Norwegian Holocaust Center Events on Nakba and Gaza War Draw Ire From Israeli Embassy

Israel's embassy in Norway condemned the events organized by the Norwegian Holocaust Center in Oslo, saying they 'legitimize antisemitism.' The center said the aim is to 'understand shadows of historical traumas without equating them'

Published in Haaretz: Norwegian Holocaust Center Events on Nakba, Gaza War Draw Ire From Israeli Embassy – Jewish World

Israel's Embassy in Norway called for an independent Holocaust studies center in Oslo to cancel two upcoming events that it claims are a "grotesque distortion of Holocaust memory."

As part of a lecture series titled "In Shadow of War – The Way Forward," the Norwegian Center for Holocaust Studies and Religious Minorities is hosting two events with the University of Oslo this spring. The first event, which took place on Thursday, was a lecture by Prof. Nadim Khoury titled "Nakba and Holocaust as cultural traumas."

According to the University of Oslo's website ahead of the event, Khoury – a Palestinian professor of international studies at the Innland Norway University of Applied Sciences – "will trace their trajectories since 1948 and explore how they are intertwined and how the tensions between them are shaping the path forward in Israeli and Palestinian lives."

A second event, scheduled for June 3, will feature Israeli historian and Brown University professor Omer Bartov, whose contributions to Holocaust scholarship were recognized by Yad Vashem in 2019.

In an April 28 X post, Israel's embassy in Norway called on the HL Center to cancel the events "immediately."

"The Norwegian Holocaust Center's decision to host events drawing parallels between the Holocaust, the 'Nakba' and the war in Gaza is a grotesque distortion of Holocaust memory," the post read. The embassy added that the center has chosen political activism over historical responsibility and it called upon it to cancel the events and stop "legitimizing antisemitism in its modern forms."

Addressing the criticism in a social media post, the HL Center explained that it invited academics from different environments and backgrounds as speakers in order to "address and reflect on challenging topics without ending up in polarized debates where constructive nuance tends to disappear."

HL Center director Jan Heiret told Haaretz that the event with Khoury was supposed to follow another event hosting Martin Auerbach, former director of the National Israeli Center for Psychosocial Support of Survivors of the Holocaust and the Second Generation (AMCHA). Auerbach couldn't come due to uncertainty around the ongoing conflict with Iran, but Heiret said the center will make another attempt to host him in the autumn.

Heiret added that both events are meant "to find a way out of a destructive spiral of hatred, dehumanization and violence."

"We must understand the long-lasting shadows of historical traumas without equating, or even putting up, the Holocaust with the Nakba – which would be a historical distortion given the events are so different in nature, course and scope," Heiret said. "We acknowledge that the consequences for the individuals and collectives traumatized by them are interconnected, and that the denial of the trauma of the other lies at the core of the dynamics of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict."

Leif Knutsen, an activist and the chair of the Jewish Community of Norway, says the academics invited to speak at the HL Center "represent a fringe element," and that it's a recurring issue.

"The center doesn't question them; it doesn't bring anyone to balance the discussion and it doesn't present their perspectives in anything like a critical light," Knutsen said. "It's always in the same direction – one that's beyond critical to Israel. Someone should be sitting on stage and presenting an alternative point of view or at least a nuanced one."

Knutsen said Norway's Jewish population of about 2,000 is particularly vulnerable due to a sharp rise in antisemitic attitudes. In its most recent report published in early 2024, the Norwegian Center for Holocaust and Minority Studies documented an increase in antisemitic attitudes among Norwegians, with 11.5 percent of survey respondents having "pronounced prejudices" against Jews.

Images from Norway, 2024

"The center should be combating antisemitism rather than promoting a one-sided program," he said. "Even worse is the effect that such extreme voices have on Norwegian Jews who are being lectured about their own understanding of reality on the basis of a supposedly academic framework that completely ignores the real conditions in Norway."

According to its website, the Norwegian Center for Studies of the Holocaust and Religious Minorities is a research, education and documentation center intended to focus on the Holocaust and other genocides, as well as antisemitism and minority rights in Norway. The center's exhibitions receive roughly 50,000 visitors each year. It was established in 2001 using capital from a national restitution settlement over World War II between Norway and the country's Jewish community.

The center has previously faced criticism for its programming. In a letter sent in September 2024, more than 100 Norwegian Holocaust survivors and their descendants accused the center of failing to use "its mandate to combat the hostility we experience," and that instead of fighting antisemitism it was positioning itself as a "critic of Israel's policies and military tactics." The letter also said the center manifests "bias in its choice of experts and supporting a narrative that's negative toward Israel as a Jewish state."

In another letter from January 2025, the Norwegian branch of B'nai Brith criticized Heiret for mentioning Palestinians twice while delivering a speech on International Holocaust Remembrance Day, amid Israel's war in Gaza.

"By focusing on Gaza and Palestinian civilians who have lost their lives during the commemoration of the Holocaust and the genocide of the Jews in Europe, at a time when one-sided and anti-Israel portrayals make debates related to Israel very un-nuanced, the director has in a blatant way contributed to the tendency to relativize the Holocaust and the genocide of the Jews," the letter said.

"As the center's own research shows, demonization of Israel leads to increasing antisemitism in Norway. Trivialization of the Holocaust is, as is well-known, defined as antisemitism."

She Grew Up in an Exiled Iranian Opposition Group, That Turned Into a Brutal Cult

Atefeh Sebdani was born in Iran to parents active in the MEK but was torn from them and sent for molding to a family in Sweden. In an interview, she describes life in the exiled cult and its rejection of Persian culture.

Published in Haaretz: She Grew Up in an Exiled Iranian Opposition Group, That Turned Into a Brutal Cult – Middle East News

At a protest in Stockholm in April, alongside the Lion and Sun flags representing pre-revolution Iran, Israeli and American flags were also waved. As in similar events around the world, the demonstrators praised the Israeli-American attack on Iran and expressed support for Reza Pahlavi, son of the shah who was deposed in 1979, as Iran's future leader.

The rule of the ayatollahs unites many Iranian exiles against the regime, and threatens political activists operating against it in Europe. However, one of the women who helps the organizers of the Stockholm demonstrations, Atefeh Sebdani, has suffered for most of her life from another Iranian group – an organization that was once part of the Islamic Revolution but later became its enemy.

Mujahedin-e Khalq was founded in 1965 by a group of Iranian students who opposed the shah's rule. The organization combined elements of Shiite Islam with Marxist and anti-imperialist ideas and operated underground during the 1970s. During this period, it attacked regime targets and gained support as an opposition organization.

When the Islamic Revolution emerged in the late 1970s, MEK even joined Khomeini on his path to power. Yet after the establishment of the Islamic Republic, conflict arose between it and the new regime and by the early 1980s, the MEK was attacking government targets. That was countered with brutal repression that included the execution of thousands. The MEK leadership fled into exile in Iraq, where it formed a controversial alliance with Saddam Hussein during the Iran-Iraq War.

Atefeh Sebdani in Stockholm, 2026. Photo: David Stavrou

Atefeh Sebdani's story begins in the clash between the ayatollahs' regime and the MEK. "My parents were imprisoned after the revolution because of their rivalry with the new regime. They were considered enemies of the state and like other MEK members, after they were released, they were forced to leave," she says.

She was two years old at the time. Sebdani recounts that she, her younger brother, her father and her pregnant mother fled to Pakistan and lived there destitute on the streets. Her father continued from Pakistan onto Iraq, where he joined other MEK members in a camp called Ashraf, which later became the movement's center.

"After some time, we also moved to the camp. By that stage it had become a kind of small town with kindergartens, parks, and schools – mainly for propaganda purposes. They wanted to show how good things were there so others would join," she says. "For me, it was like paradise. I had everything; it was idyllic. I was with my mother and I was happy."

Then, without warning, everything ended at once. She hadn't even turned five yet but her mother told her she would have to take care of her two brothers by herself. She didn't explain why or how, but when the day came, Sebdani found herself standing by a bus with a group of crying women. When the bus departed, five-year-old Sebdani became a mother in practice.

"On the way, I had to take care of one brother who was still a baby and wanted to breastfeed, and another who was very ill," she recalls. She adds that the expulsion of the children from Camp Ashraf was a process. She doesn't know exactly how long it took, but she remembers children disappearing from kindergarten without knowing why or where they were going.

Eventually, all the roughly 900 children in the camp were separated from their parents and transported to other countries.

"The place was emptied of children's voices," she says. "And children's voices are the most human thing there is – the core of life – and that was taken away."

Why were the children expelled?

"The children were an element that disturbed the organization's leader, Massoud Rajavi. The ideological struggle to liberate Iran turned into the struggle of a narcissistic leader who wanted all the power in his hands. He wanted the men and women in the movement to be under his absolute control, and the children stood in his way. The movement began as an ideological movement, but it became a cult."

What Sebdani describes aligns with what is known from other sources about the MEK. During the 1980s and 1990s, the organization became highly centralized, developing political and military branches that operated from bases in Iraq. At the same time, the National Council of Resistance of Iran was established as a political umbrella organization.

'The family I came to was politically obligated to take children. It's not that they loved children or wanted us. We underwent heavy indoctrination and were forced to constantly work for the organization.'

During this period, allegations indeed emerged about cult-like characteristics such as strict internal discipline, ideological control, and exclusion of dissenters.

