logo
In some Jewish families, speaking up for Palestine causes discontent

In some Jewish families, speaking up for Palestine causes discontent

Al Jazeera14-05-2025
On a cold December day during the Christmas holidays, Dalia Sarig's 80-year-old father arrived at her home in Vienna after she had returned from a skiing trip.
He was there to pick up her stepsister, who had joined Sarig's family on vacation.
She was convinced it would be her last meeting with her father, as their political differences were about to come to a head.
'I said goodbye. I hugged him,' she told Al Jazeera. 'When I said goodbye, I said goodbye knowing that maybe I will not see him any more.'
Tensions with her Jewish family had been building for years. At 56, Sarig, a pro-Palestine activist, is at odds with most of her relatives.
Her parents adhere to Zionism, the nationalist political ideology that called for the creation of a Jewish state and is seen by Palestinians and their supporters as the system that underpins their suffering.
Sarig knew during that December meeting with her father that she intended to stage a pro-Palestine demonstration outside parliament in January that would be filmed by a local television station. The activist group she was a part of had put her forward for a broadcast interview. Appalled by Israel's genocide against Palestinians in Gaza and determined to speak up, she went ahead with it.
'The interview was broadcast and it immediately went to my family.'
She later heard that her father, who also lives in the Austrian capital, had told friends that 'to him, I died'.
'But he never talked about it with me, he never reached out to me to tell me something like this. [He] just cut the relation.'
Her 77-year-old mother, who lives in Germany, messaged her a week later.
'I still have it here in my phone, saying, you know, 'I will not accept your political activism. You're a traitor, you are dirtying the nest … and should you change your political views, we can return to normal. Stay healthy.''
She has not spoken with her parents since.
Family divides are not uncommon among Jewish families from the United States to Israel, but have become more entrenched since October 7, 2023.
On that day, Hamas, the group that governs the Gaza Strip, led an incursion into southern Israel during which 1,139 people were killed and more than 200 were taken captive. Since then, Israeli bombardments have killed more than 61,700 people in the enclave.
'I think one of the most interesting phenomena among the liberal Zionists is the fact, while the majority moved to the right because of October 7, a minority became even more disenchanted with Israel and Zionism,' the author and academic Ilan Pappe, a prominent critic of Zionism, told Al Jazeera.
Sarig's ancestors fled Austria in 1938, the year of annexation by Nazi Germany, for Serbia. They later settled in Palestine under the British Mandate in what is now present-day Israel. But by the 1950s, most of her relatives had returned to Austria, where she was born.
As a child, she celebrated Jewish holidays while learning about Zionism from elders.
She was also told that Palestinians 'are the enemies, they want to kill all the Jews … that the Jews living there [in Israel] wanted peace, but the Arabs did not'.
At 18, she moved to Israel, where, at her parents' encouragement, she joined a leftist Zionist youth movement.
Over 13 years in Israel, she joined a kibbutz, served in the Israeli army in an office role, and married. But it was as she studied politics and Middle East history at Haifa University that her worldview began to change.
That's where she met a Palestinian professor and later became an activist for Palestinian rights.
'It began on a lawn in an evening together with my Palestinian teacher, when he told me the story of his family that was displaced from a small village.
'I understood that what I have been told, the Zionist narrative, is wrong,' she said. 'I started to think how he might feel, how he's feeling, or how I might feel as a Palestinian living in a Jewish state where my ancestors were expelled.'
Back in Austria, her family would argue with her at gatherings, agree never to speak again on Palestine and Israeli politics, break their promises, and clash once again.
In 2015, she renounced her Israeli citizenship as a gesture against Zionism.
'It makes my activism easier,' Sarig said, on being disowned by some of her family. 'I lost my Jewish community because I was considered at best, strange and weird, and at worst, a traitor.'
But being cut off from one's family can take a toll on mental health, say experts.
