The Columbia University task force overseeing efforts to combat antisemitism on campus released its fourth and final report on Tuesday, spotlighting Columbia’s lack of full-time Middle East faculty who are not explicitly anti-Zionist.

According to the report, “Columbia lacks full-time tenure line faculty expertise in Middle East history, politics, political economy and policy that is not explicitly anti-Zionist.” The absence of ideological diversity is having an impact on course offerings — in listening sessions, the task force said it heard from students that classes at the university more often than not treat Zionism as entirely illegitimate. 

The report calls on the university to “work quickly to add more intellectual diversity to these offerings” and to “establish new chairs at a senior level in Middle East history, politics, political economy and policy.” 

Furthermore, it claims that “academic resources available for teaching and research on Jewish and Israeli topics at Columbia are insufficient, especially in comparison to the resources available for teaching and research on other parts of the Middle East. The University should work quickly and energetically to build up its capabilities here, through academically first-rate full time tenure line additions to the faculty and the curriculum.” 

The report also cites numerous instances in which the academic freedom of Jewish and Israeli students was not protected in classrooms and suggests remedies — while trying to find a delicate balance between allowing for free expression and cracking down on discrimination.

“We urge the University to protect freedom of expression to the maximum extent possible while also complying with antidiscrimination laws,” states the report, titled The Classroom Experience at Columbia: Protecting the Academic Freedom of Faculty and Students. “Censorship has no place at Columbia. Neither does discrimination.”

Columbia University Acting President Claire Shipman said in a statement on Tuesday that the university will “continue to work on implementing the recommendations of the task force and addressing antisemitism on our campus.”

“We have also been working this semester to focus on discrimination and hate more broadly on our campuses — which has long been a strong recommendation of the task force. All of this work must become part of our DNA,” said Shipman. 

Columbia’s Task Force to Combat Antisemitism was formed in November 2023 as a response to a surge of antisemitism on campus that began as an immediate response to the Oct. 7, 2023, terrorist attacks in Israel. Throughout the following two years of war in Gaza, scenes of masked anti-Israel protesters barging into classrooms and hourslong demonstrations in the center of campus calling for an “intifada revolution” became commonplace at Columbia, which has faced some of the worst antisemitic incidents of any college campus since Oct. 7. 

The new report is the first one released since Columbia reached a deal with the Trump administration in July to restore some $400 million in federal funding. 

The funding was frozen by the government in March due to the university’s record dealing with antisemitism. The campus has seen less turbulence since the deal was struck and reforms aimed at combating antisemitism — some based on the task force’s earlier recommendations — were announced over the summer.  

The 13-member task force, which is led by by Ester Fuchs, professor of international and public affairs and political science; Nicholas Lemann, professor of journalism and dean emeritus of Columbia Journalism School; and David Schizer, professor of law and economics and dean emeritus of Columbia Law School, suggested a range of free expression and anti-discrimination policies that Columbia could adopt.

Among the recommendations are that the university disclose, before students enroll in a course, if the material has the potential to cause students to feel excluded or silenced. If students are not aware in advance, or if it is a required course, and a controversial topic — such as the Middle East — is not the stated topic, “it’s not appropriate to make it a central part of the course,” the report states.  

The authors write that academic freedom “entails openness to scholars and students from other countries.” As such, the report states that boycotts of faculty, students, researchers or scholars from other countries “are not consistent with academic freedom.” The academic boycott movement consistently targets Israel, “proposing to restrict the research, teaching, and studying opportunities available to a cohort whose members are overwhelmingly Jewish,” the report continues. Student protesters at Columbia have frequently demanded that the university end its partnership with Tel Aviv University.   

In addition, the task force calls for consistency across all university anti-discrimination policies to include Jewish and Israeli students and for applying anti-discrimination policies in regards to classroom disruptions targeting students or instructors for their identity in a protected class.

The latest report builds upon a series of earlier ones released by the antisemitism task force in March 2024, August 2024 and June 2025, each offering solutions to a different key issue impacting Jewish students at the Ivy League university. Each report was based in part on two dozen listening sessions the task force conducted with hundreds of Jewish and Israeli students at Columbia. 

The 70-page fourth and final report includes recommendations from the three prior reports and recaps several of the most egregious incidents of antisemitism in the classroom at Columbia since Oct. 7. Those include reports of several instructors encouraging their students, during class, to participate in the 2023-24 academic year’s anti-Israel protests. Some professors held their classes or office hours within anti-Israel encampments (where in several cases it was indicated Zionists were not welcome).

