On the evening of November 15, an event co-sponsored by Jewish students on campus, and the Chabad House, was held in Sharpless Auditorium. The event was titled Voices of Jewish History; flyers advertised a talk by Corey and Amichai Shdaimah on the rise of antisemitism, and the hostages held by Hamas in Gaza. This discussion was named the inaugural event of a “thought provoking” series entitled “Jewish Conversations.”
Amichai’s stepmother, Ditza Heiman, was captured by Hamas and held hostage, and as of the time of the event, had been held by Hamas for 40 days. As of November 28th, Ditza has been released along with 11 other hostages in the first round of releases since the extension of a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas.
Attendees of the presentation and discussion were under obligation to pre-register before being given any information about its location. Additionally, attendees had to agree to a set of guidelines which included “refraining from disruptive behavior” such as shouting, agreeing not to display any posters or “other materials,” and understanding that any questions asked should be asked “with the intention of fostering a civil conversation and demonstrating respect for [the speakers].” Photography and recording (film or sound) were strictly prohibited.
The event took place on the evening of November 15, in Sharpless Auditorium. Attendees signed in upon arrival, and doors opened at 7:50 pm. Projected behind seats set up for Corey, Amichai, and a pair of moderators, was a graphic with pictures of a select number of the 239 hostages. The projection was captioned, “the youngest hostage is just 10 months old,” and displayed a digital poster reading, “#BringThemHomeNow. At 8:16, the audience was reminded of the guidelines they were obligated to follow, and the event began with initial remarks by Ally Landau, who noted how grateful she was for the welcoming space created there.
“Navigating the campus climate has been difficult,” she said. “I hope this event can be a step in the right direction, towards peace.” She then introduced Ditza, the 84 year old stepmother of Amichai. Amichai was born in Israel and lived there most of his life before meeting his wife, Corey, an American Jew and professor at the University of Maryland. Amichai began by introducing himself and giving some information about his backstory.
The Presenters
Amichai grew up on a Kibbutz, and during his service with the IDF, he was a tank commander. Since coming to the US, he has spent 26 years as an engineer. Corey told her own story; as a child in a homogeneous community of New York Jews, she found herself wanting to widen her worldview, and went to boarding school to do so. In her early 20s, she moved to Israel. She and Amichai returned to the US in order to allow Corey to get a Master of Law from the University of Pennsylvania.
After graduating, she went to Bryn Mawr’s graduate school for a PhD. Corey told the audience about her three children, one of whom had defended his Master’s thesis in environmental science that day; another is pursuing a PhD in queer feministTorah, and their youngest is a nursing student at New York University.
Questions Begin
The first question from a moderator built on this intimate familial theme. The moderator observed that Ditza reminded him of his own grandmother, in her warmth and welcoming nature. Amichai was asked to give Ditza’s background, and describe life in Nir Oz, where Ditza lives in Southern Israel, before October 7. He fondly remembered the Kibbutz’ peaceful environment, and Ditza’s chicken soup, humorously adding that even his vegetarian son enjoys it when they visit Israel.
Kibbutzim in Israel are small communal living spaces focused on agricultural work. Such communities began being formed in 1910, and have been referred to as “one of the most successful experiments in voluntary socialism,” by Stanford economics professor Ran Abramitzky, quoted in an NPR article. They are known to be peaceful places, a sentiment mirrored in Amichai’s fond recollections. Yet the kibbutzim were also keystone elements of the Zionist state-building effort in the 1930s and 40s, a tool of the movement still being used today. Some of these small towns are places at strategic points near Palestinian regions like Gaza. Amichai explained his stepmother’s Kibbutz is on the very border of Gaza, and thus they are made “very aware” of the situation. He described the shelter that was built onto the house in case of bombings, and added that when they visit, they stay in the shelter as a guest room.
The next question focused on the moment Corey and Amichai heard that Israel had been bombed, and the way they found out Ditza had been taken hostage. Ditza’s phone, eyewitness accounts from a neighbor, and video footage, assured them that Ditza had been taken alive.
Corey noted that about 70 out of 400 people from Nir Oz were taken. “The community has been terribly impacted … Anyone who is alive and has no place to go has been displaced,” she said.
Moderators then turned the conversation to the larger issue of how to advocate for the lives of Gazans, and advocate for peace, while not crossing the line of antisemitism. Amichai responded, “We believe all people are born equal, and have the right to freedom and determination…We believe that Palestinians have the same rights…The people in the Kibbutz share these values; some are helping take people from hospitals, providing assistance to Gazans. I don’t [conflate] every Palestinian with Hamas, which is a terrorist organization.”
Along with Corey, he denounced use of the phrase “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free,” saying that pro-Palestinian activists have to acknowledge that to Jewish people, the statement calls for throwing Israelis out of Israel, and so it sparks fear instead of progress. “If you want to talk about peace,” he said, “you have to talk first about [condemning] Hamas’ attack. Hamas are not freedom fighters, they came to kill and distract and create a bigger conflict. It’s not in the name of peace, it’s not in the name of the Palestinian people.”Based on Amichai’s messaging throughout the discussion, it can be assumed that he meant to assert that Hamas is distracting from the ultimate goal of peace. Yet Amichai’s general contention regarding Hamas’ motivations have been brought into question many times in the last two months, and reaching further back in history.
