Since the start of his political career, Donald Trump has played on stereotypes about Jews and politics.
He told the Republican Jewish Coalition in 2015 that “you want to control your politicians” and suggested the audience used money to exert control. In the White House, he said Jews who vote for Democrats are “very disloyal to Israel.”
Two years ago, the former president hosted two dinner guests at his Florida residence who were known to make virulent antisemitic comments.
And this week, Trump charged that Jewish Democrats were being disloyal to their faith and to Israel. That had many American Jews taking up positions behind now-familiar political lines. Trump opponents accused him of promoting antisemitic tropes while his defenders suggested he was making a fair political point in his own way.
Jonathan Sarna, American Jewish history professor at Brandeis University, said Trump is capitalizing on tensions within the Jewish community.
“For people who hate Donald Trump in the Jewish community, certainly this statement will reinforce their sense that they don’t want to have anything to do with him,” he said. “For people who like Donald Trump in the Jewish community, they probably nod in agreement.”
To many Jewish leaders in a demographic that has overwhelmingly identified as Democratic and supported President Joe Biden in 2020, Trump’s latest comments promoted harmful antisemitic stereotypes, painting Jews as having divided loyalties and that there’s only one right way to be Jewish religiously.
“That escalation of rhetoric is so dangerous, so divisive and so wrong,” said Rabbi Rick Jacobs, president of the Union for Reform Judaism, the largest US Jewish religious denomination. “This is a moment when Israel needs there to be more bipartisan support.”
But Matt Brooks, CEO of the Republican Jewish Coalition, said the former president’s comments must be heard in context of the Israel-Hamas war and Democratic criticisms of the state of Israel.
“What the president was saying in his own unique style was giving voice to things I get asked about multiple times a day,” Brooks said. “How can Jews remain Democrats in light of what is going on?” He contended the Democratic Party is “no longer the pro-Israel bastion it used to be.”
More than 31,800 Palestinians have been killed in the Israeli offensive that followed Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack on southern Israel, in which militants killed some 1,200 people and took hostages. Much of northern Gaza has been leveled, and officials warned famine is imminent.
Trump’s comments followed a speech by Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, the country’s highest-ranking Jewish official. Schumer, a Democrat, last week sharply criticized Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu ‘s handling of the war in Gaza. Schumer called for new elections in Israel and warned the civilian toll was damaging Israel’s global standing.
“Any Jewish person that votes for Democrats hates their religion,” Trump retorted Monday on a talk show. “They hate everything about Israel.”
A cascade of Jewish voices, from Schumer to the Anti-Defamation League to religious leaders, denounced Trump’s statement.
In a statement to The Associated Press on Wednesday, the Trump campaign doubled down, criticizing Schumer, congressional Democrats’ support of Palestinians and the Biden administration’s policies on Iran and on aid to Gaza.
“President Trump is right,” said Karoline Leavitt, national press secretary for the Trump campaign.
Jeffrey Herf, an antisemitism expert at the University of Maryland, disagrees with Schumer’s call for a ceasefire in Gaza, but believes most Democrats support Israel — and he said a second Biden term would be better for it than a second Trump one.
“If (Trump) loses the 2024 election, his comments prepare the way for blaming the Jews for his defeat,” Herf said. “The clear result would be to fan the flames of antisemitism and assert that, yet again, the Jews are guilty.”
Sarna saw Trump as trying to appeal to politically conservative Jews, particularly the small but fast-growing Orthodox segment, who see Trump as a defender of Israel.
Also, about 10 percent of US Jews are immigrants, according to a 2020 Pew Research Center report. Sarna said significant numbers are conservative.
At the same time, Democrats face the tension between their Jewish constituency, which is predominantly pro-Israel, and its progressive wing, which is more pro-Palestinian.
Sarna said that while it may seem odd to focus so much attention on subsections of a minority population, “elections in America are very close, and every vote counts.”
Conservative commentator Ben Shapiro said Tuesday on his podcast that Trump “was making a point that, frankly, I have made myself, which is that Jews who are voting Democrat do not understand the Democratic Party.” Shapiro, who practices Orthodox Judaism, contended the party “overlooks antisemitism” within its ranks.
Rabbi Jill Jacobs, the CEO of T’ruah, a rabbinic human rights organization, said Trump has no business dictating who’s a good Jew.
“By insinuating that good Jews will vote for the party that is best for Israel, Trump is evoking the age-old antisemitic trope of dual loyalty — an accusation that Jews are more loyal to their religion than to their country, and therefore can’t be trusted,” she said. “Historically, this accusation has fueled some of the worst antisemitic violence.”