However, the organization's leader, Rajavi, has not been seen in public since the early 2000s, and his fate remains unclear, as the organization has not disclosed information about his whereabouts nor announced his death. Meanwhile, his wife, Maryam Rajavi, serves as the public face of the organization – contributing to an atmosphere of secrecy and uncertainty regarding its structure and decision-making.

After several months and a long journey that included stops in Jordan and Germany, Sebdani and her two younger brothers arrived in Gothenburg in western Sweden.

"For all that time, I was sure we would soon be reunited with my mother," she recalls. "We sat on planes and trains, I saw things I didn't know, I saw climates and people change, there were new languages and places – but alongside the excitement, I constantly feared we were moving further away from my mother and worried she wouldn't be able to find us."

In Gothenburg, they were told they would soon meet their mother. "I was very excited. But what actually happened was different – we stood on a train platform, and instead of my mother, two other people I didn't know arrived, a woman and a man, and we were told: these are your mother and father. That's when the nightmare began."

Atefeh and her two brothers

The people who took Sebdani and her brothers were MEK members living in Sweden and working for the movement. They also had a child of their own, and took in two other children out of roughly 200 MEK children who arrived in Sweden. Sebdani says she later traced the fate of hundreds of other children who were "exported" from Camp Ashraf and that she obtained a document listing their destinations – including Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, Canada, and the United States.

"The family I came to was politically obligated to take children," she says. "It's not that they loved children or wanted us. We underwent heavy indoctrination and were forced to constantly work for the organization." She does not reveal the identities of her foster parents, but her childhood memories expose the nature of the organization as it became a cult.

According to her, MEK families abroad were completely mobilized. They engaged in recruiting members and funds, organizing demonstrations, fighting opponents, and harassing defectors. She describes this society as oikophobic (one that is hostile, dislikes and rejects its own "home" culture, country and traditions). "They hated anything Iranian that wasn't related to the MEK. We weren't allowed, for example, to listen to Persian music unless it was the music of MEK members. I didn't read books in Persian. There was no Persian culture—everything was subordinated to the organization."

As far as you know, is this still the case?

"Yes. They still have offices in different countries and a strong presence on social media. The headquarters is in Auvers-sur-Oise, a suburb northwest of Paris, where political leadership members and full-time 'soldiers' are based. At the same time, there are activists like my foster family, and MEK members in Camp Ashraf 3 in Albania. That camp is essentially a 'troll factory' that produces large numbers of accounts and spreads propaganda in Persian and English. They write articles about themselves, smear their opponents, and create the impression of support – even though they have no real support."

Camp Ashraf 3 is the fortified camp to which most MEK members – estimated at 2,500 to 3,000 – were transferred from Iraq between 2013 and 2016. The move was carried out with the support of the United States, the United Nations, and the Albanian government. It took place because after the fall of Saddam Hussein, the MEK was no longer protected in Iraq, and international actors worked to evacuate them. Although the organization had been designated a terrorist organization in the U.S. for many years, it was removed from the list in 2012 as a result of pressure applied by the movement, and some American and other actors even saw it as a partner in opposing the Iranian regime. According to reports, the MEK no longer engages in military activity, but the camp in Albania has become a center of political and media activity with a highly centralized and controlled structure.

"It's a place where entry and exit are not free, and in the past there were physical punishments and torture of those who wanted to leave," says Sebdani. "I know stories of people who disappeared and of mandatory daily confessions about 'dirty thoughts' – for example, sexual thoughts and masturbation. You weren't even allowed to think about your children or speak with members of the opposite sex without permission. Today, with defectors speaking out and social media, the movement can no longer allow itself to use such methods."

Sebdani is not alone in her claims about the MEK. The French newspaper Le Monde conducted interviews in 2024 with former members of the organization living in Europe, including two named Amir Vafa and Amin Golmaryami. Vafa described how he and others were forced to participate in public confession sessions in which, once a week, everyone had to describe their sexual fantasies. He added that friendships were closely monitored: "It was forbidden to have lunch with the same friend twice in a row."

Golmaryami added that during clashes with Iraqi security forces in 2011, MEK leaders sent him and his comrades to go "in front of Iraqi bullets to increase the number of casualties." He claims they did this in order to "put pressure on Europe and the United States to remove the organization from the list of terrorist organizations and facilitate the relocation of its members to another country."

Another MEK member, Reza Torabi, said that at the age of 17 he was a zealous member and was assigned the role of "welcoming" young newcomers. "Our objective was to brainwash them, make them forget their previous lives, and instill in them the ideology of the Mujahedeen," he said. "My dedication was unwavering." In hindsight, he believes that he too fell victim to manipulation and regrets "the harm [he] caused in the course of his duties."

A 2005 report by Human Rights Watch, based on in-depth interviews with former members, also described a reality of beatings, verbal and psychological abuse, coerced confessions, threats of execution, and torture.

How do you believe control of MEK member is maintained today?

"If you look at people like the father, you see someone who joined in his twenties and spent his entire life inside this system. He never paid a bill or looked for a job – everything was handled by the organization. He doesn't know how to buy a plane ticket or even drive to the end of a street. The MEK infantilized these people, and there is no one to take care of them if they leave."

Does that mean there are no new members?

"That's right. There are no new members. It's a movement of older people – but they pay young people to attend demonstrations. If you go to MEK protests, you'll find Poles and Ukrainians who don't speak Persian and don't know what they're protesting about, alongside Swedes with no connection to the organization who were paid to join."

Who pays for all this?

"From what I saw and was part of, many people pay the MEK monthly so they won't harass them – Iranians in exile subjected to pressure, propaganda, flattery, and social coercion. There are also welfare funds, for example for foster families, as well as political donations and funding from human rights organizations influenced by the group's propaganda."

Beyond the political activity, the period that Sebdani stayed with her foster family, had another aspect. She talks about indoctrination and the constant threat that was used to make her stay.

"From the age of five, I experienced sexual abuse, physical abuse and psychological abuse in the foster family," she says, "but I couldn't say anything because they threatened to separate me from my brothers. I was not allowed to be a child. The first thing that happened to me in the foster family was that my father began to show interest in my naked body. He wanted me to do things. I felt it was wrong and frightening, but I knew nothing about sex or sexuality and I didn't understand.

"Over time, it only got worse, and my foster brother abused me too, encouraged by my foster mother. I had no childhood; it was just survival. I was the one who cleaned and tidied, I had to be a good student, and also the one who went out to demonstrations and went to Mujahideen conferences around the world". Talking to Sebdani she describes a reality full of exploitation, punishment, crying at night, and deception of Swedish welfare services.

As an adult, she eventually left, moved to Stockholm, became an engineer, and worked for Microsoft. After a personal crisis, she began telling her story and wrote a book (Min hand i min, "My Hand in Mine", published by Albert Bonniers förlag, 2024). Today she is married and has three children.

Politically, Sebdani is active among supporters of Reza Pahlavi. "I saw the difference between the two leaders," she says. "I met Maryam Rajavi as a child, and recently I met Pahlavi in Paris with a group of other former MEK children. I support the Iranian people, and the people support Pahlavi. He is exactly what Iran needs – a secular, humane person, with a family, who knows what living a normal life is, who listens and can unite people."

After Sebdani's meeting with Reza Pahlavi and other "MEK children" she became the target of an online campaign against her. Sebdani says that this isn't the first time and she has been targeted by a smear campaign led by the MEK on several previous occasions before.

Sebdani's book

"This kind of harassment happens to everyone who has left the organization and spoken out," she says. This time, the MEK website denied Sebdani's account through a letter it claimed was written by her biological father. "For me, as a father, seeing 'Atefeh Sebdani' at a gathering of the Shah's son was painful… Atefeh is the same person who, by spreading defamation against the organization under the false pretext of being part of a group of 'child soldiers,' has for many years become a full servant of Iranian intelligence."

The text claims that Sebdani was never part of the MEK and accuses her and her associates of collaborating with the regime in Tehran. Sebdani does not know whether her father actually wrote the text, but she says that everything in it is false and that she is familiar with other examples of letters that MEK members were forced to write under coercion.

Following the letter, a senior figure in the organization, Freydoun Salimi, also spoke out, accusing Sebdani of never having been a member of the group and of acting as an agent of the regime. In responses to his claims on X, supporters of the organization repeat the accusations and insult Sebdani. On other social media platforms, she is also accused of assisting Israel, betraying Iran, and supporting Americans attacking her country.

Sebdani's personal MEK story has a positive ending – she escaped, her siblings left, and even her mother eventually left the organization. The organization itself, however, is still very much alive. It even claims to still have networks inside Iran, though most analysts believe its influence there is limited. "The MEK is more of a European problem than an Iranian one," Sebdani concludes. "In Iran, they have no real support, not even with regime critics. But after the 'Woman, Life, Freedom' protests, it's clear that a unifying leader is needed, otherwise, there will be no change – and I have no doubt that Pahlavi is the right person."

The Left Party Sees All Racism — Except Its Own

In light of Ina Hamdan's widely discussed revelations about members of Sweden's Left Party (Vänsterpartiet) who have expressed support for violent organizations or spread antisemitic propaganda, there is reason to revisit an interesting publication that the Malmö branch of the Party released in 2023 under the title Anti-Racist Handbook.

