B'nai B'rith International
  • About Us
    • 175th Anniversary >
      • Timeline
    • Annual Report >
      • 2019 Annual Report
      • 2018 Annual Report
      • 990 Forms
    • Presidents Book
    • Around the World >
      • Australia & New Zealand
      • Canada
      • Cuba
      • Europe
      • Israel
      • Latin America >
        • Argentina
        • Brazil
        • Chile, Bolivia and Peru >
          • Anti-Semitism Forum in Santiago 2019
        • Northern Latin America and the Caribbean
        • Organization of American States (OAS)
        • Uruguay and Paraguay
      • South Africa
      • United States >
        • Allegheny/Ohio Valley
        • Chesapeake Bay
        • Colorado
        • Evergreen
        • Golden Pacific
        • Great Lakes >
          • B'nai B'rith Great Lakes Scholarship Program
        • Greater Florida
        • Kentucky
        • Liberty
        • MetroNorth
        • Midwest
        • New England
        • North Central
        • Southern California >
          • Knesset B'nai B'rith
        • Omaha, Nebraska
        • Southern Communities >
          • Atlanta, Georgia
        • St. Louis, Missouri
        • Texarkoma
        • Tri-State
    • Departments & Careers
    • Calendar
    • Events >
      • 2020 National Healthcare Award
      • 2020 B'nai B'rith Leadership Forum
      • Jewish Holiday Calendar
      • Continuing Education
    • Insurance Programs
    • Leadership
    • Programs >
      • BBRAVO
      • For Communities >
        • Project H.O.P.E.
      • For Culture and Education >
        • Unto Every Person
        • Center For Jewish Identity
        • Enlighten America
        • Museum and Archives >
          • B'nai B'rith Klutznick National Jewish Museum® Collection
          • Holocaust Art Resource List
          • Palestine Mandate Coins
        • Smarter Kids - Safer Kids
      • For Kids >
        • B'nai B'rith Cares for Kids
        • Diverse Minds
    • Senior Staff
    • B'nai B'rith Connect >
      • B'nai B'rith Connect Fall 2019 Newsletter
      • Past Connect Events
    • Privacy Policy
  • Global Advocacy
    • Take Action!
    • Anti-Semitism / None Shall Be Afraid >
      • About None Shall Be Afraid
      • B'nai B'rith on the Front Lines
      • Resources
      • Students Speak Out Against Anti-Semitism Contest
      • Take Our Pledge
    • Intercommunal Affairs
    • Tolerance and Diversity
    • Europe
    • Latin America
    • Canada
    • Israel and The Middle East
    • United Nations
    • United States
  • Israel
    • World Center – Jerusalem >
      • Sally Bein
    • Israel and the Middle East
    • Israel Emergency Fund
    • Fighting BDS
    • History in Israel
    • Center Stage 2020
    • Center Stage
    • Jewish Rescue
    • Jewish Rescuers Citation
  • Seniors
    • CSS Response to COVID-19
    • Virtual Trainings
    • CSS Advocacy
    • B'nai B'rith Senior Housing Network Timeline >
      • Wilkes-Barre
      • Harrisburg, Pa.
      • St. Louis, Mo.
      • Reading, Pa.
      • Silver Spring, Md.
      • Allentown, Pa.
      • Peoria, Ill.
      • Houston, Texas
      • Claymont, Del.
      • Pasadena, Texas
      • Boston, Mass.
      • Hot Springs, Ark.
      • Queens, N.Y.
      • Scranton, Pa.
      • Fort Worth, Texas
      • Deerfield Beach, Fla.
      • Sheboygan, Wis.
      • Schenectady, N.Y.
      • South Orange, N.J.
      • Bronx, N.Y.
      • Tuscon, Ariz. - B'nai B'rith Covenant House
      • Marlton, N.J.
      • Los Angeles, Calif.
      • New Haven, Conn.
      • Chesilhurst, N.J.
      • Tucson, Ariz. - Gerd & Inge Strauss B'nai B'rith Manor on Pantano
      • Dothan, Ala.
      • Sudbury, Mass.
    • CSS Staff Bios
    • B'nai B'rith Resident Leadership Retreat
    • CSS Puerto Rico Meeting 2019
    • Housing Locations
    • Seniority Report Newsletter
  • Humanitarian Aid
    • Community Support
    • Cuba Relief >
      • Cuba Missions
      • Get Involved
      • Cuba Blog
      • Where We Work
      • Cuba History
    • Disaster Relief >
      • Africa
      • Asia
      • Haiti
      • Latin America
      • United States >
        • SBP-New York Thanks B'nai B'rith Disaster Relief
  • News & Media
    • B'nai B'rith Impact
    • B'nai B'rith Magazine >
      • 2020 Winter B'nai B'rith Magazine
      • Magazine Archives
      • Past Magazine Articles
    • Expert Analysis >
      • Policy and Advocacy
      • Israel
      • Seniors
      • Jewish Identity
      • Community Action
    • In the News
    • Sign Up For B'nai B'rith Email Newsletters
    • Press Releases
    • Podcasts
    • Webinars and Conversations
    • Zero.Dot.Two Initiative
  • Partner with Us
    • B'nai B'rith Today
    • Give to B'nai B'rith
    • Membership
    • Planned Giving & Endowments >
      • Bequests
      • Charitable Gift Annuities
      • Charitable Remainder Trust (CRT)
      • Donor Testimonials
    • Giving >
      • Donate Stock
      • Foundations & Corporate Giving
      • Tribute Cards
      • Shop AmazonSmile
      • Purchase B'nai B'rith Apparel
    • Disaster Relief
    • Tree Of Life
    • Contact Form
  • B'nai B'rith Extra
    • Content For You