In his own time in office, Trump’s policy “of supporting Prime Minister Netanyahu and the settler agenda only endangered Palestinians and Israelis and made peace more difficult to achieve,” Jacobs said.
Pittsburgh-based journalist Beth Kissileff — whose husband, a rabbi in the Conservative denomination of Judaism, in 2018 survived the nation’s deadliest antisemitic attack — said it was highly offensive for Trump to be a “self-appointed arbiter” of what it means to be Jewish.
“Chuck Schumer had every right to say what he said,” Kissileff added. “Just because we’re Jews, it doesn’t mean we agree with everything the (Israeli) government is doing. We have compassion for innocent Palestinian lives.”
Brooks, of the Republican Jewish Coalition, defended the former president against antisemitism charges, pointing to his presidential record as an example of proof.
Trump pursued policies that were popular among American Christian Zionists and Israeli religious-nationalists, including moving the US embassy to Jerusalem and supporting Jewish settlements in occupied territories. His daughter Ivanka is a convert to Orthodox Judaism, and her husband and their children are Jewish. The couple worked as high-profile surrogates to the Jewish community during Trump’s administration.
Trump’s core supporters include white evangelicals, many of whom believe the modern state of Israel fulfills biblical prophecy. Prominent evangelicals who support Zionism have also been criticized for inflammatory statements about Jewish people.
Sixty-nine percent of Jewish voters in 2020 supported Biden, while 30 percent supported Trump, according to AP VoteCast, a survey of the electorate conducted in partnership with NORC at the University of Chicago. That made Jewish voters one of the religious groups where support for Biden was strongest. Also, 73 percent of Jewish voters in 2020 said that Trump was too tolerant of extremist groups.
Rabbi Bradley Shavit Artson said Trump’s comments are “in a complex middle zone” — not explicitly antisemitic, but reliant on such tropes.
American Jews base their votes on a complex mix of issues and values, “among them inclusion, diversity, climate change, civil rights,” said Artson, a leader within Conservative Judaism. “While they love Israel diversely, many of us also care about the wellbeing and self-determination of Palestinians.”
US Jews upset with Trump’s latest rhetoric say he doesn’t get to tell them how to be Jewish
https://arab.news/b3gg7
US Jews upset with Trump’s latest rhetoric say he doesn’t get to tell them how to be Jewish
- Trump’s core supporters include white evangelicals, many of whom believe the modern state of Israel fulfills biblical prophecy
US, China agree to slash tariffs in trade war de-escalation
- The United States and China announced Monday an agreement to drastically reduce tit-for-tat tariffs for 90 days
The United States and China announced Monday an agreement to drastically reduce tit-for-tat tariffs for 90 days, de-escalating a trade war that has roiled financial markets and raised fears of a global economic downturn.
After their first talks since US President Donald Trump launched his trade war, the world’s two biggest economies agreed in a joint statement to bring their triple-digit tariffs down to two figures and continue negotiations.
US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent described the weekend talks with Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng and international trade representative Li Chenggang as “productive” and “robust.”
“Both sides showed a great respect,” Bessent told reporters.
US President Donald Trump had imposed duties of 145 percent on imports for China last month — compared to 10 percent for other countries in the global tariff blitz he launched last month.
Beijing hit back with duties of 125 percent on US goods.
Bessent said the two sides agreed to reduce those tariffs by 115 percentage points, taking US tariffs to 30 percent and those by China to 10 percent.
In their statement, the two sides agreed to “establish a mechanism to continue discussions about economic and trade relations.”
China hailed the “substantial progress” made at the talks.
“This move... is in the interest of the two countries and the common interest of the world,” the Chinese commerce ministry said, adding that it hoped Washington would keep working with China “to correct the wrong practice of unilateral tariff rises.”
The dollar, which tumbled after Trump launched his tariff blitz in April, rallied on the news while US stock futures soared. European and Asian markets also rallied.
The trade dispute between Washington and Beijing has rocked financial markets, raising fears the tariffs would rekindle inflation and cause a global economic downturn.
The head of the World Trade Organization, Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, praised the talks on Sunday as a “significant step forward” that “bode well for the future.”
“Amid current global tensions, this progress is important not only for the US and China but also for the rest of the world, including the most vulnerable economies,” she added.
Ahead of the meeting at the discreet villa residence of Switzerland’s ambassador to the United Nations in Geneva, Trump had signalled he might lower the tariffs, suggesting on social media that an “80 percent Tariff on China seems right!“
However, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt later clarified that the United States would not lower tariffs unilaterally, saying China would also need to make concessions.
The Geneva meeting came days after Trump unveiled a trade agreement with Britain, the first with any country since he unleashed his blitz of global tariffs.