Editor’s note: After publication, Columbia’s Task Force to Combat Antisemitism updated language in the report to read: “Columbia would benefit from full-time tenure line faculty expertise in Middle East history, politics, political economy and policy that is not explicitly anti-Zionist.”

The Muslim Brotherhood’s influence has become increasingly pervasive in the United States, according to a new report by the Institute for the Study of Global Antisemitism and Policy, titled “The Muslim Brotherhood’s Strategic Entryism into the United States: A Systemic Analysis.”

President Donald Trump’s recent instruction to Secretary of State Marco Rubio to take steps toward banning Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated organizations came soon after ISGAP briefed policymakers from both parties and national security professionals, including Trump administration officials, in Washington and beyond about the study.

“For decades now, we’ve known that Islamism has been a problem within our liberal secular democracies,” ISGAP Vice President Haras Rafiq told the Misgav Mideast Horizons podcast. (Jewish Insider’s Lahav Harkov co-hosts the podcast.)  

The new ISGAP report cites authenticated Muslim Brotherhood documents describing the group’s strategy – called tamkeen, which loosely translates to “empowerment” – of entrenching itself in the institutions of Western democracies.

“It was a 100-year plan, and they’re 43 years into it,” Rafiq said. “We looked at the who, why, what, where … and then analyzed how well we’re doing against it.”

The Muslim Brotherhood’s basic goals, he said, are “to set up a utopian Islamist state and enforce their vision of Sharia-based law on the whole state, and secondly, to spread that around the world. … [Their] tactic, the opium of the masses, is to wipe Israel off the map.” 

In liberal democracies, one of the major elements of the plan is “figuring out a way to persuade Muslims, if you’re living in the West, that the Islam that your parents practice … is actually wrong and it fits into … innovation, false association with a deity, [and] haram, which means not allowed,” Rafiq said. “So first of all, change the Islam that’s practiced from within.”

The way the Muslim Brotherhood relates to non-Muslim societies, Rafiq said, is to “try to persuade others by using a faith-based identity politics which aligns with what they believe — that they are the proper Muslims. And over time, there are four key areas where they focus: One is political infiltration and legislation, the second is controlling the narrative, the media, the third is how they can increase the capacity [of those steps], and looking at Muslims and changing from within.”

Rafiq said that Muslim Brotherhood-sympathetic organizations latched onto the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks to increase their influence.

“It was a time when there was a lot of confusion,” he recounted. “What organizations like CAIR [the Council on American-Islamic Relations] and others were able to do was to latch onto people who wanted to understand who were these Muslims, why did people want to fly planes into the Twin Towers … and they actually were very quick to latch onto the media, the politicians, the people within civil society who were hungry to know more, and become one of the main voices.” 

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, a Republican, recently declared both the Muslim Brotherhood and CAIR to be foreign terrorist organizations banned from the state. Rafiq pointed out, however, that the state has not seized any assets or taken any concrete action against the organization.

The difference between CAIR, which presents itself as an advocacy group for a minority population, and other organizations that aim to do the same, Rafiq said, is that “ultimately, at the end of the day, the people who set up the organization actually are part of the Muslim Brotherhood Islamist worldview, and ultimately are trying to … use entrenchment to change the liberal democracy from within.”

Rafiq also cited ties between CAIR and unindicted co-conspirators in the Holy Land Foundation trial, the largest terrorism finance trial in the U.S., which shut down an organization that was funding Hamas.

“I guess other non-Islamist organizations that represent Muslims and other organizations don’t want those objectives and are not involved in these kinds of criminal activities,” he said.

CAIR has “been able to persuade and fool people that they’re actually representing Islam and Muslims and they’re the correct voices,” he said. Still, Rafiq cited polling that out of 1.9 billion Muslims worldwide, 1.4 billion reject Islamism, which includes the Muslim Brotherhood. 

“The good news is still that the majority of Muslims around the world reject Islamism,” Rafiq said, while noting that he did not have specific data about the U.S.

However, Rafiq said that the Muslim Brotherhood has successfully inculcated young Muslims in the West with antisemitism.

“Antisemitism is a key tool that they use in the guise of being anti-Israel or anti-Zionist, etc., to recruit people to their worldview,” he said.

Rafiq called Qatar “the last man standing” in the Sunni Arab world, in that its regime supports the Muslim Brotherhood. 