Examining Iran Nuclear Deal’s Convoluted 'Snapback' U.N. Sanctions

7/30/2015

Comments

 
PictureOren Drori
One of the prime selling points for supporters of the P5+1 (the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council—China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States—plus Germany) nuclear deal with Iran is that the sanctions on Iran which are being lifted can simply and easily be reinstated (or “snapback” into place) should Iran be found to be cheating. This is not likely to be the case. The “snapback” system that is created in the deal is convoluted and puts hurdles in the way.

Picture
The U.N. Security Council has steadily increased the pressure on Iran since 2006 with escalating sanctions targeting individuals, companies, nuclear technology and weapons transfers. In addition to these U.N. sanctions, the European Union introduced further sanctions targeting the Iranian oil industry and the U.S. tightened existing Iran sanctions and introduced new and tougher sanctions. This sanctions regime put major constraints on the Iranian economy that forced the Iranian government to enter into negotiations on its nuclear program. 

The deal that was struck between Iran and the world powers promises to lift these sanctions in return for Iran’s curtailment of its nuclear enrichment for a period of time. The sanctions are to be lifted once the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) certifies that Iran has satisfactorily addressed the IAEA’s concerns about Iran’s past illicit nuclear weapon activity and that the current program is civilian in nature. 
Should Iran cheat (and, given the Iranian regime’s history, it is a safe bet that Iran will try to cheat), there is a provision in the deal that could re-impose U.N. sanctions, but it is cumbersome. The deal creates a Joint Commission made up of one representative from each government plus an EU representative to ensure compliance by all sides. If there is intelligence that Iran is enriching uranium at higher levels than allowed, or working toward constructing nuclear weapons, a country can bring a complaint to the Joint Commission. The commission would have 15 days to discuss and resolve the issue, subject to extension by consensus. If the commission does not resolve the issue, it can be brought up to the level of the foreign ministers for consideration for 15 days, or longer if extended by consensus. 
Picture
If the situation is still not resolved, the complaint can be brought before an Advisory Board, made up of members appointed by the two parties to the complaint (for instance, the U.S. and Iran if the U.S. has evidence of Iranian malfeasance) and a third independent member. The Advisory Board will issue a non-binding opinion in 15 days, which would then go back to the Joint Commission for five days. The entire process is not streamlined and opens itself up to opportunities for continuing delays.
If, after all of the prolonged bureaucratic procedure, the complaining party does not feel that the issue is resolved, the country can turn to the U.N. Security Council and introduce concerns about Iran’s “significant non-performance” with the deal. At that point, the Security Council will put forward a resolution to continue the lifting of sanctions, which must be adopted within 30 days, or the sanctions will be re-imposed. This is the “snapback” part of the sanctions deal. It means that if Iran is found to be cheating, the sanctions can be re-introduced in a way that does not require an affirmative vote (which could be complicated by council dynamics and the ever-present threat of a veto by one or more of the permanent five members of the council). 
Picture
Picture
It is not a complete “snapback,” however, since it will not be imposed retroactively. Existing contracts and trade would be allowed to continue, so Iran could comply with the deal for years (or not get caught not complying for years) and still reap the rewards of technology and billions of dollars in trade before the sanctions would go back into effect if Iran is caught cheating.