According to Faissal Sharif, a neuroscientist and doctoral student at the University of Oxford, brain imaging studies have shown that 'the experience of social isolation triggers activity in areas that would otherwise light up in response to physical pain'.
'In other words, social pain is not metaphorical – it is biologically real,' he told Al Jazeera.
Families, he said, often form 'microcultures' with their own rules and positions on political issues.
'The betrayal felt when love and acceptance are made conditional upon silence or complicity in the genocide can be deeply wounding. In the context of Gaza, it adds an additional layer of trauma: not only is one bearing witness to mass suffering, but also paying a personal price for refusing to look away,' he said. 'This leads to long-lasting stress and anxiety, which can reach clinical levels.'
To preserve relationships, he said families need to lead with 'curiosity, not confrontation'.
'Especially when the topic is something as painful as war or genocide, facts alone won't move people – naming the emotions underneath, like fear, guilt, or grief, often opens more space for real dialogue.'
Having such conversations isn't easy.
Jonathan Ofir, a musician who was born in an Israeli kibbutz and emigrated to Denmark in the late 1990s, said that it was in 2009 that he realised he had 'actually been indoctrinated into a propaganda that omitted a whole Palestinian viewpoint'. He read Pappe's book, The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine, describing that experience as a 'turning point' for him.
Around the same time, he read other Jewish and Palestinian writers who 'challenged the Zionist narrative'.
'[But] I didn't share this publicly and I didn't share it with my family either.'
In 2014, though, during Israel's war on Gaza – the third within seven years – he said he felt confident enough to express his critical views 'outwards and publicly'.
More than 2,000 Palestinians – including 551 children – were killed during the 50-day conflict.
He took to Facebook to post an image of Israelis gathered on a hilltop near Sderot watching on as Gaza burned, a photograph that was featured in The New York Times.
A relative soon wrote him an email that concluded by recommending that Ofir 'stop posting on the internet'.
'It became this heated debate, but it very, very quickly stopped.'
Years later, he learned that his family in Israel had decided to avoid talking about politics around him 'so as to not legitimise my political views', he said.
After the October 7 attack, he checked on his extended family who lived near the site of the assault. But the incursion did not alter his position.
'My outlook hasn't significantly changed. But something changed in the Israeli society. And in that sense, you could say we might be more distant politically.'
Netherlands-based Daniel Friedman, 44, was raised in South Africa by his father, Steven, an academic and vocal critic of Zionism, and his mother, who was part of a circle of anti-Apartheid activists.
While his father remains an anti-Zionist, Friedman said that he and his mother have increasingly been clashing over Israel's genocide in Gaza since late 2023.
'This is really the only issue nowadays' affecting the conversations and bonds within some Jewish communities, he said.
One of their earlier arguments regarded the debunked claims that Palestinian fighters raped women during the October 7 incursion. After several uneasy disputes, often battled out by ping-ponging various newspaper links to support their arguments on WhatsApp, they have agreed to stop talking about politics.
'I love her, but what I struggle with is that I've lost a lot of trust for her,' said Friedman.
During a previous Israeli war on Gaza, his mother had signed a petition calling for a ceasefire, a move which saw her rejected by some family members. 'I think that had quite a big effect,' he said. 'She kind of went to the right.'
He said that he understands that for some, taking a stand means risking losing the support of a close community. He, however, chose to 'cut a lot of people out of my life on purpose' after October 7, he said.
Back in Vienna, Sarig is busy organising a conference of Jewish anti-Zionists in June, featuring speakers such as Stephen Kapos, a UK-based Holocaust survivor, the American podcaster and commentator Katie Halper and Ronnie Barkan, a Jewish Israeli activist. Pappe too is expected to attend.
As the killings in Gaza continue, her focus, she said, is on the Palestinians trying to survive Israeli fire.
'I'm not the victim,' Sarig said.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

