All News (Page 12)

The UN agency for Palestinian refugees is considering a major restructuring that could see thousands of employees laid off and some of its responsibilities transferred to other bodies, including to US President Donald Trump’s Board of Peace, according to multiple media reports citing diplomatic sources.

The reported proposal is being spearheaded by UNRWA’s acting commissioner-general, Christian Saunders, and comes as the agency faces a severe financial crisis.

Established under the framework endorsed by the UN Security Council in November 2025, Trump’s Board of Peace is tasked with overseeing Gaza’s transitional governance, reconstruction, economic recovery and coordination of humanitarian assistance.

The Board of Peace, however, has been explicit in its opposition to UNRWA, making it clear in a July 1 statement that “UNRWA has no place in the new Gaza.”

“We are turning the page on the complex of perpetual aid dependency and conflict. The people of Gaza deserve better,” the Board said in the same post.

BoP: UNRWA ‘fails’ to ‘contribute to a deradicalized Strip’

In a post on September 25, the Board of Peace said it “will only work with trusted partners who will deliver for the people of Gaza and contribute to a de-radicalized Strip. UNRWA fails on those litmus tests.”

The Associated Press reported on September 25 that Board representatives have held several private meetings with UNRWA officials. A Board official acknowledged that some of the agency’s programs and vetted employees could continue if they were effective and accountable, while maintaining that UNRWA’s institutional role was ending.

UN Watch’s Hillel Neuer posted last week that there is a plan to unravel the body, which has long faced criticism from Israel and the United States over allegations of links between some of its employees and terrorist organizations.

According to Israel Hayom, which cited Arab and Western diplomatic sources, discussions have taken place about transferring some of UNRWA’s responsibilities to the Board of Peace and other bodies. Some of the agency’s remit could reportedly also be transferred to the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank.

The reported proposal was presented by Saunders at a meeting of UNRWA’s Advisory Commission, with the agency’s financial difficulties cited as a central reason for the restructuring.

Saunders told Anadolu Agency on October 20 that the deficit stood at approximately $70 million.

“If we don’t receive money in the very near future, I will have to take some regrettable actions in order to ensure that we’re able to finish the year and to pay our staff salaries,” Saunders warned.

The head of the Arab Staff Union in Gaza, Mustafa Al-Ghoul, told Mondoweiss last week that UNRWA has dismissed around 1,000 staff in Gaza and let 2,000 retire without replacing them, leaving roughly 10,500.

Saunders gave the same figures in the AA interview, saying “We have 10,500 personnel on the ground [in the Gaza Strip].”

In the same interview, Saunders expressed support for the broader international framework for Gaza, saying: “US President Trump’s 20-point plan, UN Security Council Resolution 2803, the Board of Peace, and the National Committee for the Administration of Gaza – we are completely behind these efforts.”

Separately, Swiss French-language daily newspaper Le Temps published an investigation last week which claimed that Saunders plans for UNRWA to close its doors “within four or five years”; however, this has not yet been independently verified.

Board to exercise transitional authority in Gaza until PA completes reform

Under the UN-backed framework, the Board of Peace is to exercise transitional authority in Gaza until the Palestinian Authority has completed its reform program and can securely and effectively resume control. In the meantime, the National Committee for the Administration of Gaza is intended to serve as an interim technocratic administration.

Currently, UNRWA purports to be assisting more than 1.7 million Palestinians in Gaza, providing healthcare through 11 centers, schooling for approximately 300,000 children, and drinking water for around 820,000 people.

It also says it provides essential services to nearly six million Palestinian refugees across Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, and the West Bank.

This post was originally published on here. 

The UN agency for Palestinian refugees is considering a major restructuring that could see thousands of employees laid off and some of its responsibilities transferred to other bodies, including to US President Donald Trump’s Board of Peace, according to multiple media reports citing diplomatic sources.

The reported proposal is being spearheaded by UNRWA’s acting commissioner-general, Christian Saunders, and comes as the agency faces a severe financial crisis.

Established under the framework endorsed by the UN Security Council in November 2025, Trump’s Board of Peace is tasked with overseeing Gaza’s transitional governance, reconstruction, economic recovery and coordination of humanitarian assistance.

The Board of Peace, however, has been explicit in its opposition to UNRWA, making it clear in a July 1 statement that “UNRWA has no place in the new Gaza.”

“We are turning the page on the complex of perpetual aid dependency and conflict. The people of Gaza deserve better,” the Board said in the same post.

BoP: UNRWA ‘fails’ to ‘contribute to a deradicalized Strip’

In a post on September 25, the Board of Peace said it “will only work with trusted partners who will deliver for the people of Gaza and contribute to a de-radicalized Strip. UNRWA fails on those litmus tests.”

The Associated Press reported on September 25 that Board representatives have held several private meetings with UNRWA officials. A Board official acknowledged that some of the agency’s programs and vetted employees could continue if they were effective and accountable, while maintaining that UNRWA’s institutional role was ending.

UN Watch’s Hillel Neuer posted last week that there is a plan to unravel the body, which has long faced criticism from Israel and the United States over allegations of links between some of its employees and terrorist organizations.

According to Israel Hayom, which cited Arab and Western diplomatic sources, discussions have taken place about transferring some of UNRWA’s responsibilities to the Board of Peace and other bodies. Some of the agency’s remit could reportedly also be transferred to the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank.

The reported proposal was presented by Saunders at a meeting of UNRWA’s Advisory Commission, with the agency’s financial difficulties cited as a central reason for the restructuring.

Saunders told Anadolu Agency on October 20 that the deficit stood at approximately $70 million.

“If we don’t receive money in the very near future, I will have to take some regrettable actions in order to ensure that we’re able to finish the year and to pay our staff salaries,” Saunders warned.

The head of the Arab Staff Union in Gaza, Mustafa Al-Ghoul, told Mondoweiss last week that UNRWA has dismissed around 1,000 staff in Gaza and let 2,000 retire without replacing them, leaving roughly 10,500.

Saunders gave the same figures in the AA interview, saying “We have 10,500 personnel on the ground [in the Gaza Strip].”

In the same interview, Saunders expressed support for the broader international framework for Gaza, saying: “US President Trump’s 20-point plan, UN Security Council Resolution 2803, the Board of Peace, and the National Committee for the Administration of Gaza – we are completely behind these efforts.”

Separately, Swiss French-language daily newspaper Le Temps published an investigation last week which claimed that Saunders plans for UNRWA to close its doors “within four or five years”; however, this has not yet been independently verified.

Board to exercise transitional authority in Gaza until PA completes reform

Under the UN-backed framework, the Board of Peace is to exercise transitional authority in Gaza until the Palestinian Authority has completed its reform program and can securely and effectively resume control. In the meantime, the National Committee for the Administration of Gaza is intended to serve as an interim technocratic administration.

Currently, UNRWA purports to be assisting more than 1.7 million Palestinians in Gaza, providing healthcare through 11 centers, schooling for approximately 300,000 children, and drinking water for around 820,000 people.

It also says it provides essential services to nearly six million Palestinian refugees across Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, and the West Bank.

This post was originally published on here. 

A Russian spymaster claimed he helped topple former Austrian chancellor Sebastian Kurz, The Telegraph reported on Saturday.

Former Wirecard executive Jan Marsalek claimed to be involved in a Kremlin-associated operation to bring down the former chancellor. 

Kurz stepped down in 2021 amid allegations of corruption, bribery, and breach of trust. 

The Telegraph reported that Marsalek sent messages directly stating his role in ousting Kurz to his ringleader, Orlin Roussev, who is currently imprisoned in the UK.

If Marsalek’s allegations are true, it would indicate that the Kremlin is directly interfering in European political leadership.

Several countries assess Kremlin aims to destabilize European governments

The Telegraph report comes as multiple countries’ security agencies have assessed that the Kremlin is aiming to destabilize governments across Europe and sow chaos across the continent. 

Marsalek disappeared five years ago after Wirecard collapsed in 2020, owing creditors almost $4 billion. He is now an international fugitive, and his whereabouts are unknown. 

Since his disappearance, British authorities have revealed that he is a Russian spy directing espionage operations across Europe on an “industrial” scale. 

He is being investigated for spying on behalf of Russia in Germany, Austria, and the UK. 

When Marsalek’s ringleader Roussev was arrested in 2023, police found thousands of messages between him and Marsalek, who directed the unit of Bulgarian nationals from overseas. 

The conversations between Marsalek and Roussev were key to “identifying how this group acted and were tasked,” police commander Murphy said, and included references to Russia’s GRU military intelligence and jokes about the nerve agent Novichok, used to target Russian double agent Sergei Skripal in Salisbury, England, in 2018.

UK authorities later shared these messages with other European police forces, primarily the Austrians, who are now investigating the extent to which their spies provided Marsalek with information. 

The Telegraph reviewed an Austrian investigative file detailing messages Marsalek sent under the alias “Rupert Ticz” in 2021. 

In the messages, Marsalek says a guy who was “actually working for us for a while” is now “the victim of a witch hunt by the team of the former chancellor.”

According to The Telegraph, Marsalek then says “we’ve successfully toppled” Kurz “by confiscating the mobile phone” of the person “who’s managing their secret campaign financing.”

He then shared a link to an article about Kurz’s corruption allegations and a phone that was seized by one of the former chancellor’s close advisers, Thomas Schmid. 

Schmid’s phone was seized in 2019, and the messages on it became important evidence for corruption investigations.

Kurz stepped down in 2021 after investigations into his ÖVP party for misusing public funds to secure favorable media coverage. 

Two weeks after Kurz stepped down, Marsalek wrote Roussev that the entire situation was “quite a messy story,” according to The Telegraph.

He referred to the phone again later in the conversation, noting that “the rest of the chats ‘killed’ the chancellor.”

The Telegraph noted that the files contain no independent evidence that Marsalek organized the seizure of the phone. 

Former Austrian intelligence officers found guilty of spying for Russia

However, several former Austrian intelligence officers have been accused of handing him information intended to be passed on to Russia. 

Notably, in May, a Jury in Vienna found former Austrian intelligence official Egisto Ott guilty of spying for Russia. He was found to have provided Marsalek and Russian intelligence officers with information. 

He also was found to have helped Russia hunt down opponents ‌and selling it state laptops and phones at Marsalek’s behest.

What is in the Austrian investigation?

The Telegraph noted that Austrian investigators wrote in an assessment that “Marsalek stated unequivocally that ‘they’ had ‘toppled’ the chancellor in a successful operation.

“Marsalek thus admitted to Roussev that he had been involved in the confiscation of this mobile phone,” investigators added. 

Investigators interpreted the conversation between the two as Marsalek claiming involvement in the ex-chancellor’s downfall.

Notably, the messages between the two men were contained in police files investigating “support for a foreign intelligence service – interference in Austrian politics.”

While Kurz did not comment on the matter, sources close to him said he believed the allegations against him were politically motivated and that he was shocked to learn they could be related to Russia. 

British prosecutors noted that at the time the messages were sent, Marsalek was living in Moscow and worked for the Russian Federal Security Service. 

The messages detailed above were obtained from mobile devices seized in 2023 when British police arrested Roussev. 

“It’s the worst-kept secret in Europe that a large portion of Russian diplomatic personnel in Vienna – one of Europe’s largest at over 500 personnel – are undercover operatives for Russian intelligence agencies including the SVR and GRU,” Yorktown Institute Fellow Robert Clark told The Telegraph. 

“While Austria has expelled a number of Russian diplomats – most notably as recently as last month – Vienna remains a central node for Russian influence and operations. It’s of little wonder that Russian intelligence services would use that relatively safe environment to attempt to bring down heads of state,” he added, as per The Telegraph.

“What’s even more worrying now compared to, say, even 2021, and the pre-Ukraine war of Mr Kurz’s government, is Russia’s increasing willingness to use more belligerent means of espionage, coercion, and sabotage, to sow division within Europe, its governments, and its institutions, ultimately weakening the collective response mechanisms the continent relies upon to respond to Russian hostility. 

“The Kremlin will likely only get more bellicose, than less, despite damning revelations such as these, he added, as per The Telegraph. 

Moscow has ⁠regularly accused Western powers of trying to inflame anti-Russian hysteria.

This post was originally published on here. 

The Saudi-led coalition said it destroyed a ballistic missile launch platform in Yemen’s capital, Sanaa, that the Iran-backed Houthis had used in an attempted attack on Saudi Arabia’s Eastern Region on Sunday.

The Eastern Region, which is the economic powerhouse ​of Saudi Arabia, has been subject to multiple Houthi attacks in the past few weeks.

This is a developing story.

This post was originally published on here. 

A Russian spymaster claimed he helped topple former Austrian chancellor Sebastian Kurz, The Telegraph reported on Saturday.

Former Wirecard executive Jan Marsalek claimed to be involved in a Kremlin-associated operation to bring down the former chancellor. 

Kurz stepped down in 2021 amid allegations of corruption, bribery, and breach of trust. 

The Telegraph reported that Marsalek sent messages directly stating his role in ousting Kurz to his ringleader, Orlin Roussev, who is currently imprisoned in the UK.

If Marsalek’s allegations are true, it would indicate that the Kremlin is directly interfering in European political leadership.

Several countries assess Kremlin aims to destabilize European governments

The Telegraph report comes as multiple countries’ security agencies have assessed that the Kremlin is aiming to destabilize governments across Europe and sow chaos across the continent. 

Marsalek disappeared five years ago after Wirecard collapsed in 2020, owing creditors almost $4 billion. He is now an international fugitive, and his whereabouts are unknown. 

Since his disappearance, British authorities have revealed that he is a Russian spy directing espionage operations across Europe on an “industrial” scale. 

He is being investigated for spying on behalf of Russia in Germany, Austria, and the UK. 