“Muslim Brotherhood Islamist ideology is deeply entrenched within all parts of [Qatar’s] civil society, all the way to the top,” he said. “As a result of this entrenchment … they’ve used tamkeen successfully across the board, from educating children all the way up to civil society organizations and the leadership. One can say the Muslim Brotherhood has a funding arm, which is directly the Emir and the institution, the country, the economy and the corporation that is Qatar.”

ISGAP has estimated that Qatar’s soft power assets worldwide are worth $1 trillion. The Gulf state is the largest state donor to universities in the U.S., and much of those donations are undocumented.

Qatar spreads the Muslim Brotherhood’s messages via Al Jazeera in Arabic and English.

“The English one will be a lot more palatable, but still pushing the Islamist narrative. The Arabic is downright nasty – and they get away with it, because what they’ve done is set up Al Jazeera as a corporation,” Rafiq said. “But they are 100% owned by the Qatari royal family. Therefore, in my view, when they operate in the U.S., they should [register] under the Foreign Agents Registration Act.” 

Rafiq said the West can do more to make support for the Muslim Brotherhood more costly for Qatar and discourage its leadership from continuing. One example he gave is an ISGAP report exposing Qatari funding for Texas A&M, including a contract that said all of the research projects are property of the Qatar Foundation – including those with dual-use purposes that could be used to develop weapons. After initially denying the links, the president of the university pulled it out of Education City in Doha.

“That really hurt [Qatar],” Rafiq said. “The reason I know it hurt them was that we are constantly besmirched and lies are told about us and we are targeted by the Qatari government.”

Another win, Rafiq argued, was the Israeli strike on Doha in September.

“That was the key moment in which they realized that even though they have a defense agreement with the U.S., they can’t really hide. But the downside was that rather than actually use that and push on the advantage, what the U.S. government has done is create the situation with the ceasefire in Gaza … and pushed out countries like Saudi Arabia and the U.A.E. … and decided to bring in Qatar and Turkey, and that’s a problem.”

“We need more support from [the Trump administration] in terms of Qatar, and not to be taken in by geopolitics,” he added. 

Rafiq compared fighting the Muslim Brotherhood without taking on Qatar to taking aspirin when you have cancer.

“Islamism is a virus or a cancer … which is spreading rapidly, and unless we deal with it, the root cause, and we persuade Qatar to stop funding it … it won’t really make a difference,” Rafiq said.

One of the challenges in combating Islamism, Rafiq said, is that “we don’t make it easy to recognize Islamism in the same way that we recognize fascism and communism … [because] they’ve been able to push this narrative so effectively of Islamophobia.”

“Islam is a set of ideas, a set of values. In a liberal democracy, no set of ideas should be beyond critique, satire or even parody, even if they are ideas that I believe – and I’m a Muslim,” he said. “The people who are intolerant have persuaded us that these concepts are intolerant; therefore, we fall in line.” 

The FBI reported on Tuesday that the American Jewish community remains the most targeted religious group, accounting for nearly 70% of all religiously motivated hate crimes in 2024, even as overall hate crimes in the country have decreased. 

Hate crimes targeting Jews had plateaued following a sharp increase immediately after the Oct. 7 Hamas terror attack. 

In 2024, 1,938 anti-Jewish hate crimes were reported to the FBI’s data collection program out of 3,096 reported religiously motivated hate crimes. The year 2024 saw the highest number of anti-Jewish hate crimes ever recorded by the bureau since it began collecting data in 1991 — and an increase compared to 1,832 incidents the year prior, which accounted for 67% of all religiously motivated hate crimes that year. 

Some of that increase could be attributed to improvement in data collection, according to the FBI. That increase comes as hate crime incidents across the country slightly decreased from 11,862 in 2023 to 11,679 in 2024. 

Fifty percent of hate crime incidents across the country in 2024 were motivated by bias based on race, ethnicity or national origin, with reported anti-Black hate crimes comprising the single largest portion of those incidents (51% of 7,043 reported offenses). 

The FBI also reported that the number of anti-Muslim hate crimes (228) and anti-LGBTQ+ hate crimes (2,390) were slightly down compared to 2023. 

Jewish organizations responsible for tracking threats to the Jewish community expressed concern over the findings, which come months after two deadly antisemitic attacks in Washington and Boulder, Colo. 

Michael Masters, national director and CEO of the Secure Community Network, said that the current threat environment for American Jews is “unlike anything in modern memory.”  

