing exclusively on military solutions to security challenges, Israel is 鈥渕ore diplomatically isolated than ever. That is a choice this government has made.鈥�

To be sure, Emanuel does not give the Palestinians a pass. Those chanting 鈥渇rom the river to the sea鈥� are fanatics and 鈥渢hey will never have their way,鈥� just as those calling for a 鈥済reater Israel鈥� are fanatics who will never have their way. The Palestinian leadership聽, which is why 鈥淎rab leaders, not Israel, must hold the Palestinians responsible and accountable for their actions.鈥� Palestinians and Arab leaders must accept 鈥渢he historic 91传媒 connections to this land,鈥� and they must 鈥減ut an end to the heinous practice of financially rewarding terrorist who kills Jews. And they must stop teaching young children to hate Israelis.鈥�

But Emanuel devotes the majority of this speech to criticizing Netanyahu and his policies, which brings me to the IHRA definition and the false charge that the IHRA definition conflates criticism of Israel with antisemitism. There are endless examples, so let me give a representative one. In his recent book,聽鈥淚srael:聽What Went Wrong?,鈥� Omer Bartov asserts that the IHRA definition has 鈥渕orphed into an instrument for silencing criticism by law and duress鈥� by 鈥渄efining criticism of Israel as antisemitic.鈥�

But Bartov is wrong, as are the many others who claim the IHRA definition conflates criticism with antisemitism.

Here’s the relevant text part of the IHRA definition: 鈥溌爏imilar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic.鈥� It鈥檚 only when the Jews are blamed when 鈥渢hings go wrong鈥� or one applies 鈥渄ouble standards by requiring of [Israel] a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation鈥� that speech veers into antisemitism.

Whether or not you agree with Emanuel鈥檚 diagnosis and his solutions, you cannot say that he鈥檚 not harshly critical of Netanyahu and Israeli policies. He is about as clear as can be that Israel鈥檚 actions post-10/7 have been disastrous for Israel鈥檚 reputation, and while he does not say so explicitly, we can safely assume that he hopes Netanyahu loses the next election.

Whether or not you agree with Emanuel鈥檚 diagnosis and his solutions, you cannot say that he鈥檚 not harshly critical of Netanyahu and Israeli policies.

But it鈥檚 equally clear that his speech has not been silenced. He was invited to Tel Aviv University to give this speech, and surely, everyone involved knew what he was going to say. Nobody claimed that his speech was either antisemitic or aided and abetted antisemitism. And nobody said that Emanuel should not have been allowed to give this speech.

That鈥檚 because Emanuel criticizes Netanyahu in exactly the same way that Democrats criticize, say, Trump鈥檚 immigration policies. Or Republicans criticized Biden for聽丑颈蝉听immigration policies. What Emanuel does聽not聽do is state that Israel is聽, or that Israel does not have a right to exist. That would be, according to the IHRA, stepping over the line.

And make no mistake, there is an astonishing rise in antisemitism today. Egypt loses a soccer game, and Egyptian fans聽. Crowds at the聽聽unfurled, to massive cheers, a giant banner reading 鈥淒estroy Israel.鈥澛犅燿etailing 鈥渢he blatant hostility, discrimination, and hate that some 91传媒 and Israeli authors are facing,鈥� regardless of their views on the Gaza war. PEN America鈥檚 president, Dinaw Mengestu,聽聽because he regarded the report 鈥溌爐o the constitutional rights of those who advocate for shunning Israeli products.鈥� Even though PEN is against censorship and boycotts, when it comes to Jews, Mengestu is okay with 鈥溌燼ctually restrict or limit or suppress what is constitutionally protected speech.鈥�

These three examples (and believe me, there are more, lots more) are what the IHRA definition targets as antisemitic. But as Emanuel鈥檚 speech shows, criticism of Israeli policies, no matter how fervent, is perfectly within bounds.

Claiming that the IHRA definition silences Israel鈥檚 critics is simply wrong. The IHRA definition, instead, draws a bright line between what is and is not antisemitic. That鈥檚 why it鈥檚 essential today, more than ever.

Peter C. Herman is Emeritus Professor of English Literature at San Diego State University. His last publication with the 91传媒 Journal of Los Angeles is聽鈥�The Phoenix of Gaza Exhibit: Education or Indoctrination.”