When Marsalek’s ringleader Roussev was arrested in 2023, police found thousands of messages between him and Marsalek, who directed the unit of Bulgarian nationals from overseas. 

The conversations between Marsalek and Roussev were key to “identifying how this group acted and were tasked,” police commander Murphy said, and included references to Russia’s GRU military intelligence and jokes about the nerve agent Novichok, used to target Russian double agent Sergei Skripal in Salisbury, England, in 2018.

UK authorities later shared these messages with other European police forces, primarily the Austrians, who are now investigating the extent to which their spies provided Marsalek with information. 

The Telegraph reviewed an Austrian investigative file detailing messages Marsalek sent under the alias “Rupert Ticz” in 2021. 

In the messages, Marsalek says a guy who was “actually working for us for a while” is now “the victim of a witch hunt by the team of the former chancellor.”

According to The Telegraph, Marsalek then says “we’ve successfully toppled” Kurz “by confiscating the mobile phone” of the person “who’s managing their secret campaign financing.”

He then shared a link to an article about Kurz’s corruption allegations and a phone that was seized by one of the former chancellor’s close advisers, Thomas Schmid. 

Schmid’s phone was seized in 2019, and the messages on it became important evidence for corruption investigations.

Kurz stepped down in 2021 after investigations into his ÖVP party for misusing public funds to secure favorable media coverage. 

Two weeks after Kurz stepped down, Marsalek wrote Roussev that the entire situation was “quite a messy story,” according to The Telegraph.

He referred to the phone again later in the conversation, noting that “the rest of the chats ‘killed’ the chancellor.”

The Telegraph noted that the files contain no independent evidence that Marsalek organized the seizure of the phone. 

Former Austrian intelligence officers found guilty of spying for Russia

However, several former Austrian intelligence officers have been accused of handing him information intended to be passed on to Russia. 

Notably, in May, a Jury in Vienna found former Austrian intelligence official Egisto Ott guilty of spying for Russia. He was found to have provided Marsalek and Russian intelligence officers with information. 

He also was found to have helped Russia hunt down opponents ‌and selling it state laptops and phones at Marsalek’s behest.

What is in the Austrian investigation?

The Telegraph noted that Austrian investigators wrote in an assessment that “Marsalek stated unequivocally that ‘they’ had ‘toppled’ the chancellor in a successful operation.

“Marsalek thus admitted to Roussev that he had been involved in the confiscation of this mobile phone,” investigators added. 

Investigators interpreted the conversation between the two as Marsalek claiming involvement in the ex-chancellor’s downfall.

Notably, the messages between the two men were contained in police files investigating “support for a foreign intelligence service – interference in Austrian politics.”

While Kurz did not comment on the matter, sources close to him said he believed the allegations against him were politically motivated and that he was shocked to learn they could be related to Russia. 

British prosecutors noted that at the time the messages were sent, Marsalek was living in Moscow and worked for the Russian Federal Security Service. 

The messages detailed above were obtained from mobile devices seized in 2023 when British police arrested Roussev. 

“It’s the worst-kept secret in Europe that a large portion of Russian diplomatic personnel in Vienna – one of Europe’s largest at over 500 personnel – are undercover operatives for Russian intelligence agencies including the SVR and GRU,” Yorktown Institute Fellow Robert Clark told The Telegraph. 

“While Austria has expelled a number of Russian diplomats – most notably as recently as last month – Vienna remains a central node for Russian influence and operations. It’s of little wonder that Russian intelligence services would use that relatively safe environment to attempt to bring down heads of state,” he added, as per The Telegraph.

“What’s even more worrying now compared to, say, even 2021, and the pre-Ukraine war of Mr Kurz’s government, is Russia’s increasing willingness to use more belligerent means of espionage, coercion, and sabotage, to sow division within Europe, its governments, and its institutions, ultimately weakening the collective response mechanisms the continent relies upon to respond to Russian hostility. 

“The Kremlin will likely only get more bellicose, than less, despite damning revelations such as these, he added, as per The Telegraph. 

Moscow has ⁠regularly accused Western powers of trying to inflame anti-Russian hysteria.

This post was originally published on here. 

Channel 13 News suspended television presenter Eyal Berkovic from broadcasting on Sunday following remarks widely criticized as racist, marking his second controversy in just over a week after a confrontation with fellow presenter Lucy Aharish.

According to a report published by Israeli entertainment news outlet TMI on Sunday, Berkovic questioned the academic credentials of Dr. Abdul El-Sayed, who was elected to the US Senate from Michigan, during Saturday night’s broadcast of the Channel 13 program “Moria and Berko.” He later questioned the medical qualifications of Israeli lawmaker Ahmad Tibi.

Following the incident, Channel 13 News announced that Berkovic had been suspended from broadcasting, effective immediately.

“Freedom of expression and a diversity of opinions are among the cornerstones of a free press, but they do not provide a platform for racist remarks,” the network stated. “The statements made yesterday on ‘Moria and Berko’ are unacceptable and inconsistent with the company’s values. As a result, a clarification meeting was held with Eyal Berkovic, at the conclusion of which it was decided to suspend him from broadcasting immediately.”

Berkovic questions whether El-Sayed entitled to use title ‘doctor’

The controversy began when Channel 13 political reporter Suleiman Maswadeh introduced El-Sayed, a Democrat known for his outspoken criticism of Israel, using the title “doctor.”

Berkovic questioned whether El-Sayed was entitled to use the title, asking, “They give everyone there the title of doctor. Did you check whether he’s a doctor?”

His co-host, Moriah Asraf, clarified that El-Sayed did hold the qualification, but Berkovic continued, turning his attention to Tibi, an Arab Israeli member of the Knesset.

Berkovic said, “They also say Ahmad Tibi is a doctor. So they say. Let him bring his diploma.”

El-Sayed is a physician and epidemiologist who holds a medical degree from Columbia University and a doctorate in public health from Oxford University. Tibi is also a trained gynecologist.

The remarks drew widespread criticism on social media, including from prominent Israeli journalists.

Channel 12 journalist Barak Ravid condemned the comments, writing that “racism is not a legitimate opinion or a matter of being for or against.”

Suspension follows confrontation with Lucy Aharish

The suspension comes just over a week after Berkovic faced criticism over a separate incident involving Channel 13 presenter Lucy Aharish, an Arab Israeli journalist.

During a commercial break, Berkovic told Aharish, “Calm down, you’re not in your village here.”

Aharish accused Berkovic of racism and initially refused to return to the broadcast. She later returned to the screen.

Channel 13 did not specify how long Berkovic’s suspension would last or when he might return to broadcasting.

This post was originally published on here. 

Channel 13 News suspended television presenter Eyal Berkovic from broadcasting on Sunday following remarks widely criticized as racist, marking his second controversy in just over a week after a confrontation with fellow presenter Lucy Aharish.

According to a report published by Israeli entertainment news outlet TMI on Sunday, Berkovic questioned the academic credentials of Dr. Abdul El-Sayed, who was elected to the US Senate from Michigan, during Saturday night’s broadcast of the Channel 13 program “Moria and Berko.” He later questioned the medical qualifications of Israeli lawmaker Ahmad Tibi.

Following the incident, Channel 13 News announced that Berkovic had been suspended from broadcasting, effective immediately.

“Freedom of expression and a diversity of opinions are among the cornerstones of a free press, but they do not provide a platform for racist remarks,” the network stated. “The statements made yesterday on ‘Moria and Berko’ are unacceptable and inconsistent with the company’s values. As a result, a clarification meeting was held with Eyal Berkovic, at the conclusion of which it was decided to suspend him from broadcasting immediately.”

Berkovic questions whether El-Sayed entitled to use title ‘doctor’

The controversy began when Channel 13 political reporter Suleiman Maswadeh introduced El-Sayed, a Democrat known for his outspoken criticism of Israel, using the title “doctor.”

Berkovic questioned whether El-Sayed was entitled to use the title, asking, “They give everyone there the title of doctor. Did you check whether he’s a doctor?”

His co-host, Moriah Asraf, clarified that El-Sayed did hold the qualification, but Berkovic continued, turning his attention to Tibi, an Arab Israeli member of the Knesset.

Berkovic said, “They also say Ahmad Tibi is a doctor. So they say. Let him bring his diploma.”

El-Sayed is a physician and epidemiologist who holds a medical degree from Columbia University and a doctorate in public health from Oxford University. Tibi is also a trained gynecologist.

The remarks drew widespread criticism on social media, including from prominent Israeli journalists.

Channel 12 journalist Barak Ravid condemned the comments, writing that “racism is not a legitimate opinion or a matter of being for or against.”

Suspension follows confrontation with Lucy Aharish

The suspension comes just over a week after Berkovic faced criticism over a separate incident involving Channel 13 presenter Lucy Aharish, an Arab Israeli journalist.

During a commercial break, Berkovic told Aharish, “Calm down, you’re not in your village here.”

Aharish accused Berkovic of racism and initially refused to return to the broadcast. She later returned to the screen.

Channel 13 did not specify how long Berkovic’s suspension would last or when he might return to broadcasting.

This post was originally published on here. 

Except for those who wish Israel to sink into total chaos, nobody in Israel or abroad who wishes Israel well can be pleased with the deadlock our political system seems to have entered.

At this particular juncture, neither political bloc – that of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, nor that of the “bloc of change” headed by Gadi Eisenkot – seems capable of forming a stable government, likely to survive for longer than several months at best.

The result is that everyone seems to be preoccupied with trying to create minor changes in the situation that will place them in a better tactical position after the current stage plays out.

The current stage of the game is that the president of the state, Isaac Herzog, has met with the representatives of each of the parties/lists that participated in the elections on October 27 and passed the qualifying threshold, to ask them who they recommend to form the next government: Netanyahu, Eisenkot, or someone else.

The result of this process was more or less known in advance. Because of the extraordinary achievement of the Arab parties, which attained an all-time peak of 19 seats, and their decision to recommend Eisenkot to prevent Netanyahu from forming yet another all Right/religious government, Eisenkot was recommended by parties representing 67 of the MKs of the 26th Knesset, and Netanyahu by parties representing only 46, after the seven members of United Torah Judaism decided not to recommend anyone at this stage.

Everyone knows that Eisenkot cannot form a government with a majority of 67, since at this stage of the game the majority of Jewish Israelis will not accept a government that is fully dependent on the support of the Arab MKs.

The most Eisenkot can hope for, at this stage, is that when the new Knesset convenes next Tuesday for its opening sitting, his bloc will manage, with full Arab support, to elect a new Knesset Speaker and thus be able to get the Knesset to start functioning even before a new government is formed, on the basis of the new distribution of seats.

There is no doubt that the current Knesset Speaker – Amir Ohana (Likud) – will do his utmost to block this tactical plan, and the next week or two will witness a fascinating battle of wits between the leadership of the outgoing Knesset and the new bloc of change/Arab majority in the Knesset.

Although Eisenkot is unlikely even to try forming a government supported by all 19 MKs of the Arab parties, he might try to form a temporary minority government supported by the four parties that make up the bloc of change, and Ra’am, with its eight MKs (including MK Yoav Segalovitz, who has been mentioned as a potential national security minister) – i.e., a minority government of 56 MKs.

Another option that has been mentioned, in connection with the recent declaration by Yisrael Beytenu leader Avigdor Liberman that, under the circumstances, he is willing to serve in the same government with haredim (ultra-Orthodox), is that UTJ will join the coalition – an option that would produce a minority government of 55 MKs.

I am skeptical about the feasibility of this option, since I believe that UTJ refrained from recommending Netanyahu to the president for tactical reasons only.

In the course of his meetings with the representatives of the new parliamentary groups, Herzog did not conceal his preferred outcome at this stage: namely a national unity government. In his meeting with the Democrats, he admonished the latter in the following words: ”Is life all about yes or no, Netanyahu? Hasn’t the time come to go for unity?”

When he met with the representatives of the Likud, Transportation Minister Miri Regev referred to the opposition parties bloc as a “catastrophe bloc”, to which Herzog replied that “you extend your hand out to them, and then refer to them as a ‘catastrophe bloc’?”, adding that figures like Gadi Eisenkot are also referred to (in Likud circles) by various derogatory nicknames. (He was apparently referring to Eisenkot being referred to as a “Moroccan monkey”).

I expect that Herzog is not naïve and is aware of the fact that when he speaks of national unity, Netanyahu is not suggesting a government based on equality that can work out more moderate policies and modes of conduct, without Otzma Yehudit and the Religious Zionism Party on the extreme Right.

What Netanyahu means when he speaks of unity is a government made up of his whole all-Right/religious bloc, plus any centrist Zionist party willing to join. The chances of such a government adapting its policies to the new reality of an Israel threatened with serious economic sanctions because of its actions in Gaza and the West Bank, and the accusation of some of its leaders of war crimes, with the International Criminal Court in The Hague actually issuing warrants for their arrest – are virtually nil.

It is also difficult to see such a government acting to save what remains of the special relationship between Israel and a bipartisan United States, not to speak of the close relations that used to exist between Israel and various European states, and have vanished in the last three years into thin air.

The truth is that Netanyahu realizes that should Eisenkot fail to form any sort of government – temporary or more stable – he himself is also unlikely to form a government in the course of the 26th Knesset, even if he will manage to bully UTJ into returning to his political fold, or somehow manage to get several MKs from the bloc of change to desert.

Possibility of new elections

The most Netanyahu can hope for after he fails to form a government is that new elections will be declared as a result, and he will head yet another debilitating transition government, under much more complicated circumstances than Israel’s previous transition government that followed Israel’s 34th government in the 20th Knesset.