What is the missile treaty Russia has walked out of – and why?
What is the missile treaty Russia has walked out of – and why?

Al Jazeera

time5 hours ago

  • Al Jazeera

What is the missile treaty Russia has walked out of – and why?

Russia on Monday announced it will stop abiding by a decades-old nuclear missile treaty with the United States, raising fears of the return of a Cold War-style arms race. The Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty, signed in 1987, had put a moratorium on the deployment of short and medium-range missiles between the world's leading military powers. US President Donald Trump withdrew from the treaty in 2019, during his first term. Russia remained part of the agreement until Monday. It had pledged not to deploy such weapons as long as Washington did not do so – though the US has repeatedly accused Moscow of violating the pact. The Russian move comes days after Trump ordered the repositioning of two nuclear submarines in response to what he called 'threatening comments' made by former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, currently deputy chair of Russia's Security Council. In recent weeks, the Trump administration has ramped up pressure on Russian President Vladimir Putin to end the war in Ukraine. He has also targeted India with tariffs and threats for buying Russian oil. Meanwhile, the US special envoy for the Middle East, Steve Witkoff, is scheduled to visit Moscow this week as part of efforts to end the Ukraine-Russia war. So why has the Kremlin withdrawn from the treaty, and will it affect defence agreements between two of the major powers? What is the INF disarmament treaty? The treaty was inked by US President Ronald Reagan and Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev in 1987, ending the deadlock of the Cold War arms race. It banned possessing, producing or test-flying ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles with a range of 500 to 5,500km (311 to 3,418 miles). More than 2,600 missiles from both sides were destroyed as part of the treaty that covers both nuclear and conventional warheads. It does not cover air-launched or sea-launched weapons. Washington demolished 846, and Moscow 1,846 as part of the disarmament efforts. What justification did Russia give for withdrawing from the decades-old treaty? Russia's Ministry of Foreign Affairs on Monday cited the movement of US missile platforms in Europe, the Philippines and Australia as a direct threat to Moscow's security. 'Since the situation is developing towards the actual deployment of US-made land-based medium- and short-range missiles in Europe and the Asia-Pacific region, the Russian Foreign Ministry notes that the conditions for maintaining a unilateral moratorium on the deployment of similar weapons have disappeared,' the ministry said in its statement. The ministry said that Moscow would end the moratorium to maintain strategic balance and counter the new threat. Medvedev, the former president, said the Russian decision is the result of NATO countries' 'anti-Russian policy'. 'This is a new reality all our opponents will have to reckon with. Expect further steps,' he posted on X on Monday. Medvedev was also engaged in a heated social media exchange with Trump last week after the US president served an ultimatum to Russia to end the war in 10 days. In response, Trump on Friday ordered two nuclear submarines to be moved to 'the appropriate regions'. The Kremlin has, however, urged caution on 'nuclear rhetoric'. 'It is obvious that American submarines are already on combat duty. This is an ongoing process, that's the first thing,' Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov told reporters. 'But in general, of course, we would not want to get involved in such a controversy and would not want to comment on it in any way,' he added. 'Of course, we believe that everyone should be very, very careful with nuclear rhetoric.' Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov had in December warned against what he called 'destabilising actions' by the US and its NATO allies. Russia has also threatened to respond against a planned deployment of US missiles in Germany from 2026. When did the US withdraw from the treaty and why? The US withdrew from the INF treaty in 2019 during Trump's first term, citing Russian non-compliance. Trump had accused Moscow of breaching the treaty by developing and deploying the land-based, nuclear-capable Novator 9M729 missile system, dubbed SSC-X-8 by NATO. Moscow said the missile's range (500km) was shorter than the threshold set in the 1987 treaty. Trump had also cited the development of such missiles by China, which was not a party to the agreement. Under former US President Barack Obama, Trump's predecessor, Washington had moved to boost its military capabilities in the Asia Pacific to counter China's military power. But during his first seven months in power, Trump has largely been consumed by his tariff wars against allies and rivals alike. He has rolled back a steep tariff he had imposed on China in early April, even as a report by US intelligence agencies in March said that Beijing is now the US's top military and cyber-threat. And in recent days, he has turned his attention to Russia, trying to pressure it to agree to a ceasefire with Ukraine. The West believes that Russia's Oreshnik ballistic missile – which it fired in Ukraine last November – violates the INF treaty. The missile has a range of 500km (311 miles). Last week, Putin announced the deployment of the missile in Belarus, which shares a 1,084km (674 miles) border with Ukraine. Russia also revamped its nuclear doctrine last year, formally lowering its threshold for use of nuclear weapons. Which other disarmament agreements have the two countries withdrawn from? The US and the Soviet Union – the two most militarised nations at the time – were engaged in an arms race until the collapse of the communist nation in 1991. The two sides, however, signed a number of agreements, such as the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and the INF, as part of arms control measures. President George W Bush withdrew from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty in 2002, which was aimed at keeping Russia and the US from creating missile defences. During his first term in office, Trump also withdrew from the 1992 Open Skies Treaty in 2020. Two years later, Russia followed suit, walking out of the treaty that allowed countries to fly over each other's territory to conduct unarmed observation flights. Which security agreements are still in place between the US and Russia? The New START Treaty, which stands for 'Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty', remains the last major arms control agreement between Russia and the US. The treaty signed in 2010 caps the number of strategic nuclear warheads the two countries can deploy. It came into force in February 2011. Under the agreement, the two sides committed to the following: Deploying no more than 1,550 strategic nuclear warheads and a maximum of 700 long-range missiles and bombers. A limit of 800 intercontinental ballistic missiles in deployment. Each side can conduct up to 18 inspections of strategic nuclear weapons sites yearly to ensure the other has not breached the treaty's limits. But in 2023, Putin announced Moscow was suspending its participation in the pact, accusing Washington of non-compliance with its provisions and of trying to undermine Russia's national security. That treaty expires next year. The Russian decision came months after the US stopped exchanging data on its nuclear weapons stockpiles under the New START Treaty.