The five-page, nonbinding deal confirmed to nervous investors that Washington was willing to negotiate sector-specific relief from recent duties.
But Trump maintained a 10 percent levy on most British goods, and threatened to keep it in place as a baseline rate for most other countries.
UK’s Starmer says net migration will fall significantly
LONDON: British Prime Minister Keir Starmer promised net migration would fall significantly by 2029 as he announced policies to boost skills and training.
“It’s (...) a white paper that deals with skills and training, and one of the reasons that we’ve had stagnant growth chronically in skills and growth,” he said on Monday.
India great Virat Kohli retires from test cricket
- Kohli, 36, announces retirement only days after Rohit Sharma stepped down from test cricket as well
- He scored 9,230 runs including 30 centuries and 31 half-centuries at a test batting average of 46.85
NEW DELHI, India: India great Virat Kohli retired from test cricket Monday after playing 123 matches in his glorious 14-year red-ball career.
“As I step away from this format, it’s not easy — but it feels right,” Kohli posted on Instagram. “It’s been 14 years since I first wore the baggy blue in Test cricket. Honestly, I never imagined the journey this format would take me on. It’s tested me, shaped me, and taught me lessons I’ll carry for life.”
The 36-year-old Kohli’s retirement comes only days after Rohit Sharma stepped down from test cricket, taking two senior batters out of selection contention for India’s tour to England.
Kohli scored 9,230 runs including 30 centuries and 31 half-centuries at a test batting average of 46.85. He also led India in 68 test matches and was India’s most successful captain with 40 test wins.
Kohli said the traditions and ebbs and flows of the five-day format were special to him, including “the quiet grind, the long days, the small moments that no one sees but that stay with you forever.”
“I am walking away with a heart full of gratitude — for the game, for the people I shared the field with, and for every single person who made me feel seen along the way,” he wrote. “I will always look back at my test career with a smile. #269, signing off.”
India’s diplomatic ambitions tested as Trump pushes for deal on Kashmir
- India wary of third-party mediation, sees Kashmir as integral part of its territory
- India’s clout on global stage has risen with its rapid economic growth
NEW DELHI/ISLAMABAD: India and Pakistan have stepped back from the brink of all-out war, with a nudge from the US, but New Delhi’s aspirations as a global diplomatic power now face a key test after President Donald Trump offered to mediate on the dispute over Kashmir, analysts said.
India’s rapid rise as the world’s fifth-largest economy has boosted its confidence and clout on the world stage, where it has played an important role in addressing regional crises such as Sri Lanka’s economic collapse and the Myanmar earthquake.
But the conflict with Pakistan over Kashmir, which flared up in recent days with exchanges of missiles drones and air strikes that killed at least 66 people, touches a sensitive nerve in Indian politics.
How India threads the diplomatic needle — courting favor with Trump over issues like trade while asserting its own interests in the Kashmir conflict — will depend in large part on domestic politics and could determine the future prospects for conflict in Kashmir.
“India ... is likely not keen on the broader talks (that the ceasefire) calls for. Upholding it will pose challenges,” said Michael Kugelman, a South Asia analyst based in Washington.
In a sign of just how fragile the truce remains, the two governments accused each other of serious violations late on Saturday.
The ceasefire, Kugelman noted, was “cobbled together hastily” when tensions were at their peak.
Trump said on Sunday that, following the ceasefire, “I am going to increase trade, substantially, with both of these great nations.”
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, for his part, has not commented publicly on the conflict since it began.
India considers Kashmir an integral part of its territory and not open for negotiation, least of all through a third-party mediator. India and Pakistan both rule the scenic Himalayan region in part, claim it in full, and have fought two wars and numerous other conflicts over what India says is a Pakistan-backed insurgency there. Pakistan denies it backs insurgency.
“By agreeing to abort under US persuasion ... just three days of military operations, India is drawing international attention to the Kashmir dispute, not to Pakistan’s cross-border terrorism that triggered the crisis,” said Brahma Chellaney, an Indian defense analyst.
For decades after the two countries separated in 1947, the West largely saw India and Pakistan through the same lens as the neighbors fought regularly over Kashmir. That changed in recent years, partly thanks to India’s economic rise while Pakistan languished with an economy less than one-10th India’s size.
But Trump’s proposal to work toward a solution to the Kashmir problem, along with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s declaration that India and Pakistan would start talks on their broader issues at a neutral site, has irked many Indians.
Pakistan has repeatedly thanked Trump for his offer on Kashmir, while India has not acknowledged any role played by a third party in the ceasefire, saying it was agreed by the two sides themselves.