That transition government existed throughout the terms of the 21st and 22nd Knessets and the first two months of the 23rd Knesset – from April 30, 2019 to May 17, 2020, and was followed by Netanyahu’s COVID urgency Government with Benny Gantz, in which he demonstrated his total absence of credibility when it comes to workable unity governments.

What else can be said about the political situation at this point? That we might nevertheless still be surprised, and find ourselves at the end of a fierce battle of wits, and many broken election promises, with a stable, workable government of change.

The writer has written journalistic and academic articles, as well as several books, on international relations, Zionism, Israeli politics, and parliamentarism. From 1994 to 2010, she worked at the Knesset Library and the Knesset Research and Information Center.

This post was originally published on here. 

The American Jewish establishment knows how to count. Dollars raised. Professionals hired. Episodes downloaded. Guards posted outside synagogue doors. Its own researchers have found that too many organizations cannot measure whether their work succeeds.

Before another federation general assembly, the question is not how much machinery we have built around Jewish life, but what kind of Jewish life it is producing.

Jerusalem syndrome once brought visitors to the holy city convinced they had been chosen for a biblical mission. The professional Jewish influencer economy has developed a remote version. No pilgrimage required. Just a microphone, a sponsor, and the confidence that Israel has been waiting for your instructions.

The joke conceals something grave. Institutions finance personalities who bring audiences. Personalities lend institutions prestige. Everyone counts impressions, conferences, and checks. But a Jewish people is not a customer list.

Its strength is measured by what children know, how families live, and whether communities have the confidence and skills to protect one another when there is no camera in the room.

Israelis voted on October 27 without producing a clear governing majority. Whatever government emerges, it will live with its taxes, security decisions, and military obligations. Meanwhile, the federation world prepares its November 8 to 10 general assembly in Washington under the banner “Where the Future Takes Shape.” Israelis must live with the decisions made in their name. American Jewish institutions are gathering to discuss theirs.

The comment that exposed the business

My dispute with Jonah Platt, the actor turned host of Being Jewish, began with sovereignty, not his podcast. Platt posted on X/Twitter, then shared on Instagram, a warning that Diaspora Jews might withdraw financial, social, and political capital from Israel if its government failed to consider their concerns.

The concern is legitimate. Diaspora Jews face real antisemitism, and Israeli decisions affect their lives. Israel must listen. But there is a difference between being heard and being obeyed, between belonging to a people and governing a state.

I answered publicly that Israel is a democracy whose citizens bear different obligations. I called the premise ignorant and the assumption of equal authority without equal responsibility “sort of colonialist.” It was sharp. I also wrote that his heart was in the right place. He had not demanded an Israeli ballot; he had warned about withdrawing support. But the warning raised a question: when does philanthropy become leverage over sovereignty?

Platt’s public reply became personal. He accused me of contacting him only when I wanted something and said Diaspora Jews financed my “business ideas and institutions.” He suggested Israel return the billions sent from abroad so American Jews could finance their own security.

I have never asked him for money. I sought conversations about Israeli agriculture and Jewish self-defense, often being told he was unavailable. He could decline without turning my criticism into a fundraising pitch.

Before seeing his reply, I had privately asked whether my comment was too harsh. After reading it, I said I was disappointed he had challenged my motives instead of my argument. Our WhatsApp exchange deteriorated. He called me a “piece of s***” and told me to “go f*** yourself.” I answered angrily and personally too. But the sequence matters: a debate about sovereignty became a quarrel about money, access and the operating costs of a podcast.

Platt said he had lost money on his show and spent his days fighting for the Jewish people. In that exchange, he wrote, “I have literally been killing myself the past two years to advocate for and protect the Jewish people.”

Later he said our exchange had changed how he viewed Israel “in a really dark way.” That troubled me more than the insults. I made aliyah and served in the IDF knowing that Israel, its governments and its institutions would disappoint me. Commitment is revealed precisely when disappointment comes. Zionism is not a subscription service I cancel when customer satisfaction declines.

Rabbi Jonathan Sacks distinguished a contract, an exchange of interests, from a covenant, a bond of loyalty and responsibility that survives disagreement. Israel and Diaspora Jewry are not creditors and debtors settling accounts.

They belong to one people. That bond gives Diaspora Jews a voice that must be heard, not the powers of Israeli citizenship. A relationship is not a transaction. A donation does not purchase a vote.

The business of being important

Platt’s website advertises podcast sponsorship packages from $1,000 to $15,000. Birthright Israel is credited as the presenting title sponsor of his third season. The show lists producers, editors, and researchers. Good media can educate, connect, and change lives.

But its production costs do not measure its value to the Jewish people. An operating loss is a financial result, not proof of exceptional sacrifice. What did listeners learn? What did they do afterward? What remained when the interview ended?

His family connections sharpen the issue without proving wrongdoing. His father, Marc Platt, produced Wicked on Broadway, where Jonah played Fiyero from 2015 to 2016. His mother, Julie Platt, is the Jewish Federations of North America’s (JFNA) immediate past board chair and chairs its new Frontline initiative.

Jonah has described obtaining podcast guest introductions through her. Hollywood has a word for the advantage conferred by family connections: nepotism. The fashionable label is the nepo-baby advantage. That does not prove his father secured the role or his mother arranged his sponsorships.

It demonstrates the doors available to him that thousands of rabbis, educators and community organizers will never be offered. A famous family is not a moral failure. But inherited access is not earned authority, and an impressive guest list is not proof of an enduring contribution to Jewish life.

The establishment’s own confession

In October, Jewish Funders Network president Andrés Spokoiny revisited research on 160 organizations combating antisemitism and the field’s 25 largest funders. More than half lacked clear, realistic measures of success.

Researchers found duplication, fragmentation, and confusion between social-media engagement and persuasion. This was not an enemy’s accusation. It was philanthropy examining itself and discovering that too much activity was being counted without evidence of progress.

JFN deserves credit for the research and its efforts at coordination. But knowledge creates an obligation. Which ineffective programs lost funding? Which duplicated efforts were consolidated? Which funders changed their decisions because the evidence disappointed them?

JFN does not control every grant. Its members control their own checks. An institution that identifies failure without showing what changed has diagnosed a problem without correcting it.

Jewish learning calls us not only to understand but to act. An evaluation that changes nothing is not accountability. It is paperwork.

Another $35m. For what future?

Now comes JFNA’s Frontline, a $35 million initiative backed by more than 25 funders, reaching 120 federations and adding 100 advocacy and community-relations professionals. Smaller communities need skilled help in schools and local government. JFNA names programs such as Project Halo and Student to Student and promises outcomes. Good. Publish them. A hundred positions are a hundred responsibilities, not a hundred solved problems.

Thirty-five million dollars represents a choice. At a hypothetical all-in cost of $1,000 per participant-year, it could finance 35,000 participant-years of resilience training; at $1,500, more than 23,000.

These are scenarios, not bids. Yet trustees should compare another advocacy position with sustained Krav Maga, first aid, de-escalation, situational awareness, emergency response, and Jewish education. Jabotinsky wanted Jewish physical preparedness to be as ordinary as lighting Shabbat candles. A century later, Krav Maga should be no stranger to Jewish life than Hebrew school or bar and bat mitzvah classes.

For adults who choose to own firearms where lawful, safety instruction and secure storage could complement those skills. Qualified instructors, facilities, insurance, safeguarding and evaluation all cost money. The point is not to arm every Jew. It is to make preparedness routine, with skills that survive when the instructor goes home.

JFNA has not ignored preparedness. It’s $130m. LiveSecure’s effort supports security infrastructure and training. That makes the choice more important. Why this mix of staffing, training and outreach? Which alternatives were assessed?

How will positions be judged after their initial grants expire? Which programs will end when they fail? Innovation is not giving an old expenditure a new name. It is having the courage to change an approach that does not work.

On November 2, experts interviewed by eJewishPhilanthropy questioned whether expanded approaches without rigorous evaluation might repeat old failures. The general assembly has sessions on data and security. Excellent. The test is not whether the subject appears on the agenda. It is whether the discussion changes budgets, strategies, and the lives of people who will never attend.

Who do they actually represent?

The question of accountability leads to another: whom do these institutions represent? JFNA represents 141 federations through legitimate governance structures, not every American Jew by election. Who speaks for the family choosing between rent and day-school tuition? The young Jew who has never entered a federation building? The small congregation without a wealthy patron? Whose disagreement changes a policy? Who is heard before writing a check?

Nor should influence be confused with access. In a July 2026 AP-NORC survey, only 15% of American Jewish adults said Democrats supported Jews extremely or very well; 16% said the same of Republicans.

That measures perceived support, not a proven decline in political power. But where has Jewish influence weakened, and where has it grown? Which alliances survive elections? A photograph with an elected official is not the same as political influence.

Representation requires hearing those who do not already share the leadership’s assumptions. Otherwise, institutions can become skilled chiefly at representing themselves.

The billion-dollar fortress

JFNA estimates American Jewish institutions spend $1.015b. annually on security, a community-wide figure, not JFNA’s budget. Guards, cameras, reinforced entrances, and trained professionals save lives. Keep them. But what are we building behind those doors? Can congregants respond to emergencies, provide first aid, and protect themselves lawfully?

Are young Jews learning when to de-escalate a threat and how to defend themselves if they cannot? For adults who choose firearms where lawful, is responsible instruction part of the conversation? Can they teach their children why being Jewish is a gift rather than simply a danger to manage?

A fortified building may protect a congregation without making it confident enough to live openly outside. Not every Jew needs to carry a weapon. Every Jewish community needs people prepared to protect one another. We must protect Jewish institutions and strengthen the people within them. Otherwise, the building survives while the life it shelters grows weaker. The answer to fortress Judaism cannot simply be a more expensive fortress.

Who pays for performance?

In October, Platt defended substantial compensation for Jewish nonprofit executives. He cited Anti-Defamation League (ADL) chief Jonathan Greenblatt’s roughly $1.4m. compensation as about 1% of revenue.

But affordability is not performance. ADL recorded 912 antisemitic incidents in 2014, before Greenblatt became CEO, 9,354 in 2024, and 6,274 in 2025. Methods changed, and antisemites, not the ADL executives, cause antisemitism. Those figures cannot grade a CEO. They do make credible evaluation urgent.

The ADL helped secure an additional $30m. in federal nonprofit security grants for fiscal 2026. Count it. Count unsuccessful interventions too. Which programs changed attitudes? Which made communities safer? What ended when an initiative failed?

Leaders may deserve considerable salaries. But the moral authority of leadership cannot be calculated as a percentage of revenue. Money raised is not achievement, money spent is not impact, and money lost is not automatically sacrifice.

The war that comes home

Israel’s families understand the difference between a cost and a sacrifice. In October, the Defense Ministry reported approximately 30,000 wounded military and security personnel entering rehabilitation since October 7, 2023, with roughly 63% dealing with psychological conditions.

A Knesset report recorded 279 suicide attempts among serving soldiers from January 2024 through July 2025, excluding veterans after discharge.

Behind those figures are marriages tested by wounds no one else can see, businesses damaged by repeated mobilizations, children trying to understand the parent who came home changed, and families whose loved ones never returned. The war follows people out of uniform. It enters their bedrooms, their livelihoods, and their children’s lives.

But let us not forget what Jonah Platt told me: “I have literally been killing myself the past two years to advocate for and protect the Jewish people.”

He was describing how hard he works. The families behind those numbers are living with losses no amount of work can undo. Diaspora Jews also face real danger. Their courage in protecting synagogues, defending students, and confronting hatred matters.

But the common language of sacrifice cannot erase different burdens. A media budget is not military service. A podcast is not a son at war. A contribution, however generous, gives no donor control over a nation’s democracy. Each Jewish community owes the other fidelity, not ownership.

Strip away the machinery

The rabbis taught kol Yisrael arevim zeh bazeh: all Jews bear responsibility for one another. At Sinai, the covenant was accepted by a people, not delegated to a fundraising department. We need schools, synagogues, welfare organizations, advocates and guards. But these institutions are instruments.

Responsibility includes knowing how to act when danger comes, not only writing a check afterward. A people that cannot carry its obligations without constant professional mediation has not been made strong by its institutions, only dependent upon them.

Herzl sought wealthy backers and then built a movement capable of acting without their permission. Nordau demanded physical renewal; Jabotinsky, dignity and self-defense; Ahad Ha’am, cultural and intellectual strength.

They disagreed over means. They understood that a civilization is sustained by people who know how to live it. The test of leadership is not the dependence it creates. It is the responsibility it awakens.

Strip away the sponsors, donor dinners, conferences, microphones, and professional titles. What remains? Young Jews who can tell their own story. Families who can live Jewish lives without a campaign explaining why it matters.

A teenager learning Hebrew in one room and Krav Maga in another, confident in identity but trained to avoid needless confrontation. Neighbors who recognize danger, know first aid and can defend one another lawfully. A people able to disagree fiercely without treating the relationship as disposable. That would be a legacy worth funding.

Jonah Platt did not invent this culture. His exchange with me revealed its temptation to confuse access with authority, cost with sacrifice, and criticism with injury. JFN exposed the measurement gap. JFNA’s $35m. forces a comparison of priorities.

The ADL raises the question of executive accountability. The security bill shows the price of protection. What matters is whether Jewish communities are stronger when the professional goes home.

The institutions exist to serve the people. The people do not exist to keep their institutions in business. We did not inherit a covenant so that it could become an industry.

The Jewish establishment has spent billions trying to keep Jews Jewish.

It is time to build Jews who will stay Jewish.

Adam Scott Bellos is founder and CEO of The Israel Innovation Fund and creator of Wine on the Vine and Project Maccabee. He writes about Zionism, Jewish identity, Israel-Diaspora relations, and the future of Jewish civilization.

This post was originally published on here. 