Dmitry Medvedev: From failed Kremlin reformer to Trump's boogeyman
Dmitry Medvedev: From failed Kremlin reformer to Trump's boogeyman

Al Jazeera

time6 hours ago

  • Al Jazeera

Dmitry Medvedev: From failed Kremlin reformer to Trump's boogeyman

Dmitry Medvedev, Russia's former president and prime minister, is back in the limelight. Last week, United States President Donald Trump warned him to 'watch his words' and ordered a repositioning of two US nuclear submarines in response to Medvedev's online threats. The repositioning closer to Russia followed 'highly provocative statements' from Medvedev, who serves as deputy head of Russia's Security Council, Trump wrote on his Truth Social network on August 1. 'I have ordered two Nuclear Submarines to be positioned in the appropriate regions, just in case these foolish and inflammatory statements are more than just that,' Trump wrote, without specifying the regions or the submarines' class. Medvedev, who, despite his title, has no power to order nuclear strikes, retorted with a gloating remark. 'If some words of Russia's former president cause such a nervous response from the oh-so-scary US president, it means that Russia is right about everything and will keep going its own way,' Medvedev wrote on Telegram. 'Let [Trump] remember his favourite movies about the Walking Dead [zombie apocalypse series] and about how dangerous can be the 'dead hand' that doesn't exist naturally,' Medvedev wrote. The online feud began in mid-July, when Trump gave Russian President Vladimir Putin, Medvedev's boss and mentor for three decades, 50 days to make a peace deal with Ukraine. Medvedev called the ultimatum 'theatrical' and said that 'Russia didn't care'. 'Nuclear weapons are not Moscow's monopoly' According to a former Russian diplomat, while Trump's warnings send a signal to the Kremlin, the 'noise' around the submarines has no military significance. 'What matters far more is that Trump's words served as a reminder – nuclear weapons are not Moscow's monopoly,' Boris Bondarev, who focused on nuclear non-proliferation and arms control, told Al Jazeera. Medvedev's comments reflect Putin's views – and Trump's response could return both down to the earth of realpolitik, he added. 'Had such an approach been part of a general strategy to make Putin's view on the world and his own place in it more adequate, it would have been the beginning of a real end of the war' in Ukraine, said Bondarev, who quit his foreign ministry job to protest against Russia's 2022 full-scale invasion of Ukraine. 'But it seems to me that Donald just uttered [his threat] and doesn't mean anything serious,' he said. A pawn in the US-China game To a Ukrainian military analyst, the Trump-Medvedev feud is part of Moscow's and Washington's bigger political games. 'Putin uses Medvedev as a tool to express statements related to nuclear weapons, he doesn't want to discredit his own good peacekeeper's name,' Lieutenant-General Ihor Romanenko, former deputy head of the General Staff of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, said ironically. In Moscow's 'media spectacle' with Washington, Medvedev plays the 'bad cop', Romanenko told Al Jazeera. Meanwhile, Trump's order to reposition the subs is a step to score a diplomatic victory ahead of his summit with China's Xi Jinping. The summit may take place on September 3, when Beijing will lavishly celebrate the 80th anniversary of Japan's surrender that ended World War II. Putin has already been invited to oversee a military parade in Beijing's Tiananmen Square, but Trump is still mulling his response. The online feud may be presented to Xi as a victory of sorts, Romanenko said – along with Moscow's possible agreement to an air and sea ceasefire. The agreement will be forced by the heavy damage Ukrainian drones inflicted on Russia's military depots, transport infrastructure and oil refineries, Romanenko said. 