Published in Kvartal: V ser all rasism – utom sin egen – Kvartal

Vänsterpartiet's Anti-Racist Handbook is a strange document to read in light of current Swedish discourse. On the one hand, it's an ambitious text about how racism and discrimination should be fought. The reader learns about structural racism and intersectionality, Islamophobia and Afrophobia, colonialism and gender power structures and there's an almost academic overview of the various manifestations of racism in Swedish society. In light of this, the book argues that the party should actively recruit "non-white comrades," and proposes a range of symbolic, political and educational measures to combat racism.

On the other hand, there is very little about Islamism and contemporary antisemitism. This is interesting because it may be the key to understanding why people who devote their lives to "anti-racist politics" sometimes end up supporting violent, genocidal and fundamentalist movements such as Hamas and Hezbollah, while spreading propaganda against Jews and their national movement.

The point is the striking difference in how much nuance, complexity and analytical sensitivity the leaders of the Swedish Left Party in Malmö are willing to apply to different social phenomena.

When it comes to racism against Black people, the handbook explains how racism has changed form and modernized. Although African Americans are no longer sold from from one cotton plantation to another and are no longer viewed as people with smaller brains, racism still exists. In Sweden, the handbook explains, there is Afrophobia, manifested through hostility and hate crimes, insults and discrimination, exclusion and structural inequalities resulting from "norms of whiteness" and ideas of white supremacy.

But when it comes to antisemitism, the analysis seems to stop in history.

In the past, Jews were portrayed as the killers of Jesus, as people who kidnapped Christian children and used their blood, or those who started revolutions. The result was pogroms, state violence and discrimination. Twentieth-century antisemitism instead revolved around ideas of Jewish control over governments, the media and financial systems. The result was the Holocaust.

Antisemitism after the Second World War is different, and it is certainly about more than merely "racism against Jews." Christer Mattsson, one of Sweden's leading scholars of antisemitism and violent extremism, describes contemporary antisemitism as an "Israelized antisemitism," in which traditional anti-Jewish stereotypes are no longer expressed directly about "Jews" but are instead projected onto "Israel" or "Zionists."

Thousands of people in the streets of Stockholm shout "No Zionists on our streets" on a weekly basis. This is just a new version of "Jews Out!". Their demonstration "street theatre" also portrays Israelis as bloodthirsty creatures who drink the blood of dead infants, or as people who secretly control governments.

Recently we've also witnessed court cases of Swedish so-called pro-Palestinians who have spread messages on social media destorting the Holocaust and presented images of snakes and hyenas adorned with Stars of David killing Palestinian children. Their defence strategy, which actually convinced the court, was that the Star of David represent the Zionist flag rather than rabbis and synagogues.

This is where the handbook's blind spot becomes visible, and the results are obvious.

At the end of the Left Party's handbook there are quotations from representatives of the Party that reveal the same pattern: extreme sensitivity toward every conceivable form of discrimination on the one hand, and total blindness to extremism and racism when it comes to Jews and Israel on the other.

For example, Amelia Bartholdson wrote in the handbook that combating racism requires "awareness, humility and self-awareness." Yet after October 7 she shared a video accusing her own party secretary of being a Zionist because he did not regard October 7 as a legitimate act of resistance (the post came from EPYU, an organization that spreads conspiracy theories and blood libels). She also shared an open letter decorated with a red triangle (known as a Hamas propaganda symbol) supporting Kristofer Lundberg, a well-known supporter of the PFLP, one of the organizations organizations behind the October 7 massacre. Truly a fine display of awareness, humility and self-awareness.

In other posts, Bartholdson compared the situation in Gaza to the Holocaust and supported boycotts and so-called "apartheid-free zones." This is an interesting point, because many of those quoted in the handbook support boycotts that are not directed at products from the West Bank or at far-right Netanyahu supporters, but essentially at anything connected to Israel. It is a bit like boycotting Bruce Springsteen or Beyoncé because of U.S. immigration policy. In an American context that would seem absurd, but when it comes to Israel everyone is lumped together. How does that fit with Sabrin Omar Högelius's statement in the handbook that people should be able to "simply exist, without having to defend their origins"?

"Anti-racism should permeate the party's politics and practice and build broad alliances with civil society," Anders Neergaard wrote in the handbook. Last week he was scheduled to lead a seminar celebrating an intifada (a term that in political contexts clearly implies violence against Israeli and Jewish targets). The other seminar leader was Orwa Kadoura, who was also quoted in the 2023 handbook condemning "racist behaviors, structures and organizations," yet in recent years he has repeatedly shared antisemitic and pro-Hamas material.

Another prominent former Left Party member quoted in the handbook is Lorena Delgado Varas. "Western anti-racism goes hand in hand with feminism and socialism," she wrote. A few years later, as is well known, there the "hand in hand" had an entirely different meaning as Delgado Varas shared an image on X showing a hand with the Israeli flag controlling a hand with the American flag, which in turn controlled soldiers carrying the flags of various other countries, accompanied by a text claiming that "Zionist Jews control the world" through threats, blackmail, the media, banks and control over the U.S. Congress, Senate and government.

These examples do not even include the individuals Inas Hamdan wrote about in Expressen, because the party's antisemitism problem extends far beyond 25, 50 or even 100 people. The most important lesson of the Anti-Racist Handbook is not what it says about racism, but what it does not say.

It's not about hating Jews. It is about a worldview that blames one people, one movement and one country for all the world's evils and fails to understand what contemporary antisemitism is. Or perhaps understands it perfectly well, but chooses to exploit it in order to win votes.

Sweden Fails to Protect its Jews From Incitement

We have spoken about hatred and threats for decades. Why is Sweden still unable to recognize them when it comes to Jews?
Published in Sweden in Svenska Dagbladet: Rättegång om hets mot judar missar målet | David Stavrou | SvD Ledare

In recent years, we have seen what hate propaganda, conspiracy theories, and dehumanizing rhetoric can lead to — especially when it concerns Jews.

A long series of arson attacks, stabbings, and shootings has made Jewish communities around the world increasingly vulnerable. In many cases, the perpetrators were influenced precisely by hate propaganda, conspiracy theories, antisemitic incitement, and Islamist ideology portraying Jews as legitimate targets of violence.

At the same time, two recent court cases in Sweden — one in Helsingborg and one in Gothenburg — concluded in a way that shows that Sweden is beginning to understand the importance of combating extremism, while still failing to fully understand it.

The Helsingborg case concerned charges of incitement against an ethnic group involving antisemitic publications on social media, Holocaust distortion, and conspiratorial content. The defendant was convicted on several counts, including Nazi salutes, publishing antisemitic images, and spreading theories like the one claiming that “4 out of 5 American slave owners were Jewish,” equating Jews with rats, and portraying Jews as a satanic force controlling the world.

At the same time, the man was acquitted on certain counts related to Holocaust distortion — a newer component of Sweden’s incitement legislation. The prosecutor argued that the man’s statements formed part of a broader antisemitic conspiracy narrative involving references to the Illuminati and Freemasons. But the district court was not convinced. During the questioning of Christer Mattsson, an expert on violent extremism and antisemitism and director of the Segerstedt Institute, the defense demanded answers to questions about the number of people cremated in Belzec, Treblinka, and Sobibor, and discussed the extent to which the Israeli government does or does not “weaponize antisemitism”.
Despite Mattsson’s clear answers, and instead of the court telling the defense attorney to stop wasting time on historical revisionism, the result was an acquittal. The defendant’s statements claiming that it would have been impossible to “dispose of 6 million bodies in the ovens,” and the publication of a video describing the figure six million as false, were not considered contrary to generally accepted historical facts and were not considered serious Holocaust distortion.

The problem with the verdict is that the court failed to see the forest for the trees, and the broader antisemitic context disappeared as the court got lost in details. No one has ever claimed that six million bodies were burned or that six million is an exact number. Six million is a widely accepted estimate, supported by millions of confirmed victim names, as well as Nazi documentation, demographic studies, transport records, camp archives, postwar investigations, eyewitness testimony, and forensic evidence.

No serious historian has argued that limited crematorium capacity would suggest exaggerated death tolls or inconsistencies in the history of the Holocaust. The entire debate is absurd. Anyone who has studied this kind of rhetoric knows that Holocaust denial and Holocaust distortion — referred to in academic literature as Holocaust distortion — are very rarely expressed by claiming that the Holocaust never happened. It is usually about relativization, contextualization, and minimization.

This kind of denial is not merely a lie about the past — it is a precondition for genocide: minimizing, justifying, or erasing the crimes and thereby continuing the dehumanization of the victims while obstructing historical accountability and remembrance. In this case, it is not only an insult — it is a call to renew the violence.

In the Gothenburg trial, a woman was acquitted on Wednesday after being charged with incitement against an ethnic group. The images she published online contained classic antisemitic symbols: a snake with a Star of David on its head and large fangs about to attack a naked child; a snake shaped like a Star of David wrapped around a baby bottle with text describing Zionists as child murderers; and an image depicting a hyena eating a child while staring at another child hiding nearby wearing a Palestinian flag on its shirt. The hyena wears a kippah with a Star of David on it.

During police questioning, the woman claimed she had nothing against Jews. “It is Zionists I am speaking against, and what is happening in Gaza is horrific. Seeing children slaughtered every day,” she said.