Israel Police, along with the Health Ministry’s Enforcement and Inspection Division, recently uncovered a dangerous and illegal operation in which methamphetamine was being sold as “khat drops,” police said on Sunday.

Laboratory tests confirmed that the substance marketed as khat was, in fact, methamphetamine (commonly known as meth or speed), according to police. They did not explain how they came to suspect the dealers, nor did they say where in Israel the product was sold, how large the operation was, whether any arrests were made, or whether the mislabeled product caused any overdoses.

The Jerusalem Post has reached out to Israel Police for further comment.

What is khat, and is it similar at all to methamphetamine? 

In Israel, khat is legal to buy, sell, and consume in its natural leaf form, but any extract of the plant is entirely illegal. Even if the drops had contained a genuine khat extract, selling them would still have been against the law.

According to the US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and Australia’s Alcohol and Drug Foundation (ADF), khat (Catha edulis) is a flowering evergreen shrub used for its stimulant-like effect, which speeds up messages between the brain and the body. It is used in traditional and social settings by many cultures and subcultures throughout the Middle East.

The vast majority of users chew the buds and leaves of the plant, which is native to East Africa and the Arabian Peninsula. A small minority drink it brewed from dried leaves or smoke the dried leaves, according to the US National Institutes of Health (NIH).

The DEA’s khat fact sheet compares the plant’s effects to those of cocaine, amphetamine, and methamphetamine.

Methamphetamine, the drug police found being sold as “khat drops,” is a lab-made stimulant with a high potential for addiction, according to the NIH.

“Marketing a dangerous drug under the guise of a supposedly natural product is a particularly grave issue,” police said. “It exposes the public to significant health risks – often without consumers even realizing that they are ingesting a dangerous drug.”

“Furthermore, extracts and preparations containing substances derived from the khat plant – including drops, beverages, and capsules – are classified under the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance,” the police statement added. “Their consumption, marketing, and production are prohibited by law.”

This post was originally published on here. 

Iranian hardliners are seizing on President Donald Trump’s midterm defeat to push for a tougher line in negotiations with Washington, demanding that any end to the war come with a “new world order” that favors the Islamic Republic, CNN reported on Sunday.

Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei warned on Wednesday against the “slightest inclination towards submission,” a message hardliners believe was aimed at Iran’s negotiators. 

A column in the hardline outlet Raja News argued that the US should not be given a “way out” before it “pays the price” for attacking Iran.

The rhetoric hardened after Trump acknowledged that the war was partly to blame for Republican losses, and Vice President JD Vance wrote on X that “the reason we lost is the war.”

Will Iran harden its stance in US talks?

“The Iranian leadership sees the recent election results as a vindication of its strategy against the US,” Hamidreza Azizi, a senior Iran analyst at the International Crisis Group, told CNN. “The Iranians see no reason to offer Trump any nuclear concessions.”

Eight months in, the war has settled into a stalemate, with Qatari mediators trying to bridge the gaps between the sides. 

The US has struck Iran’s Qeshm Island several times over the past week, though both sides have played down the strikes in an apparent effort to keep talks alive.

“Now we’re making a decision: do we want to go further? I would rather not destroy the rest of the country if possible, but maybe I’ll have to,” Trump told reporters on Thursday.

Tehran has set seven conditions for reopening the Strait of Hormuz, including ending the war “on all fronts,” compensation, the withdrawal of US forces and the lifting of sanctions.

In his message, Khamenei said the war was laying the “groundwork for a new world order.”

This post was originally published on here. 

US President Donald Trump said on Sunday that it is “highly unlikely” that the US will return to war with Iran if progress is made in ongoing indirect negotiations.

“It depends on whether or not they sign a very strong agreement,” Trump said during an interview with CNN. “The answer is highly unlikely [that] it’s going to be necessary… I would if necessary, but we hit them really hard.”

Trump emphasized that American military forces are ready to act against Iran if he does decide to order strikes, saying that a third “fully locked and loaded” US aircraft carrier strike group recently arrived in the region.

Trump says US to target infrastructure if strikes renewed

He further detailed that Washington had already identified possible targets inside Iran, including infrastructure such as power plants and bridges.

“We have 38 bridges in our sight that we can knock down in literally one hour,” Trump told CNN. “They’ll all be down.”

Trump noted that he would prefer not to strike infrastructure, predicting that it could take Tehran up to 10 years to rebuild destroyed bridges. 

“I don’t like ripping down bridges. And the hardest thing to build is a bridge. It takes years, and I’m a good builder,” he added.

Trump asserted that a US attack would be “unstoppable” due to Iranian air defenses being destroyed in previous American airstrikes. 

“All of their anti-aircraft is gone…. The only thing they can do is about 10% level – make some missiles and make some drones,” Trump said of Iran’s remaining defense capabilities. “Drones at about 15% because much of their factories are gone.”

Trump repeated that renewed strikes will most likely not be necessary, telling CNN that Tehran badly wants to reach a deal. 

This post was originally published on here. 

Israelis have spoken. Unfortunately, too many politicians, commentators, and media personalities seem unwilling to listen.

The election produced no decisive winner, but it delivered an unmistakable message: Israel cannot afford another narrow coalition, endless political warfare, or a government held hostage by its ideological extremes.

We need a broad national unity government capable of confronting the challenges our political leaders have spent years avoiding.

Benjamin Netanyahu’s bloc won 53 seats, eight short of a majority. Likud remains Israel’s largest party with 27 seats, and its voters have made clear whom they want as their leader. Those insisting Netanyahu has been politically defeated are ignoring reality. His opponents may wish him gone, but Likud has shown no indication it intends to replace him.

Nevertheless, Netanyahu, while declaring his willingness for a broad-based Zionist government, must recognize that such a government will require genuine compromise, particularly on the haredi (ultra-Orthodox) draft issue and the establishment of a serious commission of inquiry.

The change bloc, with a mere 48 seats, has no credible basis for declaring victory. Gadi Eisenkot and Yair Lapid’s attempts to spin these results into an electoral triumph are not merely disingenuous; they are an insult to the intelligence of Israeli voters.

Rather than confront the political reality delivered at the ballot box, they appear to remain captive to an echo chamber of Netanyahu-obsessed advisers and sympathetic media personalities who have convinced themselves that Israel was somehow stolen from them and that they are now on a righteous mission to take it back.

Israel does not belong to Netanyahu, Eisenkot, Lapid, or any political camp; it belongs to its citizens. An election is not won by declaring victory loudly enough, and a democracy cannot function when politicians refuse to accept a result simply because it does not fit their preferred narrative.

One thing that election did confirm is that the extremes are not the mainstream. Despite their inflammatory, bombastic rhetoric and disproportionate media attention, Itamar Ben Gvir and Yair Golan secured just seven and eight seats, respectively.

Majority of Israeli’s want unity

Much of our political discourse suggests Israel is divided between these two extremes. It is not. Neither the Kaplanists nor the Kahanists speak for the majority of Zionist Israelis. Each such group is a fringe, despite what the media tries to have us believe.

The under-reported, but clear majority of Israelis want unity. They want security, economic opportunity, affordable housing, quality education, and competent government. They might disagree about policies and personalities but share far more than our politicians acknowledge.

With voter turnout reaching an extraordinary 77.9%, Israelis reaffirmed their commitment to democracy. The election’s extraordinary turnout, including significant participation by Arab citizens, debunks the claims that Israel is an apartheid state that denies Arab citizens political representation.

But democratic participation carries responsibilities. Arab citizens deserve to have safe streets free of gun violence, equality, and meaningful representation, but their elected representatives must also unequivocally reject terrorism and respect democratic institutions.

Criticizing government policy is a fundamental democratic right. Justifying or glorifying the murder of Israeli civilians by our enemies is not. Political leaders who provide cover for terrorism betray their constituents and undermine Jewish-Arab coexistence. Democracy protects the right to dissent; however, it cannot become a vehicle for destroying the state from within.

Responsibility does not rest solely with the Arab parties. The change bloc must also be held accountable. Relying on anti-Zionist Arab parties that refuse to condemn Hamas, whether as coalition partners or through external parliamentary support, is an affront to the bereaved families who have lost loved ones and to the hundreds of thousands of reservists who dropped everything to defend their country.

By making itself dependent on these factions, the change bloc may secure a short-term political advantage, but it risks deepening the very divisions Israel so desperately needs to overcome. At this critical moment in our nation’s history, political expediency must not come at the expense of national unity.

The Opportunity is at hand for a 79-seat unity government comprising Likud’s 27 seats, Yashar’s 21, B’Yachad’s 12, Yisrael Beytenu’s seven, Religious Zionist Party’s six, and Shas’s six. Such a coalition would include nearly two-thirds of the Knesset, bringing together major constituencies while leaving out the extremes.

Such a coalition would require difficult compromises from the party leaders, particularly over Netanyahu’s leadership. But surely Israel’s future matters more than personal rivalries.

For years, politicians have excused their failures by blaming fragile coalitions, hostile opposition parties, and uncompromising coalition partners.

A 79-seat government would strip away those excuses. No small faction could dictate national policy or threaten the government’s survival whenever its demands were rejected. More importantly, neither bloc would be able to unilaterally force policy on the other bloc.

Most importantly, such a coalition could finally address key issues threatening Israel’s future.

With Shas participating, a unity government can negotiate a realistic, enforceable framework for haredi military and national service that respects legitimate religious concerns while ensuring a fairer sharing of the national burden.

Instead of unilateral judicial reform legislation and mass protests, a unity government can pursue meaningful reform through broad consensus, safeguarding judicial independence while clarifying the proper balance between the courts, Knesset, and government.

Israel needs a comprehensive program to create affordable housing. Such a program needs to address land availability, planning delays, infrastructure, construction costs, and housing supply. Young families should not have to choose between financial security and owning a home.

The country needs a coherent national policy regarding Judea and Samaria, balancing historical and security interests with demographic and diplomatic realities. Decisions of such consequence cannot depend on the survival needs of a narrow coalition.

Israel must rebuild and modernize its education system, strengthening mathematics, science, technology, engineering, English, and civic education. Every Israeli child, regardless of background, deserves the skills necessary to participate in a modern economy.

These challenges require long-term thinking, difficult decisions, and the parliamentary strength to withstand pressure from special interests.

A broad unity government offers that foundation.

The “just not Bibi” obsession of the change bloc has contributed to political paralysis and divided the nation. Israel has endured two successive governments that left approximately half the population feeling excluded. The Bennett-Lapid government alienated much of the Right, while the most recent Netanyahu government alienated much of the opposition.

Israelis with opposing political views fought together in Gaza and Lebanon, suffered tragedies together, and demanded unity following the October 7 massacre. On October 8, we promised ourselves that Israel would never return to business as usual. We understood that political division, institutional complacency, and failures of leadership had exacted an unbearable price.

Netanyahu, Eisenkot, Bennett, Lapid, Liberman, Smotrich, and Deri must decide whether their personal ambitions and grievances matter more than the country’s future. They do not need to agree on everything. They must agree that Israel’s security, prosperity, and social cohesion transcend their disagreements.

A unity government will require painful compromises, but compromise is not weakness. It is the essence of responsible democratic leadership.

The arithmetic is there: 79 seats. The national challenges are undeniable. What remains to be seen is whether our political leaders have the courage to put the country and national responsibility before personal ambition and ego.

Israel has voted. It is time to stop campaigning and start governing.

As Kalman Liebskind remarked in Makor Rishon, Israel faces a historic opportunity to end its internal political warfare. Failure to seize it now might have consequences for generations.

The writer is the managing partner of Dekel Capital Management, a resident of Beit Shemesh, a proud oleh who made aliya 28 years ago and prides himself on always feeling like a new oleh (immigrant). He is an avid Zionist who cares deeply about the future of the State of Israel and the Jewish people.

This post was originally published on here. 

The ballots have been counted, the Knesset is deadlocked, and coalition arithmetic has replaced campaign slogans.

One slogan, more than any other, filled this campaign: everyone will be drafted. It was said from podiums and printed on billboards as if a problem that has followed the State of Israel since 1948 could be solved by stating it loudly.

Before the next government writes a conscription law into its coalition agreement, it should understand one thing about the people it is legislating for.

The Jewish people have always valued full-time Torah study above everything else. That dedication has never wavered, and it will not waver now. In past generations, Jews were willing to face death rather than stop learning. The same core value is what will keep yeshiva students learning today, whatever a secular law on army service may say.

A value that has never wavered

Let me be clear: what follows is not an analogy. The State of Israel is not Rome, and those debating a draft law are not persecutors. Many of them are sincere patriots worried about the country’s security. I recall this history only to show how deep this value runs.

Antiochus IV made Torah study a capital offense, and the Hasmoneans rose rather than submit. After the Bar Kokhba revolt, Hadrian’s Rome did the same. Rabbi Akiva kept teaching in public anyway.

When he was asked whether he feared the government, he answered with a parable: a fox invited the fish to escape the fishermen’s nets by coming up onto dry land, and the fish replied that if they were in danger in the water, their source of life, they would surely die out of it.

He said Torah is our water. He was tortured to death for it. Rabbi Haninah Ben-Teradion was burned wrapped in a Torah scroll for the same crime.

The Soviet regime outlawed Torah education outright and sent teachers to the gulag, yet underground chadarim (study rooms) and yeshivas ran in cellars and attics for seventy years.

A people that would not stop learning under threat of death will not stop learning to comply with a secular law about military service.

What has kept us Jewish

This persistence is the reason the Jewish people still exist. When the Second Temple was about to fall, Rabbi Yohanan Ben-Zakai did not ask Vespasian to spare Jerusalem. He asked for “Yavne and its sages.” The Temple was destroyed, the land was lost, and the people were scattered, but the beit midrash (study hall) at Yavne kept the nation alive for 2,000 years.