Aside from unnecessary bureaucracy, the more serious problem is that the language in the nuclear deal and in the subsequent U.N. Security Council resolution state that it must be a “significant” compliance issue. This is vague—what exactly constitutes "significant non-compliance?" The fear is that the tendency of the world powers will be to minimize or ignore non-compliance issues as not “significant” enough to rise to the level that would require “snapback” sanctions. Why? Because once the U.N. sanctions are re-introduced, the U.N. Security Council resolution “noted” Iran’s stated position that Iran would stop living up to its commitments in the nuclear deal in full. Essentially, the Security Council resolution allowed the “snapback” sanctions to be held hostage by the deal. 

A lot of advocacy and diplomacy went into carefully creating the structure of the U.N.’s Iran sanctions system, and within a few short months that will be reversed, and, despite the “snapback” provisions, difficult to fully re-create if necessitated by Iranian non-compliance. If, after 10 years, the sanctions have not been reintroduced, then the sanctions resolutions expire and cannot be “snapped back.” The Iranian nuclear issue would also then disappear from the Security Council agenda.

Yes, sanctions resolutions could then be reintroduced by the world powers if Iran tries to breakout to a nuclear bomb, but it is a long and difficult process to summon up the international will to do so and avoid a Security Council veto, and by then it would be too little, too late. So, Iran can either wait a few years to cheat after trade is already flowing, or wait 10 years for the credible threat of sanctions to disappear almost entirely.


Oren Drori is the Program Officer for United Nations Affairs at B’nai B’rith International where he supports advocacy and programming efforts that advance B’nai B’rith’s goals at the U.N., which include: defending Israel, combating anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism, and promoting global human rights and humanitarian concerns. He received a B.A. in Political Science from the University of Minnesota in 2004 and an M.A. in International Relations from the University of Chicago in 2006. To view some of his additional content, Click Here.
Comments

The Iran Deal—A Solid Basis for Progress, or Full of Holes?

7/15/2015

Comments

 
Picture

PictureDavid J. Michaels
For at least a decade, when asked during meetings with government representatives about priority concerns, I have typically listed them as: “Iran, Iran and… Iran.”

No one country is, to be sure, the be-all and end-all of the world’s problems, or the Middle East’s. But Iran – by far the strongest and most vociferous state adversary of Israel – is the patron of most of the non-state forces committed to terrorizing Israel’s people. In fact, both its clerical leadership and its proxies are doctrinally committed to preventing peace with the Jewish state – and to that lone regional democracy’s very destruction.


However, the deadly menace posed by Iran far surpasses even this. The United States, whose own “death” Iranian regime-incited crowds continued to urge even during the recent diplomatic engagement, has long recognized Iran as the leading state sponsor of global terrorism, with casualties spanning from Argentina to Bulgaria. Of late, much alarm has rightly been raised over the horrors of the so-called Islamic State (a Sunni group), but too many have become indifferent to the horrors, domestic and otherwise, of the (Shi’ite) Islamic Republic. In addition to the notorious Quds Force of the regime’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, a key, fragile Mediterranean country, Lebanon, is politically dominated by Iran-sponsored Hezbollah – the foremost military power at home, long the “A-team of terrorists” on the international scene, and the defender of last resort of its allied Assad regime in Syria, whose civil strife has seen far more Arabs killed in only four years than have been in at least 70 years of the conflict involving Israel. Indeed, in virtually every site of severe violence and turmoil in the region, from Iraq to Yemen – where dramatically emboldened Houthi rebels now openly hawk their mantra of “God is Great, Death to America, Death to Israel, Damnation to the Jews, Victory to Islam” – Iranian fingerprints are to be not-so-subtly found.