Rahm Emanuel and the IHRA Definition of Antisemitism Read More 禄

All the Words 鈥� A poem for Parsha Devarim

Judaism, Poetry / Rick Lupert

Devarim 鈥� the words (Deuteronomy 1:1鈥�3:22)

All the words I have spoken
have been on the west side
of the Jordan River.

I am a descendant of the ones
who perished in the desert, whose feet
never touched the promised ground.

whose immediate descendants
waded across and spoke their words.
I have spoken my words on the

promised ground. I even had a dalliance
or two in the middle of the river.
I鈥檝e spoken my words on

its mountains at sunrise
on Har Herzl where we remember
those who spoke their words.

I have spoken my words in the
marketplaces and on chartered buses.
I have spoken them to the

cats in every city there, to the
shopkeepers on Ben Yehuda Street
Name a city between the

river and the sea, and I have
spoken my words there. I鈥檓 taking
that phrase back 鈥� The river and the sea

exist for our words. Moses spoke them
before we ambled in between that space.
Nachman screamed them in the forest.

It鈥檚 your turn now. Say them often and loud.
Say them to whoever will listen. Say them to
your children, and their children, and their children.

Rick Lupert, a poet, songleader and graphic designer, is the author of 29 books including 鈥淕od Wrestler: A Poem for Every Torah Portion.鈥� Visit him at

All the Words 鈥� A poem for Parsha Devarim Read More 禄

Democratic Jews Will Criticize their People, But Why Not Their Party?

Editor's Note / David Suissa

I can鈥檛 stand the expression 鈥渟elf-hating Jews.鈥�

This is a term some Jews use to describe fellow Jews who constantly criticize their own people and Israel.

The problem is that it鈥檚 not accurate.

Jews who routinely criticize their people don鈥檛 hate themselves. If anything, they love themselves. They see what they鈥檙e doing as engaging in that great and noble 91传媒 value of self-correction.

The deepest love, after all, is tough love.

Of course, that tough love can easily go overboard. If the world is already bashing Israel, for example, tough love can turn into piling on. That doesn’t take away from its inherent value. In the 91传媒 tradition, self-criticism is not just a right but an obligation.

Indeed, the current Israeli government has earned more than its fair share of criticism, and it gets plenty of it inside Israel itself. The point is, we can all agree there is something uniquely valuable and credible about loyal members of a group taking on their own.

So, why do we so rarely see Democratic Jews criticize their political party? If it’s good for their people, why not for their party?

For starters, Democratic Jews have skin in the game.

Criticizing their party is too close to home.

It would mean helping the hated 鈥渙ther team.”

It would mean alienating their social circles.

Perhaps most importantly, it would mean betraying the identity that has defined most American Jews since the days of FDR: being a member of the Democratic party.

That鈥檚 why, even when something about their party drives them nuts, they tend to keep their mouths shut.

Democrats 鈥渉ave alienated their own voters over many years by stifling competition and dissent聽within the party,鈥� Mara Gay writes in The New York Times. 鈥淔rom the Democratic National Committee鈥檚 attempted undermining of Bernie Sanders鈥檚 2016 presidential bid to the White House staff鈥檚 efforts in 2024 to hide President Joe Biden鈥檚 obvious signs of aging from voters.鈥�

A few years ago, when things associated with their party like 鈥渄efund the police鈥� and 鈥渙pen borders鈥� were exasperating 91传媒 Democrats, I asked a few of them if they鈥檇 write about it for the Journal.

I never got a yes.

Taking on their party publicly was simply a bridge too far.

It wouldn’t be so bad if liberal Jews didn’t make such a big deal of the importance of criticizing your own. But they do. Remember, liberal Jews who are so reluctant to publicly take on their party are the same Jews who’d jump at a chance to publish a critical piece on Israel… because, you know, 91传媒 values and all that.

If these self-loving Jews should dislike anything about themselves, I’d like to suggest their hypocrisy.

And I say this with all the tough love in the world.

Democratic Jews Will Criticize their People, But Why Not Their Party? Read More 禄

A Bisl Torah 鈥� Low to High, High to Low

A Bisl Torah / Rabbi Nicole Guzik

It鈥檚 the season of road trips. On a long drive, we found ourselves at an intersection publicizing both Mount Whitney and Death Valley. The two locations are roughly two hours from each other: Two short hours between the highest peak and the lowest national park in the United States and very little distance between low to high and high to low.

Such is the challenge in our daily lives: Very little distance between short and long tempers; a small measure between highly patient and angrily reactive; the briefest of spaces between showing compassion and the hardening of one鈥檚 heart.