The Babylonians, Persians, Greeks, and Romans each had armies far larger than ours, and all of them are gone. Torah study is what kept a scattered people one people, from Baghdad to Vilna and from Fez to Brooklyn.

The Torah itself provides for this. The tribe of Levi was set apart and did not go out to war with the other tribes. The Rambam explains that Levi’s role was to serve God and teach His ways to the nation, and he adds that this calling is open to any person “whose spirit moves him” to give himself entirely to it.

Since the partnership of Issachar and Zebulun, the Jewish people have understood that those who learn and those who support them both carry the nation.

David Ben-Gurion understood this. In 1949, with the great yeshivas of Europe in ashes, he exempted about 400 students so that what Adolf Hitler had tried to destroy could be rebuilt. The fact that the number is so much larger today does not mean the arrangement failed. It means the yeshivas were rebuilt.

Not every student, but those who truly learn

Honesty requires saying something the yeshiva world itself acknowledges: full-time learning is not for everyone. The Sages taught that of a thousand who begin to study scripture, only one becomes a teacher of the generation.

Some young men, by their own admission, do not have the drive or temperament to sit and learn from morning to night. For them, serving the country, in frameworks that respect their way of life, is a legitimate and honorable path, and many are already taking it. No one should use a yeshiva as a place to hide.

But taking a genuine matmid, a young man who learns fourteen hours a day, putting him in uniform, and promising him a shiur (lecture) “now and then” is not a compromise. It is a contradiction. Torah learning is not a hobby to fit in between guard duties. Its depth comes from the hours, years, and the total immersion.

Telling a promising doctor that he may practice medicine on weekends would be recognized at once as absurd. Our tradition sees the full-time Torah scholar the same way. To say “You can still learn a little” is to say his calling does not exist.

What a law can and cannot do

Policymakers need to face a practical reality. Whatever text the Knesset passes, and whatever the courts order, no state can arrest an entire sector of its population and imprison it for studying Torah.

Tens of thousands of yeshiva students are of draft age. Israel’s military prisons hold a few hundred. Even during the tensest months of this year, arrests reached only into the hundreds, and every wave of detentions sent crowds into the streets and brought the country to a standstill.

The young men in the beit midrash are not acting out of defiance of the state. They are acting out of loyalty to something older than the state, the same loyalty Rabbi Akiva described with his fish in the water.

Faced with a choice between the Talmud and a prison cell, they will choose the prison cell. No sanctions table in a Knesset committee will change a value that generations held onto at the cost of their lives.

A law that cannot be enforced does more than fail. It wears down respect for law itself, turns citizens into criminals on paper, and deepens a rift that our enemies watch with satisfaction.

Beyond the slogan

That is why “everyone will be drafted” was never a policy. It was a campaign line written to please one part of the public and to inflame resentment toward another. It may win applause in a television studio, but it cannot survive contact with reality or with Jewish history.

Those who have been taught to see every yeshiva student as a draft dodger have been led into a misconception, and Israeli society pays the price every time it hears that message again.

The next government has a real choice. It can keep promising what it cannot deliver, or it can build an arrangement that is honest in both directions: one that protects the genuine full-time learner, opens real and respectful paths to service for those who are not suited to the beit midrash, and stops treating Torah study as a crime.

The first course will bring more slogans, more protests, and more division. The second is the only one that has a chance of working.

For 3,000 years, the Jewish people have held full-time Torah study above everything else, and that dedication has never wavered. A Jewish state, of all places, should build its laws around that fact rather than against it.

The writer is a serial entrepreneur and seasoned investment professional specializing in disruptive technologies and financial analysis. He is a researcher at the Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs (JCFA). 

This post was originally published on here. 

The election results delivered an embarrassing reality check for those who turned the haredi (ultra-Orthodox) draft into their primary political cause.

Yoaz Hendel, who championed the reservists’ struggle, failed to cross the electoral threshold. Ofer Winter, who similarly raised the draft flag, suffered defeat. Yuli Edelstein, who made the issue his central political battleground, found himself outside the arena.

Attempts to establish an independent haredi political alternative also failed. The Haredi Public Party, which advocated a different approach to the draft without rabbinic endorsement, received negligible support.

These failures do not make Israel’s manpower crisis disappear. They expose the failure to translate a genuine security challenge into a workable national solution.

Sanctions have worsened the crisis

In recent years, High Court rulings, budget cuts, economic sanctions, call-up notices, and arrest threats have become central instruments of draft policy.

Yet the promised breakthrough never arrived.

Despite substantial investment in tailored military tracks, initiatives such as the Hashmonaim Brigade and Netzah Yehuda Battalion have struggled to realize their potential.

According to Lt.-Col. Yossi Levi, CEO of the Netzah Yehuda Association, two years of sanctions severely damaged efforts to recruit haredim into combat roles, producing no actual growth in combat enlistment.

In the August draft cycle, the Hashmonaim Brigade enlisted fewer than 80 combat soldiers.

Even the IDF’s reported enlistment growth requires scrutiny, as its figures include arrested yeshiva students formally inducted into the military system without necessarily entering active service.

Perhaps the most egregious measure was revoking daycare subsidies worth hundreds of millions of shekels, harming working haredi families and their young children.

Coercion has generated antagonism, alienated potential recruits, and undermined tailored integration programs. Deep social transformation requires trust, legitimacy, and cooperation.

The public wants a different approach

A survey conducted by the Institute for Haredi Strategy and Policy in August-September 2026 among 1,001 Jewish adults reveals a striking gap between political rhetoric and public attitudes.

Fifty-eight percent regard preserving Torah study as an interest of Israel as a Jewish state.

Seventy-eight percent support alternatives to current sanctions that recognize the need to regularize the status of Torah scholars.

Within this group, 49% of all respondents favor formally recognizing and funding full-time Torah study under clear criteria, alongside a draft requirement for those who do not qualify. Only 22% favor maintaining current sanctions.

Moreover, 92% believe reducing tensions between haredi society and the broader Israeli public is important.

A practical security alternative

The burden borne by Israel’s soldiers and reservists is real, and their demand for relief is justified. Precisely for that reason, Israel cannot afford to substitute symbolic confrontation for additional operational manpower.

Israel urgently needs reserve forces for regional defense, base security, settlement protection, and homeland defense, alongside technological, intelligence, and emergency capabilities.

Two years ago, the Institute for Haredi Strategy and Policy, working with former senior defense officials, launched the Senior Executives 2030 Plan, targeting the integration of 50,000 working haredim into security and emergency systems by 2030.

Its three pillars are reserve service, integration into defense industries and systems, and strengthening civilian emergency organizations.

Institute research found that 70% of surveyed working haredi men aged 24 and older expressed interest in active, binding reserve service.

This represents an enormous untapped security resource.

The solution should begin with a three-year temporary legislative framework (Hora’at Sha’ah).

Under this framework, sanctions and legal confrontations would be suspended. The state would guarantee that anyone genuinely dedicated to full-time Torah study could continue learning without arbitrary quotas or dependence on others’ enlistment numbers.

This guarantee is essential for securing cooperation from senior rabbinic authorities.

Simultaneously, the government should establish a properly funded national directorate with executive authority to implement a five-year haredi security integration plan.

The immediate priority must be large-scale recruitment into haredi reserve units, where willingness already exists, and meaningful security contributions can be achieved relatively quickly.

Tens of thousands of haredim who deferred service while studying and subsequently entered the workforce could undergo tailored training and serve in organic units responsible for regional defense, base security, and homeland protection.

Such forces would strengthen defensive capabilities, free existing military personnel for other missions, and relieve exhausted reservists.

Building trust with rabbinic leadership would also enable constructive dialogue about tailored service solutions for haredi youth who are not studying Torah.

Alongside reserve service, integration into technology, intelligence, defense industries, and emergency response organizations should expand.

After three years, the government could evaluate actual participation, operational capabilities, and measurable contributions to national security before determining the next steps.

Measure security, not sanctions

Israel must fundamentally rethink how it measures success in haredi integration.

The relevant metrics are not how many draft notices were issued, how many sanctions were imposed, or even how many individuals completed basic training.

Training is a means. Security is the objective.

Have regional defense and base protection improved? Have operational reserve units been established? Has the burden on existing reservists diminished? Has trust between haredi society and the defense establishment increased?

Continuing sanctions and legal battles perpetuate confrontation without resolving Israel’s security needs.

A practical partnership offers another path.

The objective is not to defeat the haredim in a battle over the draft. The goal is to build Israel’s security together with them.

The writer is the publisher of Mishpacha Magazine, founder and chairman of the Institute for Haredi Strategy and Policy, and founder of the Paley Foundation.

This post was originally published on here. 

The Israeli defense establishment was shocked by US President Donald Trump’s early cut-off of military aid and is still unclear on what it implies for immediate budgetary and weapons sales issues, The Jerusalem Post has learned.

Some political officials have been trying to downplay the harm to Israel’s national security by arguing that ending US military aid and moving to a partnership model was already a large part of the negotiations between the sides about future years.

But in those conversations, the earliest military aid cut-off was expected to be the end of 2028, and possibly even a gradual cut between 2028 and 2038.

The true shock level of the issue was clear from several Israeli defense officials who declared to the Post in real time that they were completely blindsided, as well as the deafening silence from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who still has not really addressed the issue.

But the Post can now report that even days after Trump’s announcement, wide uncertainty hovers over the issue.

It is unclear whether a delay in Israeli officials addressing the issue is due to continuous ambiguity emanating from the US – where many American defense officials were also taken by surprise – or because Netanyahu is too embarrassed or busy fighting with Gadi Eisenkot for control of the next Israeli government, bruised relations between Netanyahu and IDF Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. Eyal Zamir, or some other issue.

Until Trump, US defense officials, Netanyahu, and Israeli defense officials have clarity about the amounts and the timing contained in the freeze, both US government and private sector officials may take actions on their own to freeze certain weapons transfers or approvals.

They may do so to avoid running afoul of Trump when they do not clearly know his guidelines.

In May 2024, then US president Joe Biden instituted a partial freeze on transferring large 2,000-pound bombs to Israel, and some other weapons.

Some weapons transfers slowed following Trump announcement, Israeli officials say

However, while that partial weapons freeze was officially narrowly tailored, many Israeli officials said unofficially that it had ripple effects across the spectrum of weapons transfers, significantly slowing certain transfers that were not formally frozen.

In some ways, while Israeli officials appreciate Trump’s tremendous support of Israel striking Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran, with fewer strings attached than under Biden, they are more worried about the future now than in May 2024, because it is unclear that the problem is curable.

In June 2024, the Post learned that then defense minister Yoav Gallant succeeded in convincing the Biden administration to unfreeze many of the restrictions by giving promises about how the specific weapons would or would not be used.

In contrast, with Trump, if he has calculated that continuing military aid is not politically viable, there may be no clear solution.

But in favor of Trump, he has said there is no question that the US will continue to sell Israel the weapons it wants, versus Biden, who in May 2024 had frozen certain weapons, whether via military aid or full purchase price.

In the most optimistic scenario, some Israeli officials still hope Trump will quietly restore some of the military aid over the next two years, but will do it on an ad hoc basis. This would mean he could do less real-time reporting to the public and the US Congress, which he would need to do under a more formal agreement.

Announcement may affect 2023 F-35 deal, potential F-15 purchases

In 2023, Israel, the US government, and Lockheed Martin signed a deal for 25 additional F-35s, to eventually raise the number of aircraft Israel operates from 50 to 75, which would mean a third squadron. Additional steps in that process took place in mid-2024.

Previously, the Post was told the first third-squadron F-35 deliveries would start in 2027.

It is unclear how the loss of potentially up to almost $8 billion in military aid would affect these purchases or the parallel purchases of new F-15 aircraft and other items Israel lacks the capacity to independently produce.

Further, the Post has learned that even after the Trump announcement, there are still no plans to try to rebuild Israel’s fighter jet industry, which was closed in failure in the 1980s, and Israeli officials estimate it would take around 10 years to restore.

This post was originally published on here. 

IDF troops in southern Lebanon recently uncovered two stockpiles of military equipment and weapons in a civilian home located approximately 200 meters from a United Nations post and in a storage facility located approximately 100 meters from a UN post, the military announced on Sunday. 

During operations by the ‘Oded’ (9th) Brigade Combat Team in the area of Meiss El Jabal, Israeli forces found Kalashnikov rifles, RPG launchers and rockets, a PK machine gun, fragmentation grenades, an explosive device, ammunition, and communications and surveillance equipment.

These were found alongside humanitarian aid boxes and emblems of the Amal and Hezbollah terrorist organizations.

Hezbollah apartment found near UN post in Et Tiri

In a separate operation in the area of Et Tiri, troops from the Kfir Brigade Combat Team located an apartment that Hezbollah had been using for military purposes, about 250 meters from a UN post, the IDF said.

Inside, soldiers found surveillance equipment, combat gear, living supplies and Hezbollah emblems.

Both brigades are operating under the 91st Division in the security zone in southern Lebanon.

The military said the findings were further evidence that UNIFIL, the UN peacekeeping force in Lebanon, had failed in its mission, and that terrorist groups were cynically exploiting the force’s inaction.

The IDF said it would not allow Hezbollah to harm Israeli civilians or soldiers, and would continue to remove threats while remaining committed to the ceasefire agreement.

This post was originally published on here. 

Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang was targeted by a spy plot orchestrated by China’s Ministry of State Security (MSS), according to a New York Times report on Friday citing sources briefed on a US intelligence memo. 

Chinese businesswoman and executive at a Singapore-based data center company, Alice Huang, also known by her Chinese name as Huang Le, was reportedly recruited by the MSS to develop a close relationship with Jensen and collect information on the tech executive. 