Little wonder, then, that for all the chatter in Washington about Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu’s “hard-line” demands and anxieties on Iran, those same sentiments are matched, at the very least, by virtually all of America’s Arab partners as well – those who know Iran best and must live with it as next-door neighbors. Notably, no action and no capacity on the part of Israel, and no sharp political differences that they have had with it, has ever so alarmed the Arab states as a potentially nuclear-armed Iran has. Presaging a nuclear arms race in a region that can least afford it, and during an American presidency that had aimed for global nuclear non-proliferation, those Arab states have pledged to match any military capacity that the Iranians acquire.

Little wonder, then, that Israelis across party lines – already facing the most brutally inhospitable of neighborhoods – have been so extraordinarily adamant that the most dangerous of governments not have any capability to obtain the most dangerous of weaponry.

And “capability,” to be certain, is what is key; the watering down of fundamental benchmarks for a nuclear agreement with Iran – from “no nuclear-weapons capability” to “no nuclear weapons” – was a significant, early blunder by international negotiators. Those negotiators have now managed to reach a hard-won deal with Iran – notwithstanding unceasing public animosity, and relentless re-interpretation of mutual understandings, on the part of supreme Iranian authorities – and that deal may buy some short-term benefits. The question is, do temporary benefits outweigh lasting hazards and damage? Fully assessing the agreement’s benefits and drawbacks may be possible only over the course of months, if not years.

Filling a vacuum of uncertainly, the Iran deal could wrest transient Iranian restraint in its nuclear activities for the first time in years, and at a time when world powers, facing an Iran whose nuclear program is now extensive, have either been complicit in or unsure about how to contend with that advancing program. But, by virtually all accounts, Iran has been allowed to remain a nuclear-threshold state, with much of its nuclear infrastructure (and some of its nuclear research and development work) remaining intact. As critically, after only ten or fifteen years of the agreement’s duration, Iran would be significantly freed to race for a nuclear bomb – with world powers left in the same position of determining how, if at all, they might obstruct this unprecedented disaster for international peace and security. Meanwhile, the economic sanctions that at least strained Iranian mischief-making endeavors and prompted the Iranians to negotiate will have been lifted (with just limited possibility of effective restoration). Iranian pursuit of conventional but ever-more-lethal arms will also have progressed unabated – indeed now likely escalated, with foreign acquiescence – and Iran’s de facto status as a nuclear player will have been conceded to by its heavyweight interlocutors.

Even without these factors, cynics – or, as they might prefer, realists – have good reason to fear that the landmark agreement with Iran will not yield responsible Iranian policies or movement toward regional stability. A much-heralded political agreement, and international inspections, utterly failed to stop even singularly isolated North Korea from becoming a regime possessing nuclear weapons. And we know one thing about Iran: notwithstanding its supreme leaders’ express disavowal, in religious terms, of obtaining nuclear arms, Iran has practiced incessant duplicity and subterfuge in its stunningly aggressive pursuit of nuclear capabilities – a pursuit that the world’s most well-informed intelligence agencies unmistakably recognize as consistent with a hunt for access to the most dangerous weapons in existence. The very ability to “break out” as a nuclear-armed state and state-sponsor of terrorists may, after all, be all that Iran needs to afford itself and its proxies relative impunity for their violent fanaticism – or a safeguard against any external notion of supporting Arab Spring-style uprising in Iran, like the abortive one of 2009. The very inability of the U.S. to prevent the unthinkable but long-anticipated would certainly prove a victory for the Islamic Republic – and an undermining of confidence in Washington’s preparedness to defend core interests and allies.

The hope of those endorsing the international nuclear agreement with Iran, beyond interest in again freeing up Iranian oil resources and business opportunities, may not rest on expectation of organic Iranian regime or policy change as much as a mix of trust in an active (if decidedly constrained) inspections protocol, optimism that valuable time will have been bought to detect and effectively disrupt any Iranian nuclear misdeeds, and suspicion that Iranian domestic political considerations (particularly demands for sanctions relief) will ultimately outweigh the temptations of a wild nuclear adventurism. But Iran’s nuclear campaign, despite all the outside pressures and scrutiny, has proven tellingly determined. The policy calculus of an ideologically radical theocracy like Iran, after all, may well differ from the mundane considerations of politicians in foreign capitals like London, Paris and Vienna. Moreover, with the mullahs’ many hard-earned foes, a nuclear “deterrent” may not take a back seat in Tehran to economic growth and rising employment rates as a perceived necessity for self-preservation and policy advancement. If Iran does reach a point of no return in its ability to acquire nuclear arms, the country might even eventually be able to have its cake and eat it too – enjoying near-hegemony in its neighborhood as well as economic strength, enabled by an international community hungry for oil and wary of war.