Our constant battle is teetering from low to high, high to low, and back to high again.

Wherever we travel, let us challenge ourselves to maalin bakodesh, to rise towards holiness: To ascend in our communication with others, to expand our hearts, to gain a stronger understanding of our own weaknesses and misgivings. And because we know it is so easy to slide back down, it becomes our constant task to climb higher, be better, and live a more sacred, meaningful existence.

We didn鈥檛 end up at Mount Whitney or Death Valley, but the lesson continues to hold true.

May we choose to rise, higher and higher and higher.

Shabbat Shalom

Rabbi Nicole Guzik is senior rabbi at Sinai Temple. She can be reached at her Facebook page at or on Instagram . For more writings, visit Rabbi Guzik鈥檚 from Sinai Temple鈥檚 website.

A Bisl Torah 鈥� Low to High, High to Low Read More 禄

Moses the Thoughtful Judge

Poetry / Gershon Hepner

Rashi tells us that when Moses avoided
responding immediately to Korah鈥檚 complaint,
his reason was perhaps that Korah鈥檚 supporters had not avoided
getting drunk that day. The great teacher-saint
called for a delay in case Korah鈥檚 supporters were intoxicated,
which would have made their presence in the tabernacle a sin.
Delay till morning caused the risk of such聽a sin to be abated,
morning commonly too early for consumption of alcohol to 聽begin.

Moses鈥� postponement of his opposition to an evil foe
compares his fairness by protecting his foes鈥� supporters,
to the fairness he would in a later story show:
helping as he did supporters, like Zelophehad鈥檚 five brother-deprived daughters.

Some wait until they hear God鈥檚 voice,
but, trying to be brave, some make a choice,
addressing Him before contacted,
strongly feeling so attracted
to a Power which they may
not meet, however much they pray,
yet daring to try reaching Him,
though chances of a strike are dim.

Regardless of how much you know,
if you wait you still can go
with God. The first step that is taken
by man is generally mistaken.

For most of all humanity
such steps are a profanity,
unless like Abraham you walk
with God, allowing Him to talk.

In Yiddish, people can describe an opinion that is unlikely to be correct as a nechtiger tug, implying that the opinion, which often reflects a wishful prediction, is as implausible as the mistaken belief that a day has turned into the night because no daylight shines in it.

My poem suggests that Rashi implies that Moses鈥� delay in his response to Korah and his 250 supporters, was based on this: night is the time for drunkenness and, when it is compared to the intention of Korah and his supporters to replace Moses with Korah to intoxication, may have reflected an opinion that their opposition to Moses was based on an opinion or prediction that was comparable to a nechtiger tug.

This suggestion implies that though Rashi spoke French, not Yiddish, his explanation for Moses鈥� decision to ‘delay until morning’ his confrontation with his foes, was based on his hope that their opposition would resolve the error on which their opposition was based, as soon as daylight cleared away their intoxicated mental darkness.

Indeed, possibly, the attribution of Psalm 90 to Moses is based on聽Ps. 90:5-6, can be read as a justification of the ‘delay until morning’ of Moses鈥� response to Korah鈥檚 opposition, regarding the opposition as a nechtiger tug:

聽讝职专址诪职转指旨诐, 砖值讈谞指讛讬执讛职讬讜旨;聽聽讘址旨讘止旨拽侄专, 讻侄旨讞指爪执讬专讬址讞植诇止祝 Thou carriest them away as with a flood; they are as a sleep; in the morning they are like grass which groweth up.

址旨讘止旨拽侄专, 讬指爪执讬抓讜职讞指诇指祝;聽聽诇指注侄专侄讘, 讬职诪讜止诇值诇讜职讬指讘值砖聽聽 In the morning it flourisheth, and groweth up; in the evening it is cut down, and withereth.

Gershon Hepner is a poet who has written over 25,000 poems on subjects ranging from music to literature, politics to Torah. He grew up in England and moved to Los Angeles in 1976. Using his varied interests and experiences, he has authored dozens of papers in medical and academic journals, and authored 鈥淟egal Friction: Law, Narrative, and Identity Politics in Biblical Israel.鈥� He can be reached at gershonhepner@gmail.com.

Moses the Thoughtful Judge Read More 禄

Print Issue: City of Lost Angels? | July 17, 2026

Print Issue / 91传媒 Journal Staff

锘�锘�锘�

Print Issue: City of Lost Angels? | July 17, 2026 Read More 禄