The memo was circulated last spring among top Trump administration policymakers and detailed a plot by Beijing’s spy agency to gather information about the sensitive technology behind American AI chips, which China has largely been denied access to.

The NYT described the new information as insight into what seems to be “an especially audacious example of China’s longstanding industrial espionage efforts.”

US spy agencies are now working to unravel Beijing’s goal for having one of its spies maintain a close relationship with Jensen, raising questions regarding Jensen’s status as an influential figure in the global AI race and a Trump ally.

Previous US intelligence assessments regarding Jensen’s relationship with Le concluded that she was a Chinese asset who funneled information to Beijing, but the memo reportedly included details of her direct espionage work.

US intelligence revealed Le’s connections to Beijing, AI executives

On October 29, the NYT first reported that Jensen was the target of a spy plot, a revelation that came after US intelligence agencies conducted at least a year of electronic surveillance on Le. 

Beyond Le’s relationship with the Nvidia CEO, people familiar with Le told the NYT that she also maintained connections with other AI chip executives, including the leaders of Gigabyte, a top assembler of Nvidia supercomputers.

Le is also reportedly well-connected within a network of companies and investors in China’s Shanghai and Zhejiang provinces that used ties with local officials to push for data centers.

Megaspeed, Le’s Singapore-based company, initiated a multibillion-dollar purchase of Nvidia AI chips shortly after the first time she was publicly pictured with Jensen in 2024. According to the NYT report, the purchase came as a surprise to many in the industry.

Since the purchase, Megaspeed built data centers in Southeast Asia and rented computing power to Alibaba, allegedly giving the Chinese company backdoor access to chips they otherwise would be blocked from using.

Le linked to Chinese military cybersecurity subsidiary as MSS increases focus on AI

Le’s network also included financial links to the Chinese military, including investments in a cybersecurity subsidiary of one of Beijing’s most prominent military-technology developers.

Former CIA counterintelligence analyst Peter Mattis told the NYT that China’s spy agency, the MSS, has increasingly focused on technology as Beijing views AI supremacy as “the key fight for dominance in the economic world.”

Between 2015 and 2023, the MSS expanded cyber operations and widened its spy network through aggressive recruitment, the NYT cited researchers and US officials as saying.

The MSS, which recruited Le to gain proximity to Jensen, has reportedly used its ties to Chinese companies to conduct hacking, espionage, and intelligence-gathering efforts. 

This post was originally published on here. 

Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang was targeted by a spy plot orchestrated by China’s Ministry of State Security (MSS), according to a New York Times report on Friday citing sources briefed on a US intelligence memo. 

Chinese businesswoman and executive at a Singapore-based data center company, Alice Huang, also known by her Chinese name as Huang Le, was reportedly recruited by the MSS to develop a close relationship with Jensen and collect information on the tech executive. 

The memo was circulated last spring among top Trump administration policymakers and detailed a plot by Beijing’s spy agency to gather information about the sensitive technology behind American AI chips, which China has largely been denied access to.

The NYT described the new information as insight into what seems to be “an especially audacious example of China’s longstanding industrial espionage efforts.”

US spy agencies are now working to unravel Beijing’s goal for having one of its spies maintain a close relationship with Jensen, raising questions regarding Jensen’s status as an influential figure in the global AI race and a Trump ally.

Previous US intelligence assessments regarding Jensen’s relationship with Le concluded that she was a Chinese asset who funneled information to Beijing, but the memo reportedly included details of her direct espionage work.

US intelligence revealed Le’s connections to Beijing, AI executives

On October 29, the NYT first reported that Jensen was the target of a spy plot, a revelation that came after US intelligence agencies conducted at least a year of electronic surveillance on Le. 

Beyond Le’s relationship with the Nvidia CEO, people familiar with Le told the NYT that she also maintained connections with other AI chip executives, including the leaders of Gigabyte, a top assembler of Nvidia supercomputers.

Le is also reportedly well-connected within a network of companies and investors in China’s Shanghai and Zhejiang provinces that used ties with local officials to push for data centers.

Megaspeed, Le’s Singapore-based company, initiated a multibillion-dollar purchase of Nvidia AI chips shortly after the first time she was publicly pictured with Jensen in 2024. According to the NYT report, the purchase came as a surprise to many in the industry.

Since the purchase, Megaspeed built data centers in Southeast Asia and rented computing power to Alibaba, allegedly giving the Chinese company backdoor access to chips they otherwise would be blocked from using.

Le linked to Chinese military cybersecurity subsidiary as MSS increases focus on AI

Le’s network also included financial links to the Chinese military, including investments in a cybersecurity subsidiary of one of Beijing’s most prominent military-technology developers.

Former CIA counterintelligence analyst Peter Mattis told the NYT that China’s spy agency, the MSS, has increasingly focused on technology as Beijing views AI supremacy as “the key fight for dominance in the economic world.”

Between 2015 and 2023, the MSS expanded cyber operations and widened its spy network through aggressive recruitment, the NYT cited researchers and US officials as saying.

The MSS, which recruited Le to gain proximity to Jensen, has reportedly used its ties to Chinese companies to conduct hacking, espionage, and intelligence-gathering efforts. 

This post was originally published on here. 

In a lengthy X/Twitter post after Tuesday’s midterm defeat, US Vice President JD Vance laid out why Republicans lost. He cited a pollster who asked Trump 2024 voters who had switched to the Democrats what would bring them back.

According to Vance, four answers accounted for nearly all the responses: end the war, focus on the cost of living, put America first, and change America’s relationship with Israel.

Much of the pro-Israel community reacted with outrage at Vance “blaming the Jews.” But on the core diagnosis, Vance is largely right. The war with Iran became deeply unpopular. It drove up gas prices and inflation, and it turned a significant number of Americans against Israel. US President Donald Trump himself called Vance’s analysis “largely true.” Attacking the messenger accomplishes nothing.

The problem is what Vance wrote next. Referring to the criticism Rachel Campos-Duffy received last Monday for calling for a diplomatic resolution to the conflict with Iran, he concluded that “it turns out her political advice was sound.”

That conclusion does not follow. Even if the war cost Republicans Congress, this in no way justifies pursuit of diplomacy with the regime in Tehran. Vance is not merely wrong. He has it exactly backward. The war became a political disaster precisely because the administration abandoned it for diplomacy.

On February 28, Trump announced the launch of Operation Epic Fury and laid out four military objectives: destroy Iran’s navy, destroy its ballistic missile program, ensure it can never obtain a nuclear weapon, and end its ability to fund and direct its proxies. Reopening the Strait of Hormuz was added a couple of weeks later, after Iran closed it.

Trump’s words to the Iranian people

Trump did not stop there. The final minutes of that speech were addressed to the Iranian people. He told the IRGC and the police to lay down their arms or “face certain death.” He told the Iranian people that “the hour of your freedom is at hand” and urged them, once the bombing was over, to take over their government.

Regime change was not one of the stated military objectives. But it was never really separate from them. A surviving Islamic Republic will rebuild its missiles, its proxy network and its nuclear program the moment it is able to. It was always clear that the only way to achieve Trump’s four objectives permanently is to bring down the regime.

For roughly five and a half weeks, the war moved in that direction. American forces concentrated heavily on Iran’s navy and missile launch sites. Israel concentrated on the regime itself. The decapitation campaign did not end with the killing of supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on the first day.

It continued for weeks; Ali Larijani was killed about three weeks in. In the final stretch, Israel was striking the IRGC and the Basij, the forces that terrorize and murder Iranian civilians. Israeli drones were hitting their checkpoints and headquarters. Defections had begun. The conditions necessary for the population to return to the streets were underway.

Then came April 8.

Trump agreed to a ceasefire mediated by Pakistan, whose prime minister had requested a two-week pause to give diplomacy a chance. Trump announced he would suspend the bombing for two weeks. Those two weeks have now stretched to seven months.

What followed was a memorandum of understanding negotiated with Vance in the lead, and Israel cut out of the process. It was one of the weakest diplomatic agreements in recent memory, and it collapsed almost immediately.

The campaign Israel and the US were waging before April 8 never resumed. Later American strikes on Iranian infrastructure were not a return to that war. IRGC and regime leadership have not been attacked since.

None of this should have surprised anyone. Ten days before the war began, I wrote in these pages that Iran was not trying to win a war with the United States. It was trying to survive Trump. The regime knew it could not defeat America militarily.

It also knew Trump had no appetite for a prolonged war. Its strategy was simple: drag the conflict out, keep oil prices high, and let political pressure build in Washington as the midterms approached. For the Islamic Republic, survival is victory. Once Trump is gone, everything the war set out to destroy can be rebuilt.

That is precisely what happened. Every week of negotiations was another week of high gas prices with the regime still standing. Tehran’s playbook worked perfectly, and it worked because Washington agreed to play along.

Iran’s own behavior shows who it fears. In recent weeks, Tehran has issued statements threatening European governments, Gulf states that host American bases, and American forces directly. The IRGC has warned AI companies that work with Israel. It has even warned Elon Musk over Starlink. Conspicuously, Iran has refrained from threatening Israel.

Since April 8, Iran has fired exactly one missile at Israel and promptly stopped when Israel’s response was too costly. The regime is not afraid of American negotiators. It is afraid of Israel because it knows that Israel is waiting for an opportunity to actually bring down the regime.

Those who wish to argue that Israel pushed Trump into this war may do so. That argument ignores that Trump has been more focused on the Iranian threat than any figure in American public life since the 1980s, but grant it for argument’s sake.

Even so, it is incoherent to blame Israel both for starting the war and for how it turned out. The war became a problem because Trump chose the path of diplomacy advocated by Pakistan, Qatar, and Vance himself, against Israel’s wishes.

Diplomacy is not an inherent good. Neville Chamberlain conducted diplomacy too. The question is whether it serves the objective. Seven months of talks with Tehran have produced no deal that holds, no dismantled nuclear program, no end to proxy terrorism, and no freedom for the Iranian people. What they have produced is exactly the outcome that Iran was working towards since April 8.

As politics, Vance’s post is shrewd. He kept his distance from the war from the start and was largely absent from public view during the fighting. He reappeared only when the ceasefire talks began. Now he is making sure the defeat does not stick to him. Donald Trump Jr. has already endorsed his analysis.

But shrewd politics is not sound strategy. Trump now faces a choice. According to reports, the options before him are renewed strikes, a deal being drafted by Qatari mediators, or continued blockade and sanctions in the hope that Tehran eventually gives in. Vance and others are pushing for a deal. If Trump takes that road, he will be repeating the very mistake that brought him here.

The voters did not punish the war Israel wanted. They punished the one Washington settled for.

The writer is the executive director of Israel365 Action and co-host of the Shoulder to Shoulder podcast.

This post was originally published on here. 

While the United Kingdom has become known as the “cradle of democracy” via which candidates are elected to the “mother of parliaments,” the Israeli system, by contrast, as we are witnessing, is best described as a Balagan, a Yiddish word to describe a state of chaos, disarray, and confusion.

The two electoral systems have their differences.

The UK electorate goes to the polls (at most) every five years and elects 650 members of parliament, one for each seat, geographically designated. Each member represents a party. A minority are independents.

The leader of the party with the most seats will be asked by the monarch to see if he or she can form a majority government either with their own party or, if not, in coalition with another party or parties. The system is first-past-the-post. Parliament is bicameral, two houses, one elected, the other selected by appointment or accident of birth.

The Israeli system is a form of proportional representation. As you know only too well, elections are by votes for a party whose number of seats out of the 120 is determined by their proportion of the public vote.

But while the systems have fundamental differences, each from time to time finds itself with the same issue that arises with leadership, namely, how to get rid of them when they have outstayed their welcome. This is now the Israeli conundrum.

The starkest similarity of that problem is between Netanyahu and Thatcher. Both are and were known as the strongman and woman of their respective parties in their respective eras. Both engendered a feeling of security in their people, and each became a thorn in the side of their citizens.

Margaret Hilda Thatcher, baroness Thatcher, served as prime minister of the United Kingdom from 1979 to 1990, the longest-serving British prime minister of the 20th century.

As prime minister, she implemented policies that came to be known as “Thatcherism.” A Soviet journalist dubbed her the “Iron Lady,” a nickname that became associated with her uncompromising politics and leadership style.

Similarly, Benjamin “Bibi” Netanyahu is Israel’s longest-serving prime minister of the 20th Century.

He has held office from 1996 to 1999, from 2009 to 2021, and since 2022.

Maggie took “her” country to war over the Falkland Islands against Argentina and, while she did not welcome the start of the war, she famously announced “Rejoice, rejoice” when victory was assured.

Bibi took “his” country to war after the October 7 massacre in 2023, and more recently against Iran. Many believe he is poised to take the country back to war against Iran as the outcome of the elections remains in balance.

Was Maggie pleased to go to war with Argentina? And how. In October 1981, her conference revealed her ministers conspiring against her, and she was behind in the polls. She was against membership in the European Union. Everything changed in March 1982 as she launched the response attack on Argentina. The result was her victory in the General Election of 1983.

War has often been used as a politician’s device – either to distract from internal issues or to hope the public will not want to change leaders at a time of uncertainty, and the worst cynics accuse Bibi of this behavior.

I said Maggie took her country and Bibi took his country to war, and therein lies part of the problem. Neither Thatcher nor Netanyahu realized that they have no feudal right to govern their respective countries forever.

Shakespeare says in Hamlet: “There is a special providence in the fall of a sparrow. If it be now, ’tis not to come; if it be not to come, it will be now; if it be not now, yet it will come.”

But leaders such as them believe the end of their “reigns” will never come, and so ultimately and inevitably the problem becomes how to get rid of them.