Analysts and Indian opposition parties are already questioning whether New Delhi met its strategic objectives by launching missiles into Pakistan on Wednesday last week, which it said were in retaliation for an attack last month on tourists in Kashmir that killed 26 men. It blamed the attack on Pakistan — a charge that Islamabad denied.
By launching missiles deep into Pakistan, Modi showed a much higher appetite for risk than his predecessors. But the sudden ceasefire exposed him to rare criticism at home.
Swapan Dasgupta, a former lawmaker from Modi’s Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party, said the ceasefire had not gone down well in India partly because “Trump suddenly appeared out of nowhere and pronounced his verdict.”
The main opposition Congress party got in on the act, demanding an explanation from the government on the “ceasefire announcements made from Washington, D.C.”
“Have we opened the doors to third-party mediation?” asked Congress spokesperson Jairam Ramesh.
And while the fighting has stopped, there remain a number of flashpoints in the relationship that will test India’s resolve and may tempt it to adopt a hard-line stance.
The top issue for Pakistan, diplomats and government officials there said, would be the Indus Waters Treaty, which India suspended last month but which is a vital source of water for many of Pakistan’s farms and hydropower plants.
“Pakistan would not have agreed (to a ceasefire) without US guarantees of a broader dialogue,” said Bilawal Bhutto Zardari, a former foreign minister and currently chairman of the People’s Party of Pakistan, which supports the government.
Moeed Yusuf, former Pakistan National Security Adviser, said a broad agreement would be needed to break the cycle of brinksmanship over Kashmir.
“Because the underlying issues remain, and every six months, one year, two years, three years, something like this happens and then you are back at the brink of war in a nuclear environment,” he said.
US and China to publish details of ‘substantial’ trade talks in Geneva
- Both sides agree to set up a joint mechanism focused on “regular and irregular communications related to trade and commercial issues,” says China's vice premier
- WTO chief Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala welcomed the progress in trade talks as important for the whole world, including the most vulnerable economies
GENEVA: The United States and China are set to provide details on Monday of the “substantial progress” made during talks in Switzerland over the weekend aimed at cooling trade tensions ignited by President Donald Trump’s sweeping tariffs.
US Treasury Scott Bessent and Trade Representative Jamieson Greer met with Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng and international trade representative Li Chenggang for closed-door talks in Geneva on Saturday and Sunday.
It was the first time senior officials from the world’s two largest economies have met face-to-face to talk trade since Trump slapped steep new levies on China totalling 145 percent, with cumulative US duties on some Chinese goods reaching a staggering 245 percent.
In retaliation, China has put 125 percent tariffs on US goods.
The increasingly ugly trade spat between Washington and Beijing has rocked financial markets and raised fears of a global economic slowdown and an inflationary spike in the United States.
Both sides sounded an optimistic note after the talks concluded on Sunday, without providing many specifics, with the Chinese delegation pledging to release a joint communique on Monday.
China’s He told reporters that the atmosphere in the meetings had been “candid, in-depth and constructive,” calling them “an important first step.”
The two sides have agreed to set up a joint mechanism focused on “regular and irregular communications related to trade and commercial issues,” Li told reporters at the briefing.
In a statement, the White House hailed what it called a new “trade deal” with China, without providing any additional details.
“These discussions mark a significant step forward and, we hope, bode well for the future,” World Trade Organization chief Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala said in a statement shortly after her own meeting with He.
“Amid current global tensions, this progress is important not only for the US and China but also for the rest of the world, including the most vulnerable economies,” she added.
Ahead of the talks at the discrete villa residence of Switzerland’s ambassador to the United Nations in Geneva, Trump signalled he might lower the tariffs, suggesting on social media that an “80 percent Tariff on China seems right!“
However, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt later clarified that the United States would not lower tariffs unilaterally. China would also need to make concessions, she said.
“It’s definitely encouraging,” Asia Society Policy Institute (ASPI) vice president Wendy Cutler told AFP on Sunday after the talks had concluded.
“The two sides spent over 15 hours in discussions,” she said. “That’s a long time for two countries to be meeting, and I view that as positive.”
But, she added, “the devil will be in the details.”
The Geneva meeting comes days after Trump unveiled a trade agreement with Britain, the first with any country since he unleashed his blitz of global tariffs.
The five-page, non-binding deal confirmed to nervous investors that Washington is willing to negotiate sector-specific relief from recent duties. But Trump maintained a 10 percent levy on most British goods, and threatened to keep it in place as a baseline rate for most other countries.
“What we get in these talks is a beginning of the narrative, the beginning of a dialog,” Citigroup global chief economist Nathan Sheets said in an interview over the weekend, as the US-China talks were under way. “This is just the beginning of a process, getting the ball rolling.”