“We have documented individuals echoing the rhetoric of designated foreign terrorist organizations and plotting heinous attacks on our houses of worship, schools, and centers of Jewish life,” Masters said in a statement. “This reality demands accurate, timely reporting so law enforcement and Jewish security partners can respond swiftly.” 

Jonathan Greenblatt, CEO of the Anti-Defamation League, said in a statement, “Since the Hamas-led Oct. 7 massacre in Israel, Jewish Americans have not had a moment of respite and have experienced antisemitism at K-12 school, on college campuses, in the public square, at work and Jewish institutions. Our government and leaders must take these numbers seriously and enact adequate measures to protect all Americans from the scourge of hate crimes.”

Ted Deutch, CEO of the American Jewish Committee, called for “leaders of every kind — teachers, law enforcement officers, government officials, business owners [and] university presidents [to] confront antisemitism head-on” in response to the FBI data. 

“Jews are being targeted not just out of hate, but because some wrongly believe that violence or intimidation is justified by global events,” Deutch said. “With the added climate of rising polarization and fading trust in democracy, American Jews are facing a perfect storm of hate. Whether walking to synagogue, dropping their kids off at school, sitting in restaurants, or on college campuses, Jews are facing a climate where fear of antisemitism is part of daily life.”

“This is unacceptable — the targeting of Jews is not a Jewish problem, it is a society-wide issue that demands a society-wide response.”

The United Nations released an unprecedented report on Thursday highlighting a “disproportionate” 38 percent increase in antisemitism across the globe, even in countries that have no Jewish population. The report also identifies certain actions by the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel as “fundamentally antisemitic.”

Dr. Ahmed Shaheed, the U.N. special rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief, will present the final version of the report at the annual session of the U.N. General Assembly’s third committee on Thursday afternoon. An interim report was released last month. According to Shaheed, antisemitism is a threat that requires a “multi-pronged human rights approach” to address the issue. 

In his presentation, Shaheed recommends that states adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism as a “non-legal educational tool” to enable them to identify, monitor and respond to antisemitic discourses and attacks. He also calls on the U.N. Secretary General António Guterres to appoint a senior-level envoy to coordinate global efforts to combat antisemitism, as well as the establishment of faith-based organizations to show solidarity and build resilience and trust between communities.

“My key purpose in doing the report is to motivate states and other actors to take action against antisemitism and seize on the very serious threat to everybody to take common action to stop this,” Shaheed said in an interview with Jewish Insider. “I am very clear that governments must respond to all antisemitism by taking preemptive steps, but there’s also an obligation to have laws in place and enforce them to protect people and provide remedy to the victims of such incidents.” 

Shaheed suggested that the U.N. report could help sooth concerns among Israelis and members of the Jewish community that the international body is biased against the Jewish state. “If the secretary-general appoints an envoy to a very senior level in his office to deal with the matter, I think Jews will start feeling that the U.N. also works for them,” Shaheed told JI. “Right now, I feel a sense of grievance that the U.N. is a very biased body against Israel and the Jewish community, and I am hoping that one of the outcomes of this is that those within the U.N. system itself start taking more notice of the issues faced by Jewish communities across the world and that we build bridges in working together.” 

Shaheed, a career diplomat from the Maldives, revealed that when he was appointed to the post in November 2016, he “found almost nothing” was done by this mandate established three decades ago on addressing concerns raised by Jews. This inspired him to “start a conversation” with Jewish groups and human rights monitors how to address the issue. “I think there’s a grave understand that we have to address this deficit and pay more attention to this subject. This is a very good start, and I think we need to build on this connection for the time to come.” 

Shaheed noted that, since boycotts are internationally legal, he took “a very fine line” when spotlighting the “antisemitic tropes” invoked by the BDS movement. “There are elements in the BDS movement who are overtly and openly antisemitic,” he said. “The effects of this movement have been attacks on campuses and incidents against students and religious academics.” The report also connects online antisemitism as a driving tool that leads to violent attacks against the Jewish community. 

“This is a landmark report that represents the first time that the U.N., a body that has too often in the past been identified as a source of Jew hatred has seriously grappled with the stark reality of current antisemitism,” Mark Weitzman, director of government affairs at the Simon Wiesenthal Center, tells JI. “In reading it we get a sense that the author of the report, Prof. Shaheed, is morally outraged not only by the surge in antisemitism but also by many governments lack of recognition and commitment to fighting antisemitism.”