Christer Mattsson, who also testified in this case, explained that research has long established that snakes and the killing of children are common antisemitic symbols. Anti-Zionism, he explained, becomes antisemitism when it adopts antisemitic stereotypes, conspiracy theories, and so-called antisemitic tropes, such as the notion that evil Jews control global media and governments. Mattsson explained that in this form of “Israelized antisemitism,” “Zionists” assume the role historically assigned to Jews in classic antisemitic ideology and are portrayed as uniquely evil, manipulative, powerful, and conspiratorial.

Despite this, the court missed the point. The fact that a message is critical of Israel does not exclude the possibility that it is simultaneously antisemitic. The Star of David, the snakes, the conspiracies, and the innocent dead children should have been enough. It seems Swedish courts will not act until someone explicitly says, “I really hate Jews and now I’m going to kill a few,” or “Auschwitz is a fictional place.”

But that is not what antisemitism sounds like today. To minimize and distort the Holocaust and spread hatred against the legitimate national movement of the Jewish people is not an exercise in free speech — it is spreading hatred and encouraging violence in disguise.

Things should be called by their proper names, and words have consequences. History gives us many examples of this and they are often associated with specific names – Capital Jewish Museum in Washington DC, the Tree of Life – Or L’Simcha Synagogue in Pittsburgh, Bondi Beach in Sydney, the Krystalgade Synagogue in Copenhagen, the Hypercacher supermarket in Paris, the Jewish Museum in Brussels, Heaton Park Synagogue in Manchester, the Halle Synagogue in Germany, Chabad of Poway Synagogue in California, Golders Green Road in London, the Ozar Hatorah School in Toulouse, and the El Ghriba Synagogue in Tunisia.

All of these acts began with words.

We have spoken about hatred and threats for decades. Why is the state still unable to recognize them when it comes to Jews?

עדות מבפנים: כך הפך ארגון אופוזיציה איראני לכת מסוגרת ואכזרית

אטפה סבדאני נולדה באיראן למשפחה שהייתה פעילה במוג'אהדין חלק, הופרדה מהוריה והועברה למשפחת אומנה בשוודיה שקשורה לארגון. בריאיון ל"הארץ" היא מתארת את החיים בארגון הגולה שלטענתה מדכא זהות אישית, מנתק את חבריו מהתרבות הפרסית ומשתמש נגדם באלימות קשה.

פורסם ב"הארץ": עדות מבפנים: כך הפך ארגון אופוזיציה איראני לכת מסוגרת ואכזרית – אירופה – הארץ

אטפה סבדאני הייתה בין אלפי מפגינים שהתאספו בשבוע שעבר בסטוקהולם והביעו תמיכה במתקפה של אה"ב וישראל באיראן, ובבנו של השאה לשעבר. הם גם התנגדו בקול למשטר האיראני ולשלוחותיו במזרח התיכון, ולצד דגלי ארה"ב וישראל הניפו את דגל איראן שלפני המהפכה האסלאמית.

בדומה להפגנות אחרות של גולים איראנים ברחבי העולם, המוחים בבירת שוודיה התאחדו סביב התקווה לדמוקרטיה באיראן. סבדאני, ממארגני המחאה, נולדה באספהאן ב־1986 אך כבר כשהייתה בת שנתיים נאלצה לעזוב את מולדתה עם משפחתה ומאז לא שבה אליה. בריאיון ל"הארץ" היא מספרת כי רוב חייה הייתה קורבן להתעללות פיזית ונפשית – לא מטעם המשטר האיראני אלא דווקא מידי ארגון האופוזיציה מוג'אהדין חלק, שהוריה היו חברים בו.

"ההורים שלי נחשבו לאויבי הרפובליקה האסלאמית, וכמו אנשי מוג'אהדין אחרים הם ישבו בכלא ולאחר מכן נאלצו לעזוב את המדינה", סיפרה סבדאני. לדבריה, הוריה לקחו אותה ואת אחיה הקטן וברחו לפקיסטאן. אימה הייתה אז בהיריון ובני המשפחה חיו במדינה השכנה בלי כל רכוש או כסף.

מוג'אהדין חלק (MEK) הוקם ב־1965 על ידי סטודנטים איראנים שהתנגדו לשלטון השאה. הארגון שילב אסלאם שיעי ורעיונות מרקסיסטיים ואנטי־אימפריאליסטיים ופעל במחתרת. בשנות ה־70 הוא ביצע פיגועים נגד מטרות של המשטר האיראני וגם נגד מטרות אמריקאיות במדינה. הוא הוגדר ארגון טרור בארה"ב ובמדינות נוספות.

אף שארגון האופוזיציה האיראני סייע להפלת משטר השאה, לאחר המהפכה האסלאמית ב־1979 הוא הסתכסך עם השלטון החדש ותקף מטרות שלו ובכירים בו. השלטון, מצידו, יצא בתגובה למסע דיכוי שכלל הוצאות להורג של אלפי בני אדם. העימות בין הצדדים דחק בהנהגת מוג'אהדין חלק לצאת לגלות בעיראק, שם כונן הארגון ברית שנויה במחלוקת עם השליט העיראקי סדאם חוסיין בזמן מלחמת איראן־עיראק.

אביה של סבדאני השאיר את משפחתו בפקיסטאן והצטרף לחברי מוג'אהדין בעיראק. הם פעלו שם במחנה ששמו "אשרף", שלימים נהפך למרכז של תנועת האופוזיציה האיראנית הגולה. "כעבור זמן־מה עברנו גם אנחנו למחנה", היא מספרת. סבדאני מתארת את מחנה הארגון בעיראק מנקודת המבט של הילדה הקטנה שהסתובבה בכל פינה ופינה בו. "המחנה היה מעין עיר קטנה עם גני ילדים, פארקים ובתי ספר", היא מספרת. ואולם במבט לאחור היא מסבירה שהמחזה האידילי היה רחוק מלהיות אידיאלי. "הם הקימו הכול לצורכי תעמולה. הם רצו להראות כמה טוב במחנה כדי שאחרים יצטרפו אליו. בשבילי זה היה כמו גן עדן. הייתי עם אמא שלי והייתי מאושרת".

בשנת 1991 אמרה אימה של סבדאני לבתה, בלי שהכינה אותה מראש, שבהיותה האחות הגדולה היא בקרוב תצטרך לטפל לבדה בשני אחיה. היא הייתה אז בקושי בת חמש. באותה העת, מספרת סבדאני, החלו ילדים להיעלם מהגן שלה בלי שידעה מדוע ולאן. "המקום התרוקן מקולות של ילדים", היא אומרת, "וקולות של ילדים הם הדבר האנושי ביותר, זה גרעין החיים וזה נלקח משם".

אלא שאז הגיע תורה של אטפה הקטנה. יום אחד היא מצאה את עצמה עומדת ליד אוטובוס עם קבוצה של נשים שמיררו בבכי. כשיצא האוטובוס לדרך והיא ואחיה עליו אליו, נהפכה הילדה הקטנה לאם. "הייתי צריכה לטפל באח אחד שהיה עדיין תינוק ורצה לינוק, ובאח שני שהיה חולה מאוד", היא מספרת. לדבריה, כ־900 ילדים בסך הכול הופרדו מהוריהם והועברו למדינות אחרות. "הילדים הפריעו למנהיג הארגון, מסעוד רג'אווי", אומרת סבדאני. "המאבק האידאולוגי לשחרור איראן נהפך למאבק של מנהיג נרקיסיסט שרצה את כל הכוח בידיו. הוא רצה שהגברים והנשים יהיו בשליטתו המוחלטת – והילדים עמדו בדרכו".

אטפה סבדאני בהפגנה בסטוקהולם, 2026. צילום: דיויד סטברו.

"כך למעשה הפך ארגון האופוזיציה מתנועה אידאולוגית לכת", היא אומרת, ומהדהדת ביקורת שהוטחה לא פעם במוג'אהדין חלק. לאורך שנות ה־80 וה־90 נעשה מוג'אהדין חלק ריכוזי מאוד, אכף משמעת נוקשה בקרב חבריו, כפה את האידאולוגיה שלו והדיר מתנגדים שצמחו בקרבו. בה בעת הקים הארגון זרועות פוליטיות וצבאיות ואלו פעלו מבסיסים בעיראק בחסות ארגון גג פוליטי ששמו המועצה הלאומית העליונה להתנגדות באיראן (NCRI).

לסבדאני ואחיה, כאמור, לא היה מקום בארגון – לפחות לא בבסיס הפעולה המרכזי שלו. אחרי מסע בדרכים שנמשך כמה חודשים בליווי אנשי הארגון, ושכלל עצירות בירדן ובגרמניה, הגיעו שלושת האחים לעיר גטבורג שבמערב שוודיה. "כל הזמן הזה הייתי בטוחה שבקרוב נתאחד עם אימא", היא נזכרת, "ישבנו במטוסים וברכבות, ראיתי איך האקלים, השפות, המקומות והאנשים משתנים, אבל לצד ההתרגשות חששתי כל הזמן שאנחנו מתרחקים מאימא ודאגתי שהיא לא תוכל למצוא אותנו. בגטבורג אמרו לנו שתכף נפגוש אותה, והתרגשתי מאוד".