Changes to the 1988 Hamas charter were presented in 2017 by its leader at the time, Khaled Meshaal; these changes altered Hamas’ stated goal to destroy Israel, in favor of a marginally less forward approach, “still [rejecting] the country’s right to exist, and [backing] ‘armed struggle’ against it,” as a 2017 article from Reuters put it. That same articles quoted Meshaal saying, “Hamas advocates the liberation of all of Palestine but is ready to support the state on 1967 borders without recognising Israel or ceding any rights.”
Hamas has been categorized by the US Department of State as a terrorist organization, and Amichai stated that he has heard from Palestinians that they are not in support of Hamas’ acts. Whether the group’s motivations or methods are supported by the majority of Palestinian people, and whether they imagine their moves to be “in the name of freedom” for the Palestinian people, or for the nation, is a contentious topic, and one that is difficult to come to an accurate conclusion on, as reporting from and polling on the area continues to be uneven and unstable.
Controversy on Campus
Corey then answered a question specifically regarding the environment on college campuses, and gave her reaction to claims regarding Chabad House’s posters advertising the event being torn down: “Why would someone tear down this poster? It’s not political, it’s about me and my pain…It’s as if my mother-in-law doesn’t count, or I don’t count. I also shouldn’t have to say as a preface that I’m a person who advocates for peace, in order to say that it’s not okay to hold someone hostage.” A similar sentiment is held by pro-Palestinian protestors, who argue that the issue they are being forced to debate on is antisemitism, as opposed to the real issue of Palestinian suffering. They believe they should not have to say as a preface that they are not antisemitists in order to advocate for a ceasefire. SJP organizer and Bryn Mawr senior MK says, “Instead of fighting for a free Palestine, we’re fighting to prove that we’re not antisemitic.”
Corey told a story about her son at NYU, who she has been worried about, as pro-Palestine protests continue being held on campus. After telling him to stay in his room during protests, Corey related, his reply was,“‘no, it’s okay, I look German.’ That is really painful to me,” she said. Corey’s son seems to be saying here that he would fear being targeted by pro-Palestine protestors, if he fit a stereotypical racial profile of a Jewish person.
Speaking further on this subject, Corey referenced Jewish students she knows who have lost friends over the conflict, and might now be trying to hide their Judaism: “Jews have good reason, because in living memory we’ve experienced [traumatic events like this], to be scared…To shun somebody because they are Jewish or Israeli is antisemitism.”She pointed out that Jewish students she had heard of and spoken to were having “beliefs ascribed to them before they even opened their mouths,” seemingly contending that both Jewish and Zionist identities and beliefs were being negatively connoted, and associated with violence against Palestinians.
A moderator then discussed the experience of Jewish students on campus, including sleepless nights and daily struggle. “Other people just go about their days…What can people do to help?” The moderator did not state whether she was referring to the experience of Jewish, or specifically Zionist, students. Amichai responded, “We can talk about it. We want people to know that these are real stories. Not everyone feels what we feel, and I don’t expect people to feel the same amount of pain…Not everybody needs to lose sleep, but we ask for people not to deny that this is happening…The obligation is to try to get [the hostages] out of there.”
The Future
The discussion was then steered towards hope for the future, for Israel, for Jews in the US, and for discussion on college campuses. To describe what gives her hope, Corey offered her gratitude to the audience for being there and listening, and expressed her appreciation for the dialogue that has been taking place at the University of Maryland, Baltimore: “I feel that I’ve received the support I need from my community.”
Amichai again emphasized his hope for a peaceful resolution, and conveyed his wish that the Israeli government would change, and be replaced with an administration that would work towards peace.
Q&A
Professor Freedman then stepped to the podium to facilitate a Q&A section. Some questions came from a pre-selected list sent in via Google Form prior to the event; others were sent in during the talk via a number displayed on the backdrop projection.
The second question restated by Professor Freedman asked, “What’s a message you might want to give to students who are pro-Palestinian protestors?” Corey replied, “I’m not sure I’d want to give advice but I’d want them to know how I, as a Jewish woman, experience certain things. As a Jewish person, when I see ‘From the river to the sea,’ hear a call for the abolition of the state of Israel. If that’s not your intent, say something else.” Yet some student protestors using this phrase are calling for exactly that; they see Israel as a nation-state built on the displacement of the Palestinian people.
For example, a teach-in by SJP organizer MK on the Birthright Israel Foundation sparked conversation among attendees about discourse on the topic at Bryn Mawr College. One student, and member of the honor council board, noted, “The fact that in classes we’re talking about decolonization, but we’re supposed to support a colonist state, is quite outrageous.” However, others who would condemn use of the “from the river to the sea,” phrase think it stands for a wiping out of all Israeli people living on Palestinian land, a perspective strongly refuted by many student activists, who use the words to call only for Palestinian self-determination.