'Playing the fool' Trump may not realise that some Russians see Medvedev as a political has-been whose online rants are reportedly fuelled by his worsening alcoholism. He was elected Russia's president in 2008, after Putin had completed two consecutive presidential terms and could not run for a third time. The move and the ensuing propaganda campaign to promote Medvedev's candidacy were nicknamed a 'castling' after the chess term. It immediately spawned political jokes that ridiculed the real power dynamic between Medvedev and Putin. In one of them, Putin arrives at a restaurant with Medvedev and orders a steak. The waiter asks, 'And what about the vegetable?' referring to the choice of a side dish. After a long look at Medvedev, Putin answers, 'The vegetable will have steak, too.' However, Medvedev cultivated a personal and political image that contrasted with Putin's. He started using social networks, met with the rock bands U2 and Deep Purple, and began cautious reforms that made analysts talk about a political thaw and a reset of Russia's ties with the West. However, Medvedev's failed perestroika ended with giant rallies against Putin's 2012 return to the presidency and massive vote rigging. The resulting tightening of political screws ended with Putin's turn to belligerent nationalism and the war in Ukraine. Five years later, another wave of popular protests throughout Russia followed the release of a documentary about Medvedev's luxurious, Monaco-sized palatial complex. The documentary was made by the late opposition leader Alexey Navalny's team and got tens of millions of views on YouTube. At the time, as Medvedev served as prime minister, his approval ratings kept waning. In 2022, Putin unceremoniously sacked him – and gave him the Security Council job, a sinecure for demoted allies. The fall from Putin's grace prompted Medvedev's transformation into an online troll who posts threats to Ukraine and other ex-Soviet nations and sabre-rattles Moscow's nuclear might. Many posts appeared online long after midnight. 'Degraded' There are three viewpoints on why Medvedev changed his tune to become the Kremlin's attack dog, according to Nikolay Mitrokhin, a researcher with Germany's Bremen University. One is that after not being allowed to run for president for the second time in 2012, Medvedev started drinking and 'degraded to the current state', Mitrokhin told Al Jazeera. The second one is that by 'playing fool', he repeats what Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev had done to survive under his ruthless predecessor Joseph Stalin to survive and compete for the Kremlin throne after his boss's death, Mitrokhin said. And the third explanation Mitrokhin agrees with is that Medvedev 'as a character, has always been very vile and warlike'. But his aggression was only limited to what Putin allowed him to do – such as nominally order Russia's 2008 war with ex-Soviet Georgia or be in charge of supplying weaponry to pro-Moscow rebels in southeastern Ukraine in 2014. Mitrokhin described him as 'a very aggressive small man with plenty of psychological complexes – a Napoleon's syndrome – who has a chance to reveal his 'inner self'. And he does – with his master's approval'.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store