The war-wariness of Westerners and others is, of course, understandable, and the new deal with Iran does seem poised to make irrelevant the already tepid threat of a Western military response to Tehran’s nuclear activity. No doubt, a military confrontation with Iran – already such a destructive force on the international scene – would have been terribly costly. The only thing far more costly is the prospect of confrontation with an Iran whose illicit nuclear ambitions have been allowed to come to fruition. 

David J. Michaels is Director of United Nations and Intercommunal Affairs at B'nai B'rith International, where he began working in 2004 as Special Assistant to the Executive Vice President. A Wexner Fellow/Davidson Scholar, and past winner of the Young Professional Award of the Jewish Communal Service Association of North America, he holds degrees from Yale and Yeshiva University.To view some of his additional content, Click Here.
Comments

Obergefell Ruling Surprisingly Important For Social Security 

7/1/2015

Comments

 
PictureRachel Goldberg
The June 26, 2015 decision in Obergefell v. Hodges, in which the U.S. Supreme Court recognized the right of same sex couples to marry and to have their unions recognized by all states and the federal government, was part of a big week of decisions out of the court. In a single week we saw significant rulings on issues ranging from the death penalty to the EPA to President Obama's health care reform.   
In the case of same sex marriage, the decision was actually the second important Supreme Court decision on the subject in exactly two years. Whether coincidence or not, June 26 is now the date of two decisions that have had a huge impact on the issue of same sex marriage, and, perhaps surprisingly, for the Social Security administration. 

In June of 2013, the Supreme Court decided in United States v. Windsor (known as the Windsor case) that the federal government must recognize same sex unions recognized by the states, but did NOT require states to allow marriage, or even recognize those legally performed in other states. This meant that for the first time same sex couples could get many federal benefits, like resident status for non-citizen spouses or filing as married on tax day. Before the Windsor decision, many legally married same sex couples filed as married for state returns and single for federal returns, causing confusion and requiring them to spend more money on accountants than other married couples. Others saw their spouses face deportation.

There are hundreds, even thousands, of other ways that federal recognition of marriage impacted families, so the Department of Justice coordinated and vetted the implementation of federal recognition across all the government agencies. To the surprise of many, one of the most challenging areas for implementation of the ruling was Social Security. While the Windsor decision was often treated in the media like a one-fell-swoop sort of thing, at the Social Security Administration (SSA) it was actually the opening of a year-long deliberative process which resulted in a final rule that was confusing and burdensome for both SSA and potential Social Security beneficiaries. 

Picture
Picture
Picture
Social Security’s statute requires SSA to recognize as marital relationships those legal relationships which are recognized by the state in which a person lives. Since Windsor continued to allow states to refuse recognition, some couples were getting recognition—and benefits—from SSA, while others living in “non-marriage states” were not. To make things more complicated, “recognition” can mean many things. If a state allows marriage license for same sex couples, well then it recognizes same sex marriages. But what if a court has ruled that same sex partners can inherit each other’s property like spouses? Does that count? What about domestic partnerships recognized by the states? The Windsor ruling, therefore, left Social Security treating people differently based on their state of residence AND constantly tracking what each state (and its courts) decided to make ongoing determinations about what constitutes recognition. 

And this is a high stakes process. Couples in which one person earns less get to take advantage of their spouse’s earnings record, boosting their own social security payment for life (and upon the death of their spouse, their benefit amount goes up again). For people with little non-Social Security retirement income, these distinctions are critically important. Likewise, workers who die leaving spouses, children and step children have earned benefits on which their families can rely, but part of those benefits depend on the recognition of the legal relationship between the adults.

Now with the Obergefell decision, we have what sounds like one-fell-swoop again: presto, all same sex marriages are recognized by Social Security. But once again, the process will be shepherded by the Justice Department and the results will not be immediately apparent. We do expect that in relatively short order, SSA will be able to divest itself of the burden of determining who lives where to know who is married to whom. This will not only provide more low-income retirees with better access to benefits, but it will also remove a costly administrative burden from an agency that can ill afford to waste its time. 