Three things brought Thatcher down: The poll tax, a flat-rate local tax regardless of income, leading to riots. Division over membership of Europe and, thirdly, her cabinet colleagues’ knives in her back. (Sir Geoffrey Howe’s resignation speech was lethal, even though listening to his speeches was once likened to being savaged by a dead sheep).

In her 11 years in office, I never met one person who admitted voting for her.

We have yet to see whether Netanyahu will fall this time round.

So why else do leaders cling onto power long after change is due?

The short distance you walk to the polling booth and the privacy it affords the voter seems to be a problem.

For as the pen is raised or the envelope is about to be sealed to cast your vote, a moment’s weakness overcomes many, and their resolve to vote for change disappears and is replaced by a yearning for the same old, same old. After all, they haven’t done such a bad job, have they? They will keep us safe, won’t they?

Challenges in Israel’s political system

In fact, Israel’s whole electoral process in some respects is weaker than Britain’s.

We have noticed, as new olim (immigrants to Israel), the fact that while there are a few core issues: wider conscription of the haredim (ultra-Orthodox), a Zionist party precluding having members of Arab parties in government, what is missing are the sort of issues the UK regards as bread and butter:

Immigration; welfare; taxation; these are spelt out in a way that doesn’t happen in Israel. Why not? You deserve a proper look at all important policies.

What does this all teach us? It is perhaps as important that not only do our leaders stay resolved, but so should the voters. If you want to change your leader, it is in your hands.

Change takes resolve and risks to be taken if progress is to be made.

Nigel Lithman is a retired criminal Judge and author. He lives between London and Zichron Ya’akov.

This post was originally published on here. 

The House of Representatives is expected to bring measures of impeachment against Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth this week after major Republican losses during the US midterm elections.

Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Kentucky) is expected to introduce the bipartisan effort in a matter of days. House Republican sources told Axios that their reasoning behind supporting measures of impeachment ultimately has to do with how the defense chief handled the Iran war.

“Iran, Iran, Iran … We should have never done the war before the midterms,” one GOP lawmaker told Axios.

Another GOP member of Congress told Axios that Hegseth has been “very damaging to our ability to get the facts out to the American people on why the strikes targeting Iran’s nuclear facilities, and the additional military actions, were necessary.”

Several recent US reports have indicated that Republicans who lost in the midterms feel they have nothing to lose, and are looking to blame Hegseth because of his role in conducting the war in Iran.

While many Republicans do not appear to blame the war on Trump, and still appear to be unwilling to break from the administration, they may not have the same fealty towards Hegseth, CNN reported. 

One Trump adviser said Hegseth “could be on the chopping block” because of the war. “Someone is going to get blamed for this, and you know it’s not going to be him (Trump),” the adviser told Reuters.

Senator Thom Tillis (Republican- North Carolina) told CBS News on Tuesday night that Hegseth has “a reckoning” coming and his strained relationship with lawmakers was undermining the Trump ⁠administration’s push ​for a $1.5 trillion defense spending package in Congress.

While the measure could get the votes to pass in the House, it remains unclear whether or not it would pass in the Senate.

Trump backs Hegseth amid bipartisan impeachment push

US President Donald Trump has continued to back Hegseth. When asked by reporters on Wednesday whether he was considering replacing Hegseth, Trump ‌said: “No, I think he’s doing a very good job.”

In light of the upcoming measures of impeachment, Hegseth lashed out at Massie and those bringing the articles of impeachment against him in a five-minute-long video on Thursday.

“A disgruntled, defeated congressman, along with all his Democrat allies, has also dropped sham articles of impeachment against yours truly, just like they tried against President Trump twice,” he said in a video released on X. “Just like the president, we don’t back down, and that especially applies now.”

At the War Department: We Stand. We Fight. We Defend the Republic. https://t.co/Kkr0DazmCE

— Secretary of War Pete Hegseth (@SecWar) November 5, 2026

“You see, their policies don’t work. So their obsession with political theater disguised as power drives them to try to destroy their opponents. It’s all about the politics of personal destruction.”

In response, Massie wrote that the only way he will not introduce articles of impeachment against Hegseth is if the secretary resigns.

There is one contingency in which I won’t reintroduce the articles of impeachment: Hegseth resigns.

— Thomas Massie (@RepThomasMassie) November 5, 2026

“Secretary Hegseth will not back down or be deterred by politicians seeking to score partisan points or launch phony investigations where no wrongdoing exists,” Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell said in a statement to Axios.

“The Department of War has followed the law, and our Secretary will continue to stand and fight every single day to support and defend the Constitution, lead our troops, and protect America.”

When did Hegseth last face impeachment?

Notably, Massie previously tried to impeach Hegseth in September for continuing the war in Iran without congressional approval. House Republican leadership delayed the floor vote on the measure and sent members home early.

While House Speaker Mike Johnson denied that he sent the lower chamber home early to avoid the impeachment vote, it still would have been challenging political optics before the midterms.

Massie, who lost his seat to MAGA-backed Ed Gallrein, noted that if his impeachment resolution does not pass, the incoming Democratic majority of Congress will plan much stricter measures.

“My Hegseth impeachment resolution is a much gentler version of what’s coming when Dems control Congress. They’ll have hearings & trials,” Massie wrote on X/Twitter.

During the midterms race, Democrats signaled plans to pursue Hegseth’s removal if they gained control of Congress.

“One of the first things we’re going to do in the majority, we’re going to run Pete Hegseth out of town,” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries said at an October rally in Pennsylvania. 

Reuters contributed to this report. 

This post was originally published on here. 

The House of Representatives is expected to bring measures of impeachment against Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth this week after major Republican losses during the US midterm elections.

Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Kentucky) is expected to introduce the bipartisan effort in a matter of days. House Republican sources told Axios that their reasoning behind supporting measures of impeachment ultimately has to do with how the defense chief handled the Iran war.

“Iran, Iran, Iran … We should have never done the war before the midterms,” one GOP lawmaker told Axios.

Another GOP member of Congress told Axios that Hegseth has been “very damaging to our ability to get the facts out to the American people on why the strikes targeting Iran’s nuclear facilities, and the additional military actions, were necessary.”

Several recent US reports have indicated that Republicans who lost in the midterms feel they have nothing to lose, and are looking to blame Hegseth because of his role in conducting the war in Iran.

While many Republicans do not appear to blame the war on Trump, and still appear to be unwilling to break from the administration, they may not have the same fealty towards Hegseth, CNN reported. 

One Trump adviser said Hegseth “could be on the chopping block” because of the war. “Someone is going to get blamed for this, and you know it’s not going to be him (Trump),” the adviser told Reuters.

Senator Thom Tillis (Republican- North Carolina) told CBS News on Tuesday night that Hegseth has “a reckoning” coming and his strained relationship with lawmakers was undermining the Trump ⁠administration’s push ​for a $1.5 trillion defense spending package in Congress.

While the measure could get the votes to pass in the House, it remains unclear whether or not it would pass in the Senate.

Trump backs Hegseth amid bipartisan impeachment push

US President Donald Trump has continued to back Hegseth. When asked by reporters on Wednesday whether he was considering replacing Hegseth, Trump ‌said: “No, I think he’s doing a very good job.”

In light of the upcoming measures of impeachment, Hegseth lashed out at Massie and those bringing the articles of impeachment against him in a five-minute-long video on Thursday.

“A disgruntled, defeated congressman, along with all his Democrat allies, has also dropped sham articles of impeachment against yours truly, just like they tried against President Trump twice,” he said in a video released on X. “Just like the president, we don’t back down, and that especially applies now.”

At the War Department: We Stand. We Fight. We Defend the Republic. https://t.co/Kkr0DazmCE

— Secretary of War Pete Hegseth (@SecWar) November 5, 2026

“You see, their policies don’t work. So their obsession with political theater disguised as power drives them to try to destroy their opponents. It’s all about the politics of personal destruction.”

In response, Massie wrote that the only way he will not introduce articles of impeachment against Hegseth is if the secretary resigns.

There is one contingency in which I won’t reintroduce the articles of impeachment: Hegseth resigns.

— Thomas Massie (@RepThomasMassie) November 5, 2026

“Secretary Hegseth will not back down or be deterred by politicians seeking to score partisan points or launch phony investigations where no wrongdoing exists,” Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell said in a statement to Axios.

“The Department of War has followed the law, and our Secretary will continue to stand and fight every single day to support and defend the Constitution, lead our troops, and protect America.”

When did Hegseth last face impeachment?

Notably, Massie previously tried to impeach Hegseth in September for continuing the war in Iran without congressional approval. House Republican leadership delayed the floor vote on the measure and sent members home early.

While House Speaker Mike Johnson denied that he sent the lower chamber home early to avoid the impeachment vote, it still would have been challenging political optics before the midterms.

Massie, who lost his seat to MAGA-backed Ed Gallrein, noted that if his impeachment resolution does not pass, the incoming Democratic majority of Congress will plan much stricter measures.

“My Hegseth impeachment resolution is a much gentler version of what’s coming when Dems control Congress. They’ll have hearings & trials,” Massie wrote on X/Twitter.

During the midterms race, Democrats signaled plans to pursue Hegseth’s removal if they gained control of Congress.

“One of the first things we’re going to do in the majority, we’re going to run Pete Hegseth out of town,” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries said at an October rally in Pennsylvania. 

Reuters contributed to this report. 

This post was originally published on here. 

Attorney-General Gali Baharav-Miara said on Sunday that she is not aware of any evidence that comes “even close” to affecting the results of last month’s Knesset election, amid an ongoing investigation into suspected foreign interference in the vote.

“I am not aware of any evidentiary basis that comes even close to being able to affect the election results, or to support a claim of influence that could lead to a change in the results,” Baharav-Miara said at the Justice Ministry’s annual conference in Eilat. 

“If additional, new information that has not yet been presented is brought before us, it will be examined and handled in accordance with the law.”

She stressed that decisions on whom to investigate are made on professional grounds. “When there is an evidentiary basis, whoever needs to be investigated will be investigated. This is not a matter of right or left. It is not a matter of Jew or Arab,” she said. “So it has been, and so it will be.”

Baharav-Miara added that Central Elections Committee chairman Justice Noam Sohlberg was overseeing the matter “professionally, with statesmanship and responsibility,” and that her office would keep him updated.

Her remarks echo Sohlberg’s statement last week that even if the suspicions of foreign interference are substantiated, they would not undermine the integrity of the election or its results as a whole. The suspicions, which concern foreign funding intended to influence the vote, are being investigated by a joint team of the Shin Bet, police and prosecution.

Right-wing parties question election integrity 

Likud has claimed that Arab parties “stole” the election, allegations police said were not supported by the information available to them. 

Otzma Yehudit last week accused Baharav-Miara and the Shin Bet’s legal adviser of exerting “improper pressure” on Shin Bet chief David Zini to keep him from completing the investigation, without saying where the claim came from.

This post was originally published on here. 

An oil tanker caught fire after striking a naval mine east of the Strait of Hormuz, Iran’s navy said on Sunday, according to Iranian state media.

Reuters was unable to immediately confirm the report.

This is a developing story.

This post was originally published on here. 

Vice President JD Vance and his allies are privately debating whether he should run for president in 2028 after Republicans suffered sweeping losses in Tuesday’s midterm elections, The Wall Street Journal reported on Saturday, citing people close to him.

Some allies have told Vance they no longer believe any Republican can win the presidency in two years, and on Election Day, a longtime confidant texted him to consider sitting out the race, according to the report. 

Vance has told associates he hasn’t made up his mind, six people close to him told WSJ.

Democrats flipped seven Republican Senate seats on Tuesday, including Vance’s former seat in Ohio, and won governorships in Georgia and Texas.

Within a day of the vote, a veteran New York fundraiser began hearing from major donors who said they could not back Vance and floated Florida Governor Ron DeSantis as an alternative, according to the report.

Vance calls for rethinking Israel relationship

In a lengthy essay posted on social media this week, Vance blamed the Iran war for the Republican losses and said the party needed to change its relationship with Israel. Republicans in Washington widely read the essay as a first step toward distancing himself from some of Trump’s unpopular policies, the Journal reported. Donald Trump Jr. publicly endorsed it.

People close to Vance told the newspaper the results were a rejection of the war rather than of Trump, and predicted the president’s coalition could be rebuilt once the conflict ends.

One of the things the data analysts on our side obsessed over was “composition”—whether the electorate looked close enough to 2024 for Republicans to win. And despite polls that showed a Democrat blowout, the data kept on telling us the same story: in some states turnout was merely OK, in other states it was downright amazing, and in no state was it catastrophic. There was a genuine sense of optimism on our team: our people were showing up. So, I asked the smartest data guy I know, does that mean we’re going to shock the world? “No,” he told me. “We might do better than the polls suggest. But the data is telling us that a lot of Trump/Vance 2024 voters are pissed and planning to vote for the other guys. Our voters are turning out, but they may not vote for us.” Well, that looks prophetic now. Our voters did show up. In Florida, for example, the electorate was 9 points more Republican than Democrat, just a couple points worse than 2024. Undoubtedly there were places we could have done better on turnout. But the main problem is not turnout. The main problem is that many people who voted for Trump/Vance in 2024 voted for Democrats in 2026. There will be a lot of infighting and arguing over what happened and why that is. One of the pollsters I really respect told me that our economic messaging wasn’t sharp enough down the stretch. I’m sure that’s true. But the real reason we lost is obvious to almost everyone. Another pollster—one of the smartest people I know in politics, told me yesterday we’d lose the generic ballot by 13 points. I felt negative going into Tuesday, but even I was shocked by this. In his polling, he saw that a lot of Trump 2024 voters were angry and planning to vote for Democrats. He asked those voters who had abandoned us what would cause them to come back on our team. The top four answers, accounting for nearly all of the responses were: 1) End the war 2) Focus on cost of living/inflation 3) Put America First 4) Change our relationship to Israel Our voters showed up. And the above four reasons are why many of them voted for Democrats. This is according to a pollster who nailed the results. While many spent Monday attacking Rachel Campos Duffy for calling for a diplomatic resolution to the conflict, it turns out her political advice was sound. (She’s also a great person.) In the next few months, there’s going to be a lot of gaslighting. Expect to hear any number of establishment politicians say the solution to our woes is amnesty. I’m open to the idea that we should change enforcement—by focusing more on businesses that hire illegal labor, for instance. But anyone pushing amnesty is lying to you. The reason we lost is the war. The president himself said so last night. If you’d like to argue it was worth it, that losing the Senate for the next 6 years was worth it, then do so. Argue it was a worthwhile cost to pay. Agree or disagree, that’s at least honest. But everyone knows why we lost. And any honest conversation about where we go from here must start there. I remain hopeful about our country. To the people who are pissed off and want to say, “I told you so”: you’re right, you did tell us so. Take that energy into electing Republicans who share your worldview. To the people who are just pissed at the results, you should be. Let’s take that anger and get back to the work of saving our country.

