By Halie Soifer in Washington, D.C.
On March 12, Ayman Mohamad Ghazali drove an explosive-laden truck into the largest Reform synagogue in the United States. He clearly intended to inflict mass casualties, using his vehicle as a weapon to target Temple Israel in West Bloomfield, Michigan, with clergy, teachers, and 140 young children inside.
Once his truck became lodged in the hallway, the heavily armed Ghazali exchanged gunfire with guards and ultimately turned his weapon on himself. No one was killed, though one security guard was injured, and first responders suffered from smoke inhalation from the burning vehicle.
The heroic saving of lives at Temple Israel was a miracle, but it was not a fluke. It resulted from a hardening of security infrastructure at synagogues and Jewish institutions since the 2018 murder of 11 people at the Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh, the largest massacre of Jews in American history. Increased security for synagogues includes FBI training for active shooter situations, which Temple Israel participated in just six weeks ago. Physical bollards were positioned in front of Temple Israel to mitigate the impact of a possible car ramming, and they likely worked.
These measures come with a cost. According to the Jewish Federations of North America’s testimony before Congress last year, security for the Jewish community totaled $765 million annually. Following the attack at Temple Israel, synagogue security requirements will likely increase further as we enter the “most elevated and complex threat environment” in recent history, according to the Secure Community Network. This is largely due to the U.S. war with Iran, the situation in Gaza, possible copycat incidents from Temple Israel, and potential Iranian sleeper cells in the United States.
While events in the Middle East may contribute to the increased threat to American Jews and Jewish institutions, the actions of the U.S. or Israeli military – or events in the Middle East in general – should never be used as an excuse or justification for antisemitism. In the past year, there have been four incidents of anti-Israel sentiment manifesting in antisemitic violence. The first was the firebombing of the Pennsylvania Governor’s residence in April, followed by the targeting of two Israeli Embassy employees departing the Capital Jewish Museum in Washington D.C. a month later. In June, a group rallying for the release of hostages held in Gaza was firebombed, and one victim was killed in Boulder, Colorado.
The perpetrators of these incidents all chose to commit an act of violence targeting Jews, allegedly due to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Anti-Israel sentiment also appears to have driven the antisemitic attack on Temple Israel, which Ghazali targeted seven days after four of his relatives – two of his children and two brothers, one of whom served as a Hezbollah commander – were killed in Lebanon by Israel.
Since the Temple Israel event, media outlets, including The New York Times, have struggled to explain Ghazali’s deranged decision to attempt to inflict mass casualties on a building holding up to 140 young children. While The Times originally focused this headline on Ghazali as a “quiet presence” before his family was killed and he chose to attack Temple Israel, it subsequently changed the headline to instead focus on his community.
The original headline humanized Ghazali in a manner that seemingly provided at least partial justification for his actions. The truth is, there is no excuse for violence of any kind, including antisemitism. The Jewish people – individually or as a whole – should never be blamed for the actions of any government or military, including those of Israel.
Candidates such as Michigan Democratic Senate candidate Dr. Abdul El-Sayed also participated in the equivocation blame game. While El-Sayed stated on X that there was no justification for violence, he also asserted that “hurt people, hurt people,” rationalizing Ghazali’s actions as resulting from the killing of his family members. Ghazali’s loss does not provide an excuse for killing others, and what happened in Lebanon has nothing to do with West Bloomfield.
If we go down the road of allowing blame of Israel to serve as excuses for antisemitic violence, then we are saying that some forms of violence and hate, in some political contexts or conflicts, are more justified or understandable than others. Is violence targeting Americans, either abroad or at home, acceptable because the U.S. military is engaged in war in Iran? Is targeting Russian Americans because of the war in Ukraine acceptable? Of course not, and we’re all more vulnerable to such violence if we try to explain away antisemitic violence related to Israel.
Many U.S. political figures, Democrats and Republicans alike, condemned the attack on Temple Israel. What now must occur is an unequivocal condemnation of antisemitism in all its forms, including when Israel is used as a justification or excuse for one’s actions or views. Violence is never justified, and we excuse, justify, or contextualize it away at our own peril. Jewish Americans today are all as vulnerable as those 140 children at Temple Israel, even more so if we fail to see their attempted murder as anything other than an unconscionable form of hate, irrespective of the political context in which it emerged.
*
Halie Soifer is the CEO of the Jewish Democratic Council of America.