סבדאני בהפגנה של המוג'הדין ח'לק ב-2005

בפועל, היא מספרת, לא חיכתה לה אימה בשום מקום. "עמדנו ברציף של רכבת ובמקום אימא הופיעו שני זרים – אישה וגבר – והם אמרו לנו 'אנחנו מעכשיו ההורים שלהם'. מאותו רגע התחיל הסיוט". בני הזוג שלקחו את סבדאני ואחיה היו אנשי מוג'אהדין שחיו בשוודיה. בנוסף לסבדאני ואחיה, היה להם ילד משלהם והם הביאו אליהם הביתה עוד שני ילדים מתוך כ־200 ילדי מוג'אהדין שהגיעו לשוודיה.

סבדאני מספרת שלימים התגלגלה לידיה רשימה ובה מאות שמות של ילדים שהוצאו ממחנה "אשרף" בעיראק והועברו למדינות אחרות, ובהן גרמניה, הולנד, נורווגיה, קנדה וארה"ב. "למשפחה שהגעתי אליה הייתה מחויבת פוליטית לקחת ילדים", היא מספרת, "זה לא שהם אהבו ילדים או רצו אותנו. עברנו אצלם אינדוקטרינציה קשה ונאלצנו לעבוד כל הזמן בשירות הארגון".

סבדאני לא חשפה בריאיון עם "הארץ" וגם לא בספר שכתבה את זהות הוריה המאמצים בשוודיה. היא מספרת שבדומה למשפחות אחרות בחו"ל שהיו חברות במוג'אהדין חלק, גם היא ובני משפחתה האלה היו מגויסים לגמרי לשרת את ארגון האופוזיציה האיראני, ובין היתר עסקו בגיוס חברים וכספים, בארגון הפגנות, במאבק במתנגדים ובהצקה ובאיומים נגד מי שעזבו את הארגון.

סבדאני טוענת שבמוג'אהדין חלק עשו כל שביכולתם כדי למחוק את הזהות האיראנית של חבריו. "אנשי הארגון שנאו כל דבר איראני שלא היה קשור למוג'אהדין חלק, ונלחמו נגדו", היא מספרת. "נאסר עליהם, למשל, להאזין למוזיקה פרסית למעט זו שיצרו אנשי המוג'אהדין עצמם. "לא קראתי ספרים בפרסית, לא הייתה אצלנו תרבות פרסית", היא אומרת, "הכול היה כפוף לארגון, ומשפחת האומנה שלי עבדה בו במשרה מלאה".

לדברי סבדאני, התנהלות הארגון שמזכירה כת נמשכת עד היום. "למוג'אהדין חלק יש עדיין משרדים בכמה מדינות ונוכחות ברשתות החברתיות", היא אומרת. "יש לו למשל מפקדה בצרפת, ששוהים בה מנהיגים וחברים בארגון שכל חייהם מוקדשים לתנועה". סבדאני אומרת שמחנה הארגון באלבניה, "אשרף 3", משמש "חוות טרולים" שמייצרת חשבונות רבים ומפיצה תעמולה בפרסית ובאנגלית. "הם כותבים כתבות על עצמם, משמיצים את מתנגדיהם ויוצרים רושם שיש תמיכה בתנועה, למרות שאין להם שום תמיכה אמיתית", היא אומרת.

על פי הערכות, ארגון מוג'אהדין חלק מונה בין 2,500 ל־3,000 חברים. רובם עברו למחנה "אשרף 3" בשנים 2013 עד 2016 בתמיכת ארה"ב, האו"ם וממשלת אלבניה. המעבר ההמוני לאלבניה נעשה משום שלאחר נפילת סדאם חוסיין מהשלטון בעיראק, אנשי מוג'אהדין חלק כבר לא היו מוגנים במדינה. בשעתו נודע ארגון האופוזיציה בפיגועי טרור ובפגיעה במטרות של המשטר האיראני, ואילו כיום הפעילות שלו מתמקדת בעיקר בפן הפוליטי והתקשורתי. ועדיין, כפי שטוענת סבדאני, הוא מתנהל ככת סגורה ודכאנית. "זה מקום שהכניסה אליו והיציאה ממנו אינם חופשיים. בזמנו גם הוטלו עונשים פיזיים על אנשים שרצו לעזוב אותו, והיו כאלה שגם עברו עינויים", מספרת הפעילה החברתית ממוצא איראני.

"אני מכירה סיפורים על אנשים שנעלמו ועל חובת וידויים על בסיס יומיומי, על 'מחשבות מלוכלכות' ומעשים לא ראויים, למשל מחשבות מיניות ואוננות. אסור לך אפילו לחשוב על הילדים שלך או לדבר עם בני המין השני בלי אישור", היא מספרת. "כיום, כשיש רשתות חברתיות וסיפורים של פורשים, הארגון כבר לא יכול להרשות לעצמו להשתמש בשיטות כאלה".

עטיפת ספרה של סבדאני "ידי בידי" שיצא לאור ב־2024 צילום: Mili Malinovic

סבדאני אינה היחידה שמטיחה האשמות מסוג זה במוג'אהדין חלק. העיתון הצרפתי לה מונה ראיין ב־2024 פעילים שעזבו את הארגון וכיום חיים באירופה. אמיר ופא ואמין גולמרימי היו שניים מהם. ואפא סיפר שהוא וחבריו נאלצו להשתתף בכל שבוע בווידויים פומביים שבהם חויבו כולם לתאר את הפנטזיות המיניות שלהם. ועוד סיפר שקשרי החברות בתוך הארגון היו בפיקוח נוקשה. "אסור היה לאכול ארוחת צהריים עם אותו חבר פעמיים ברציפות", הוא אמר.

גולמרימי סיפר שבעימותים אלימים עם כוחות ביטחון עיראקיים ב־2011, שלחו אותו מנהיגי מוג'אהדין חלק עם חבריו לצאת "מול הכדורים של העיראקים כדי להעלות את מספר ההרוגים". הוא טען שהם עשו זאת כדי "להפעיל לחץ על אירופה ועל ארה"ב, שיסירו את הארגון מרשימת ארגוני הטרור ויסייעו בהעברת חבריו למדינה אחרת".

חבר אחר בארגון האופוזיציה האיראני, רזא טורבי, סיפר ללה מונד כי כשהיה בן 17 הוא היה חבר נלהב בארגון והוטלה עליו משימה לקבל את פניהם של מצטרפים חדשים צעירים. "המשימה שלנו הייתה לעשות להם שטיפת מוח, לגרום להם לשכוח את חייהם הקודמים ולהטמיע בהם את האידאולוגיה של מוג'אהדין חלק", הוא סיפר. "הייתי מסור לכך בלי עוררין". במבט לאחור אמר טורבי כי הוא סבור שגם הוא נפל קורבן למניפולציה, והביע חרטה על "הנזק שגרם מתוך מילוי תפקידיו".

זאת ועוד, דו"ח של ארגון זכויות האדם Human Rights Watch מ־2005, שהתבסס על ראיונות עומק עם פורשי הארגון, תיאר מציאות של מכות, התעללות מילולית ופסיכולוגית, וידויים בכפייה, איומים בהוצאה להורג ועינויים שבשני מקרים אף גרמו למוות.

"אם לוקחים למשל אנשים כמו אבא שלי, רואים אדם שנכנס לארגון כשהיה בן 20 וחי בו כל חייו", מספרת סבדאני. "הוא מעולם לא שילם חשבונות או חיפש עבודה, בהכול טיפל הארגון. הוא לא יודע איך לקנות כרטיס טיסה או לנהוג לקצה הרחוב. המוג'אהדין עשה אינפנטיליזציה לאנשים האלה, ואין מי שיטפל בהם אם הם יעזבו אותו".

סבדאני אומרת כי מוג'אהדין חלק הוא "תנועה של מבוגרים", כזאת שאין לה מצטרפים חדשים. "אבל הם משלמים לאנשים צעירים כדי שיפגינו. אם הולכים להפגנות של מוג'אהדין מוצאים שם פולנים ואוקראינים שאינם מדברים פרסית ושאין להם מושג על מה הם מפגינים, לצד שוודים שאין להם קשר לארגון אבל שילמו להם כדי שיצטרפו".

היא טוענת שהכסף לארגון האופוזיציה הגולה מגיע מתרומות, אבל לא כאלה שניתנו מרצון כפי שאפשר להניח. "ממה שראיתי, המונים משלמים למוג'אהדין מדי חודש בחודשו כדי שלא יציקו להם", אומרת סבדאני. "מדובר בהעברות כספים על בסיס קבוע, של איראנים בגלות שמפעילים עליהם תעמולה, חנופה ולחץ חברתי".

כספים אחרים, לדבריה, מגיעים לידי הארגון ממערכות רווחה במדינות בעולם, למשל למשפחות אומנה כמו זו שבה היא גדלה. "ויש גם תרומות פוליטיות וכספים של ארגוני זכויות אדם שמושפעים מהתעמולה ומהפעילות הפוליטית של הארגון". סבדאני מספרת שבמשך כל השנים שבהן חיה במשפחה אומנת בשוודיה, שוחחו היא ואחיה בטלפון עם אימה הביולוגית פעם בשנה – ובמשך חמש דקות בלבד. בכלל, היא מספרת, כשם שלא הייתה דרך לעזוב את מוג'אהדין חלק, לא הייתה לה אפשרות לעזוב את משפחת האומנה שלה, והיא חיה באיום מתמיד. "מגיל חמש עברתי במשפחת האומנה התעללות מינית, התעללות פיזית והתעללות נפשית", אומרת סבדאני, "אבל לא יכולתי להגיד כלום כי איימו להפריד אותי מהאחים שלי. הדבר הראשון שקרה לי במשפחת האומנה הוא שהאבא התחיל להביע עניין בגוף שלי ורצה שאעשה דברים בשבילו. הרגשתי שזה היה רע ומפחיד אבל לא ידעתי כלום על מין או מיניות. אחר כך זה נהיה רק יותר גרוע, וזה קרה גם עם אחי בעידוד אם המשפחה האומנת".