— JD Vance (@JDVance) November 4, 2026

Vance’s private warnings on war with Iran

In January, as Trump weighed a major military operation, Vance privately urged him not to give up on diplomacy and began gathering polling on the risks of an all-out war, according to text messages viewed by WSJ. 

The results showed the public split 44% to 43% on going to war, but 62% said fewer than 100 US combat deaths would be acceptable, and 65% said Trump should seek congressional approval first.

Trump told the Journal he has not second-guessed the decision. “I did the right thing,” he said on election night. “I would have done it again.”

Can Vance still win the 2028 nomination?

Vance still holds significant advantages over potential rivals, including high name recognition, consistent leads in primary polling, and his role as finance chair of the Republican National Committee, which keeps him in regular contact with major donors.

But he also drew criticism during the campaign for attacks on Democratic candidates who went on to win, including calling Michigan Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed “a little weasel who should shut his mouth.”

Two people close to Vance suggested he run for his old Ohio Senate seat or for governor instead; he rejected both ideas, according to the report.

Trump has declined to endorse a successor. “Maybe he won’t run,” Trump said of Vance on Wednesday. “I don’t know who’s going to run.”

Vance himself acknowledged at a CBS News town hall in October that “there’s a chance” he never runs.

This post was originally published on here. 

Poland began two days of national mourning on Sunday, and police bolstered security after six people were killed in a mass shooting in the southern city of Krakow that the government said was likely inspired by far-right ideology.

Saturday’s attack in the city’s historic main square shocked a country that has prided itself on being safer than many of its Western European neighbors, deepening public concern following a string of school stabbings in October that officials linked to extremist content online.

Sixteen people were wounded in the attack, including two police officers and the suspected gunman, a 24-year-old Polish man who remained in a critical condition in hospital, local authorities said.

Krakow’s old town is a UNESCO World Heritage Site that attracts visitors from around the globe, and several foreigners were among the casualties.

One of the people who died was identified as a British citizen and another as Austrian, while five foreign nationals from Austria, Germany, Portugal, Russia and Britain were among the wounded.

Three bodies, guns found in suspected shooter’s home

In the suspect’s home town, Ostrowiec Swietokrzyski, about 200 km (124 miles) north of Krakow, police later found the bodies of his parents and sister at his home.

Prosecutor’s Office spokesperson Daniel Prokopowicz said it was “highly likely” that the killings in Ostrowiec Swietokrzyski and Krakow were carried out by the same person, but that investigations were ongoing.

The three bodies found there had gunshot wounds, and seven firearms and a “significant” quantity of ammunition were recovered from the property, Prokopowicz added.

Some nationalist politicians questioned a statement by Interior Minister Marcin Kierwinski on Saturday that the attack was likely inspired by far-right ideology.

“If Kierwinski has misinformed the public, he should face political consequences. We demand immediate explanations and access to information what he had based his statements on,” Przemyslaw Czarnek, deputy head of the conservative opposition PiS party, wrote on X/Twitter.

The suspect belonged to a shooting club, but little more information about him has come to light so far.

Streets closed as mourners leave candles

In Krakow, the old town’s main market square – one of the largest medieval squares in Europe – and the surrounding streets remained closed, with police allowing only essential workers to pass. Many nearby cafes were closed and flags at the city hall were at half-mast. Mourners placed candles in several locations in the area.

The traditional hourly trumpet call from St Mary’s church on the square was suspended for 12 hours to commemorate the dead, the first time this has happened since 1939, state news agency PAP reported.

In the capital, Warsaw, police said on Saturday they were strengthening security measures in busy areas popular with tourists. Barriers were installed on streets leading onto the Krakowskie Przedmiescie street in the historic heart of the capital.

Shooting shakes local sense of security

In Krakow, locals and tourists spoke of their shock on Sunday.

“This is terrible for me, that (this) can happen in Poland because it’s never happened like this in Poland… I think that this can be a new era in my country,” local resident Witold Slowikowski said.

In Warsaw, Maria, a 20-year-old cafe employee, said she “almost burst into tears” when she heard about the shooting.

“Recent events – not just this one, but things happening lately – are really affecting our sense of security,” she said.

Leading daily newspaper Rzeczpospolita said in an editorial that the mass shooting brought a “brutal end to an era in which Poland was considered an island of safety.”

Officials and members of the public also praised the actions of police officers who apprehended the gunman, who was armed with a semi-automatic rifle.

The two officers, who sustained gunshot wounds while overpowering the gunman after a close-range shootout, have regained consciousness, a regional government official told a press conference. Both had undergone surgery.

Prime Minister Donald Tusk praised their bravery. “They likely saved many human lives, disregarding the risk to their own,” he said on Saturday in a post on X.

This post was originally published on here. 

Raihaana Adira grew up thinking Islam was a branch of Judaism. As a child in Canada, she spent afternoons with her grandfather as he flipped between Al Jazeera and CNN, teaching her about the prophets and telling her that Jews were “our cousins.”

That early lesson stayed with her. Today, she is an Ismaili Shia Muslim and a proud Zionist, and in a candid conversation with Sam Halpern, she explains how she got there. At McGill University, sorority sisters told her she made them uncomfortable because she was “antisemitic,” though no one could say what she had done. Wanting to find out for herself, she went on exchange to the Hebrew University of Jerusalem in the summer of 2023. There, she saw women in hijab in the classrooms and found that no one cared what she was.

Six weeks after she flew home, October 7 happened, and her classmates began calling Hamas heroic while she was still trying to find out whether her friends had been at the Nova festival.

The interview gets most powerful when Adira describes being caught between two communities. She says she was told on campus that “the only good Muslim is a dead one,” then walked into a bathroom to find “kill all Jews” written on the stall. She remembers the day she felt most alone: a staff member at her own Hillel told her they could not support her because of what “her people” had done.

She takes Halpern through the morning she found an effigy of Benjamin Netanyahu, dressed in striped pajamas like a concentration camp prisoner, hanging from her campus gates. When her friends took it down, she says, police warned that they could be charged with mischief. Most personal of all, Adira lost her father to murder when she was 16. That loss, she says, is why she cannot understand people who celebrate killing, whether on October 7 or after the death of Charlie Kirk. It is also why she hopes one day to build a support network for teenagers who have lost a parent to war, terror, or violence.

Adira also takes on the hard questions about her own community. She talks openly about antisemitism among Canadian Muslims, and about the moment she was turned away from a campus mosque for being a Zionist. She explains why she calls herself “a Canadian Muslim, not a Muslim Canadian,” drawing on the story of her grandparents, refugees expelled from Uganda by Idi Amin who ran a convenience store and a pork sausage shop while keeping their faith at home.

She is now back in Israel with the Ophir Foundation, and she has a cheeky new project in the works: a video series offering Israel “recommendations to improve its apartheid,” starting with the observation that a country trying to erase Arab culture would not put Arabic on every street sign. 

This post was originally published on here. 

My grandfather, Avraham Saide, was born in Kikar Hatulim in Jerusalem in 1906, during the late Ottoman rule. His parents, Sion and Esther, were extremely poor – to the extent that they would go to the Ottoman barracks near Jerusalem’s Jaffa Gate to pick up discarded meat and stale bread.

In 1910, Avraham’s mother died at the age of 24 from tuberculosis, which she probably contracted from wearing infected, donated clothing.

After World War I, when Jerusalem came under British rule, Avraham’s father remarried – and astonishingly had another seven children. Avraham, however, did not get along with his new stepmother. So at the tender age of 17, he left Jerusalem to find his father’s family, who were originally from Aleppo in Syria.

His destination was Argentina, to find his Syrian Jewish first cousins living there. His route first took him to Syria, then occupied by the French, where he boarded a ship to Buenos Aires. His landsmen in Argentina were not as welcoming and accommodating as he had hoped. 

On his second visit to Buenos Aires, he acquired the first registered British-Palestine passport, following the passage of the British Government’s Palestinian Citizenship in the Mandate Act in 1925.

Golda Meir and David Ben-Gurion were also among the first recipients of this passport, but Avraham was able to procure one for himself from the British Consul in the Argentine capital.

After returning to the Yishuv (the Jewish settlement in Palestine) and selling cloth to earn money, he traveled to Alexandria with a Bedouin caravan, thereby bypassing the colonial railway from Jerusalem to the Egyptian city. 

In Egypt, he met his 15-year-old future wife, Mazal Fortuna, at a local synagogue, and was invited to her parents’ home for a Shabbat meal. Ironically, she was to be engaged to someone else, but the family – being enthusiastic Zionists – were attracted to Avraham, since he actually came from Jerusalem, “the Holy City.”

He then stayed and worked for a while in Alexandria in order to marry Mazal. They subsequently returned to the Yishuv with their first son, also named Sion, following the Sephardic custom to name after a living grandfather. Like many others at that time, the 1929 Arab riots and subsequent murders of Jews in Jerusalem, Safed, and Hebron soured Avraham’s attitude toward British colonial rule.

AFTER LIVING for a while in Petah Tikvah, the family returned to Avraham’s native Jerusalem. Although an Anglophile, Avraham became more and more opposed to the British presence and their determination to remain here and rule. 

The Peel Commission Report of 1937, the Woodhead Commission of 1938, and the White Paper of 1939, which would allow in only 15,000 Jews each year, confirmed Avraham’s fears that the British were reneging on their commitments outlined in the 1917 Balfour Declaration – the British public statement supporting a Jewish national home in Palestine.

Field Marshal Erwin Rommel’s advance during World War II and the possible Nazi conquest of the Yishuv by the Nazis – before being defeated by Allied forces at El Alamein in 1942 – highlighted the Jews’ precarious situation. 

This persuaded my grandfather to become a medical orderly at the age of 40, and to take an active part in the struggle for the establishment of a state of the Jews. He served in the Irgun underground, covertly carrying secret messages in sterile dressings to figures such as the future prime minister, Lehi’s Yitzhak Shamir, and to the Irgun’s Dov Gruner, one of the “Olei Hagardom” – those executed by the British. 

Avraham explained to the British forces on guard duty that he could not open the dressings for inspection, as this would destroy their sterility and defeat the entire healing purpose. 

Family flees Jerusalem Old City with six children

BY THIS TIME, Avraham had Hebraicized his name to “Sade,” and moved his family to the Shimon Hatzadik neighborhood in Jerusalem, near Sheikh Jarrah. During the 1948 War of Independence, shortly before the State of Israel was declared, the family had to flee with their six children, including my father Shlomo (Solly), then just three years old.

The Royal Jordanian Legion was advancing, under the command of Lt. Col. Abdullah al-Tell, who was responsible to Sir John Glubb (“Pasha Glubb”). Glubb was a British military officer who led and trained Transjordan’s Arab Legion between 1939 and 1956, and served as its commanding general. 

The family immediately fled to the safer confines of western Jerusalem, where they were surrounded by multiple Arab forces. Jerusalem was under constant siege, and provisions were scarce. The family survived on meager rations of about eight gr. of bread a day.

Fortunately, on June 11, 1948, just hours before the designated UN ceasefire took force, Israeli forces circumvented the Arab lines leading to Jerusalem. The improvised Burma Road had been constructed, bypassing Arab-held Latrun and connecting Israeli positions with Bab el-Wad. This broke the Arab blockade of the access roads to Jerusalem, allowing provisions to be brought to its starving citizens. 

Family remained in Romema until Six Day War

FOLLOWING THE War of Independence, Avraham and Mazal lived with their sons and daughters in a small apartment in Jerusalem’s Romema neighborhood, near today’s Central Bus Station. The family remained there until after the Six Day War.

My grandfather spoke eight languages and met old friends, both Arab and Jew, following Israel’s victory in the Old City and Jerusalem’s reunification. He lived to experience both Ottoman and British rule, as well as Israeli independence. His sons fought in all the post-independence wars, and he continued to work in the medical profession for the Health Ministry. 

Avraham passed away in 1993, following the death of his wife a few years earlier. They were survived by five sons and three daughters. 

He grew up wearing a Turkish fez before donning a British trilby, and obtaining, upon request, the first known passport issued during the British Mandatory rule.

He contributed to the fight for Israel, and lived to see its establishment in 1948. His life began the same year that Ben-Gurion arrived in Ottoman Palestine from Poland, and concluded while Yitzhak Rabin was the prime minister of the sovereign State of Israel. 

On November 3, his descendants marked 100 years to the day when Avraham Sade formally received his historic passport, issued during the British Mandate of Palestine.

This is the story of an ordinary family caught up in the terror of war, and in the tribulations of the Jewish people during the last century. They came to build the Land of Israel, and in turn, were built by it.■

This post was originally published on here.