Over the past decade SSA has lost workers (to retirement) without being able to replace them, has had to close field offices due to budget constraints, and has reduced some of its direct communication with the public to save money. The Obergefell decision will have many impacts more noticeable and more celebrated, or more debated, than its impact on the Social Security Administration. But for those of us who recognize the importance of SSA’s mission, and the difficult environment in which the employees work, this is a big deal.
Also Read: How SSA Is Implementing Obergefell

Rachel Goldberg, Ph.D has been the B’nai B’rith International director of health and aging policy since 2003 and the deputy director of the B’nai B’rith International Senior Services since 2007. Before joining B'nai B'rith International, she taught politics and government at the University of Puget Sound and Georgetown University. To view some of her additional content, Click Here.
Comments

    Analysis From Our Experts

    B'nai B'rith International has widely respected experts in the fields of:

    • Global Advocacy
    • Supporting & Defending Israel
    • Senior Housing & Advocacy
    • Humanitarian Aid

    Archives

    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014

    Categories

    All
    2020
    2020 Census
    ADA
    Adriana Camisar
    Affordable Housing
    Afro Semitic
    Aging
    AJIRI
    Alan Schneider
    Alberto Nisman
    Alina Bricman
    Alt-right
    American History
    Americans With Disabilities Act
    AMIA
    Anita Winter
    Anti-Defamation Commission
    Anti Semitism
    Anti-Semitism
    Argentina
    Art
    Art & Music
    Asia
    Australia
    Australian Jewish News
    Azerbaijan
    Balfour Declaration
    Bambi Sheleg
    Ban Ki-moon
    Barr Foundation
    BDS
    Benefits
    Benjamin Naegele
    B'nai B'rith
    B'nai B'rith Anti-defamation Commission
    B'nai B'rith Housing
    B'nai B'rith International
    Bolivia
    Boris Johnson
    Brazil
    Breana Clark
    Caregiver Credits
    Caregivers
    Catholic Church
    CEIRPP
    Census
    Center For Senior Services
    Charles O. Kaufman
    Cheryl Kempler
    Cold War
    Comedy
    Commission On The Status Of Women
    Community Action
    Congress
    Coronavirus
    Cristina Fernández De Kirchner
    CSS
    CSS Housing
    Csw
    Cuba
    Cuban Jewish Relief Project
    Cyprus
    Daniel Mariaschin
    Dava Sobel
    David Michaels
    Dept. Of Housing And Urban Development
    Dilma Rousseff
    Disabilities
    Disabled Americans
    Disaster Relief
    Discrimination
    Dr. Howard Weiner
    Durban
    Dvir Abramovich
    Ecuador
    Eduardo Kohn
    Eighth Summit Of The Americas
    Elections
    Embassy
    Entebbe
    Eric Fusfield
    Europe
    European Union
    Evan Carmen
    Expert Analysis
    Facebook
    Fatah
    Fiduciary
    Film
    Fox News
    Gaza
    Georgia
    Germany
    Greece