"לא הייתה לי ילדות, רק הישרדות", מתארת סבדאני את שנותיה הראשונות בשוודיה, שלטענתה היו רצופות עונשים, ניצול והונאה של רשויות הרווחה המקומיות. "אני הייתי זו שמנקה, שמסדרת, שצריכה להיות תלמידה טובה, וגם זו שיוצאת להפגנות ונוסעת לכנסים של מוג'אהדין בכל העולם".

בסופו של דבר, בבגרותה עזבה סבדאני את משפחת האומנה שלה. היא עברה להתגורר בבירה סטוקהולם, למדה הנדסה ועבדה בחברת מיקרוסופט. כיום היא נשואה ויש לה שלושה ילדים. גם אימה הביולוגית ואחיה עזבו את מוג'אהדין חלק ומתגוררים באירופה.לאחר משבר אישי קשה שעברה, החלה סבדאני לספר בפומבי על חייה בחסות ארגון האופוזיציה. ב־2024 היא הוציאה לאור את ספרה Min hand i min (בתרגום לעברית: "ידי בידי") בהוצאת הספרים Albert Bonniers Förlag. לצד הראיונות וההרצאות על עברה בארגון שנהפך למעין כת, הייתה סבדאני לפעילה חברתית ופוליטית בכל הקשור לנעשה באיראן. היא נחשבת למשל לתומכת בבנו של השאה לשעבר, רזא פהלווי, ואף פגשה אותו בכנס בפריז בהשתתפות ילדי מוג'אהדין אחרים.

סבדאני בפגישה עם בנו של השאה האיראני לשעבר רזא פהלווי בכנס של ילדי מוג'אהדין בפריז, בחודש שעבר צילום: Mili Malinovic

המשך הכתבה: עדות מבפנים: כך הפך ארגון אופוזיציה איראני לכת מסוגרת ואכזרית – אירופה – הארץ

מוג'

Once again, hatred and incitement by “pro-Palestinian” demonstrators in Stockholm — this time while they are rightly opposing a new Israeli law

Published in Swedish in Kvartal: Bisarrt judehat – mot en skamlig israelisk lag – Kvartal

The weekly so-called pro-Palestinian demonstrations in Stockholm often include an element of street theatre. These street shows are usually extremely untasteful and they’re often defamatory. Some of the greatest hits include actors dressed as a blood-stained Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and KD party leader Ebba Busch holding a Falun sausage in an implied sexual position. There’s President Trump dressed as an SS officer, Prime Minister Kristersson dancing around with a dead baby, Netanyahu in devil horns, and characters wiping their behinds with an Israeli flag.

This weekend a new show hit the streets of Stockholm – a character who appears to be a religious Jew because of the kippah on his head holding a glass of blood beside a Palestinian woman being hanged. Those who follow Middle East politics were probably supposed to understand that the Jewish character is Israeli right-wing extremist minister Itamar Ben Gvir celebrating the legislation of the new Israeli death penalty law.

There’s a lot to be said about the Israeli law, but before that’s done the obvious should be pointed out. For those who don’t follow Middle East politics, what happened on Saturday is that Swedish police blocked streets, SL cancelled buses, and taxpayer money was spent in order to allow a group of activists to act out an antisemitic blood libel hundreds of years old, in which a Jew is using the blood of a non-Jewish innocent victim.

The activists will no doubt claim that their protest is legitimate. The character they acted is not all Jews, they’ll say, it’s only Ben Gvir, or only Israeli Jews, or only Zionists. However, the red-stained glass, the grotesque nature of the Jewish characteristics, and the timing make that claim laughable. The performance took place during Passover, the holiday that European Jews have been blamed since the Middle Ages for using Christian children’s blood for making their special holiday bread. The context of their other shows is that Israel controls the world, the American president and Sweden’s government are maneuvered by the Zionists – Israel’s Prime Minister and Jeffrey Epstein (both Jews of course). They relativize the Holocaust and they mock every Israeli symbol by attaching it to blood and money. Sure, they’re not antisemitic, just anti-Zionists. If anyone is so naive as to think that there’s a difference, perhaps they can explain it to Swedish Jewish children who may have passed by in central Stockholm and wondered why they’re being accused of hanging innocent Palestinians. Again.

Still, the new Israeli legislation deserves a serious discussion, even if those who demonstrated against it in Stockholm are on the wrong side of history. Israel’s new “death penalty for terrorists” law was passed in the Israeli parliament in March. The bill stipulates that the death penalty will be imposed on a terrorist who killed a person “with the intent of denying the existence of the State of Israel.” This wording creates a distinction that effectively designates the law almost exclusively for Palestinian terrorism. However, the court will be authorized to impose a life sentence instead of the death penalty if it finds “special reasons” for doing so or if “exceptional circumstances” are present.

It’s important to point out that the Israeli opposition voted against the law, and many in Israel hope that it will be cancelled if a new government takes over after the next elections. This may be the case because the law, which was pushed through by the most extreme Israeli politicians, was also opposed by other Israeli authorities. An official in the Ministry of Justice said that establishing the death penalty in the West Bank through civilian legislation is “highly problematic”. IDF representatives said that the law contradicts international conventions to which Israel is committed, and officials from both the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the National Security Council opposed it.

The objections are not only technical. Israeli parliamentarian Gilad Kariv (The Democrats, former Labor Party) said that the law contradicts the values of the State of Israel and that it is disgraceful both in its substance and in the political manner in which it was approved. He also said that the party will bring the constitutional question before the High Court of Justice. This is an important point because the law is indeed expected to be reviewed by the High Court of Justice, and there is a possibility that it will be changed, amended, or cancelled.

However, apart from the extreme right, parts of Israeli society who used to be against such legislation in the past have become more positive towards it because of the 251 Israelis who were kidnapped on October 7th. They argue that many of the people who led and participated in the massacre, including Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar, were prisoners who were released from Israeli jails. If they had been executed for their previous crimes, the most horrific crime in Israeli history could have been avoided. Perhaps the main point supporters of the law point to is the possibility of prisoner exchanges which in Israel’s reality have always been an incentive for Palestinian terrorists to commit more attacks. Capital punishment could, according to the law’s supporters, prevent future Israeli kidnapped civilians from being used as bargaining leverage.

Israeli security officials, including several chiefs of staff of the IDF and heads of the Shin Bet, Israel’s security agency, objected to this reasoning and claimed that terrorism is not meaningfully deterred by the threat of execution because attackers who carry out suicide or high-risk operations are often not motivated by personal survival. Increasing the severity of punishment does not change behavior. Instead, capital punishment could escalate tensions, increase incentives for revenge attacks, and complicate intelligence cooperation and prisoner-management strategies.

Other objections, made by Israeli NGOs, are purely ideological. The Zulat Institute for Human Rights, for example, stated that the legislation “is fundamentally based on racial discrimination, is illegitimate, and has existed in the darkest regimes of modern history.” This is, in short, a very controversial issue in Israel, in many ways it’s another part of the bloody aftermath of October 7th and the regional war that is still going on, and the last word hasn’t been said yet.

Back to Stockholm. Considering the complexities of the Israeli legislation isn’t high on the agenda of the Swedish activists. This is a classic situation of a clock being correct twice a day even if it stopped working. Yes, they’re entirely right in their objection to the Israeli death penalty, but they are the last people in the world to preach on this subject.

First, recently more and more Iranian flags are seen at their demonstrations. The regime in Teheran executes over 1,000 people a year. Still, in the Iranian example, Swedish activists prefer demonstrating in support of the bloodthirsty regime against the “imperialist American-Israeli attack” while conveniently ignoring the institutionalized public hangings of women, homosexuals and regime critics from cranes. Other countries which have had the death penalty for years, from the US, China, and Japan to Iraq and Saudi Arabia, are never mentioned in any demonstration. Only Jewish executions, it seems, are morally wrong as far as they’re concerned.

Second, believe it or not, the Palestinian Authority, the same Palestinians the demonstrations are all about, has a death penalty law. In the West Bank it was used in the past and death sentences are not carried out in practice in recent years, but in Gaza, Palestinians have been executed by Hamas on a large scale, both officially and unofficially. Whoever is really worried about the legal execution of Palestinians should have been demonstrating against Hamas long before demonstrating against Israel.

And the finally, for many Israelis (including the one writing this text), the new law is a source of embarrassment and deep concern. It’s like many Swedes see things like NMR, or Swedish volunteers to the SS, or Swedish imams preaching about Jews engaging in black magic. The fact that in Israel a similar phenomenon is powerful enough to legislate is terrible. Still, the ones who will fix this are democratic and liberal Israelis, not a bunch of extremist wannabe actors from Sweden who believe that Israel never had a right to exist whether it has a death penalty law or not.

Israel Between Peace and the Sword

The choices the region will face after the Iran-US-Israel War, and does international law have anything to do with them.