Corey and Amichai’s son, Elad, came up to the stage to provide his own perspective on the question: “I have similar issues with certain terms being thrown around. A lot of people don’t understand definitions of things…There are strict rules for the IDF about how they should treat civilians … throwing around the word genocide is inflammatory, and it hasn’t been defined in this situation.” He added, “No one knows what Zionism means anymore. I grew up proud to be a Progressive Labor Zionist, and anyone who thinks that means that I wanna kill and displace people has a misconception of what it means to be a Zionist.”
Labor Zionism is defined by its left-leaning, socialist tendencies. This faction of the Zionist movement is responsible for the formation of the kibbutzim and moshavim, and believed not in Theodor Hertzl’s “political Zionism,” but in the idea that a Jewish state would be built through the migration of working-class Jewish people to Israel. At its core, the faction is a bridge between socialism and nationalism. Yet, as the historian Gil Troy puts it in his book, The Zionist Ideas: Visions for the Jewish Homeland―Then, Now, Tomorrow, “Over the decades … persistent problems made these pragmatists look less effective and romantic … The complex Palestinian problem became incendiary. The pressing agenda — and overall vision — changed.” Labor Zionists needed land to fulfill their vision, and that land was disputed territory. What Elad calls Progressive Labor Zionism may hold on to a fundamental goal of peace, yet it often seems that this goal, and the actions of the political party, are at odds.
Another question asked for the speakers’ reaction to Israel’s Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, refusing to agree to a ceasefire in exchange for hostages. Amichai began, “As [a family member] of a hostage, I’d like to believe the government is doing what they can [to free the hostages].” He continued by providing his thoughts on Hamas’ poor treatment of its own citizens, saying, “this starts to get political but…” and seemingly asserting that Hamas is purposefully not prioritizing the issue of its own hospitals’ lack of sufficient fuel.Though this statement is neither supported or directly refuted by reports from the area, conversations around where Hamas is obtaining its funding, and how those funds are being allocated, are being reported on. Amichai then affirmed once again that he hopes the government is prioritizing the hostages in their strategies.
The final question restated by Professor Freedman was sent in from senior Lucca Guzaman- Gieseke, who observed that some of the language around sympathy for lives lost and hope for the future feels like its buoying a double-standard, wherein those who are pro-Israel condemn some pro-Palestinian speech, but do not reflect on their own rhetoric. The question called for further sympathy towards Palestinian people who are also being tormented.
Elad answered that the event was held for the speakers to talk about “our experiences and antisemitism, so there wasn’t really the space to talk about Palestinian loss of life.” He went on, “I mean it upsets us a lot. I’m very very concerned about how many people are dying. For my own standpoint, I think there are better ways to go about this, but I don’t know what they are, and it’s hard to tell the IDF to stop when you don’t know what they should do…I have no solution to offer.” Amichai also responded with a message of sympathy and sadness, expressing his sadness that the war would only cause more hate.
Concluding
Rabbi Eli made a few closing remarks: “I want to thank everyone here, this has been tremendously inspiring. This gives us hope.” The Rabbi also expressed his frustration with a perception held by some that supporting Israel means supporting genocide. “We can cry for every life lost, and we should, and we do,” he said. But saying ‘Israel is committing genocide’…I don’t accept it.” Debate over use of the term “genocide” when referring to the Israel-Hamas war has been tense in recent weeks. A press release from the UN on November 16th officials warned that “grave violations committed by Israel against Palestinians in the aftermath of 7 October, particularly in Gaza, point to a genocide in the making.” Yet others, as displayed in an opinion piece from The Economist argue that “Israel, by contrast [to Hamas], does not meet the test of genocide. There is little evidence that Israel, like Hamas, “intends” to destroy an ethnic group—the Palestinians. Israel does want to destroy Hamas, a militant group, and is prepared to kill civilians in doing so. And while some Israeli extremists might want to eradicate the Palestinians, that is not a government policy.”
Following the event, Haverford senior Lucca Guzman-Gieseken spoke briefly to the Bi-Co News, regarding his opinions on the event being defined as apolitical, and the discussion around pro-Palestinian phrases: “I think the fact that [this event] is a reaction to what’s going on on campus makes it inherently political…there are definitions for things like genocide and it sucks that there’s a double standard, and its hard for that to be acknowledged. It’s disheartening to hear that there’s all this suffering and it can’t be acknowledged the way we want it to be.”
Guzman-Gieseken added, “I don’t like being called out for being pro-Palestinian and supposedly anti-semitic. Saying the Israeli government is committing genocide is not antisemitic, and as a queer brown person, that is such a crazy thing to be accused of.”
A Jewish student who helped organize the event spoke to her own experience with the discussion: “As a Jewish student on campus I thought [the event] was incredibly moving…especially hearing the stories about the impact October 7 had on members of our community…My message [to students who purposely didn’t come to the event] would be: I get it. I was nervous to come to this event, [but] I think that it’s really important to hear different perspectives, and it’s important to know that you can come to something and not agree with everything people say.”
As the auditorium cleared, it seemed multiple students associated with the organization of the event seemed to have found a form of emotional release in hearing the speakers’ stories, while some attendees left quickly and quietly.