    Guatemala
    Gun Reform
    Gun Violence
    Halle
    Hamas
    Harvard University
    Health Care
    Helping Communities
    Hezbollah
    Holocaust
    Homecrest House
    Honduras
    HUD
    Human Rights
    Human Rights Public Policy
    IACHR
    Ibrahim Yassin
    ICC
    ICHRPP
    IDF
    Ilhan Omar
    Immigration
    India
    InsideSources
    Inter-American Commission On Human Rights (IACHR)
    Iran
    Iran Deal
    Irina Bokova
    Israel
    Israel Nation-state Law
    Item 7
    Janel Doughten
    Japan
    Jeremy Havardi
    Jerusalem
    Jewish
    Jewish-catholic Relations
    Jewish Communal Leadership
    Jewish Culture
    Jewish Film Festival
    Jewish Heritage
    Jewish History
    Jewish Identity
    Jewish Leadership
    Jewish Movies
    Jewish Museum
    Jewish Refugees
    Jewish Rescuers Citation
    Jews
    JNS
    JRJ
    Judaica
    Kakehashi Project
    Knesset
    Kristallnacht
    Kyoto
    Latin America
    Laura Hemlock
    Leadership Forum
    Lebanon
    LIHTC
    Lima
    Literature
    Low-income
    Low Income Seniors
    Low-income Seniors
    Luis Almagro
    Mahmoud Abbas
    Mark Olshan
    Mauricio Macri
    Medicaid
    Medicare
    Memorandum Of Understanding
    Mexico
    Middle East Affairs
    Mohammed El Halabi
    Music
    Nahum Goldmann Fellowship (NGF)
    NGF
    Nicolas Maduro
    NRA
    OAS
    Older Americans Act
    Olympics
    Op Ed
    Op-ed
    Opioid Crisis
    Oren Drori
    OSCE
    Palestinian
    Palestinians
    Panama
    Paraguay
    Pat Wolfson Endowment
    Perlman Camp
    Peru
    Poland
    Policy
    Policy And Advocacy
    Pope Francis
    Poverty
    Programming
    Programs
    Project H.O.P.E.
    Public Policy
    Purim
    Rachel Goldberg
    Rachel Knopp
    Rashida Tlaib
    Rebecca Rose
    Rebecca Saltzman
    Rep. Cheri Bustos
    Rep. Jamie Raskin
    Rhonda Love
    Richard Spencer
    Roberta Jacobson
    Rod Serling
    Romania
    Section 202
    Senior Housing
    Senior Housing Advocacy
    Seniors
    Seniors Issues
    Shimon Peres
    Sienna Girgenti
    Social Security
    South America
    Spain
    Summit Of The Americas
    Sup
    Supporting Defending Israel
    Sweden
    Syria
    Syrian Refugees
    Tareck El Aissami
    Temple Mount
    Terror
    Terrorism
    Theater
    The Twilight Zone
    Times Of Israel
    Tokyo
    Trump
    Twitter
    UN
    U.N.
    Un Affairs
    UNESCO
    UNGA
    UNHRC
    United
    United Nations
    UNRWA
    UN Security Council
    Unto Every Person
    Uruguay
    U.S. Congress
    U.S. House Of Representatives
    Vatican
    Venezuela
    Volunteering
    Voter ID Laws
    Voting
    We Walk To Remember
    White House
    WHO
    William Kentridge
    Winter Olympics
    World Center
    World Heritage Committee
    World Jewish Congress
    World Vision
    Wuppertal
    YLN
    Yom Hashoah
    Young Leadership Network
    Zionism