Published in Swedish Svenska Dagbladet: Israel måste alltid ha svärdet redo | David Stavrou | SvD Ledare

The Swedish discourse on the war in Iran has been dominated by the question of its legality. In recent weeks, international law scholars, academics, politicians, and columnists have explained why the American and Israeli attack is “illegal under international law.” There is much to say about this reasoning, but a reasonable question is what the point really is. In the real world, the legality of war matters very little, because international law, in general, has hardly had any real significance over the past decades.

The main reason is simply that it doesn't work. International law has been used by some of the world’s worst despots, from Gaddafi to Assad, to delay international action against their crimes, and when it was finally used for intervention—in many cases, it made the situation even worse and led to more violence and failed states.

International law has also given legitimacy to regimes such as Qatar and Somalia, which have gained seats on the UN Human Rights Council despite their total lack of such rights. Terrorist organizations have used it in their propaganda to avoid the consequences of their actions, and China’s and Russia’s veto rights in the UN Security Council ensure that aggressive dictators go unpunished.

“If the U.S. illegally invades other countries, Russia will do the same” is a common argument against the American offensive. But the truth is rather the opposite: Russia did not wait for the Americans to attack Georgia or Ukraine, and—like Turkey in Syria, Azerbaijan in Armenia, and Eritrea in Ethiopia—has ignored international law for decades. No country is waiting for Israel or the U.S. to legitimize their actions according to the “law of the jungle”.

For a country that has not been at war since 1814, the question of the legality of military interventions may seem like the most important one. Theoretically, even a superpower like the U.S. should be concerned with issues of limiting its global power. But for a country like Israel, which is constantly threatened by real enemies who want to annihilate it and kill its population, this question appears fairly academic.

There is, however, another question that from an Israeli perspective is extremely important. It is simple but crucial, and it should concern other countries as well—it is not whether the war is legal, but whether it is effective. Or more broadly: can military power by itself solve Israel’s problems with Iran and other enemies?

“When all you have is a hammer,” as the well-known saying goes, “every problem looks like a nail.” Israel undoubtedly has a powerful hammer. Could it be that the country has become accustomed to solving all its problems with it? Previously, Israel used many forms of power to strengthen its security and international standing. Diplomats engaged in creating complex alliances, its soft power included outstanding achievements in culture, art, agriculture, science, and technology, and governments were willing to participate in peace negotiations and consider compromises.

The Hamas massacre on October 7 and Iran’s persistence in combining nuclear ambitions with threats to wipe Israel off the map changed all of this. The Israeli foreign service has been marginalized; the country’s artists and scientists are boycotted around the world, and its enemies are blown to pieces rather than invited to ceremonies on the White House lawn. Considering that many of Israel’s enemies are ruthless killers, this is hardly surprising. Anyone who sees value in human life should not shed tears for people like Hassan Nasrallah, Yahya Sinwar, and Ali Khamenei. But do military operations improve reality if they are not accompanied by other measures such as diplomacy, economic development, and new creative political alliances? This is not only an Israeli question. A new world order is taking shape before our eyes, and if we are not heading toward total anarchy, the question of limiting military power and understanding what it can and cannot achieve is crucial.

One indication is the situation in Gaza. After more than two years of extensive military force and enormous destruction, the reality is that Hamas not only still exists, it is armed and controls many state functions. In Lebanon, Israel may have achieved significant military successes against Hezbollah, but the Israeli are still spending far too much time in bomb shelters, and despite everything, Hezbollah is still alive and kicking. Both militarily and politically.

Israelis are once again deprived of basic necessities—schools are closed, workplaces shut down, flights canceled, thousands have lost relatives, been forced from their homes, and suffered injuries and trauma. Not to mention that Israel is deeply divided on issues concerning its democracy, which can only be resolved when the shooting stops. Meanwhile, Israel has also, without justification, become the punching bag of the international community. All the world’s power seems to be of little use in solving this.

And then there is Iran. Now that the war has begun, it should, for the sake of both Iranians and Israelis, end with a regime change—and no regime change is possible without the use of force. The Iranian people themselves, who ultimately must liberate themselves, have asked for foreign intervention, and giving it to them is the right thing to do. But what then?

“From the moment we decided that only here, in the land of Israel, could the Jewish state arise, we accepted that more than a hundred million people from the Arab world, from the Arab nations, and from the Palestinians would be our neighbors,” said Israel’s former prime minister Yitzhak Rabin a few years before he was assassinated in 1995. “There are now only two possibilities: either a serious and determined effort is made to achieve peace—peace and security—or the sword will always rule.” In the 1990s, Rabin chose the first option, but since then, leaders across the region, including Israeli leaders, have developed a dependence on using force. Perhaps even an adiction.

When the war in Iran is over, Israel will face a choice. Previously, the country combined pragmatic diplomacy, careful alliance-building, and visionary openings toward the Arab world. In a region like the Middle East, this is risky. Israel will always need to keep a sword ready, but with security guarantees and economic support instead of anachronistic laws and self-righteous moralism from other countries, peace may once again become an option.

Oslo Police Probe Blast Outside U.S. Embassy, Bolster Security at Jewish Sites

Norwegian police said they are searching for suspects and added that they were reinforcing security measures to protect both the Iranian diaspora and the Norway's Jewish communities

Pubished in Haaretz, with AP and Reuters: Oslo Police Probe Blast Outside U.S. Embassy, Bolster Security at Jewish Sites – Europe

The U.S. embassy in Oslo was hit by a loud explosion overnight into Sunday, causing minor damage but not injuries, Norwegian ‌police said, as the justice minister said a thorough investigation had been launched. The blast at the embassy compound in western Oslo occurred at around 1 A.M. local time, sending thick smoke into the street by the entrance of the consular section, eyewitnesses said.

The explosion was caused by some sort of incendiary device, Oslo police representative Frode Larsen said during a news conference Sunday. Investigators believe the embassy was the target and are searching for one or more potential perpetrators and their motive. Justice Minister Astri Aas-Hansen added they had deployed "considerable resources" to the investigation.

"One of our hypothesis is that this is terrorism, but we are also exploring other options," Larsen later told public broadcaster NRK. Police added that they were reinforcing security measures to protect both the Iranian diaspora and the country's Jewish communities. "This is an unacceptable incident that is being treated with the utmost seriousness," said Astri Aas-Hansen, Norway's justice and public security minister. "The police have stated that they are investigating the case with significant resources, and that nothing indicates the situation poses any danger to the public," she said.

PST, the Norwegian police security service, called in additional personnel following the incident but has not changed the country's terror threat level, according to communication adviser Martin Bernsen. The blast occurred at the entry to the consular section, Oslo police said, and witnesses said the entrance had been damaged.

"There was a very thick layer of smoke on the street," said ‌Sebastian ⁠Toerstad, 18, a high school student who drove past the embassy at the time of the explosion. "There was some damage to the entrance," he added. Police said no further explosive devices had been found in the area. "Investigations have been ⁠carried out at the scene with the aid of dogs, drones and a helicopter, searching for one or more potential perpetrators," the Oslo police department said in ⁠a statement.

The U.S. Embassy in Oslo referred media queries to the U.S. State Department, which did not immediately return a request for comment. Nor did Oslo police. Other details were not available.

Leif Knutsen, a Norwegian Jewish activist and chairman of the newly founded Jewish Community of Norway umbrella organization, said security around Jewish institutions across Norway has been elevated since October 7. Knutsen noted that armed police with assault rifles have been stationed around the synagogues in Oslo and Trondheim and near the Israeli embassy.

The local Jewish community generally trusts the Norwegian Police Security Service, known as PST, and cooperation between security services and Jewish institutions is strong, according to Knutsen. He said, however, that many people feel more vulnerable on their way to and from synagogues, when they "become visible" outside the protected perimeter.

He expressed that the broader concern is what the situation represents. "What's wrong with a society when its most heavily guarded and fortified installations are not government offices or military bases, but two synagogues and the embassy of a country that Norway is supposed to have a friendly relationship with?" Knutsen said, adding that the situation was "unsustainable" in the long term.

Can Swedish journalists understand the chaos, suffering, and fear of war

When two Israeli soldiers visited Stockholm, their story was misunderstood, writes Israeli journalist David Stavrou.

Published in Kvartal: https://kvartal.se/erikhogstrom/artiklar/svenska-journalister-forstar-inte-de-israeliska-soldaterna/cG9zdDo2MTgxMg

Two young Israeli soldiers recently visited Stockholm together with an activist from Breaking the Silence, an Israeli organization that collects and publishes testimonies from Israeli veterans and, in many cases, acts as a whistleblower by exposing alleged human rights violations and war crimes. The Swedish visit was organized in collaboration with the Christian aid organization Diakonia, which arranged interviews with the Swedish press (SVT, Dagens ETC, Dagens Arena, and Jewish Chronicle). In the interviews, the soldiers used pseudonyms, and their faces were not shown.

In some of the publications, the interviews were presented as evidence supporting the gravest accusations against Israel. For example, Dagens ETC wrote: “The serious allegations have been dismissed as Hamas propaganda by commentators like Alice Teodorescu Måwe. But everything is now confirmed by Israeli soldiers.”

In the interviews, the soldiers reportedly said things like, “we were ordered to shoot all Palestinians we considered ‘military-age men’” and “we used Palestinian men as human shields.” Other claims included that many buildings were destroyed in Gaza and that, during the first weeks of the war, there was a lack of rules of engagement. Later, the soldiers said, rules were introduced, but they were weak and not always applied. As a result, unarmed men were shot.