    RSS Feed

Connect With Us

About B'nai B'rith

Contact Us
Subscribe to Our Newsletters
Programs


Support Our Work

Attend an Event
Become a Member
Donate Now
B'nai B'rith Apparel

Subscribe to Our Podcast

Apple Podcasts
Spotify
Google Play
Stitcher


​​
© 2021 - B'nai B'rith International 

1120 20th Street NW, Suite 300N
Washington, D.C. 20036

Phone: 202-857-6600
Privacy Policy 
Picture
  • About Us
    • 175th Anniversary >
      • Timeline
    • Annual Report >
      • 2019 Annual Report
      • 2018 Annual Report
      • 990 Forms
    • Presidents Book
    • Around the World >
      • Australia & New Zealand
      • Canada
      • Cuba
      • Europe
      • Israel
      • Latin America >
        • Argentina
        • Brazil
        • Chile, Bolivia and Peru >
          • Anti-Semitism Forum in Santiago 2019
        • Northern Latin America and the Caribbean
        • Organization of American States (OAS)
        • Uruguay and Paraguay
      • South Africa
      • United States >
        • Allegheny/Ohio Valley
        • Chesapeake Bay
        • Colorado
        • Evergreen
        • Golden Pacific
        • Great Lakes >
          • B'nai B'rith Great Lakes Scholarship Program
        • Greater Florida
        • Kentucky
        • Liberty
        • MetroNorth
        • Midwest
        • New England
        • North Central
        • Southern California >
          • Knesset B'nai B'rith
        • Omaha, Nebraska
        • Southern Communities >
          • Atlanta, Georgia
        • St. Louis, Missouri
        • Texarkoma
        • Tri-State
    • Departments & Careers
    • Calendar
    • Events >
      • 2020 National Healthcare Award
      • 2020 B'nai B'rith Leadership Forum
      • Jewish Holiday Calendar
      • Continuing Education
    • Insurance Programs
    • Leadership
    • Programs >
      • BBRAVO
      • For Communities >
        • Project H.O.P.E.
      • For Culture and Education >
        • Unto Every Person
        • Center For Jewish Identity
        • Enlighten America
        • Museum and Archives >
          • B'nai B'rith Klutznick National Jewish Museum® Collection
          • Holocaust Art Resource List
          • Palestine Mandate Coins
        • Smarter Kids - Safer Kids
      • For Kids >
        • B'nai B'rith Cares for Kids
        • Diverse Minds
    • Senior Staff
    • B'nai B'rith Connect >
      • B'nai B'rith Connect Fall 2019 Newsletter
      • Past Connect Events
    • Privacy Policy
  • Global Advocacy
    • Take Action!
    • Anti-Semitism / None Shall Be Afraid >
      • About None Shall Be Afraid
      • B'nai B'rith on the Front Lines
      • Resources
      • Students Speak Out Against Anti-Semitism Contest
      • Take Our Pledge
    • Intercommunal Affairs
    • Tolerance and Diversity
    • Europe
    • Latin America
    • Canada
    • Israel and The Middle East
    • United Nations
    • United States
  • Israel
    • World Center – Jerusalem >
      • Sally Bein
    • Israel and the Middle East
    • Israel Emergency Fund
    • Fighting BDS
    • History in Israel
    • Center Stage 2020
    • Center Stage
    • Jewish Rescue
    • Jewish Rescuers Citation
  • Seniors
    • CSS Response to COVID-19
    • Virtual Trainings
    • CSS Advocacy
    • B'nai B'rith Senior Housing Network Timeline >
      • Wilkes-Barre
      • Harrisburg, Pa.
      • St. Louis, Mo.
      • Reading, Pa.
      • Silver Spring, Md.
      • Allentown, Pa.
      • Peoria, Ill.
      • Houston, Texas
      • Claymont, Del.
      • Pasadena, Texas
      • Boston, Mass.
      • Hot Springs, Ark.
      • Queens, N.Y.
      • Scranton, Pa.
      • Fort Worth, Texas
      • Deerfield Beach, Fla.
      • Sheboygan, Wis.
      • Schenectady, N.Y.
      • South Orange, N.J.
      • Bronx, N.Y.
      • Tuscon, Ariz. - B'nai B'rith Covenant House
      • Marlton, N.J.
      • Los Angeles, Calif.
      • New Haven, Conn.
      • Chesilhurst, N.J.
      • Tucson, Ariz. - Gerd & Inge Strauss B'nai B'rith Manor on Pantano
      • Dothan, Ala.
      • Sudbury, Mass.
    • CSS Staff Bios
    • B'nai B'rith Resident Leadership Retreat
    • CSS Puerto Rico Meeting 2019
    • Housing Locations
    • Seniority Report Newsletter
  • Humanitarian Aid
    • Community Support
    • Cuba Relief >
      • Cuba Missions
      • Get Involved
      • Cuba Blog
      • Where We Work
      • Cuba History
    • Disaster Relief >
      • Africa
      • Asia
      • Haiti
      • Latin America
      • United States >
        • SBP-New York Thanks B'nai B'rith Disaster Relief
  • News & Media
    • B'nai B'rith Impact
    • B'nai B'rith Magazine >
      • 2020 Winter B'nai B'rith Magazine
      • Magazine Archives
      • Past Magazine Articles
    • Expert Analysis >
      • Policy and Advocacy
      • Israel
      • Seniors
      • Jewish Identity
      • Community Action
    • In the News
    • Sign Up For B'nai B'rith Email Newsletters
    • Press Releases
    • Podcasts
    • Webinars and Conversations
    • Zero.Dot.Two Initiative
  • Partner with Us
    • B'nai B'rith Today
    • Give to B'nai B'rith
    • Membership
    • Planned Giving & Endowments >
      • Bequests
      • Charitable Gift Annuities
      • Charitable Remainder Trust (CRT)
      • Donor Testimonials
    • Giving >
      • Donate Stock
      • Foundations & Corporate Giving
      • Tribute Cards
      • Shop AmazonSmile
      • Purchase B'nai B'rith Apparel
    • Disaster Relief
    • Tree Of Life
    • Contact Form
  • B'nai B'rith Extra
    • Content For You