They also reported that journalists and healthcare workers were considered legitimate targets, even if they themselves did not participate in such incidents. The two soldiers also described a discourse that dehumanized Palestinians.


Many Israelis have strong objections to Breaking the Silence. They argue that this type of testimony contributes to hatred of Israel, causes the country to be treated unfairly, and that even if the reports are true, they should be discussed domestically rather than in a hostile international stage.

Of course, Swedish journalists do not need to concern themselves with this—but it can help to understand the context. Many Swedes would likely raise an eyebrow if Swedish organizations on the political fringe were setting the agenda for Sweden’s image abroad. In this case, the soldiers are telling an important story—the problem is that the Swedish press misunderstood it.

A key issue concerns how to distinguish between different types of armed forces. Traditionally, there is a difference between terrorists or non-state actors who use violence against civilians and state-controlled armies with formal military forces, command structures, and legal frameworks. That definition is largely irrelevant for Israelis because Hamas is a hybrid actor. Although the organization uses terrorist methods, its military branch—the al-Qassam Brigades—is structured like an army, with battalions and brigades, elite units, command chains, and modern weapons systems. During the war, this was also supported by high-tech disinformation campaigns, a financial empire of global investments, leaders living luxuriously outside the region, and alliances with some of the world’s most tyrannical regimes.

This paints the Israeli soldiers’ testimony in a very specific colour since Hamas, despite its military structure, is not bound by international law. Its militants can behead, rape, and execute civilians, burn people alive, and take children as hostages—with or without uniforms—while exploiting its other source of power – the power of sovereignty, and the civilian control the organisation holds in Gaza. Expecting Israel not to act against individuals simply because they are not in uniform in this asymmetric conflict may be understandable, but it is hardly surprising that the reality forces terrible dilemmas and tragic decisions.


The Israeli soldiers confirm that Israel, despite the genocidal nature of the Hamas attack against it, at least tried to maintain some form of legal framework. They say civilians were evacuated, leaflets were dropped as warnings, orders were given not to shoot women and children, and no-go zones were established in order to limit Israel's massive firepower. Using human shields is obviously illegal and should be punished. But the claim that journalists and healthcare workers are always protected in a reality where Hamas has been shown to use both journalistic and medical infrastructure for attacks on Israeli civilians is detached from reality.

Israel claims that intercepted communications show Hamas used ambulances to transport fighters, weapons, and equipment. Hamas also hid weapons and command centers in hospitals, schools, mosques, and private homes. The IDF has released images that allegedly confirm this. Furthermore, at least three civilian hostages—Almog Meir Jan, Andrey Kozlov, and Shlomi Ziv—were reportedly held in a family home in Gaza where the son was a journalist and the father a doctor. There are also allegations that so-called freelance journalists were embedded in Hamas units on October 7 and documented the massacre for propaganda purposes.

The fact that Hamas controlled the Gaza Strip with an iron grip for years means that almost everything in Gaza effectively became part of the effort to destroy Israel. When the soldiers say they were told “everything is a military target,” this is viewed as condemning evidence against Israel—but in reality, it is not far from the truth.


International law recognizes these complex circumstances. While it may seem unfair to those unaccustomed to war, under the Geneva Conventions civilian structures—including hospitals—can lose their protection if they are used for military purposes. Even unarmed combatants and civilians participating in hostilities can, under certain circumstances, be considered legitimate targets. This is not what Israel claims—it is how international law works.

The reality described by the Israeli soldiers is horrific. Some of it, such as the use of human shields, also appears illegal. It can and should be discussed. It can and should be used for journalistic purposes and, hopefully, ultimately, for reconciliation when the heartbreaking testimonies from both sides become part of a healing process. That said, nothing in what the soldiers said in Sweden confirms allegations of genocide or deliberate starvation of civilians. Using these stories to imply that these horrific accusations are true is an abuse of the witnesses and their experiences.

Finally, there is one more aspect to consider. Being scared, wanting revenge, and not adhering to strict moral ideals under fire is natural in armed conflict. So too are remorse and shame. The Israeli soldiers who came to Stockholm were brave enough to share this with the world. But a reasonable question to pose to Diakonia, which organized the visit, is: Where is the Palestinian Breaking the Silence? Where are the remorseful Hamas fighters? Where are the Islamic Jihad militants ashamed of massacring Israeli civilians and now revealing their actions as “deeply immoral and devastating to our neighbors,” as one of the Israeli activists put it? Are these ignored by Diakonia—or do they simply not exist?

Is Israel on its way to the Middle Ages

The Swedish right should support courageous Israeli leaders who oppose the government’s reactionary impulses and fight for democratic values.

Published in Swedish daily Svenska Dagbladet: https://www.svd.se/a/wr8JEM/netanyahu-tar-israel-mot-medeltiden

The ceasefire which has been in effect in Gaza for several months has given Israelis and Palestinians an opportunity to reflect on their next steps, and to begin rebuilding and recovering after two of the most difficult years in the region’s history. Although Israel is slowly disappearing from the international headlines, it remains important to examine what is actually taking place in its political arena. If there's anything to learn from recent history it's that what happens there will influence global politics for many years to come.

One of the war’s results is that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who is currently on trial for corruption, is doing everything he can to control the historical narrative of the war and avoid taking responsibility for Israel’s failure on October 7. Instead, he places the blame on the security services and his political opponents. He refuses to establish an independent official inquiry commission and is doing his utmost to replace Israel’s military and legal elite with loyal officials. These changes may help Netanyahu evade accountability for the charges against him. But for his coalition partners—far-right, fundamentalist, and ultranationalist parties—they are a means to a broader goal: undermining Israel’s liberal democracy.

For example, the Knesset, Israel’s parliament, is discussing a bill that would expand state control over the media. The proposal would replace existing regulatory bodies with a new authority whose members are appointed by the government—effectively enabling political control over broadcast content. The bill has drawn criticism from the government’s legal adviser, who warned that it threatens freedom of the press. It is hardly surprising that the same attorney general is among those the government is attempting to remove.

Screenshot

Because Israel is a democratic country, many Israelis are demonstrating against these proposals and other government measures. In recent months, however, many protesters have claimed that the police are acting in ways they did not previously. They report arbitrary arrests and increased use of force, including stun grenades and mounted riot police.

The minister responsible for this is Itamar Ben-Gvir, a far-right politician previously convicted of incitement and support for terrorism. While he is busy consolidating control over the police within Israel, another minister, Bezalel Smotrich, is consolidating control over the West Bank. Smotrich is laying the groundwork for potential annexation and is taking no action against the growing violence perpetrated by extremist settlers.

Netanyahu himself has recently reaffirmed his intention to continue pursuing the so-called judicial reform which many in Israel describe as a judicial overhaul, as it threatens the fundamental principles of the rule of law and the separation of powers, weakens the independence of the courts, and risks undermining democracy. The issue has now returned to the parliamentary agenda and in addition, efforts to limit the powers of the attorney general and the Supreme Court are being resumed. Another bill currently under discussion would introduce the death penalty for terrorist offenses—formally to prevent Hamas and other groups from taking Israelis hostage in order to exchange them for convicted terrorists, but there are also those motivated simply by revenge.

If the death penalty does not sound like a sufficiently reactionary reform, the Knesset has even discussed the conservative Jewish concept of shmirat negiah—the obligation for a man and a woman who are not married to each other to refrain from physical contact. It is not an official legislative proposal, at least not yet. But the mere fact that it is being discussed alarms liberal and secular Israelis—and rightly so.

Swedes have always had a deep interest in Israel. This can have both positive and negative effects. To understand whether Sweden’s voice can contribute something meaningful in this context, we should examine the country’s current discourse on Israel.

The political left in Sweden has unfortunately totaly lost its bearings. Many of its supporters have embraced Hamas’ narrative of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. This does not necessarily mean they support terrorism, but the view of Israel as a settler-colonial project that should be boycotted and opposed regardless of its policies or leadership has spread from a radical minority into mainstream politics. Even established political parties have begun discussing the dangerous idea of a one-state solution.

A one-state solution would either mean the end of the Jewish state—which even the Swedish left previously supported—or plunge the entire region into an even worse bloodbath than what we have witnessed over the past two years.

Equally dangerous is the stance of Sweden’s populist right. Supporting Israel because its current leaders appear to use methods similar to those of authoritarian, illiberal regimes, or because they see Israel as a symbol of a struggle against Islam, is both misguided and harmful. It is also a betrayal of the Israelis who are fighting for a democratic, liberal, and peaceful future.

This year, both Swedes and Israelis are heading to the polls. If Sweden still wishes to exert a positive influence on Israel (and on the Palestinians, for that matter), Swedish supporters of the left should cooperate with Israeli artists, entrepreneurs, researchers, and academics who are independent and often in opposition to the government, rather than the easy and intellectually lazy solution of boycotting and margenelizing them.

The Swedish right should support courageous Israeli leaders who oppose the government’s reactionary impulses and fight for democratic values, rather than backing corrupt leaders and extremist parties that are dragging Israel back toward the Middle Ages. Any other approach amounts to rewarding both Hamas and Jewish extremists and for those who live in the region, it is yet another step on the road to hell.